menu close menu


Apsc Performance Agreement

39B Effective performance – GSP staff (a) The Agency`s performance management policies and processes, which address unsatisfactory performance, are available to GSP superiors and staff within the Agency and contain information that is clearly stated: on the other hand, supervisors are responsible for providing employees with regular information, honest and timely about their performance. Unsatisfactory benefits should not be moved on, nor can employees be rewarded with salary increases or promotions if they are unable to prove actual performance. It is necessary to clearly define what it means to be a manager and what is expected of managers. If they are expected to be coaches and mentors and give regular feedback, they should be given time to take on this role. In many cases, they also need to be able to perform these functions. Check the time spent in meetings and make sure managers have time to manage the workspace they are responsible for and not just to participate in meetings. Managing Underperformance requires a fair and equitable approach for all. It is necessary to distinguish commitment, motivation and the realization of valuable work and inerperformance. We also need to make sure that the problem is with the employees and not the managers. 360 feedback would help, but would like independent evaluation and monitoring to ensure it is of real value. Problem if there are few employees at a certain level, if you want open and honest feedback.

When managers develop their employees, it has to be something they are responsible for. They could look for opportunities for staff, but individuals should also be responsible for their own development. Do these parties have the expertise to manage their career development or are we looking at other functions to support them? On 1 July 2015, new instructions from the performance management will come into effect, which will force GSP employees to take more responsibility for their own performance. ApS agencies must also ensure that their strategies and practices focus on correcting unsatisfactory performance and recognizing service providers. (e) the management and evaluation of the performance of GSP staff in accordance with the Agency`s performance management policies and procedures; Training and support in new leadership styles such as reinforcement-based, competency-based, adaptive and service-based leadership. Focus less on the process and the checkbox and more on the action. Implementation of an inter-authority tutoring programme at all levels. A consistent approach to performance management across agencies.

(i) a clear indication of the expected performance and behaviour of the worker; and I think managers and team leaders need more development and support to give effective performance feedback. I have observed a number of employees who perform well and are demoralized because they have only received feedback on their weaknesses. To grow, people need to know what their strengths are and what they do well. Managers need to understand the psychological effects of performance feedback, which is not balanced, and how to better motivate staff. (ii) the possible results if the performance of a GSP staff member is found to be unsatisfactory; and the need to change the way performance is managed in the GSP has been known for a long time. Numerous APSC studies have highlighted the serious challenge faced by SPG agencies when it comes to effectively monitoring the performance of their staff. The message to the two SPG agencies and their employees is clear: poor performance must not be tolerated. . .



Comments are closed.