Following the signature of your self assessment in SysPer, your reporting officer – in most cases this will be the Head of Unit – will invite you to a formal dialogue during the period mid January until the end of February.
The rules and style of the dialogue remain the same, but the role of this conversation between colleagues and their immediate superiors changes considerably in terms of quality:
- If you have intermediate hierarchy (like for example Heads of Sector) the evaluator may invite them to be present at the dialogue, but only if the jobholder agrees to it. At the same time, the jobholder on his own initiative can also demand the presence of such a colleague.
- In units larger than 20 people, the Head of Unit can delegate the appraisal function of holding the dialogue and drafting the appraisal report to an AD official of his/her unit, by agreement of the Director General. In such larger units, the Heads of Unit may also delegate preparatory work for the appraisal (dialogue and report) to an official (no grade specified, this can typically be an assistant or secretary) of the same unit. In any case the Head of Unit remains the formal reporting officer and has to sign the appraisal report. The Director remains the appeal assessor (appeal)
- The topic of the dialogue is an assessment of the jobholder’s performance in 2012, with regard to efficiency, abilities and conduct in the service. This shall be done jointly by both sides and be a fair exchange of views.
- In contrast to the previous evaluation system, an indication of performance level or promotion prospects is no longer part of the dialogue. The reporting officer has no formal influence on your promotion. Nonetheless you should try to discuss with him/her openly whether s/he sees you on a normal or rapid career path, provided your performance remains the same or improves. If s/he indicates a critical situation and a possibly slow career path, you should ask for an appeal with your Director (appeal) and discuss with your Head of Unit the difficulties and possible solutions for improvement.
- Although there is no more formal training map to fill in for the dialogue, the jobholder’s learning and training needs have to be discussed during the dialogue.
- If the jobholder does not accept the invitation for the dialogue without justified absences, the reporting officer may draw up an appraisal report without holding a dialogue.
- Within 10 working days of the dialogue, the reporting officer draws up the appraisal report
- With the new system, the evaluator is the sole responsible for the evaluation report.
- There is no more Countersigning officer to verify and counter-sign the evaluation report. Nonetheless Directors are under an obligation to coordinate criteria and foster good management practice across their Directorates, and with other Directorates, in order to ensure equal treatment.
- If you had carried out tasks in the interest of the institution in 2012 and clicked the relevant point in your self assessment the Group ad Hoc will automatically send a contribution that has to be made reference to and taken into account in the report.
- Once you receive the appraisal report, you have five working days and three options
- The appraisal report is structured along the same lines as the self assessment and should give an individual (not standardized!) evaluation of the jobholder’s efficiency, ability and conduct.
- Since there is no direct link between the wording of the report and the promotion procedure, the reporting officer’s role and freedom with regard to the drafting of the report increases. The report should be an honest feedback to the jobholder, and not drafted with a view to a certain number of points or performance levels as was often the case in the past.
- It would be very useful (but is not formally foreseen, so cannot be imposed) if you could convince your reporting officer to give in the general comment section an indication of the career track s/he sees you on. That could be something like
- A ‘well performing official’ or
- An ‘over performing official’
- The tasks fulfilled went beyond the jobholder’s responsibilities
- S/he often carried out tasks beyond his/her objectives
- An excellent colleague
- Accept the report in SysPer
- Add comments to the single sections of the report
- Refuse the report and appeal to the Director, with a text explaining your reasons of disagreement
The appeal dialogue
- If you do not agree with the text of your evaluation report you have the option to appeal to your appeal assessor (in most cases this will be the Director) within five working days from having received the contested report.
- Your appeal will no longer be dealt with by a Joint Committee but by the appeal assessor, who will invite you for a second dialogue within ten working days of your request to appeal against the appraisal report.
- You can invite another member of staff or a staff representative to accompany you. The R&D team stands ready to help you.
- Your Appeal Assessor can also invite another member of staff to the dialogue but s/he cannot invite your Reporting Officer.
- The appeal dialogue only refers to the qualitative content of the report, and not to promotion issues.
- The appeal dialogue and the Director’s decision are limited exclusively to elements you have already brought forward in your self assessment, during the dialogue or in your reasoned demand for an appeal. So there is no use in strategically holding back information that you would like to ‘surprise’ your Director with.
- After the dialogue, the Appeal Assessor will enter in Sysper2his/her decision whether or not to modify the report, as well as comments made by accompanying staff members who were present at the second dialogue.
- At this point, your report becomes final and the evaluation process is over.