Performance and Development Review
(PDR) Scheme
Guidance Notes
Performance and Development Review (PDR) Scheme
Guidance notes
Contents
1. Aims of Newcastle University’s Performance and Development Review (PDR) Scheme .. 1
2. Potential Benefits of Performance and Development Reviews (PDRs) ............................. 2
3. Who is Reviewed? ............................................................................................................ 3
4. Frequency of PDRs ........................................................................................................... 3
5. Number of Reviews per Reviewer ..................................................................................... 3
6. Responsibilities ................................................................................................................. 3
7. Selection of Reviewers ...................................................................................................... 5
8. Training of Reviewers and Reviewees .............................................................................. 6
9. Confidentiality ................................................................................................................... 6
10. Newcastle University’s PDR Process .............................................................................. 7
11. The Performance & Development Review (PDR) Meeting .............................................. 9
12. After the Performance and Development Review (PDR) meeting .................................. 11
13. Performance and Development Review (PDR) Documentation ..................................... 12
14. Unresolved Issues......................................................................................................... 13
15. How the PDR Process relates to other HR Processes .................................................. 13
17. Maximizing Staff Development Opportunities ................................................................ 15
18. Monitoring the Performance and Development Review (PDR) process ......................... 16
19. Team Reviews .............................................................................................................. 16
1. Aims of Newcastle University’s Performance and Development
Review (PDR) Scheme
The University’s Performance and Development Review (PDR) scheme is based on
the understanding that professional updating, development and training is an
ongoing and important activity. This activity helps to maintain and improve the
performance of individuals, academic/service units and the University. The purpose
of the scheme is to review the performance, development needs and career
aspirations of all members of staff. Reviews will reflect academic/service unit and
institutional aims and priorities; and will ensure that appropriate steps are taken to
optimise performance. The PDR scheme is integrated with the probation process so
that there is a clear mechanism for assessment, feedback and development.
All staff are required to take part in the PDR process.
The University’s PDR scheme aims to:
a)
provide staff with the opportunity to evaluate their performance. The
scheme will allow staff to give and receive informed and constructive
feedback on their performance and that of their section/school;
b)
review the achievements of members of staff against their agreed
objectives for the period under review/last 12 months;
c)
clarify for the individual, the University and the academic/service unit
priorities and to agree personal objectives related to these;
d)
discuss staff development needs in relation to personal, academic/service
unit and institutional objectives and agree how these development needs
can be met;
e)
discuss short and long-term career aspirations in relation to current and
potential future roles and within the resources available;
f)
Provide a framework within which the probation discussion can take
place.
Page 1
2. Potential Benefits of Performance and Development Reviews
(PDRs)
Well conducted PDRs can have significant benefits for individuals, academic/service
units and the University.
Benefits to the Individual
PDRs provide an opportunity:
a)
b)
to have an honest and constructive meeting about performance,
development needs and career aspirations;
to give constructive feedback to the reviewer;
c)
to agree challenging objectives for the next 12 months with the aim of
increasing job satisfaction;
d)
to align the individual’s goals with those of the academic/service unit;
e)
to clarify the reviewee’s role within the academic/service unit;
f)
to give and receive praise and recognition;
g)
to discuss under-performance and identify areas for improving
performance;
h)
to build the relationship between the reviewee and the reviewer;
i)
to allow uninterrupted time to discuss key issues with a line manager;
j)
to plan for personal development activities.
Benefits to the Institution/Academic/Service Unit
PDRs provide an opportunity:
a)
to align individual goals with those of the academic/service units and
therefore optimise the performance of both;
b)
to improve communication within the academic/service unit and the
institution;
c)
to develop the relationship between reviewer and the reviewee, allowing
for the exchange of ideas;
d)
to facilitate mutual understanding of the reviewee’s role;
e)
to aid resource planning (for example, financial, human and physical);
f)
to gain commitment to the academic/service unit’s goals and standards;
g)
To consider the individual’s performance in line with the University’s
probation policy.
