2.
Does this mean that employees will get less this year than the amount
Introduction to the Performance-Based Incentive System (PBIS) for
National Government Agencies and Employees
Source: http://www.gov.ph/pbb/faqs/
What is PBIS?
The Performance-Based Incentive System (PBIS) is a new system of
incentives for government employees that is being introduced in FY 2012, per
EO No. 80.{{1}} Under this new system, employees may receive two
incentives: the Performance-Based Bonus (PBB) and the Productivity
Enhancement Incentive (PEI).
The PBB is a top-up bonus that is given to employees based on their
performance and contributions to the accomplishment of their Department’s
overall targets and commitments.{{2}} This will be on top of the PEI current
annual incentive distributed to employees across the board. The amount
available for PEI bonuses will depend on savings incurred by the national
government.
What is PBB?
The PBB, which is the new bonus introduced via the PBIS, will be given to
employees based on their contribution to the accomplishment of their
Department’s overall targets and commitments.
Under the PBB, units of Departments will be ranked according to their
performance. The personnel within these units shall also be ranked. The
ranking of units and personnel will be based on their actual performance at the
end of the year, as measured by verifiable, observable, credible, and
sustainable indicators of performance.
What is the difference between PBIS and PBB?
The PBB or the Performance-Based Bonus is a component of the PBIS or the
Performance-Based Incentive System. The PBB is a top-up bonus which will
be given to employees based on their contribution to the achievement of their
Department or Agency’s targets and commitments in FY 2012. The other
component is the PEI, which is provided to employees across the board,
regardless of their actual performance.
What is the difference between PBB and the bonuses currently given to
national government employees?
The PBB is a new incentive given to government employees based on their
performance. This is different from existing bonuses in government, which are
given to employees across the board, regardless of their performance.
The PBB was introduced by the Aquino Administration to reward and
encourage exemplary performance among public servants in national
government. The PBB, as introduced in 2012, is on top of the following
bonuses currently provided to government employees:
i. Mid-Year and Year-End Bonuses are the government equivalent of the 13th
Month Pay of employees in the private sector. Like the 13th Month Pay, the
total amount of the Mid-year and Year-end Bonuses are equivalent to their one
month’s salary, depending on their rank and salary grade. The Mid-year and
Year-end Bonuses are given no earlier than May 1 and November 15,
respectively.
ii. The Cash Gift is an across-the-board bonus of P5,000 given to each
employee of the national government. It is released in two tranches: at the
middle and end of the year, together with the Mid-year and Year-end Bonuses.
iii. The Collective Negotiation Agreement (CNA) Bonus, meanwhile, is
provided to employees of government agencies where there is an accredited
employee’s union, and where the agency and the union have entered into a
Collective Negotiation Agreement (CNA).
The CNA Bonus is funded by savings from the agency’s maintenance
expenditure items identified in their CAN. An agency can raise these savings
through cost cutting and productivity measures—identified in their CNA.
iv. The PEI is an existing across-the-board bonus, given equally to
government employees. Unlike the Mid-year and Year-End Bonuses and Cash
Gifts, the amount given per employee is not fixed. Instead, the amount
depends on the level of savings incurred and authorized by the national
government to fund the PEI. Thus, the amount per employee has varied
through the years.
1. Will our PEI be smaller in 2012?
Yes. In 2011, the PEI was P10,000. This year it is P5,000. But this does not
include other bonuses given throughout the year.
given in 2011?
Since the PBB will be given on top of the PEI, only the underperforming
minority will be getting less, while the majority of performing employees will
get the same amount as last year’s PEI. Employees who demonstrate
exemplary performance, on the other hand, will actually enjoy bigger bonuses.
Assuming, for example, that everyone achieves their respective targets, about
42.25 percent of employees will get a top-up PBB bonus of P5,000 in addition
to their PEI of P5,000. This adds up to P10,000, which is the same amount
received by employees in 2011.
Meanwhile, more than 50 percent of employees will receive bonuses higher
than P10,000, since the PBB for better performers ranges from P7,000 to
P35,000. This way, exceptional performers are given due recognition and
reward, encouraging the rest of the bureaucracy to follow suit and aim for
exemplary public service.
How much will the PBB be?
The amount will depend on the performance of each employee and the unit
that he/she belongs to. This is to foster a culture of teamwork within each unit
and within the department itself, especially if the latter has different kinds of
outputs and services to deliver.
The Best Performer from the best-performing unit or “Best Bureau” will get a
PBB of P35,000; the Better Performer from a “Better Bureau” will get
P13,500; while the Good Performer from a “Good Bureau” will get P5,000.
However, the minority of poor performers will get no PBB.
In other words, the PBIS provides the best rewards for the best people in the
bureaucracy, amounting to a total of P40,000 with the PBB and PEI
combined.
Under the PBIS, however, underperformers will not be left empty-handed:
they will still receive the P5,000 across-the-board PEI.
Will government employees get less as a result of PBIS?
PBIS-covered government employees will still receive their Year-End and
Mid-Year Bonuses, Cash Gifts, and CNA Bonuses. These bonuses are separate
from the PBIS and are therefore unaffected by an employee’s performance.
For the PEI and PBB—which now fall under PBIS starting 2012—most
government employees will receive the same or even much more that what
they used to receive under the PEI in the previous years. We place this at 57
percent based on the approved distribution of the PBB, on the assumption that
the agency meets the minimum performance standard. Only the minority of
underperformers will get less: a PEI of 5,000, which will be given across-the-
board.
Is it fair for government employees who will get less than what they used
to get?
For the longest time, good performers in government received little to no
recognition for their hard work. Majority of them receive as much in bonuses
as their coworkers who underperform or do not take responsibility for their
tasks.
Through the PBIS, the Aquino administration seeks to foster a culture of
fairness and excellence in the bureaucracy, where good work is duly
recognized, while poor output goes unrewarded.
Is the PBB just a new name for an additional “Christmas Bonus” for
government employees?
No. The PBB is not a holiday or Christmas Bonus. Instead, the PBB is based
on an agency and employee’s actual performance. It is therefore a reward for
good performance, not a gift or entitlement.
Because an agency and its employees are going to be assessed based on their
actual performance from January 1 to December 31, 2012, distributing the
PBB will start in January of next year. However, agencies that have met at
least 90 percent of their performance targets by November 30, 2012 (see
Section C) may have their actual performance evaluated earlier. This will
allow for the possible release of their employees’ PBB by end-December
2012.
Why do we need the PBB when we already have all these other bonuses?
Under the status quo, bonuses are given uniformly to all civil servants,
regardless of their performance. In some cases, this incentive system has even
been abused. To remedy this, the Aquino administration sought to introduce a
new system that will focus on service delivery and reward the best in the
bureaucracy through incentives that correspond with the performance of
employees and their offices.
In other words, having definite rewards for exemplary work can inspire public
servants to perform better. This can even motivate their co-workers in their
