The Inside and Outside of Evaluations Presenter: Terry Kirchner LTA Trustee Institute Plattsburgh, NY May 7, 2016
Today’s agenda • Introduce some different ways to think about evaluations for library boards and directors – Shift from reactive to proactive evaluations • Examine ways that library boards and directors could work together as partners
Today’s BIG question: Do the dynamics of the traditional performance evaluation processes support or hinder the mission, vision and values of your library?
What drives our work as trustees and staff? Mission = core purpose and focus Vision = aspirational description of what an organization would like to accomplish Values = guiding principles/core beliefs
The Mission, Vision and Values Statements Recognize that people are the #1 resource in any library/organization. It’s through people that the mission, vision and values are given life.
Why do evaluations? It’s through evaluation that we assess if the progress being made is effectively supporting the ideals expressed by the mission, vision and values.
Evaluation as part of board governance • Governance is a collaborative effort that relies on trust among board members and the director • A culture of trust is present when individuals feel free to debate, question, openly examine and even argue with each other’s points of view without turning the discussion into (or perceiving it as) a personal attack
Language and evaluations One of the primary tools used to conduct and express evaluation is language. It’s through language that we create frames of reference that affect how we see, describe, prioritize and react to the world around us.
Common core values of libraries Democracy – giving citizens access to the information they need to participate in democratic processes and for the common good Equity of Access – providing access to recorded knowledge for any and all who seek it
Common core values of libraries Intellectual freedom – standing up for freedom to access any content and fight censorship where it occurs Literacy and learning – empowering others to improve themselves, increase their knowledge and realize their potential
Common core values of libraries Logic – organizing libraries rationally, providing information literacy instruction including searching, critical thinking and evaluation of resources Privacy – protecting the confidentiality of library users and their library uses
Common core values of libraries Service – creating and maintaining a library that is user friendly, courteous and approachable; and measuring all projects and plans in terms of service Stewardship – preserving knowledge for future generations, developing and carrying out librarianship training that passes on core values and building the trust of the communities served
Library values exercise Review the values listed and identify the 3 that are the leading drivers of your library: • Democracy • Equity of access • Intellectual freedom • Literacy and learning • Logic • Privacy • Service • Stewardship
Values and communication The core values that serve as an individual’s and an organization’s foundation influence the words that are spoken or written and the words that are heard or seen .
Values of self and others Recognizing the core values held by oneself and others can help improve overall communication, build stronger teams and allow for shared goals and purpose.
Special thanks Core values exercise is courtesy of Sharon Morris, Director of Library Development at the Colorado State Library who presented the PLA 2016 Preconference - Stepping Up to Extraordinary: Using Core Values to Inform Public Library Leadership (Tuesday, April 5, 2016/Denver, CO)
Sample board self-evaluation questions What are the shared values of the board? What are the shared aspirations of the board? How can the shared aspirations be achieved? How prepared is the board to move forward?
Stages of board evolution
Consent boards • Use a traditional model of governance • Have a minimal level of engagement, with a focus on: – Fiduciary oversight responsibilities – Supporting the agenda set by the library director
Working boards • Effectively use its committee structure • Have board members able to work well together as partners • Have a solid understanding of: – Operations – Performance in key markets/segments – Connects operational performance to competitive advantages
Strategic boards • Understand the organization’s wider reaches in its regional, national, and international context • Take a longer-term view of the organization’s successes and potential impact on the community • Seek wider and longer perspectives • Are constrained by focusing in only one direction
Mindful boards • Accumulate all the skills and capabilities from the previous stages and the expand the board’s capacity to govern in complex systems • Deliberate, discern and act in mindful ways through critical decisions and episodes • Expand their purpose to include the well-being of the organization, those affected by the organization and its actions, and the fulfillment of the organization’s mission, vision and values
Mindful boards – part 2 “Mindful boards intentionally look out at the world through multiple windows – technology, politics, sociology, environment, and economics. To leverage the power of using multiple windows, members of the mindful board hone their individual capabilities while practicing three interdependent disciplines as a governing body: leadership by the group, expanded consciousness, and fearless engagement.” (Roberts & Summerville, 2016, p.2)
Resistance to mindfulness 3 sources of resistance to achieving mindfulness: • Concern that the process takes too long • Inability to engage in group leadership, expand consciousness or initiate fearless engagement • Deeply held beliefs in the status quo in terms of board/library director relationship and the nature of leadership
Employee performance evaluations and the U.S. government – a long history… The U.S. government was a driving force in bringing the employee performance review into the business environment
Historical highlights of US gov’t performance evaluation activities 1883 – Pendleton Act, or Civil Service Act: Attempted to provide a merit-based promotion system to end favoritism 1923 – Classification Act of 1923: Established a “graphic rating scale” for each service rendered
US gov’t highlights – cont. 1935 – Uniform Efficiency Rating System: Grouped factors under the headings: • Quality of performance • Productiveness • Qualifications Each grouped factor had a 5-level rating scale and there was a 5-level summary rating
US gov’t highlights – cont. 1950 – Performance Rating Act: Required the establishment of appraisal systems within all agencies with prior approval by the Civil Service Commission Established three adjective summary rating levels: • Outstanding • Satisfactory • Unsatisfactory
US gov’t highlights – cont. 1954 – Incentive Awards Act: Authorized honorary recognition and cash payments for superior accomplishment, suggestions, inventions, special acts or services, or other personal efforts
Performance evaluation goes mainstream 1954 – Peter Drucker published, The Practice of Management , and his book was a runaway success – laying the groundwork for future years of performance evaluations based on the Management by Objectives (MBO) approach
Management by Objectives (MBO) The process of employers/superiors managing subordinates by introducing a set of specific goals that both the employer/superior and the subordinate strive to achieve in the near future. The goals are often SMART: • Specific • Measurable • Agreed/Achievable • Realistic • Time-bound
Best tool for managing relationships? Dear, it’s time for your annual performance appraisal. For the sake of our relationship and the well-being of the family unit, I want you to prepare for a discussion of your strengths and weaknesses and the ways you have fallen short of your goals for the year. Also, honey, I would like for you to define some stretch goals for the coming year. (Peter Block forward in Abolishing Performance Appraisals by Tom Coen and Mary Jenkins)
Evaluation as a transformative opportunity
Changing the status quo Move from: To: Performance review Performance preview Annual review Continuous review Focus on individual skills and tasks Focus on context and partnerships Past orientation Present and future orientation Reactive actions Proactive actions Progressive discipline approach Progressive improvement approach Hierarchical power / Power over Shared power / Power with Merit/rating-based pay Market-based pay Fear-based relationships Trust-based relationships Competitive environment Team environment Boss-dominated monologues Two-sided conversations
Performance preview conversations Include 4 key variables: 1. You, including your imperfections 2. Me, including my imperfections 3. Our ability to complement and support one another (aka chemistry) 4. The context, challenges and situations being faced
Recommend
More recommend