Page 2
3. Who is Reviewed?
All categories of University staff, regardless of the nature of their contract, are
covered by the PDR scheme. As such, all staff are reviewed annually. However,
because the joint NHS Trust/University appraisal scheme is consistent with the
principles of the University’s PDR scheme, clinical academics who are reviewed as
part of the NHS Trust/University scheme and where there is a University reviewer
present are exempt from the University’s PDR process.
4. Frequency of PDRs
The head of unit determines the frequency of PDRs within their school, although this
should be at least an annual activity with an informal mid-year review as appropriate.
All reviewees can therefore expect an annual PDR. It is optional, though highly
recommended to have a much shorter “how’s it going” review 6 months later.
5. Number of Reviews per Reviewer
Preparing for and facilitating PDRs is a major undertaking calling for considerable
commitment and goodwill from both reviewers and reviewees. Restricting the
number of reviewees per reviewer is the most effective way to ensure that PDRs are
conducted regularly, fairly and with sufficient preparation and consideration. Heads
of academic/service units determine the PDR scheme structure within their schools
and in doing so agree how many reviewees each reviewer will review. It is
recommended that no reviewer is responsible for more than 10 reviewees at any one
time.
6. Responsibilities
Vice-Chancellor
The Vice-Chancellor, through the Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Pro-Vice-Chancellors,
Registrar, and directors of services, is directly responsible for ensuring that PDRs
are conducted annually throughout the University. The Vice-Chancellor is reviewed
by the Chair of Council and then conducts PDRs at the start of each academic year
with the Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Pro-Vice-Chancellors, Provosts and Registrar. The
Vice-Chancellor’s performance and development objectives therefore impact directly
on the objectives of the senior management team.
Pro Vice Chancellors and the Registrar
Pro Vice-Chancellors and the Registrar hold PDRs with their directors of
services/sections, heads of academic unit and deans annually. They also ensure that
PDRs are being conducted throughout their areas of responsibility. Their own PDR
objectives therefore impact directly on the objectives of their heads of
academic/service unit/directors of services and deans. Usually these PDR meetings
take place before Christmas each year so that objectives for the academic/service
unit will be reflected in all subsequent PDRs and development needs can be
budgeted for.
Page 3
Heads of Academic/Service Units
Heads of academic/service unit and directors of services are responsible for
ensuring effective PDRs take place in their own academic/service unit. Heads may
delegate the responsibility for conducting the PDR meetings, although they should
agree who is responsible for reviewing each member of staff, the timing of the
exercise and the design of the process and documentation. For the purpose of
making a recommendation on probation it will need to be the line manager who
carries out the PDR review. Heads are ultimately responsible for monitoring the
performance of their academic/service unit and for ensuring that the
academic/service unit delivers agreed objectives. The PDR process should help the
heads of academic/service units to ensure that all staff are reviewed annually.
Heads of academic or service units are encouraged to apply a sampling approach to
ensure there is sufficient rigor and quality in the PDR process within their areas.
They are also encouraged to ensure staff in their areas are recording the dates of
when PDRs are being conducted.
Reviewers
Reviewers are responsible for implementing the academic unit or service unit’s PDR
process annually and for using the appropriate PDR documentation with all of their
reviewees. Reviewers are responsible for attending the appropriate PDR training and
for ensuring adequate preparation for each review. The majority of PDRs are usually
conducted during the period of January to April to ensure alignment with business
planning and to allow for accurate budgeting for staff development activities. No
reviewer should be expected to review more than ten reviewees per annum.
Reviewers are responsible for recording that PDRs have taken place. Reviewers are
also responsible for ensuring that, after the review meetings, the PDRs they have
conducted for their team on SAP via Manager’s desktop.
Reviewees
Reviewees are responsible for preparing effectively for their PDR meetings, for
contributing constructively at the meeting, and for agreeing their performance and
development objectives.
Clinical Academics
Clinical Academics are expected to complete a joint Trust and University appraisal
process: Joint Appraisal Form and Academic Staff in Medical Sciences PDR form
are required to be completed.