own units to perform well, too. Altogether, such a system is designed to
encourage improved performance and better accountability, in line with
ensuring the accomplishment of the Administration’s priority development
agenda.
More importantly, however, the PBB seeks to transform the management of
agency and employee performance to foster a culture of accountable public
service, as well as produce concrete and visible improvements in the delivery
of public goods and services. The ultimate aim of the PBB—besides
instituting a genuine meritocracy in Philippine government—is to serve the
Filipino public more effectively and efficiently.
How will the PBI be funded?
For national agencies, both the PEI and the PBB shall be sourced from the
Miscellaneous Personnel Benefits Fund (MPBF). For GOCCs, their PBB shall
be sourced from their corporate funds.
How will the PBIS be implemented?
The PBIS will be implemented in annual phases. FY 2012 is the pilot
implementation year of the PBIS. What we intend to do in FY 2012 is to lay
down the pre-conditions for a successful PBIS, such as setting clear and
reasonable performance indicators and targets with the Departments. This
allows the government to make a credible PBB system as well as a reasonably
good validation system.
The AO25 Task Force will support Departments during the pilot
implementation year, especially with respect to laying down targets based on
the President’s priorities.
FY 2013 shall be the Harmonization Phase, during which the Results-Based
Performance Management System (RBPMS; see Section D) will be put in
place, together with a Strategic Performance Management System (SPMS)
prescribed by the Civil Service Commission. Thus, the guidelines on the PBB
shall be updated to reflect, harmonize, and implement the two systems.
Departments will then be expected to submit an improved set of performance
targets and indicators.
In FY 2014, we can already expect the alignment of the Department targets
with its smallest operational units. In addition to the FY 2013 good
governance conditions, two or three more conditions should be met. A gradual
increase from the FY 2013 bonus is likewise expected.
In FY 2015, the PBB should have reached the Institutionalization Phase. The
system will be fully developed by this time, so that there is full alignment of
Department targets with individual targets. In addition to the FY 2014 good
governance conditions, two or three more conditions should be met. A gradual
increase from the FY 2014 bonus is also expected.
When will the PBB be given out to employees?
The PBB will be given to employees only after their departments and agencies
have 1.) accomplished all PBIS eligibility criteria, 2.) met their performance
targets, and 3.) submitted all their accomplishment reports to the AO25 Task
Force before the deadline (see Section C).
The final deadline for such accomplishment reports will be in the first week of
January 2013. However, agencies that have met their performance targets by
November 30, 2012 (see Section C) may be have their actual performance
evaluated sooner, so that the government can facilitate the possible release of
their employees’ PBB within December 2012.
Will all employees get their PBB by the end of 2012?
No. Only employees belonging to agencies that have met their performance
targets by November 30, 2012 (see Section C) can have their actual
performance evaluated to facilitate the possible release of their employees’
PBB within December 2012.
However, if agencies do not meet this early deadline for the submission of
accomplishment reports, then their final deadline will be in the first week of
January 2013.
Do agency heads have the authority to redistribute the PBB equally to
their employees?
No. The PBB shall be given based on the performance ranking of delivery
units and the individuals within these units. Agency heads are not allowed to
diverge from the objective system of performance ranking under the PBIS.
Otherwise, they defeat the very purpose of the PBIS.
PBIS Coverage
Which agencies and employees are covered by the PBIS?
Regular, contractual, and casual officials and employees of Departments and
Agencies of the National Government who occupy plantilla positions, who
have an employer-employee relationship with these Departments and
Agencies, and who have been in government service for at least four (4)
months as of November 30, 2012 may be covered by the PBIS.
The PBIS will be implemented in all Departments and Agencies of the
National Government, State Universities and Colleges (SUCs) and
Government-Owned or-Controlled Corporations (GOCCs). However, these
institutions must first meet the eligibility criteria (see Section C) before they
can qualify for the grant of PBB under the PBS.
For SUCs, the implementation shall be coordinated with the Commission on
Higher Education. For GOCCs who are covered by the GOCC Governance
Act of 2011 (Republic Act No. 10149), the implementation of PBIS shall be
led by the Governance Commission for GOCCs (GCG). GCG will issue
separate guidelines for the adoption of PBIS in GOCCs.
Are Congress, the Judiciary and other constitutional offices covered by
PBIS?
The Congress, Judiciary, Constitutional Commissions and the Office of the
Ombudsman are encouraged to adopt the PBIS in line with the provisions in
EO No. 80 and the guidelines issued by the AO 25 Inter-Agency Task Force.
Of these Constitutional Offices, only the Civil Service Commission and the
Commission on Audit have officially opted into the PBIS and may therefore
be eligible for the grant of the PBB.
Are casual and contractual employees included?
Contractual and casual employees who have an employer-employee
relationship with their respective Departments, Agencies, SUCs and GOCCs,
who have been in government service as of November 30, 2012, and who
have rendered at least four (4) months service during the year as of that date
are eligible to receive the PBB under the PBIS.
Who are not covered by the PBIS?
Those with no employer-employee relationship with their respective National
Government Departments and Agencies, SUCs and GOCCs are not covered
by the PBIS. These include job order workers, consultants, and those hired
under contracts of service (Note: Contracts of service are different from
contractual employees who hold plantilla positions). As such, they will not
receive both the PEI and PBB under the PBIS.
Will those employees who are not covered by the PBIS still receive
bonuses?
Under the current implementation, regular, casual and contractual officials and
employees of National Government Departments and Agencies, particularly
the Constitutional Offices, who have not opted to adopt the PBIS may still
receive other bonuses, including PEI, but not the PBB.
PBB Eligibility Criteria
How can an agency be eligible for the PBB under the PBIS?
To qualify for the PBB, an agency covered by the PBIS must fulfill the
following:
i. Meet all Good Governance Conditions set annually by the AO 25 Task force
(see succeeding items for more details);
ii. Achieve at least 90 percent of each performance target set for the agency
(see succeeding items for more details);
iii. Rank eligible bureaus (delivery units) and the individuals within them; and
iv. Submit accomplishment reports on time.
What are Good Governance conditions?
EO No. 80 states that the Inter-Agency Task Force under AO No. 25 will set
the good governance conditions for the PBB on an annual basis. The good
governance conditions are based on the performance drivers of the Results-
Based Performance Management System (RBPMS): financial stewardship,
internal process, and leadership, learning and growth.
i. What are the Good Governance Conditions set by the AO 25 Task Force
for fiscal year 2012?
For FY 2012, the AO 25 Task Force has set four good governance conditions,
with three under financial stewardship and one under internal process. These
are: the establishment of a Transparency Seal; posting of bid notices and
awards on the website of Philippine Government Electronic Procurement
System (PhilGEPS); liquidation of all cash advances to officials and
employees; and establishment of a Citizen’s Charter or its equivalent.
ii. What is the Agency Transparency Seal?
Pursuant to Section 93 of the General Appropriations Act of 2012, all
