GovernmentExecutive.com

The Defense Department has released new details on how employees will be rated, and consequently paid, under its new personnel system.

Although the Pentagon had released many details on the workings of the National Security Personnel System on its Web site in late November and again on Dec. 7, it had not included information on exactly how employees would be rated.

NSPS replaces the General Schedule with broad paybands, eliminates across-the-board raises in favor of performance-based raises, replaces locality raises with market-sensitive increases and requires intensive performance appraisals. The system also seeks to streamline unions' bargaining power -- a move that sparked a lawsuit and has delayed implementation until at least February.

The most recent details on NSPS indicate that employees will be graded on a five-point scale based in part on their performance in relation to benchmarks. The five ratings will be: unsuccessful, fair, valued performance, exceeds expectation or role model.

Benchmarks will vary by type of employee. The department added benchmark descriptions for four groups: Technician/Support, Professional/Analytical, Supervisory, and Supervisors in Professional/Analytical.

There are other employee groups, including Investigative, Fire Protection, Police/Security Guard, and Physician/Dental, for which there are still no standards available.

The documents also reveal seven areas of performance (dubbed Standard Performance Factors) on which all employees will be rated:

1. Technical Proficiency
2. Critical Thinking
3. Cooperation/Teamwork
4. Communication
5. Customer Focus
6. Resource Management
7. Achieving Results

Supervisors will be rated on two other categories:

1. Leadership
2. Supervision

For each of the standard performance areas, benchmarks will vary according to paybands. The system designates distinct bands, based on levels of expertise, for each occupation. For example, the Professional/Analytical pay schedule has three paybands: Entry/Intern/Developmental (payband 1), Full Performance/Journey level (payband 2), and Subject Matter Expert/Program Manager level (payband 3).

Benchmarks are provided only for the "valued performance" and "role model" rating levels. For a Subject Matter Expert/Program Manager (payband 3) in the Professional/Analytical group, an employee would have to reach the following three benchmarks to be rated a "valued performer" in the category of Communication:

• Seeks and actively listens to others' questions, ideas and concerns; shows respect for and carefully considers diverse viewpoints and crafts clear and organized responses, following up to ensure understanding.
• Communicates complex information, concepts and ideas to a wide range of audiences in an accurate, clear, concise, comprehensive, well-organized and timely manner; written communications are generally accepted without changes.
• Tailors style and materials to communicate information effectively to different levels of audiences, properly emphasizing critical issues.

If that same employee wanted the highest rating, "role model," he or she would have to attain these benchmarks as well:

• Adeptly reads complex interpersonal interactions and nonverbal cues and adjusts own behavior to communicate more effectively with others.
• Prepares and delivers communications that are of exceptional technical quality as recognized by peers, supervisors and/or customers.
• Uses a variety of techniques to communicate highly complex information, concepts and ideas to a range of audiences in a manner that facilitates their understanding and acceptance of the information.

These benchmark descriptions will serve only as a guide for supervisors rating their employees' performance. In addition to the nine performance factors, employees and supervisors will set out individual goals before each Oct. 1 performance cycle. Supervisors will rate employees on how well they achieve those goals, which are required to be linked to larger organization goals, as well as the nine factors.

All information released by Defense officials is still subject to change after consultation with unions.

COMMENTS

• You got to find humor in all this dysfunction just to make it through the day working for the federal government, especially DoD. There was a day, in the mid 80’s when we had a five level performance rating appraisal system. We used to receive yearly performance awards based upon 1 to 10 percent of our gross wages. It was DoD or OPM that changed this rating system to a “Pass/Fail” rating system. We never got the true word on why it changed. Just based upon our perception of management it may have been to “intensive” for them to comprehend to rate their subordinates. So now DoD has to create a new system just to re-implement the five level rating system. This new rating system is much more complex then the one we had in the 80’s. Management has gone 10-15 years with a more simplistic rating system. How long will it take to train them up to speed? What happens in NSPS when the agency is incapable of budgeting yearly performance raises? Our agency can’t budget for this item now, who is to say, they will do it then? What is their punishment for violating the NSPS “pay” for performance rules? It will be an easy out for the agency, management will be instructed not to rate anyone to the level that qualifies for a raise, or then again, it will just be the chosen few (management) that will receive the yearly raises. The people who designed the system and the rules for NSPS, what spiral to they fall under? HR Assistant Posted January 30, 2006 6:46 PM
• Let's start at the top! Critical thinking? Resource management? If airhead and his friends were any good at that, we wouldn't be looking at the kind of messes we are. "Communication" has been mostly attempts at deception. They've achieved results, all right, but not positive ones. I won't bother with the rest - the picture is pretty clear. GovExec.com reader Posted December 28, 2005 6:54 PM
• Hey Deputy Secretary England: Here's some comments from the vocal minority that thinks NSPS is flawed. I suggest you read the Mailbag comments for the past couple years, re-read the 58,000 comments sent in by interested employees, and next time you visit a DoD worksite -- stop by the union office and ask one of the union representatives to escort you around and show you what really happens. Mark Gibson Posted December 15, 2005 10:27 PM