Page 4
Staff Development Unit
The Staff Development Unit is responsible for offering support in the form of advice,
guidance, training and coaching to academic/service units. Reviewers and reviewees
must be familiar with the aims and operation of the PDR scheme before carrying out
reviews, and initial awareness training is obligatory for reviewers and highly
recommended for reviewees.
Advice and guidance is available from the Staff Development Unit on all staff
development planning and resourcing issues. The Unit is also available to help
reviewers and reviewees with training and/or development needs that are identified
as part of the PDR process. The Staff Development Unit organises an Open
Programme each year to provide a wide range of workshops and can design and
deliver tailor-made development activities for individuals and/or, academic/service
units as appropriate.
The Staff Development web pages hold a range of useful resources and
documentation including a short, online film which can be viewed as a useful
refresher of the PDR process.
Human Resources Section
The Human Resources Section will have a role in supporting PDR activity however it
is the University senior managers, and heads of academic/service units who are
expected to take clear ownership of the scheme. The senior team’s management of
the PDR process will be monitored by the Vice-Chancellor. The Vice-Chancellor is
ultimately responsible for the University’s PDR scheme and may routinely ask
academic units or service units for information on PDR completion in their areas.
7. Selection of Reviewers
Reviewers are selected by the head of academic/service unit. Normally, line
managers will review the staff in their own area of responsibility. It is acknowledged,
however, that occasionally there may be a more appropriate reviewer and this
should be discussed with, and agreed by, the Head of academic unit/service unit
Normally the reviewer will be a person who:
a)
understands the work of the reviewee and their areas of responsibility;
b)
is aware of the needs and requirements of the academic/service unit and
the University;
c)
is able to influence the allocation of the resources needed to implement
any plans made during the review;
d)
has been trained in the skills and knowledge needed for the effective
operation of the PDR scheme;
e)
Will be making the final recommendation re the completion of probation.
Page 5
8. Training of Reviewers and Reviewees
Reviewers
All reviewers who review the performance and development of others must attend
obligatory awareness training in the PDR process, its aims, and its documentation.
Some, especially first time reviewers, will also need skills training to ensure their
PDR meetings are effective – for example, training in giving constructive feedback to
reviewees. Regular workshops are available on the Open Programme offered by the
Staff Development Unit. Tailored activities can also be organised to meet specific
needs of an academic or service unit and the PDR online film is also available to
view as a useful refresher on the Staff Development Unit’s webpage.
Reviewees
It is strongly recommended that staff being reviewed under the PDR scheme for the
first time should also attend awareness training. Short, practical workshops, which
encourage reviewees to maximise the benefit from their PDRs, are also available on
the SDU’s Open Programme as well as a PDR online film available through SDU’s
Learning Resource Centre .
9. Confidentiality
Confidentiality is essential if the University’s PDR scheme is to succeed and if staff
are to feel comfortable being honest during review meetings. The PDR Form is a
summary of the main points of the meeting, not the fine detail of the confidential
discussion. The form is confidential to the reviewee, the reviewer and the next level
of management (or with the agreement of the reviewee, another senior
manager).Where a PDR review involves discussion for probation purposes, the line
manager of the staff member will complete a separate probation page and forward to
Human Resources. Relevant information from the PDR may be included with the
probation page. PDR Forms are not sent to the Human Resources Section or the
Staff Development Unit. Any training and development needs can be discussed with
the Staff Development Unit. All forms are available from the SDU’s webpage.
Page 6
10. Newcastle University’s PDR Process
University Level
The following flow chart (figure 1) illustrates how the University’s PDR process starts
with the Vice-Chancellor and cascades throughout the institution from the most
senior managers through to all other staff members. Target dates are included to
ensure that staff development needs can be identified in time for them to be included
in the school’s/section’s budget planning process.