departments shall have a Transparency Seal on their respective websites that
should contain the following information:
1. The agency’s mandates and functions, names of its officials with their
position and designation, and contact information;
2. Annual reports required by National Budget Circular Nos. 507 and 507-A
issued on January 31, 2007 and June 12, 2007, respectively, for the last three
years;
3. Their respective approved agency budgets and the corresponding targets for
fiscal year 2012;
4. Major programs and projects, categorized along the five key results areas of
the Aquino Social Contract, as identified by E.O. No. 43, s. 2011;
5. Program/projects beneficiaries as identified in the applicable special
provisions;
6. Status of implementation and program/project evaluation and/or assessment
reports; and
7. Annual procurement plan, contracts awarded and the name of
contractors/suppliers/consultants.
iii. What information should agencies post on PhilGEPS?
Departments and Agencies must ensure that all Invitations to Bid and awarded
contracts are posted on the PhilGEPS website, pursuant to the Revised
Implementing Rules and Regulations of the Government Procurement Reform
Act (RA No. 9184).
iv. What types of cash advances are covered in FY 2012?
Departments and Agencies must ensure the liquidation, within the
reglementary period, of all cash advances granted to all officials and
employees for the year.
As stated in the rules of the Commission on Audit (COA), the liquidation of
cash advances for foreign travels must be done within 60 days from travel,
while the liquidation of cash advances for domestic travel must be made
within 30 days from travel. The liquidation of cash advances for special
activities must be done within 30 days upon completion of the project or
activity as provided for in the liquidation authority.
1. Are cash advances given to local government units and other organizations
covered by the Good Governance condition in FY 2012?
No. For FY 2012, the Good Governance condition only covers the cash
advances granted to national government officials and employees within the
year for the purpose of local and foreign travel and special projects.
2. Are the outstanding cash advances due for liquidation since FY 2011 or
before covered?
No. For FY 2012, the liquidation of outstanding cash advances due since FY
2011 or before is not yet included in the Good Governance condition.
Nonetheless, COA requires Departments to liquidate such outstanding cash
advances immediately.
v. What are Citizen’s Charters?
Departments must comply with Section 6 of the Anti-Red Tape Act (ARTA,
RA No. 9485), which provides that “All government agencies including
departments, bureaus, offices, instrumentalities, or government-owned and/or
controlled corporations, or local government or district units shall set up their
respective service standards to be known as the Citizen’s Charter in the form
of information billboards which should be posted at the main entrance of
offices or at the most conspicuous place, and in the form of published
materials written either in English, Filipino, or in the local dialect, that detail:
(a) the procedure to obtain a particular service; (b) the person/s responsible for
each step; (c) the maximum time to conclude the process; (d) the document/s
to be presented by the customer, if necessary; (e) the amount of fees, if
necessary; and (f) the procedure for filing complaints.”
Are all agencies required to establish a Citizen’s Charter?
To qualify for the PBB, agencies must establish an equivalent of a Citizen’s
Charter, such as a service guide or a service charter. For instance, the
IRR{{3}} of ARTA clarifies that “those performing judicial, quasi-judicial
and legislative functions are excluded from the coverage of the Act, however,
their respective frontline services are deemed included.”
vi. How will the agencies’ compliance to Good Governance conditions be
validated?
By November 30, 2012, Departments will be validated on their compliance
with the Good Governance conditions. This will be done through the
submission of certifications to be signed by the Head of their respective
Departments or Agencies and other accountable officials. The AO25 Task
Force shall also validate if Departments and Agencies have complied with
their online posting requirements (e.g. Transparency Seal, PhilGEPS).
Oversight agencies may also conduct spot-checking.
What are the Performance Targets that agencies should meet?
In order to qualify for the PBB, PBIS-covered Departments and Agencies
must achieve at least 90 percent of each of their: 1) performance targets for
their Major Final Outputs (MFOs), Support to Operations (STO) and General
Administration and Support Services (GASS) submitted to Congress; and 2)
Priority Program targets agreed with the President under the five Key Result
Areas (KRAs) of the Aquino Social Contract, under E.O. No. 43 s. 2011.
i. What is a performance target?
A performance target (PT) is a predetermined target level of performance
(quantity, quality, timeliness and cost of an output) against which actual
performance can be compared and for which a mean, deviation and trend line
can be calculated over time.
ii. How are the performance targets for PBB set?
Departments and Agencies have been asked to review the MFOs, performance
indicators, and targets as declared in the Organizational Performance Indicator
Framework (OPIF) Book of Outputs for FY 2012, and the key program and
project targets related to the five Aquino Social Contract KRAs under EO 43.
A Department or Agency should select or prioritize three performance
indicators for each MFO and indicate the target for FY 2012. The Head of
Agency should also set the performance targets of support services belonging
to STO and GASS.
Frontline service Departments which have key programs or projects with
performance targets for FY 2012 agreed with the President shall also prioritize
and feature those performance targets (for instance, 4.6 million international
tourist arrivals for the Department of Tourism; the construction of 41,000
classrooms in the case of the Department of Education). The resulting targets
corresponding to the MFOs, STO, GASS and key programs or projects shall
be deemed the baseline commitment of the Department for 2012 to be
cascaded to second level units.
iii. What is an MFO?
A Major Final Output (MFO) is a good or service that a Department or
Agency is mandated to deliver to external clients through the implementation
of programs, activities and projects.
iv. What are the performance indicators for MFOs?
A performance indicator (PI) is a characteristic of performance i.e. quantity,
quality, timeliness or cost that is to be measured and will illustrate the
standard by which a Department is expected to deliver its services.
As specified in EO No. 80, PIs should be verifiable, observable, credible, and
sustainable. For the FY 2012 PBB, Departments shall select or prioritize three
PIs for each MFO to capture the dimensions of quantity, quality, and
timeliness. In order for the people to better appreciate what a Department or
Agency does, the strategic performance indicators should center on indicators
for frontline services or services of the Department or Agency catering to the
public.
v. What is STO?
STO or Support to Operations refers to activities that provide technical and
substantive support to the operations and projects of a Department or Agency.
For PBB in FY 2012, Departments and Agencies are asked to identify
performance indicators and targets for these activities capturing the
dimensions of quality and timeliness of services as specified by the
Department Secretary.
vi. What is GASS?
General Administration and Support Service (GASS) refers to activities
dealing with the provision of overall administrative management support to
the entire operation of a Department or Agency. It includes activities such as
general management and supervision, legislative liaison services, human
resource development, and financial and administrative services. For PBB in
FY 2012, Departments and Agencies are asked to identify performance
indicators and targets for these activities capturing the dimensions of quality
and timeliness of services.
vii. Are support services of agencies included in the PBB?
Support services (or offices under STO and GASS) will not be left out since
