The Inside and Outside of Evaluations Presenter: Terry Kirchner - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

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

• rganization 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
• n 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

• thers 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

• rganization 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
• f 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,

• r 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

• f 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

• pportunity

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

Sample performance preview questions

• What are you getting from me (and/or the

board) that you like and find helpful?

• What are you getting from me (and/or the

board) that impedes your effectiveness and would like to have stopped?

• What are you not getting from me (and/or the

board) that you think would enhance your effectiveness, and tell me, specific to you, why do you need it at this time?

Helpful hints

• Encourage the use of I-Speak to help each

party talk about their own experience rather than using criticism about a person

– When I work with him, I find it him hard to understand (using I-speak) versus He’s hard to understand (using personal criticism)

• Ask open-ended questions
• Be open to new discoveries and curious

Bibliography

Coen, Tom & Mary Jenkins. (2000). Abolishing Performance Appraisals. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler. Culbert, Samuel A. with Lawrence Rout. (2010). Get rid of the performance review! How companies can stop intimidating, start managing – and focus on what really

• matters. New York: Business Plus

Roberts, Charlotte M. & Martha W. Summerville. (2016). The mindful board. Strategy+Business, Issue 82, pp. 1-6.

Questions? Comments?

Terry Kirchner Executive Director Westchester Library System (914) 231-3223 tkirchner@wlsmail.org