Analysis of PCS DCLG PMR Survey Comments 2015

Annex B

Analysis of PCS DCLG PMR Survey Comments 2015

The PCS DCLG PMR Survey contained 60 questions and 7 free text fields for further comments. Overall there were over 450 responses left by members to try to express their additional thoughts not captured by the questions, most of these responses covered numerous issues. Over 99% of the comments were critical of the system and/or how it had been applied. A detailed analysis of the comments to each free text question is contained below. The order set out in this annex is the same as in the survey and the findings within each question are ranked by the number of people raising the specific point.

1. The PMR Process in General – What if anything could be improved?

There were 157 responses to this question with most respondents highlighting numerous issues with the current system and how it could be improved. This was the highest response rate to any question and the replies were varied.

i) Transparency

No transparency with the process
Line manager can tell you you’re doing a good job only to receive a DN at moderation
No notes on what happens
Not allowed to see evidence
Impossible to challenge

ii) Scrap it

System is pointless and ridiculous
Needs to be scrapped and new system devised
There is no benefit to the current system

iii) Moderation

Lots of pressure to fill a ‘quota’
Impossible to do, as there is no like for like match
The manager with the loudest voice gets their way regardless of evidence
Moderating staff whose work we don’t see
No challenge, moderation seen as sacrosanct
Get lower grade staff to moderate performance of senior managers as a trial
Should be stopped and staff marked by what they do

iv) Nine Box Grid

Worst part of the PMR system
So subjective, it needs to be ripped apart
Other parts of the civil service do not use a nine box grid why do we?
Replace it with a narrative.
Managers don’t even understand the ‘What’ and ‘How’ axis

v) Bureaucratic

Amount of time is disproportionate
Needs to be simplified
Incomprehensible, so it turns into a tick box exercise
Too long so nobody actually follows the process anyway

vi) Subjectivity

Eliminate the ‘How’ axis as its too subjective
Perception beats evidence
Bias and discrimination is rife
No way to actually challenge an adverse marking

vii) Counterproductive and Reduces Morale

Putting people in boxes is counterproductive
The private sector abandoned stack ranking as it reduces morale
This PMR system makes people want to leave
Creates a bulling culture where people are afraid
Divisive and pits people against each other

viii) Not clear what it is for

No one can actually say what the PMR system is used for

ix) Other Comments

There are too many equality issues linked to the PMR process
Development Needed phrase is not helpful. Less ambiguity on wording
PMR erodes the art of management
Not value for money

2. Development Needed – Further comments from staff who have had this box marking within the last 2 years

There were 19 responses from staff who had received a DN in the last two years.

i) Transparency

No transparency so managers can get away with lies
No evidence needs to be provided to put you in lowest box marking
As no evidence is provided, there is no challenge

ii) Moderation

This should be scrapped as it allows the worst form of discrimination
Line managers get shouted down by more senior managers who decide your box marking
Markings decided by people who don’t see your work
No minutes taken on markings, so impossible to challenge

iii) No warning given

I was told I was good all year and then got a DN marking
I still don’t know why I was given a DN marking
Was not told I needed to improve throughout the year

3. Moderation Meetings – Further comments from line managers/attendees at moderation meetings

There were 29 responses from line or senior managers.

i) Evidence

Markings supported by evidence are overturned
Markings are based on perception and not evidence
It’s about picking the weakest and marking them down regardless of evidence
Anecdotal evidence and hearsay used to change markings
Those with the loudest voice get their way regardless of evidence

ii) Subjectivity

Favouritism plays a big role
If there are any minutes, they are buried under the guise of confidentiality because the content is shocking
Kangaroo court
Based on opinions of people, not work
It is not objectively measured

iii) Quota

It’s clear that the purpose is to fill a quota

iv) Not allowed to attend the meeting

As a line manager I am not allowed to attend the moderation meeting and feel powerless to stop direct reportees being downgraded

v) Not enough knowledge

Moderates around the borders as other line managers don’t know enough to challenge
Impossible to compare different jobs at the same grade