they will also have to set their own performance indicators and targets.
Offices providing administrative and technical support to the units responsible
for the delivery of the MFOs and the key programs and projects shall be given
two performance indicators each, capturing the dimensions of quality and
timeliness of services specified by the Department Secretary.
viii. Are performance targets lower than FY 2011 accomplishments
acceptable?
No. The performance targets of Departments and Agencies must be consistent
with the FY 2012 budget approved by Congress and should not be lower than
accomplishments in FY 2011.
Evaluation and Ranking of Performance for PBB
What is the PBB system of evaluation and ranking?
The PBB shall be characterized by a system of ranking bureaus or delivery
units and the personnel within these units according to their performance.
The performance incentives shall be based on two levels to consider: the
delivery unit and individual contributions to the achievement of a
Department’s or Agency’s targets. In categorizing groups, the Department
Secretaries are authorized to rank or line up the bureaus and attached agencies
under their respective Departments according to performance and determine
whether they are eligible or not to receive the PBB.
Department Heads may also modify the ranking system among delivery units
to best fit their operations or their respective functions. They can also use their
existing personnel rating system to force-rank their employees within bureaus
or delivery units.
How will the performance of bureaus or delivery units be evaluated and
ranked?
Departments and Agencies shall submit their actual accomplishments of
targets—as well as the accomplishments of their component bureaus or
delivery units— to the AO25 Task Force. Failure to meet any of the PBB
eligibility criteria (see previous section for details) within the deadline will
render Departments and Agencies ineligible for the PBB in FY 2012.
Bureaus or delivery units will be forced-ranked according to their
accomplishment of targets and will be categorized under the following groups:
Best Bureaus (top 10 percent of ranked bureaus), Better Bureaus (next 25
percent), Good Bureaus (remaining 50 to 65 percent) and Poor Bureaus
(bureaus that failed to accomplish 90 percent of their targets).
How will individual performance be evaluated?
Within the bureaus or delivery units which are ranked as Best, Better and
Good Bureaus, employees will be ranked according to their actual individual
performance and categorized under the following groups: Best Performers
(top 10 percent of ranked employees in a bureau), Better Performers (next 25
percent) and Good Performers (next 65 percent).
At the same time, individual employees who receive a rating of “Below
Satisfactory” under the annual Performance Appraisal System of the Civil
Service Commission will not receive any amount under the PBB. Meanwhile,
employees in Poor Bureaus will not be eligible to receive any amount under
the PBB, since their respective bureaus failed to meet the minimum
performance criteria.
How much PBB will be given to employees at every rank?
The amount of PBB will depend on the performance of each employee as well
as the unit that he/she belongs to. The Best Performer from a Best Bureau will
get a PBB of P35,000; the Better Performer from a Better Bureau will get
P13,500; while the Good Performer from a Good Bureau will get P5,000. Of
course, the minority of poor performers (employees in Poor Bureaus or those
who get a Below Satisfactory rating in the Performance Appraisal System)
will get no PBB. [INSERT GRAPHIC TABLE]
This Performance-Based Bonus distribution matrix shows that the amount of
the bonus that may be received by a qualified government employee is
dependent on the performance of the bureau and of the individual employee.
Who will determine the bureau and employee rankings?
The Secretary or Head of the Agency shall rank the qualified bureaus or
delivery units. The Department Secretary or Head of Agency may task a
Performance Management Group (PMG)—consisting of senior officials that
directly oversee and observe the performance of bureaus or delivery units—to
assist him in undertaking the forced-ranking of delivery units and individuals.
Meanwhile, the heads of the bureaus or delivery units will be responsible for
the ranking of the employees within these units.
What if my supervisor does not like me?
The ranking of employees in bureaus or delivery units will be done by each
unit head according to the actual and measurable performance of employees.
Under the PBB, employee evaluations are designed to be objective and
measurable, instead of subjective or dependent on an employee’s personal
relationship with his or her supervisor.
Can I appeal the rating that I received from my supervisor? How and
where can I forward my complaint?
Yes, an employee can question the rating that they receive as a result of the
rankings. The PBIS requires all departments and agencies to create grievance
committees that will address possible questions or complaints by employees
on their rankings.
If a rating issue cannot be resolved within the agency’s grievance committee,
it may be escalated to the AO25 Task Force that will evaluate the complaint
and resolve the issue, whether at the level of its Secretariat, Technical
Working Group or Task Force Principals, as the case may be.
PBIS Governance, Policy and Prospective Developments
Who is governing the implementation of PBIS?
The AO25 Task Force is chaired by the Department of Budget and
Management and co-chaired by the Office of the Executive Secretary. Its
members are the Department of Finance, the National Economic Development
Authority, the Presidential Management Staff, the Civil Service Commission,
the Career Executive Service Board, the Commission on Audit, the Office of
the Ombudsman, the Governance Commission for GOCCs, the Commission
on Higher Education, and the National Competitiveness Council (representing
the private sector). The Development Academy of the Philippines serves as
Secretariat and technical resource institution of the Task Force.
What is the governance mechanism for the implementation of PBIS in
every government department and agency?
The Department Secretaries or Heads of Agencies shall be responsible for the
implementation of the PBIS in their respective Departments or Agencies. To
support the principals in the implementation of PBIS, Performance
Management Groups (PMGs) should be convened at every Department or
Agency.
What happens after the pilot implementation of PBIS in 2012?
After the pilot implementation in 2012, PBIS will be further refined based on
the lessons, feedback and evaluation of the pilot implementation. After all, the
objective in the pilot year is to put in place the pre-conditions for a successful
PBIS, such as setting and agreeing on clear and reasonable performance
indicators and targets with the Departments to ensure the credibility of the
PBB as well as develop a reasonably good validation system.
The AO25 Task Force will be supporting the Departments through the pilot
implementation year, especially in the setting of targets based on the
President’s priorities.
FY 2013 shall be the Harmonization Phase, during which the Results-Based
Performance Management System (RBPMS; see Section D) will be put in
place, together with a Strategic Performance Management System (SPMS)
prescribed by the Civil Service Commission. Thus, the guidelines on the PBB
shall be updated to reflect, harmonize, and implement the two systems.
Departments will then be expected to submit an improved set of performance
targets and indicators.
In FY 2014, we can already expect the alignment of the Department targets
with its smallest operational units. In addition to the FY 2013 good
governance conditions, two or three more conditions should be met. A gradual
increase from the FY 2013 bonus is likewise expected.
In FY 2015, the PBB should have reached the Institutionalization Phase. The
system will be fully developed by this time, so that there is full alignment of
Department targets with individual targets. In addition to the FY 2014 good
governance conditions, two or three more conditions should be met. A gradual
increase from the FY 2014 bonus is also expected.
Is the PBIS a standalone program or part of a larger one?

