Staff Performance Review Policy: Difference between revisions
→Philosophy
Adam.burgess (talk | contribs) |
Adam.burgess (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
== Philosophy == | == Philosophy == | ||
EBC’s success is dependent in part on the performance and contribution of every employee. Effective performance management involves a continuous two-way process of communication between an employee and the Board via the Staff Liaison focused on: | |||
*(a) the direction and goals of EBC and the employee's contributions in the coming year; | |||
*(b) clear, reasonable expectations for performance and accountability; | |||
*(c) learning and development needs; | |||
*(d) recognition of employee contributions; and | |||
*(e) guidance and support to enhance employee performance. | |||
<blockquote>"Some boards neglect their duty of evaluating the director. They may fear conflict, be | <blockquote>"Some boards neglect their duty of evaluating the director. They may fear conflict, be | ||
at a loss for the tools, or lack the tradition. All are poor, if common, reasons to avoid | at a loss for the tools, or lack the tradition. All are poor, if common, reasons to avoid | ||
| Line 44: | Line 50: | ||
* Identifying opportunities, strengths, challenges, and strategic questions before | * Identifying opportunities, strengths, challenges, and strategic questions before | ||
they become troubling issues."</blockquote> (Source: http://firstnonprofit.org/images/uploads/pdf/Evaluating.pdf) | they become troubling issues."</blockquote> (Source: http://firstnonprofit.org/images/uploads/pdf/Evaluating.pdf) | ||
== Definitions of key concepts or terms used in the policy == | == Definitions of key concepts or terms used in the policy == | ||