More Related Content
What's hot (20)
Similar to Richard Ward PR14-15 (20)
Richard Ward PR14-15
- 1. Ratings Exceeds (E) Performance consistentlyexceeds the standards required (consistentlygoes above and beyond expectations). Met (M) Performance consistentlymeets the standards required (consistentlymeets expectations). Not Achieved (NA) Performance is below the expected standards required or has not been demonstrated consistently (consistentlynot meeting expectations, there is a clear need for improvement). Progressing (P) Performance is progressing towards the expected standards required (staff member is new to their role and performance is on track). Not Assessed (NAS) The employee has not had the opportunityto demonstrate performance against the expected standard required. Mid-year performance review Name: Richard Ward Period from/to (YY/YY): 14/15 Date completed: 26 January 2015 Achievement against your performance objectives Describe what you have achieved for each performance objective below. Make sure this includes how you went about meeting each objective. Rating 1 In this mid-year I dealt with a user who was having issues with the Source. Once I had resolved her issues she wrote me an e-mail thanking me for my help. To ensure that I could achieve this, I was committed and loyal to the vision, values, and goals of the Office. I met the professional standards required of my role and profession, and I also had to remain open and straightforward with my communication to ensure that we could find some effective solutions. M 2 I engage every week with Audit New Zealand to discuss their outstanding Source requests. Together with the Information Management team I devise effective solutions, and implement them when required. I provide first level Source Support to the OAG and will consistently follow through requests to meet client requirements.. As an Information Management team we need to implement some Service Level Agreements (SLAs) to ensure that clients are aware of the standards they should expect from our team. E 3 I consistently meet user requirements for off-site retrieval of paper records. I have my own personal deadline of 24 hours from date of request to the time the client receives the record. If I am away, I ensure the clients know the process to retrieve their required record. I am currently unable to meet the records lifecycle requirements and I need support to meet this objective. M 4 I have had no input into the R&D schedule and PRA Action Plan The implementation of the OAG paper records database into the Source is an objective that may not be achieved this year. As part of the Information Management team I have been involved in meetings and discussions into the requirements for Records Management in the Source, but the process has not yet been implemented. NAS 5 I have attended two training courses to help me improve my knowledge of the systems that the Information Management team use. I have attended training courses on Sharepoint 2010 power user and Managed Metadata. I now intend on taking a training course on the Introduction to the Public Records Act 2005. I actively participate in team meetings, planning and strategy activities. E Overall mid-year rating E
- 2. Ratings Exceeds (E) Performance consistentlyexceeds the standards required (consistentlygoes above and beyond expectations). Met (M) Performance consistentlymeets the standards required (consistentlymeets expectations). Not Achieved (NA) Performance is below the expected standards required or has not been demonstrated consistently (consistentlynot meeting expectations, there is a clear need for improvement). Progressing (P) Performance is progressing towards the expected standards required (staff member is new to their role and performance is on track). Not Assessed (NAS) The employee has not had the opportunityto demonstrate performance against the expected standard required. Employee comments: My role in the Information Management team requires me to work as part of a team to meet our high standards and devise effective solutions. As per the customer satisfaction survey the Information Management Team scored very highly and I am an important member of that team. I want to attend more training sessions this year to further my development within my team and the organisation. Manager comments: Richard has met his expected performance targets diligently and has exceeded in a number of areas. He is always willing to take on new tasks and be involved in the work of the team. He has proactively taken on a support role with Audit NZ and we receive consistently good feedback about his work with them and the wider organisation. The challenge in the next six months will be to continue to learn about SharePoint while managing a large load of support work.