The PBIS is a system that is a component of the Results-Based Performance

Management System (RBPMS), which is envisioned to be the single
performance management system for the whole of the Executive Branch, in
place of the multiple and disparate performance management systems that are
currently being implemented.

The Administration’s plan to establish the RBPMS stems from Administrative

Order No. 25, which seeks to rationalize, harmonize, streamline, simplify,
integrate, and unify the performance management systems and activities of
oversight government agencies .

What is the RBPMS?

RBPMS stands for Results-based Performance Management System, which

utilizes the Five Key Result Areas set by the President, the Organizational
Performance Indicators Framework (OPIF) of the DBM and the PDP-Results
Matrix (RM) of the NEDA as underlying frameworks.

The RBPMS will incorporate a common set performance scorecard, and at the
same time, create an accurate, accessible, and up-to-date government-wide,
sectoral, and organizational performance information system. The RBPMS
shall likewise be used as basis for determining entitlement to performance-
based allowances, incentives, or compensation of government personnel.

What are the features of the RBPMS?

The RBPMS consists of a set of comprehensive performance indicators that

will cut across societal and sectoral performance, down to organizational and
individual performance with reference to the Five KRAs under EO 43, the
Results Matrix, and the Organizational Performance Indicators Framework.

It highlights citizen-focus and a culture of public service while linking the

drivers of organizational performance, namely: financial stewardship; internal
process efficiency; and leadership, learning and growth to higher level goals
and desired outcomes.

The Major Final Outputs or the goods and services delivered by a Department
will now be measured on the basis of how the needs of citizens are efficiently
and effectively addressed, i.e., “kung naramdaman ni Juan dela Cruz ang
serbisyo ng gobyerno”.

In addition, agency performance in the scorecard will also hinge on the quality
of good governance in each agency, particularly through these drivers:
financial stewardship, or the judicious utilization of public resources and
assets of the Government; internal process, which focuses on driving
efficiency and seamlessness in work systems and processes to deliver services
to the public; leadership, learning, and growth which focuses on the ethical
behavior of senior officials and leaders that promote public trust, as well as
the innovation arising from learning and growth conditions within the
Department/Agency.

Who is developing the RBPMS?