VC reviewed by the Chairman of Council
(Usually September)
VC reviews Pro Vice Chancellors and Registrar
Pro Vice-Chancellors and Registrar review directors of
services, heads of academic/service unit, deans and
heads of research institutes
Directors of services, heads of academic/service unit
review their reviewees (maximum of 10)
Managers/reviewers review their reviewees
Academic/service unit staff development plans produced
in time for budget planning
Plans to address local
actions agreed and
actioned throughout the
year
Training and development needs
that can be addressed locally
are actioned throughout the year
and other staff development
needs are collated into an
academic/service unit plan
Page 7
Figure 2 below illustrates how PDR progresses for an individual reviewee
Reviewer and reviewee agree the date, venue and
documentation for the PDR meeting at least four weeks
prior to the meeting
Both reviewer and reviewee prepare for the PDR meeting
by using the PDR form as a guide
PDR meeting takes place (approximately one hour) and
where appropriate the date of mid-year review is agreed
and put into both diaries
PDR review meeting date is recorded on SAP via
Manager’s desktop
Summary of the main points of the PDR meeting is drawn
up into the PDR form template
Copy of agreed PDR Form sent to head of
academic/service unit or the next level of management for
comments where appropriate
Final copy, (including head of academic/service unit
comments where appropriate) sent back to reviewer
Reviewer ensures reviewee receives the final PDR Form
and keeps a copy for their own records
Plans to address local actions agreed
and addressed throughout the year
Training and development needs that
can be addressed locally are actioned
throughout the year
Providers of T&D activities, including
SDU and Health & Safety work closely
with the academic/service units to meet
generic staff development needs
throughout the year
Page 8
11. The Performance & Development Review (PDR) Meeting
The review meeting is a very important part of the PDR process and should involve a
two-way discussion between the reviewer and the reviewee. Both parties should
prepare for the meeting and allow sufficient time (one to one and a half hours is
typical). The timing and venue of the meeting should be agreed at least four weeks
before the meeting takes place. The venue should provide privacy, freedom from
interruptions and, if possible, informality.
Role of the Reviewers
Reviewers are strongly advised to seek advice and guidance on conducting PDR
meetings, particularly for the first time, but briefly the reviewer should:
a)
explain the purpose of the meeting at the outset;
b)
put the reviewee at ease and encourage them to talk freely about their
work;
c)
set a tone of joint responsibility and helpfulness by remembering that the
PDR meeting is ‘owned’ by the reviewee. Therefore, the reviewee should
do most of the talking, not the reviewer;
d)
assure the reviewee of confidentiality as set out in these guidance notes;
e)
listen and co-operate, considering the individual’s point of view;
f)
remember that problems should not be aired for the first time at a PDR
meeting. The discussion should contain no surprises;
g)
use the documentation as the agenda for the meeting and work through
each of the main headings, listening, note taking and sharing views and
ideas;
h)
provide a balanced view of their perceptions of the review period and
future goals in relation to the school’s/section’s priorities;
i)
explain in detail the priorities and direction of the academic/service unit;
j)
concentrate on the individual and their role using specific examples rather
than generalisations;
k)
ask ‘open’ questions to probe and encourage the reviewee to contribute;
l)
be prepared to address any problem areas constructively and use a joint
problem-solving approach to generate solutions;
m)
praise specific examples of excellent performance and point out specific
examples of underperformance where improvements are necessary;
n)
avoid interrupting but retain the initiative throughout the meeting;
o)
agree an action plan with the reviewee for new objectives and any
development needs/actions for career progression. If agreement cannot
be reached the reviewer will set the objectives to be achieved. Guidance
on this part of the process is strongly recommended for new Reviewers
and is available from the Staff Development Unit;
Page 9
p)
close the meeting by re-reading the objectives and summarizing progress
throughout the review period;
q)
where appropriate agree a interim review date with the reviewee (30
minutes to one hour maximum) and put into diaries of both reviewer and
reviewee;
r)
Where appropriate, explain to the reviewee what recommendation will be
made regarding their probation, based on their performance during the
probation period.
