Performance
Elements FAQs
Under the Federal employee performance appraisal
regulations, performance elements are work assignments or
responsibilities that are used to plan, monitor, and
appraise employee and group performance. A few of the
most frequently asked questions about performance
elements include:
?
|
What
kinds of performance elements can agencies use in
employee performance plans? |
The regulations
specify three types of performance elements:
- critical elements,
- non-critical elements, and
- additional performance elements.
|
 
?
|
What
is a critical element? |
| A critical element
is a work assignment or responsibility of such
importance that unacceptable performance on that
element would result in a determination that an
employee's overall performance is unacceptable.
The regulations require that employees have at
least one critical element in their performance
plans. Critical elements must address performance
at the individual level only. |
?
|
What
is a non-critical element and how can it be used
in the performance appraisal process? |
A non-critical
element is a dimension or aspect of individual,
team, or organizational performance, exclusive of
a critical element, that is used in assigning a
summary level. It may include, but is not limited
to, objectives, goals, program plans, work plans,
and other means of expressing expected
performance. Its use is optional but, if used, it
must be expressed as an element and standard, be
included in the employee's performance plan, and
be used in assigning a summary level for the
rating of record. However, a non-critical element
cannot be used as a basis for taking a
performance-based action. Other features of
non-critical elements include:
- non-critical elements cannot be used in
two-level appraisal programs (i.e.,
pass/fail);
- non-critical elements can be given more
weight than critical elements when
assigning a summary level above Unacceptable
(Level 1); and
- while a non-critical element must have a
performance standard written for at least
one level, the written standard need not
describe the Fully Successful or
equivalent level.
|
?
|
Can
an agency appraisal program provide for
appraising non-critical elements at the Unacceptable
level? |
| Yes. Writing a
performance standard for a non-critical element
at the Fully Successful level and
appraising that element at only two levels (e.g.,
Fully Successful and Unacceptable)
has been done for some time and results in an
employee being appraised as Unacceptable
for that element. When a non-critical element is
appraised at the Unacceptable level, it
usually causes the summary rating of record to be
lowered from what appraisal on only the critical
elements would merit. However, a non-critical
element appraised at the Unacceptable
level can not lower the summary level to
Level 1 or be the basis for a performance-based
action under parts 432 or 752 of title 5, Code of
Federal Regulations. Also, the Office of
Personnel Management encourages agencies to
change the focus of their non-critical elements
to more effectively use them to set goals and
results-measures that distinguish among higher
levels of performance above Fully Successful
or equivalent. |
?
|
Why
can't a pass/fail appraisal program use
non-critical elements? |
| A non-critical
element, by definition, must be used in assigning
a summary level and in the application of a
Pass/Fail summary program, this cannot be done.
The reason it cannot is because the only way a
Level 1 summary can be assigned is when
performance on a critical element is Unacceptable,
no matter what the performance on any
non-critical element. Therefore, pass/fail
appraisal and non-critical elements cannot be
used together. |
?
|
What
is an additional performance element? |
| Additional
performance elements provide agencies another
tool for communicating performance expectations
important to the organization. In essence, they
are dimensions or aspects of overall performance
that the agency wishes to communicate and
appraise, but which will not be used in
assigning a summary level. Such additional
elements may include objectives, goals, program
plans, work plans, and other methods of
expressing expected performance. Like
non-critical elements, they do not have to be
appraised at any particular level. Their major
distinctions from non-critical elements are that
they can not be used in assigning a
summary level and additional performance elements
do not require a performance standard. They allow
agencies to factor group or team performance into
the performance plan of employees under two-level
(Pass/Fail) summary appraisal programs. |
?
|
If
additional performance elements are not used in
assigning a summary level, what purpose do they
serve? |
| Additional
performance elements allow employee performance
plans to communicate a fuller picture of the
performance that is expected. This can be
particularly important in two-level (Pass/Fail)
summary level programs, which may only use
critical elements that appraise individual-level
or individually-controllable performance to
assign a summary level. By using additional
performance elements to set expectations for and
appraise group and organizational goals and
results, an agency can answer many of the
criticisms of the Pass/Fail approach, the most
common of which concern its apparent focus on
mediocre performance and failure to emphasize and
reward excellence. The inclusion of additional
performance elements encourages a dialogue among
supervisors, employees, and peers that might not
have taken place if they had not been included in
a performance plan or goal statement. An agency
could include items that employees are not ready
to have affect their ratings of record, but which
may be used in the future as non-critical
elements. One example would be appraising
"team interaction" in a group that has
not had sufficient time or experience with such
concepts and behaviors. Because no standard is
required, additional performance elements also
might be appropriate when the organization has
not decided what measurements are valid or who is
the most credible rater(s).
Lastly, assessments on additional performance
elements that make distinctions above the Fully
Successful or equivalent level may be used as
the basis for granting awards. Such a use of
additional performance elements is a perfectly
reasonable way to meet the legal requirement at
section 4302(a)(3) of title 5, United States
Code, to "use the results of performance
appraisals as a basis for rewarding
employees."
|
?
|
Can
an additional performance element include
individual performance? |
| Yes. Additional
performance elements (e.g., stretch goals, extra
credit for special projects, published customer
service standards) can address individual or
group performance, whichever is the most
appropriate to the agency's mission, goals, and
culture. |
?
|
Since
they can't affect the summary level, can an
agency use additional performance elements
instead of non-critical elements in a Pass/Fail
program? |
| Yes. Within a
Pass/Fail summary program, additional performance
elements can be used in ways otherwise usually
associated with non-critical elements. |
?
|
Can
an agency appraise an element at a performance
level more than one level from the level at which
a standard is established? |
| Yes, provided the
agency program provides for such levels to be
assigned. That is, an element cannot be appraised
at Outstanding based on a standard
established at the Fully Successful level
if the applicable program only provides for
appraising elements at Unacceptable and Fully
Successful. |
|