The RBPMS is being designed by the Inter-Agency Task Force on the

Harmonization of the National Government Performance Monitoring,
Information and Reporting Systems, created under Administrative Order No.
25 issued on December 21, 2011.

Citation:

[[1]] On July 20, 2012, President Aquino issued Executive Order No. 80
directing the adoption of the Performance-Based Incentive System for
government employees beginning FY 2012. The system shall consist of the
Productivity Enhancement Incentive (PEI) and the Performance-Based Bonus
(PBB). EO No. 80 is premised on the following: First is the need to rationalize
the current incentive system in government, which is generally characterized
by across-the-board bonuses. Second is the necessity to strengthen
performance monitoring and appraisal systems based on existing systems like
the OPIF, the Strategic Performance Management System of the CSC, and the
RBPMS. Third is the belief that service delivery by the bureaucracy can be
improved by linking personnel incentives to the bureau or delivery unit’s
performance and recognizing and rewarding exemplary performance.[[1]]

[[2]] Last December 21, 2011, President Aquino issued Administrative Order
No. 25 creating an Inter-Agency Task Force on the Harmonization of the
National Government Performance Monitoring, Information and Reporting
Systems in line with the Administration’s thrust to raise transparency and
accountability in governance. AO 25 seeks to rationalize, harmonize,
streamline, simplify, integrate, and unify the efforts of government agencies
mandated to exercise broad oversight on performance of government agencies
relative to the National Leadership’s Agenda, the Philippine Development
Plan (or PDP) 2011-2016, agency mandates, commitments and targets. The
AO aims to establish a unified and integrated Results-Based Performance
Management System (RBPMS) across all departments and agencies within the
Executive Branch.[[2]][[3]] Section 1 of Rule I of the IRR.[[3]]
Executive Order No. 292 [BOOK V/Title I/Subtitle A/Chapter 5-
Personnel Policies and Standards]
Published: July 25, 1987.
Source: http://www.gov.ph/1987/07/25/executive-order-no-292-book-vtitle-
isubtitle-achapter-5-personnel-policies-and-standards/
CHAPTER 5
Personnel Policies and Standards
SECTION 21. Recruitment and Selection of Employees.—(1) Opportunity
for government employment shall be open to all qualified citizens and positive
efforts shall be exerted to attract the best qualified to enter the service.
Employees shall be selected on the basis of fitness to perform the duties and
assume the responsibilities of the positions.
(2) When a vacancy occurs in a position in the first level of the Career Service
as defined in Section 8, the employees in the department who occupy the next
lower positions in the occupational group under which the vacant position is
classified, and in other functionally related occupational groups and who are
competent, qualified and with the appropriate civil service eligibility shall be
considered for promotion.
(3) When a vacancy occurs in a position in the second level of the Career
Service as defined in Section 8, the employees in the government service who
occupy the next lower positions in the occupational group under which the
vacant position is classified and in other functionally related occupational
groups and who are competent, qualified and with the appropriate civil service
eligibility shall be considered for promotion.
(4) For purposes of this Section, each department or agency shall evolve its
own screening process, which may include tests of fitness, in accordance with
standards and guidelines set by the Commission. Promotion boards shall be
formed to formulate criteria for evaluation, conduct tests or interviews, and
make systematic assessment of training experience.
(5) If the vacancy is not filled by promotion as provided herein the same shall
be filled by transfer of present employees in the government service, by
reinstatement, by re-employment of persons separated through reduction in
force, or by appointment of persons with the civil service eligibility
appropriate to the positions.
(6) A qualified next-in-rank employee shall have the right to appeal initially to
the Secretaries or heads of agencies or instrumentalities including
government-owned or controlled corporations with original charters, then to
the Merit System Protection Board, and finally to the Civil Service
Commission an appointment made in favor of another employee if the
appellant is not satisfied with the written special reason or reasons given by
the appointing authority for such appointment; Provided, however, that the
decision of the Civil Service Commission may be reviewed on certiorari only
by the Supreme Court within thirty (30) days from receipt of the decision of
the aggrieved party. For purposes of this Section, “qualified next-in-rank”
refers to an employee appointed on a permanent basis to a position previously
determined to be next-in-rank and who meets the requirements for
appointment thereto as previously determined by the appointing authority and
approved by the Commission.
(7) Qualification in an appropriate examination shall be required for
appointment to positions in the first and second levels in the career service in
accordance with the Civil Service rules, except as otherwise provided in this
Title: Provided, That whenever there is a civil service eligible actually
available for appointment, no person who is not such an eligible shall be
appointed even in a temporary capacity to any vacant position in the career
service in the government or in any government-owned or controlled
corporation with original charter, except when the immediate filling of the
vacancy is urgently required in the public interest, or when the vacancy is not
permanent, in which cases temporary appointments of non-eligibles may be
made in the absence of eligibles actually and immediately available.
(8) The appropriate examinations herein referred to shall be those given by the
Commission and the different agencies: Provided, however, That nothing
herein shall affect those eligibilities acquired prior to the effectivity of the
Civil Service Law: Provided, further, That a person with a civil service
eligibility acquired by successfully passing an examination shall be qualified
for a position requiring a lower eligibility if he possesses the other
requirements for appointment to such position.
SECTION 22. Qualification Standards.—(1) A qualification standard
expresses the minimum requirements for a class of positions in terms of
education, training and experience, civil service eligibility, physical fitness,
and other qualities required for successful performance. The degree of
qualifications of an officer or employee shall be determined by the appointing
authority on the basis of the qualification standard for the particular position.
Qualification standards shall be used as basis for civil service examinations
for positions in the career service, as guides in appointment and other
personnel actions, in the adjudication of protested appointments, in
determining training needs, and as aid in the inspection and audit of the
agencies’ personnel work programs.
It shall be administered in such manner as to continually provide incentives to
officers and employees towards professional growth and foster the career
system in the government service.
(2) The establishment, administration and maintenance of qualification
standards shall be the responsibility of the department or agency, with the
assistance and approval of the Civil Service Commission and in consultation
with the Wage and Position Classification Office.
