University of Minnesota  Administrative Policy

Performance Management for Academic Professional and Administrative Employees

Policy Statement

Responsible administrators/supervisors are required to conduct annual performance reviews with written documentation for each academic professional and academic administrative employee who reports to them. Beyond this singular event, regular performance feedback is to be provided throughout the year that recognizes performance excellence and addresses areas needing improvement. As part of performance management, responsible administrators/supervisors are also expected to work with the employee in developing a plan for addressing the employee's professional development needs and interests.

Periodic comprehensive or developmental reviews, in addition to annual reviews, are required for senior leaders, encouraged for those in higher-level leader positions, and are optional for others at the discretion of the responsible administrator/supervisor. Refer to Appendix: Types of Performance Reviews for Academic Professional and Administrative Employees for a more detailed description of each type of review.

Excluded from coverage under this policy are professionals-in-training and individuals whose primary appointment is "without Salary".

Delivery Format and Procedures

The senior leader of each campus, college, or administrative unit determines the unit specific delivery format and procedures for annual performance reviews. Criteria for these reviews will vary according to the nature of the position and the unit in which it is located. A key aspect of this process is the relationship of the responsible administrator/supervisor and the employee, paired with the recognized value and importance of shared responsibility between the two individuals. Refer to the procedure, Conducting Annual Performance Reviews of Academic Professional and Administrative Employees for further guidance.

For related performance review requirements for instructional or probationary (H) academic professional employees and collegiate departmental chairs or heads, refer to the relevant document under Related Information.

Participation in Decisions with Regard to Performance Reviews

University employees are prohibited from participating in evaluating performance of another individual with whom they have a personal relationship, such as marital, familial or other committed relationship, as this would violate Board of Regents Policy: Nepotism and Personal Relationships (PDF).

Reason for Policy

This policy implements Board of Regents Policy: Employee Performance Evaluation and Development (PDF). The University of Minnesota is committed to a performance management system for academic professional and administrative (P&A) employees that is delivered in a manner that is appropriate to the nature of the work that recognizes and rewards exemplary performance, provides for the growth and development of the employee, and addresses substandard performance. It also serves as a basis for annual merit determinations.




Frequently Asked Questions

  1. What is private information and what is public information regarding an individual's performance review?

    Performance reviews are private personnel data but may be shared within the institution where employee job responsibilities require reasonable access to the information.


Subject Contact Phone Email
General Information or Procedural Assistance
  • Primary: Responsible administrator/supervisor
  • Secondary: Local campus, college, or administrative unit HR administrator
  • Other (as needed): Office of Human Resources specialist or consultant
612-624-UOHR (8647); 800-756-2363 [email protected]
Procedural Assistance with Review and Evaluation of Deans and Senior Leaders
  • Office of Human Resources Chief of Staff
612-625-8844 [email protected]
Responsible Individuals
Responsible Officer Policy Owner Primary Contact
  • Vice President, Office of Human Resources
  • Director - Leadership and Talent Development
  • See Contacts Table above