Role of the Reviewee
Detailed advice and guidance on contributing to PDR meetings for reviewees is
available from the Staff Development Unit in the form of short workshops throughout
the year, but briefly the reviewee should:
a)
have prepared for the PDR meeting;
b)
remind themselves of the purpose of the meeting prior to attending;
c)
feel comfortable about asking for clarification on any aspect of the
PDR – such as the process, documentation, or confidentiality;
d)
talk freely, for example, about their work, skills, difficulties, or future;
e)
remember that it is the reviewee’s meeting and as such they should do
most of the talking, not the reviewer;
f)
promote a tone of joint responsibility and helpfulness;
g)
listen and try to understand the reviewer’s points of view;
h)
use the documentation as the agenda for the meeting and work
systematically through each of the main headings. This will involve
listening, and sharing views, hopes and concerns;
i)
provide a balanced view of their perceptions of the review period and their
future goals in the context of the school’s/section’s/University’s priorities;
j)
discuss their achievements and successes during the review period;
k)
concentrate the discussion on their role and future, using specific
examples;
l)
raise any problem areas constructively and using a joint problem-solving
approach to generate solutions;
m)
give specific examples of excellent performance and specific examples of
where performance could be improved;
n)
be honest with the reviewer, providing specific examples of how the
reviewer could help more, where appropriate;
o)
be confident enough to ask for more support, guidance or resources;
Page 10
p)
agree an action plan with the reviewer. This will include new objectives
and any development needs/actions for career progression. Ensure that
this part of the meeting is accurately recorded as it will form the basis of
the mid-year review;
q)
agree the final objectives and summarise progress with the reviewer at
the end of the meeting If agreement is not reached the reviewer will set
the objectives;
r)
where appropriate, agree an interim review date with the reviewer (30
minutes to one hour) and put into diary.
12. After the Performance and Development Review (PDR) meeting
Completing the PDR Documentation
Follow-up action after the PDR meeting is crucial if the process is to be effective and
credible. Either the reviewer or the reviewee can commit to completing the PDR
Form. It is recommended that the reviewee completes the form after the key points
have been agreed during the review meeting. The documentation is designed to be
short and simple. It is essential, however, that the discussion is documented whilst it
is still fresh in the minds of both parties and completion should normally be within
two weeks.
Reviewers must confirm on their own PDR form that they have completed the PDRs
of all staff they supervise.
Reviewers are responsible for ensuring that, after the review meetings, the PDRs
they have conducted for their team are recorded on SAP via Manager’s desktop.
Interim Review
This is a brief informal meeting to check progress against agreed objectives and the
individual’s development plan.
Interim reviews should be recorded by the Reviewer on SAP via Manager’s Desktop.
Copies of PDR Documentation
The completed PDR Form which is signed by both the reviewer and reviewee to
confirm that the document is an accurate record of the main points of the discussion,
is sent to the head of academic unit/service unit or other appropriate senior manager
where applicable who will make their comments. The form is then returned to the
reviewer. The reviewer ensures that the reviewee sees the completed document.
Copies should then be kept by both the reviewer and reviewee.
Heads of academic/service unit are responsible for ensuring that PDRs take place
within their academic/service units each year. They should use this opportunity to
gain an annual ‘academic/service unit-wide’ view of the career aspirations,
Page 11
development needs and any performance issues within their academic/service units.
It is also intended that by overseeing the process the heads of academic/service unit
can help to ensure that the scheme is being operated openly and equitably.
Actioning Staff Development Needs
Many of the staff development needs raised during PDR meetings will be best met
within the academic/service unit or by attendance at an external workshop.
Reviewers and reviewees should agree how such needs will be actioned most
appropriately and who will be responsible. A note of what is agreed should be made
on the PDR form.
The Staff Development Unit can also help with development needs. The reviewer
and reviewee should agree and record who will contact the Staff Development Unit
to discuss and implement such development activities.
13. Performance and Development Review (PDR) Documentation
The University’s generic PDR documentation has been kept short and simple and
designed in such a way that it can meet the needs of all categories of staff. The
forms are available electronically from the Staff Development Unit and Human
Resources websites and can be lengthened and shortened as needed. Where
academic/service units have designed their own PDR documentation, the paperwork
is made available locally. The PDR form will be the primary documentation upon
which recommendations under the probation procedure will be based and recorded.
