Senior executives see drop in performance ratings
Senior executives are receiving much lower performance ratings on average under a new evaluation system, according to statistics released by the Office of Personnel Management Tuesday.
In fiscal 2004, 59.4 percent of career employees in the Senior Executive Service received the highest performance rating, down from the 74.5 percent in fiscal 2003. When all SES members, including political appointees, are counted, 61.6 percent received the highest possible rating in 2004.
Most SES employees switched that year to pay-for-performance systems involving stricter evaluations.
OPM Director Linda Springer said the decreased numbers demonstrate the program's success in delivering meaningful performance evaluations. Not every SES member can receive the highest performance rating, she said.
"Our report documents some good early news about SES pay and recognition and should reinforce that managers are taking the evaluation process more seriously," Springer said.
The ratings are based on individual performance as well as the performance of the organization under the executive's leadership, OPM said. SES members could have earned five possible ratings: unacceptable, minimally successful, fully successful, exceeds fully successful or outstanding.
The OPM-gathered data also found that while the percentage of highest achievers went down, the percentage of SES members who received performance awards increased, from 57.4 percent in fiscal 2003 to 58.2 percent in fiscal 2004. The dollar amount rose as well, from an average of $12,883 to an average of $13,734.
Leaders of the Senior Executives Association--a nonprofit organization that advocates for career federal executives - said they had mixed feelings about OPM's findings.
"It's good news that a large number of career members of the SES continue to receive significant awards for the quality of their performance," said Bert Subrin, SEA's member and agency liaison. "However, we hope that the substantial decrease in 2004 of the number of career SES receiving ratings at the highest level is not the result of de facto quotas or curves being used at some agencies."
Some of the agencies had a single "fully successful" rating as the highest possible score, which may account for the drop in numbers at the top, Subrin added.
The report included data from more than 30 agencies that have implemented, or are working on implementing, pay-for-performance systems.
The percentage of employees receiving the highest possible ratings varied widely among agencies. The State Department ranked 85.9 percent of its SES members at the top level, while the Nuclear Regulatory Commission gave only 9.3 percent of its 150 employees the highest mark.
Agencies were required to receive certification from OPM and the Office of Management and Budget before implementing a pay-for-performance system. Upon certification, agencies were allowed to increase the base pay of their highest performing employees. OPM and OMB required agencies to make "meaningful distinctions" between employees to receive certification.
COMMENTS
- You can buy this non-sense if you want. What happens when a SES doesn't perform at an acceptable level, if there is such a rating? Most old-timers know that the SESers are the biggest screw ups in the government and are never held accountable for anything. This is just more smoke and mirrors. Just waiting for an early out !!! Old Grunt Posted October 21, 2005 6:59 AM
- In all my years of service, I have never heard of a single SESer being removed for performance. I've seen forced resignations for misconduct but never a performance removal. I would also be real curious to know the percentage of unacceptable performance among the SES. With over 6,000 members I wouldn't be surprised if the answer has always been zero. HR Specialist GovExec.com reader Posted October 24, 2005 8:05 AM
- I can really relate to Robert M.'s comments. Yes, GovExec.com , please try really hard to get and print those statistics Robert is talking about. They may be some real eye-openers in there, especially if the mediocre performers got performance awards; and how many were there? What did happen to the bottom of the scale SESs? Were they re-assigned? Quietly dropped from the SES? Just thinking about my tax dollar and getting the most for my money. GovExec.com reader Posted October 24, 2005 2:33 PM