Academic Administrative Employees
Employees appointed in the 93xx or 9631-9640 classifications established by the Office of Human Resources.
Academic Professional Employees
Employees appointed in the 97xx or 9621-9630 classifications established by the Office of Human Resources.
Actions by a University member that directly or indirectly influence the University employment (e.g., hiring, promotion, supervision, evaluation, and determination of salary) or academic progress (e.g., grading and advising) of any other University member with whom they have a personal relationship. This definition includes instances where there is no direct influence on employment or academics, but the relationship has a negative impact on the educational or work environment.
Performance Management System
A process undertaken between responsible administrators/supervisors and the employees reporting to them. This process includes communicating, assessing, coaching, developing, and recognizing employee performance, resulting in effective achievement of organizational and individual goals. This includes:
  • Communicating performance expectations to individual employees;
  • Assisting employees in connecting their objectives to the University’s overall mission through goal setting;
  • Adjusting performance expectations as the unit’s business needs change;
  • Conducting an annual review of employee performance with written documentation;
  • Measuring the degree to which expectations are met;
  • Addressing areas needing improvement through training, coaching, and other methods;
  • Providing regular feedback and candid discussion on performance;
  • Encouraging, guiding, and supporting individual development plans in areas of behavioral and functional competence;
  • Addressing substandard performance;
  • Recognizing and rewarding performance;
  • Providing one basis upon which salary increases are determined; and
  • Making decisions, as appropriate, as a function of performance evaluation.
Personal Relationship
A marital or other committed relationship; significant familial relationship, including, relationships by blood, adoption, marriage, parent, grandparent, child, sibling, first cousin, uncle, aunt, nephew, niece, spouse, brother- or sister-in-law, father – or mother-in-law, son- or daughter-in-law, step-parent or step-child; consensual sexual or romantic relationship; a close personal friendship; or a significant business relationship.
Responsible Administrator
The individual hiring the employee and/or the individual to whom the employee reports.
Senior Leaders
Individuals specified as senior leaders in Board of Regents Policy: Reservation and Delegation of Authority. This includes the executive and senior vice president, chancellors, vice presidents, general counsel, University librarian, the director of audits, deans (on all campuses), athletic director (Twin Cities), and others as directed by the Board, to include the Executive Director and Corporate Secretary, Board of Regents and the Chief of Staff, Office of the President.


Annual Performance Reviews

  • Establishes unit specific procedures for conducting annual reviews and evaluating performance of P&A employees.
  • Ensures performance review policy compliance throughout the unit with timely reviews conducted; establishes appropriate consequences for not conducting evaluations.
P&A Employee Being Reviewed
  • Provides annually to the responsible administrator/supervisor a written summary of the year's work and accomplishments toward goals.
  • Participates in identification of goals and a professional development plan for the next year.
Responsible Administrator/Supervisor Conducting Review
  • Articulates clear expectations within areas of responsibility and work.
  • Provides regular feedback to employees on their performance.
  • Conducts performance reviews of all P&A employees for which supervisory responsibility is held in accordance with University and unit policy.
  • Works with the employee to develop a set of goals for the next year and any modifications that may be appropriate throughout the year.

Reviewing the Performance of Senior Leaders

Refer to Procedure: Reviewing the Performance of Senior Leaders.

Related Information


February 2019 - Review and Evaluating Deans procedure retired, and incoporated into Reviewing the Performance of Senior Leaders.
October 2012 - The designation of Senior Leader has replaced the Senior Administrator term as defined in this policy.
August 2010 - General edits made for clarification, alignment with current practice, and consistency of format. The appendices were converted into two procedures: Reviewing and Evaluating Deans and Assessing the Performance of Senior Administrators, with revisions made to the procedures for senior administrators. One new appendix was added on types of performance reviews.
May 2008 - Policy converted to the new University-wide format for administrative policies.
May 2007 - Language was revised to reflect current performance review processes and to align with the recently adopted Board of Regents Policy: Employee Performance Evaluation and Development. The administrative policy: Ex-Spouse Participation in Reviews was incorporated into the language of this policy. Two appendices were added to this policy: (1) Appendix A: Review and Evaluation of Deans and (2) Appendix B: Review and Evaluation of Senior Administrators.
October 2002 - Language contained in Performance Appraisals for Academic Professional and Administrative Staff incorporates information on performance reviews heretofore contained in the Academic Professional and Administrative Policies and Procedures Manual (Issued February 1984) and the administrative policy on Review and Evaluation of Academic Administrators (Issued January 1992). Edits were made and information updated and expanded. Policy information was put into standard University-wide policy format.
January 1992 - Administrative Policy: Review and Evaluation of Academic Administrators
1984 - Information initially included in the Academic Professional and Administrative Staff Policies and Procedures Manual.
October 2002