The PDR form can be used in two ways:
Step One: PDR Preparation
It is important that both the reviewer and reviewee prepare for the PDR review
meeting by reflecting on the last 12 months, analysing successes and difficulties as
well as considering objectives and development needs for the individual for the next
12 months. To help with this preparation both parties can either use the actual PDR
form as a guide. Reviewers and reviewees should decide whether to share their
preparation notes prior to the meeting to help to generate an agenda for the
discussion.
For academic staff MyImpact can be used prior to the PDR meeting and a copy of
the information is can be sent to the reviewer with an up-to-date CV.
Step Two: Record of the Meeting
The PDR form is designed as a summary record of the PDR meeting. It is completed
after the review meeting and should be a summary of the main points of the
discussion. It should not be a lengthy, detailed narrative and most typically would be
a series of key bullet points under each section heading plus a list of objectives and
some notes on development needs.
Page 12
Keeping the PDR paperwork short and simple is another way in which the University
is working to keep the reviewer’s workload manageable. It is more important that the
review meetings are conducted regularly, fairly and with sufficient preparation than
lengthy reports produced.
Completing a PDR Form should take no longer than one hour. It is important to
agree at the PDR meeting who will complete the form and by when. Any additional
information can be attached to the PDR form to avoid duplication.
The probation page at the end of the PDR form is only applicable to staff who are in
their probationary period. Further information can be found in Section 15
14. Unresolved Issues
On the rare occasions when reviewers and reviewees fail to agree on issues raised
during the review meeting, such issues should be taken to the next most senior
manager in the academic/service unit. This may be a PVC/Head of
academic/service unit and very occasionally the Vice-Chancellor.
15. How the PDR Process relates to other HR Processes
Newcastle University’s PDR process has been designed to complement the existing
Human Resources processes. Effective PDRs should therefore save time,
duplication of effort and add value to the:
a)
promotions procedure;
b)
probation process.
Promotion /Advancement
The PDR scheme applies to all University staff, not just those seeking promotion or
advancement. However a PDR process like Newcastle University’s, which facilitates
an honest discussion about performance, professional updating, training and
development, may help with career development. Therefore members of staff can
include all or part of their most recent PDR document with their portfolio for
promotion or advancement if they wish.
Probation Procedure
As part of induction the employee’s line manager should meet them during the first
few weeks of employment to formulate an initial work plan which will include any
agreed development needs and the objectives and quality measures against which
their performance will be measured. These are subsequently reviewed as part of the
Performance and Development Review process.
The initial work plan and development needs discussion should be recorded as a
PDR, by the Reviewer, on SAP via Manager’s desktop.
Page 13
Therefore the timing of the PDRs for those staff on probation is driven by the
probation processes. For instance:
Staff Category
First Formal Review
Final Review
Academic Staff (up to and
including grade H)
12 months
22 months
Non-Academic Staff (Grades A-E)
N/A
5 months
Non-Academic Staff (Grades F-H)
N/A
10 months
Research Staff (F-H)
N/A
10 months
After completing the probationary period staff move onto the academic/service unit’s
regular annual PDR cycle alongside other, longer-serving staff. Further information
on the Probation Policy can be found on the Human Resources Website.
Entirely separate procedures exist for disciplinary issues.
Disciplinary and Grievance Procedure
Disciplinary and grievance matters should always be discussed immediately in line
with the University’s advice on disciplinary procedures and under no circumstance
should be reserved for the annual PDR meeting. Separate procedures exist for
disciplinary action and these are kept distinct from the PDR process. PDRs are not
used as part of any disciplinary procedure.
MyImpact
As part of their preparation for a PDR meeting, academic and research staff should
normally submit their most up to date CV and any information from MyImpact to their
reviewer. Student feedback and other sources of evidence of performance may also
be submitted. Contract research staff can use the training and development section
of the PDR Form as the Personal Development Agreement, required by the
Concordat.