SECTION 23. Release of Examination Results.—The results of any
particular civil service examination held in a number of places on the same
date shall be released simultaneously.
SECTION 24. Register of Eligibles.—The names of the competitors who
pass an examination shall be entered in a register of eligibles arranged in the
order of their general ratings and containing such information as the
Commission may deem necessary.
SECTION 25. Cultural Communities.—In line with the national policy to
facilitate the integration of the members of cultural communities and
accelerate the development of the areas occupied by them, the Commission
shall give special civil service examinations to qualify them for appointment
in the civil service.
SECTION 26. Personnel Actions.—All appointments in the career service
shall be made only according to merit and fitness, to be determined as far as
practicable by competitive examinations. A non-eligible shall not be appointed
to any position in the civil service whenever there is a civil service eligible
actually available for and ready to accept appointment.
As used in this Title, any action denoting the movement or progress of
personnel in the civil service shall be known as personnel action. Such action
shall include appointment through certification, promotion, transfer,
reinstatement, re-employment, detail, reassignment, demotion, and separation.
All personnel actions shall be in accordance with such rules, standards, and
regulations as may be promulgated by the Commission.
(1) Appointment through certification.—An appointment through certification
to a position in the civil service, except as herein otherwise provided, shall be
issued to a person who has been selected from a list of qualified persons
certified by the Commission from an appropriate register of eligibles, and who
meets all the other requirements of the position.
All such persons must serve a probationary period of six months following
their original appointment and shall undergo a thorough character
investigation in order to acquire permanent civil service status. A probationer
may be dropped from the service for unsatisfactory conduct or want of
capacity any time before the expiration of the probationary period: Provided,
That such action is appealable to the Commission.
(2) Promotion.—A promotion is a movement from one position to another
with an increase in duties and responsibilities as authorized by law and usually
accompanied by an increase in pay. The movement may be from one
department or agency to another or from one organizational unit to another in
the same department or agency.
(3) Transfer.—A transfer is a movement from one position to another which is
of equivalent rank, level, or salary without break in service involving the
issuance of an appointment.
It shall not be considered disciplinary when made in the interest of public
service, in which case, the employee concerned shall be informed of the
reasons therefor. If the employee believes that there is no justification for the
transfer, he may appeal his case to the Commission.
The transfer may be from one department or agency to another or from one
organizational unit to another in the same department or agency: Provided,
however, That any movement from the non-career service to the career service
shall not be considered a transfer.
(4) Reinstatement.—Any person who has been permanently appointed to a
position in the career service and who has, through no delinquency or
misconduct, been separated therefrom, may be reinstated to a position in the
same level for which he is qualified.
(5) Reemployment.—Names of persons who have been appointed
permanently to positions in the career service and who have been separated as
a result of reduction in force or reorganization, shall be entered in a list from
which selection for reemployment shall be made.
(6) Detail.—A detail is the movement of an employee from one agency to
another without the issuance of an appointment and shall be allowed, only for
a limited period in the case of employees occupying professional, technical
and scientific positions. If the employee believes that there is no justification
for the detail, he may appeal his case to the Commission. Pending appeal, the
decision to detail the employee shall be executory unless otherwise ordered by
the Commission.
(7) Reassignment.—An employee may be reassigned from one organizational
unit to another in the same agency: Provided, That such reassignment shall not
involve a reduction in rank, status or salary.
SECTION 27. Employment Status.—Appointment in the career service shall
be permanent or temporary.
(1) Permanent status.—A permanent appointment shall be issued to a person
who meets all the requirements for the positions to which he is being
appointed, including the appropriate eligibility prescribed, in accordance with
the provisions of law, rules and standards promulgated in pursuance thereof.
(2) Temporary appointment.—In the absence of appropriate eligibles and it
becomes necessary in the public interest to fill a vacancy, a temporary
appointment shall be issued to a person who meets all the requirements for the
position to which he is being appointed except the appropriate civil service
eligibility: Provided, That such temporary appointment shall not exceed
twelve months, but the appointee may be replaced sooner if a qualified civil
service eligible becomes available.
SECTION 28. Salary Increase or Adjustment.—Adjustments in salaries as a
result of increase in pay levels or upgrading of positions which do not involve
a change in qualification requirements shall not require new appointments
except that copies of the salary adjustment notices shall be submitted to the
Commission for record purposes.
SECTION 29. Reduction in Force.—Whenever it becomes necessary because
of lack of work or funds or due to a change in the scope or nature of an
agency’s program, or as a result of reorganization, to reduce the staff of any
department or agency, those in the same group or class of positions in one or
more agencies within the particular department or agency wherein the
reduction is to be effected, shall be reasonably compared in terms of relative
fitness, efficiency and length of service, and those found to be least qualified
for the remaining positions shall be laid off.
SECTION 30. Career and Personnel Development.—The development and
retention of a competent and efficient work force in the public service is a
primary concern of government. It shall be the policy of the government that a
continuing program of career and personnel development be established for all
government employees at all levels. An integrated national plan for career and
personnel development shall serve as the basis for all career and personnel
development activities in the government.
SECTION 31. Career and Personnel Development Plans.—Each department
or agency shall prepare a career and personnel development plan which shall
be integrated into a national plan by the Commission. Such career and
personnel development plans which shall include provisions on merit
promotions, performance evaluation, in-service training, including overseas
and local scholarships and training grants, job rotation, suggestions and
incentive award systems, and such other provisions for employees’ health,
welfare, counseling, recreation and similar services.
SECTION 32. Merit Promotion Plans.—Each department or agency shall
establish merit promotion plans which shall be administered in accordance
with the provisions of the Civil Service law and the rules, regulations and
standards to be promulgated by the Commission. Such plans shall include