4. Moderation Meetings – Further comments from staff not attending moderation meetings

There were 62 responses to this question

i) Secretive

Never been involved in one and no idea how they work
Never been given any clear explanation of how they work
The feedback given at moderation meetings should be recorded and made available to all those who were 'discussed'
Everything is secret and cannot be disclosed
Held completely behind closed doors
Astonishing - people get to disparage you with impunity and anonymity
Kafkaesque

ii) Fear

Everyone is terrified of getting a poor box marking, so no-one talks of moderation
Everyone is trying to outdo everyone else out of fear

iii) Subjectivity

Totally subjective, a system that needs to be changed.
High profile teams get better markings
Based on hearsay
What ever happened to integrity
Its run like a popularity contest

iv) Line Manager

Marking depends on having a strong willed manager who will fight for staff
High graded staff can generally push for better performance markings
Lower grade managers struggle to be heard

v) Other

Staff should be allowed to attend when moderation is about them
Complete exclusion of staff is abhorrent
It is clear it is only the quota that really counts

5. Performance Bonuses and Vouchers - Any additional comments

There 77 responses to this question

i) No equality of opportunity

Opportunity largely depends on what work you are involved in
The system is markedly unfair
The same teams nominate themselves
For people outside 2MS, it is more challenging to get nominated
Disproportionately awarded to those who do ‘flavour of the month’ jobs

ii) Rewarded randomly

Not rewarded for doing best or challenging work
It is a lottery
Depends on divisions/managers you work for
Depends on how loud you are
Hardworking conscientious employees get nothing

iii) Transparency

Needs to be more transparency on what is being rewarded
It is not clear how you would even get nominated

iv) Put the money into an annual payrise

Use the money to give everyone a payrise
Annual payrises should be reinstated

v) The voucher system

In times of austerity the voucher scheme should be scrapped.
Scrap it as it is a waste of money
The voucher scheme should be investigated by NAO
Isn’t it corrupt?

6. Bullying and Discrimination – Additional comments answered by respondents who had felt bullied or witnessed bullying behaviour as part of the PMR process

There were 51 responses to this question.

i) No evidence

There was no evidence to support box marking, bullied into accepting it
Marked down with no evidence and no leave to appeal
When I challenged, was told my work was shit

ii) Victimisation

Managers are bullied into filling a quota at moderation, those who don’t are adversely affected
Managers who stand up to bullying in moderation meetings then get marked as DN themselves
When I refused to sign my PMR, my manager took revenge

iii) Development Needed

People are bullied into accepting an adverse box marking when problem lies with the line manager

iv) Vulnerable Employees

Vulnerable employees are repeatedly picked on
HR don’t seem to do anything about bad managers
When I have tried to raise issues, basically ignored

v) Other

Excluded from doing work on my objectives

Bullying has been the result of an abuse of hierarchy

7. Any other comments

There were 57 responses to this question

Design a fairer system

A fairer system is urgently required
Dedication used to be valued, not any more
It is so vague, any manager can use it to do what they want
Subjective and bad managers are not challenged
It has essentially been an unmitigated disaster.

Discrimination

Ageism is rife in the Department
Pressure put on managers to mark down lower grade staff, so that by the time it comes to G6/7, less need to be marked in DN as quota has been filled
Fast streamers get all the bonuses and better markings, but they have more high profile jobs not given to ordinary staff
System discriminates against vulnerable staff
Entrenched bias against just about everyone who does not conform to the white middle class cliché of a civil servant
Development Needed disproportionately given to equalities group
A vile process which legitimises bullying and racism
Favours white, under 35 able bodied men
It’s all about written form; people with learning disabilities are likely to be disadvantaged here.

Ideas for a new system

Report by exception where everyone is presumed to be doing a good job unless advised otherwise
Move to a 2 box system – Competent and Not Competent and do not have a guided distribution range
Union Reps should sit on each of the moderations as observers
Change Development Needed as it tries to capture employees who need training and those who are poor performers
Scrap the nine box grid as it is not objective
Provide staff with a PMR system that reflects its value as an effective management tool
Look at the DN box markings and remove statistical bias against equality groups
Needs to be a process that holds managers to account for markings

What is the purpose of the PMR system

What is the point of it
It is not useful in any way
It means nothing for career progression

Motivation/Stress

It is the biggest motivation to find another job
Divisive system which causes a tremendous amount of upset each year for no purpose
It has severely affected my mental health
It has demotivated me, blamed me and called me a failure
I have been subject to appraisals all my life, but I have never experienced a more demoralising system

Annual Awards

Annual awards should be reinstated as not everyone has the opportunity to be involved in ‘eye catching’ work.

Other

No-one seems to care if you don’t get a report
Unclear what the standard is
Given up on getting an exceeded ever
Completely flawed and a waste of money
It’s not universal -it is completed differently in different divisions
This has been a catalyst for me leaving