- 3. Ratings Exceeds (E) Performance consistentlyexceeds the standards required (consistentlygoes above and beyond expectations). Met (M) Performance consistentlymeets the standards required (consistentlymeets expectations). Not Achieved (NA) Performance is below the expected standards required or has not been demonstrated consistently (consistentlynot meeting expectations, there is a clear need for improvement). Progressing (P) Performance is progressing towards the expected standards required (staff member is new to their role and performance is on track). Not Assessed (NAS) The employee has not had the opportunityto demonstrate performance against the expected standard required. Full year performance review Name: Richard Ward Period from/to (YY/YY): 14/15 Date completed: Achievement against your performance objectives Describe what you have achieved for each performance objective below. Make sure this includes how you went about meeting each objective. Rating 1 I now engage with Audit New Zealand staff on a regular basis, discussing issues regarding the Source, and how I can help resolve them. This has been a healthy challenge for me, as I have been dealing with people who are adapting to a new way of working and a change in work culture. I have had to remain professional on many occasions, when my recommended solutions have not been warmly received. I always respect what my colleagues have to say, and I continually encourage an open conversation. However I always ensure that any solution is in line with our Information Management principles and Office policies. I know this has been successful, because I previously met with the Professional Practices Group (PPG) within Audit New Zealand on a weekly basis, but now they are competent enough to not require the same level of engagement and support. E 2 Supporting the Source is now an integral part of my role. I implement all pre-approved changes, provide Information Management advice, and train all new starters on how to use the Source. As per my IDP, I can now complete a range of BAU Source activities without assistance. This has benefitted my team because my Senior Information Management Advisors can now solely concentrate on the Sharepoint 2013 upgrade. E 3 Due to the Sharepoint 2013 upgrade becoming one of the organisations priorities, I am now responsible for supporting the Source full time on the Sharepoint 2010 platform. To satisfy our Records Management process I have trained two members of my team, to ensure we can continue to deliver the function to a high standard. All records requests are now received through Service Desk and a shared mailbox. This has helped me to gauge our work load, resource effectively and meet our SLAs. It also enables me to review the completed work, to confirm it is being carried out accurately. My next aim is to improve my teams understanding of SilentOne and how to use all the functions productively. E 4 As part of the Information Management team I am still continually involved in meetings and discussions into the requirements for Records Management in the Source, but the process has not yet been implemented. The Sharepoint 2013 upgrade is now the main priority for the Information Management team. Although I am not directly involved in that project, I consistently alleviate the work load of my team, so the project can be resourced effectively. M
- 4. Ratings Exceeds (E) Performance consistentlyexceeds the standards required (consistentlygoes above and beyond expectations). Met (M) Performance consistentlymeets the standards required (consistentlymeets expectations). Not Achieved (NA) Performance is below the expected standards required or has not been demonstrated consistently (consistentlynot meeting expectations, there is a clear need for improvement). Progressing (P) Performance is progressing towards the expected standards required (staff member is new to their role and performance is on track). Not Assessed (NAS) The employee has not had the opportunityto demonstrate performance against the expected standard required. We are now adopting new processes and procedures, along with using new systems. As a result I am in the progress of updating the records desk file and uploading it into the Source. The R&D schedule is still being developed, but I need to learn more about the work involved to publish one. 5 I have now attended a course covering the Introduction into the Public Records Act 2005. This broadened my knowledge of the Act and has subsequently ensured that I am more confident when dealing with records related queries. However I have not attended any of the Records Management Network meetings, which would be beneficial. These meetings would supplement my PRA training and introduce me to new people within my field. I feel we work very proactively and efficiently as a team. We are all willing to adapt and support each other when required, which creates a positive working environment. E Overall full year rating E Employee comments: This mid-year I have taken more responsibility within my team. I have had to adapt my role to fulfil the immediate needs of the organisation, and ensured that our high standard of service has not been compromised. In 2015/2016 I want to continue to develop and start learning more about Sharepoint 2013. I expect to achieve this by attending more training courses and ultimately using the application more. Manager comments: Richard has had a very strong first year in the role. His primary responsibilities have been around providing business as usual support to The Source, and managing the paper records processes. Richard has worked hard to ensure that our staff have the support they need. He has done particularly well working with Audit New Zealand and has received consistently positive feedback about his work with them. He is always willing to talk issues through with staff and works hard to provide them with good solutions. When in doubt, he is proactive in talking to his colleagues about how to do things. In his work on paper records, he has provided a very efficient service to the business. Richard has been proactive in his work, managing not just the day-to-day processes, but also instigating and managing the off-siting of older records, without prompting. As The Source 2013 project has kicked off, Richard has adapted his routine to meet the changing demands of the project, even though it has meant a significant change of duties. During this process, he has provided excellent support to Jordan and Sarah as they take over the paper records responsibilities of his work. Due to other priorities that have come up throughout the year, there are a few tasks that there has not been an opportunity to work on. These include working on the R&D schedule, and the migration of the paper records database. Hopefully there will be more time to look at these in the coming year. Richard is a positive, efficient and energetic new member of staff and has been a credit to both himself and the team.