Confidentiality within HR Processes
Maintaining the confidentiality of the PDR process is essential. Therefore, it is not
acceptable for a recruiting manager to ask to see a PDR of someone they are
thinking of appointing. Only the reviewer, the reviewee and the next level of
management (or with the agreement of the reviewee, another senior manager) have
sight of PDR documentation. However staff moving into new posts are encouraged
to share their previous PDR Forms, particularly their current and future development
needs that still need addressing. For probation purposes an additional (removable)
page is included on the form available from the Staff Development Unit’s webpage
which will be completed giving details of the recommendation and this will be sent to
HR. This may be supplemented by extracting certain information from the PDR. No
other information from the PDR form will need to be sent to HR.
Page 14
Pay Review
Whilst it is recognised that the same evidence is likely to inform decisions on pay,
there is not a direct link between pay reviews and PDRs. Although positive PDRs
are not a guarantee of a pay award, an honest discussion about performance,
development and career aspirations may ultimately help with promotion prospects.
Support
Heads of academic/service units will be provided with appropriate T&D support from
SDU when they are planning to‘re-energise’ the PDR process in their area.
17. Maximizing Staff Development Opportunities
As part of the PDR process reviewers and reviewees will explore the reviewee’s
training and development needs and consider the best ways of meeting these.
Reviewers can consider a range of development options including:
















delegating more challenging work to reviewees
short periods of work shadowing
short courses/workshops (in-house and external)
open/e-learning
reading materials
skills coaching
mentoring
longer formal development programmes
professional qualifications
inclusion on a working party
responsibility for a new area of work
secondments
job swaps
teaching fellowships
study/research leave
servicing on or supporting a committee
Whilst many of the training and development needs that emerge from PDR meetings
can be met within the academic/service units or by attendance at external
workshops, reviewers/reviewees will also benefit from the central staff development
provision. The Staff Development Unit offers a range of generic workshops and
facilitates large numbers of tailor-made events for individuals, schools and sections.
One-to-one coaching and mentoring can also be arranged.
It is recommended that once the PDR process is complete for all of their staff: Heads
of Units collate all of the emerging staff training and development needs into an
academic/service unit Staff Development Plan. This working document which is
available on the Staff Development Unit’s website helps the head of
academic/service unit to plan, prioritise and budget for development activities. It also
highlights where help, advice and funds can be sought over the coming 12 months.
Page 15
18. Monitoring the Performance and Development Review (PDR)
process
The University’s senior management, Pro Vice-Chancellors and heads of
academic/service unit are expected to take clear ownership of the PDR scheme.
Their performance in this area is monitored by the Vice-Chancellor, who is ultimately
responsible for the PDR process.
19. Team Reviews
It may be appropriate in some academic/service units of the University to build on
the benefits of the PDR scheme by introducing team reviews. Such reviews can
enhance existing teams by enabling a specific work team to discuss progress and
plans in areas such as:
a)
a review of the team’s effectiveness;
b)
recognition of the team’s achievements;
c)
planning the team’s goals and objectives;
d)
identifying the team’s development needs.
The head of academic/service unit (or their nominee) is the key figure in facilitating
the process and it should be stressed that not all University teams will benefit from
the process. Typically teams with the following characteristics benefit most:
a)
teams where there is enough overlap for common goals to be identifiable
and meaningful;
b)
teams of appropriate size that have a shared identity;
c)
teams where members are sensitive towards colleagues.
It is not intended that team reviews should replace the one-to-one PDR meetings,
but experience shows that where team reviews have taken place, the subsequent
one-to-one meetings with individuals tend to be more focussed and are often shorter.
Where an individual is completing a probationary period they will need to have a
separate PDR meeting as well as any team review that takes place.
Effective Date
Approval
Policy/Procedure Owner
Last Reviewed
19 October 2002
Staff Committee
Veryan Johnston, Executive Director of HR
30 July 2013
Page 16