Performance Management System Office Performance Evaluation System (PMS - OPES)

Introduction
The human resource is the organization's most valuable asset. They define the efficiency, effectiveness and over-all quality of service in any industry. It is important for any organization to establish an effective system that accurately evaluates the performance of workers for the purpose of determining tenure, transfers or promotions, and appropriate incentives. While policies and systems for employee performance evaluation have long been in place in the government, there has been an increasing demand to review the existing system, i.e. demand for public servants to produce tangible results by "making a difference" instead of "just keeping busy," demand for increased accountability by performing the mandate of the organization, the need to correct the notion that a permanent appointment guarantees security of tenure. Hence, the call for the Civil Service Commission (CSC), as the central personnel agency of the government, to revisit and, as necessary, re-invent the performance management system of the bureaucracy. The development of the performance management system for the civil service was initiated by a re-assessment of the existing Performance Evaluation System (PES). This resulted to the Performance Management System - Office Performance Evaluation System (PMS-OPES)-a new strategy that will establish a culture of performance and accountability in the bureaucracy. Through the PMS-OPES, the CSC aims to establish a high-performance culture by aligning individual objectives to the organizational objectives. The new performance management system would meaningfully and objectively link employees performance vis--vis an agency's Organizational Vision, Mission, and Strategic Goals by using a technology composed of various strategies, methods, and tools for ensuring fulfillment of the functions of the offices and its personnel as well as for assessing the quality, quantity, and timeliness of the accomplishments. It is a systematic process for improving organizational performance by developing the performance of individuals and teams. It is a means of getting better results from the organization, teams and individuals by understanding and managing performance within an agreed framework of planned goals, standards and competence requirements. Processes exist for establishing shared understanding about what is to be achieved, and for managing and developing people in a way that increases the probability that it will be achieved in the short and longer term. The unique component of the PMS-OPES is the use of points system to measure the collective performance of individuals within an operating unit. It simplifies the

performance evaluation/measurement process and also provides an objective and user-friendly performance management system.

The Performance Management System - Office Performance Evaluation System (PMS-OPES)

The PMS-OPES is a new way of managing performance in the civil service that serves as an evaluation strategy for assessing office performance or the collective performance of individuals within the smallest operating unit of an organization. By measuring office performance, it becomes easier to directly translate the agency's strategic direction into more specific and measurable objectives. It also serves as a standard-setting mechanism for better alignment of individual objectives to agency objectives. Moreover, it enhances objectivity of individual performance evaluations. The following are the objectives of the PMS-OPES: 1. To align individual performance goals with the organization's strategic goals/vision; 2. To ensure organizational effectiveness by cascading institutional accountabilities to the various levels of the organization's hierarchy; 3. To have performance management linked to other HR systems; and 4. To link agency overall performance to the Organizational Performance Indicator Framework, to the Agency Strategic Plan, and to the MediumTerm Philippine Development Plan.

Features of the PMS-OPES

The following are the main features of the PMS-OPES: Focuses on outputs. The PMS-OPES is primarily concerned with outputs (the achievement of results or quantified objectives) but also concerned with outcomes (the impact made on performance). Uses a standard unit of measure. To simplify evaluation and to be able to easily compare performance across offices or functions, the PMS-OPES uses a standard unit of measure which is the points system. In this technique each output is assigned a number of points based on the length of time it takes one person to produce an output. As a result, a compilation of outputs called PMSOPES Output Reference Table is created containing a consolidated list of outputs of an office given its functions which also indicate the corresponding points that an office would earn for completing an output. It also contains the operational definitions that spell out the criteria or standards the output must meet to earn points.

The Points System

Measurement is critical during the execution or in carrying out of one's functions. Without measurement it is difficult to define performance. It is through the gathering of correct numbers that one is able to receive feedback on how well one is doing or performing and, in turn, it provides the basis in making decisions as to whether continue, stop or adjust what one is doing. One of the challenges that management has to deal with is how to translate the organization's mission into a set of goals and performance measures that make success concrete to everyone. They tackle the question: "Given our mission, how is our performance going to be defined?" No matter how an organization define its performance, it is necessary for all organizations to be able to capture information that tells a story about how the organization is doing. Capturing this information is usually done through some act of measurement. There are various measures being used to evaluate performance. The most common are input measures, output measures, efficiency measures, quality measures, and outcome measures. While these measures are sufficient to compare performance of offices with similar functions or similar line of work, it is difficult to use these measures to compare performance of offices with dissimilar functions. Whether in public sector or in private sector, management grapples with the task of how to compare the performance across different kinds of activities. For example, how would one compare the performance of an office that issue copies of birth certificate with the performance of an office that conducts training or seminar? It is really difficult-just as what the popular idiom "comparing apples with oranges" indicates-to compare values of different kinds. In private sector, financial measures provided the common denominator that made comparison possible. However, financial measures such as ROI (Return on Investment) or EVA (Economic Value Added) is not suitable for the public sector since most government agencies are non-profit organizations. In searching for a common denominator, the CSC recognized the only resource that all humans have an equal amount of-time. As long as we are alive, all of us have the same 24 hours in a day and 365 days in a year. By using time that is converted to points, the CSC was able to create a more objective performance evaluation system that made it possible to compare performance of different offices as well as provide a system where more objective target setting is achieved.

How to Use the Points System

Comparison is possible in the PMS-OPES due to the assignment of values to outputs using points. It is like assigning a monetary value to a product only, in this case, the unit is in points. In the market system, one can compare the value of two different products, for example a car and a truck, based on the prices assigned to them. Of course, in this instance, we are just looking on the monetary value and not considering the utility value of a product. In similar

fashion, using a point system, the outputs of one office can be compared to the outputs of another office. The amount of points assigned to a particular output is dependent on the amount of time it would take for one person to produce the output. The conversion of 1 hour to 1 point is used in this method. For example, if it takes an employee, on the average, two (2) hours to write a letter, then the assigned points for producing a letter is two (2) points. By assigning equitable points to all the outputs being produced by an organization, it is now possible to summarize the outputs of an office by just a single number. This makes it simpler to compare the performances of different offices by just comparing the amount of points each office produced. A PMS-OPES Output Reference Table shall be created which is a listing of all the outputs of an office and the corresponding points that an office would earn for completing each output. It also contains the operational definitions that spell out the criteria or standards an output must meet to earn points.

The PMS-OPES in the Performance Management Cycle

Performance management is a natural process of management and usually consists of these basic activities:

Plan - decide what to do and how to do it. Act - carry out the work/strategies needed to implement and realize the plan. Monitor - carry out continuous checks on what is being done and measure outcomes in order to assess progress in implementing the plan. Review - consider what has been achieved and, in the light of this, establish what else needs to be done and/or corrective action required if performance is not in line with the plan.

In the system developed by the CSC, the performance management system process framework consists of the following phases:

Performance Planning and Commitment - done at the start of the performance period where all staff agree on their performance expectations and the office work plan. Performance Monitoring and Coaching - the phase where the checking on the progress of achieving objectives is conducted. It is also the time where management addresses factors that either help or hinder effective work performance. Tracking tools or monitoring strategies are usually employed during this phase. Performance Review and Feedback - this phase aims to measure employees' commitments in the performance contract. It is during this

period that progress and achievements are assessed so that action plans can be prepared and agreed upon. Performance Evaluation and Development Planning - in this process, improvement needs are determined and action plans are developed to address them. This is also the phase when the rater and ratee discuss opportunities for career planning, reward and recognition.