Documents/GEAR

GOALS - ENGAGEMENT - ACCOUNTABILITY - RESULTS: GETTING IN GEAR FOR EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT

Strategic_Plan

Start: 2011-11-30, Publication: 2012-10-23

Source: http://www.lmrcouncil.gov/meetings/handouts/GEAR%20Report%2011-17-2011.pdf

After discussing the full scope of our recommendations, the group decided upon the Goals-Engagement-Accountability-Results (GEAR) model as a way to describe our philosophy. It is important to understand that the recommendations found in this report are not sequential steps. Instead, they are a set of interrelated processes that will improve employee and organizational performance. The workgroup believes that every successful organization must have clear, aligned goals, engaged employees and supervisors, and accountability for every employee at every level. These elements combine to produce results.

Submitter:

Name:Owen Ambur

Email:Owen.Ambur@verizon.net

Organization:

Name:EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT WORKGROUP

Acronym:EPMW

Description:
Beginning in late May 2011, workgroup members representing various Federal agencies, labor unions, and management organizations from the LMR Council and the CHCO Council discussed ways to strengthen the existing system of employee performance management. The group members consistently asked, What will make this effort different than previous attempts?

Stakeholder(s):

  • National Council on Federal Labor-Management RelationsPresident Obama created the National Council on Federal Labor-Management Relations (LMR Council) as “[a] nonadversarial forum for managers, employees, and employees’ union representatives to discuss Government operations [that] will promote satisfactory labor relations and improve the productivity and effectiveness of the Federal Government.” Office of Personnel Management (OPM) Director John Berry and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Deputy Director for Management Jeffrey Zients co-chair the LMR Council. At the LMR Council’s April 2011 meeting, they raised the prospect of the Council, in conjunction with the Chief Human Capital Officers Council (CHCO Council), examining the Federal Government’s performance management accountability framework and making recommendations for improvements.

  • Chief Operating Officers (COO)The workgroup realized that to be successful, the organizational performance processes typically managed by the Chief Operating Officer (COO), Performance Improvement Officer (PIO), and the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) must be brought together with the individual performance management processes that are heavily influenced by employee and labor relations and led by the Chief Human Capital Officer in consultation with the Chief Learning Officer (CLO), or equivalent, and individual supervisors.

  • Performance Improvement Officers (PIO)

  • Chief Financial Officers (CFO)

  • Chief Human Capital Officers (CHCO)

  • Chief Learning Officers (CLO)