provisions for a definite screening process, which may include tests of fitness,
in accordance with standards and guidelines set by the Commission.
Promotion Boards may be organized subject to criteria drawn by the
Commission.
SECTION 33. Performance Evaluation System.—There shall be established a
performance evaluation system, which shall be administered in accordance
with rules, regulations and standards, promulgated by the Commission for all
officers and employees in the career service. Such performance evaluation
system shall be administered in such manner as to continually foster the
improvement of individual employee efficiency and organizational
effectiveness.
Each department or agency may, after consultation with the Commission,
establish and use one or more performance evaluation plans appropriate to the
various groups of positions in the department or agency concerned. No
performance evaluation shall be given, or used as a basis for personnel action,
except under an approved performance evaluation plan: Provided, That each
employee shall be informed periodically by his supervisor of his performance
evaluation.
SECTION 34. Responsibility for Training.—The Commission shall be
responsible for the coordination and integration of a continuing program of
personnel development for all government personnel in the first and second
levels.
Central staff agencies and specialized institutes shall conduct continuing
centralized training for staff specialists from the different agencies. However,
in those cases where there is sufficient number of participants to warrant
training at department or agency or local government levels, such central staff
agencies and specialized institutes shall render the necessary assistance, and
consultative services.
To avoid duplication of effort and overlapping of training functions, the
following functional responsibilities are assigned:
(1) Public and private colleges and universities and similar institutions shall
be encouraged to organize and carry out continuing programs of executive
development.
(2) The Commission, the Commission on Audit, the Department of Budget
and Management, the General Services Administration, and other central staff
agencies shall conduct centralized training and assist in the training program
of the Departments or agencies along their respective functional areas of
specialization.
(3) In coordination with the Commission, the Department of Local
Government and Community Development shall undertake local government
training programs.
(4) In coordination with the Commission, each department or agency,
province or city shall establish, maintain and promote a systematic plan of
action for personnel training at all levels in accordance with standards laid
down by the Commission. It shall maintain appropriate training staffs and
make full use of available training facilities.
Whenever it deems it necessary, the Commission shall take the initiative in
undertaking programs for personnel development.
SECTION 35. Employee Suggestions and incentive Award System.—There
shall be established a government-wide employee suggestions and incentive
awards system which shall be administered under such rules, regulations, and
standards as may be promulgated by the Commission.
In accordance with rules, regulations, and standards promulgated by the
Commission, the President or the head of each department or agency is
authorized to incur whatever necessary expenses involved in the honorary
recognition of subordinate officers and employees of the government who by
their suggestions, inventions, superior accomplishment, and other personal
efforts contribute to the efficiency, economy, or other improvement of
government operations, or who perform such other extraordinary acts or
services in the public interest in connection with, or in relation to, their
official employment.
SECTION 36. Personnel Relations.—(1) It shall be the concern of the
Commission to provide leadership and assistance in developing employee
relations programs in the department or agencies.
(2) Every Secretary or head of agency shall take all proper steps toward the
creation of an atmosphere conducive to good supervisor-employee relations
and the improvement of employee morale.
SECTION 37. Complaints and Grievances.—Employees shall have the right
to present their complaints or grievances to management and have them
adjudicated as expeditiously as possible in the best interest of the agency, the
government as a whole, and the employee concerned. Such complaint or
grievances shall be resolved at the lowest possible level in the department or
agency, as the case may be, and the employee shall have the right to appeal
such decision to higher authorities.
Each department or agency shall promulgate rules and regulations governing
expeditious, fair and equitable adjustment of employees’ complaints or
grievances in accordance with the policies enunciated by the Commission.
In case any dispute remains unresolved after exhausting all the available
remedies under existing laws and procedures, the parties may jointly refer the
dispute to the Public Sector Labor Management Council constituted under
section 46, for appropriate action.
Executive Order No. 292
ADMINISTRATIVE CODE OF 1987
Appraising Performance
Slide Show - http://www.slideshare.net/viviandabu/pms-in-government-
service-8742018
Executive Order # 80 – 2012
http://www.gov.ph/2012/07/20/executive-order-no-80-s-2012/
DIRECTING THE ADOPTION OF A PERFORMANCE-
BASED INCENTIVE SYSTEM FOR GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES
WHEREAS, there is a need to rationalize the current incentive system in
government which is generally characterized by across-the-board bonuses that
are given uniformly to all civil servants;
WHEREAS, there is a need to strengthen performance monitoring and
appraisal systems based on existing systems like the Organizational
Performance Indicator Framework (OPIF) which is being used by the
Department of Budget and Management (DBM) to measure agency
performance, the Strategic Performance Management System (SPMS) of
the Civil Service Commission (CSC) which links individual performance to
organizational performance, and the Results-Based Performance Monitoring
System (RBPMS).
WHEREAS, service delivery by the bureaucracy can be improved by linking
personnel incentives to the bureau or delivery unit’s performance and
recognizing and rewarding exemplary performance in the public sector;
WHEREAS, there is a need to establish and implement a Performance-Based
Incentive (PBI) System that will motivate higher performance and greater
accountability in the public sector and ensure the accomplishment of
commitments and targets under the five (5) Key Result Areas (KRAs) laid
down in Executive Order (EO) No. 43 (s. 2011) and the Philippine
Development Plan (PDP) 2011-2016;
WHEREAS, Administrative Order (AO) No. 25 (s. 2011) seeks to establish a
unified and integrated RBPMS across all departments and agencies within
the Executive Branch of Government, incorporating a common set
performance scorecard, and creating an accurate, accessible, and up-to-date
government-wide, sectoral, and organizational performance information
system, which shall be used as basis for determining entitlement to
performance-based allowances, incentives, or compensation of government
personnel;
WHEREAS, one of the governing principles of the Senate and House of
Representatives Joint Resolution (JR) No. 4 (s. 2009), otherwise known as the
“Salary Standardization Law (SSL) III,” is the establishment of a PBI scheme
which aligns personnel efforts to organizational performance to reward
exemplary civil servants and well-performing institutions; and
WHEREAS, Presidential Decree (PD) No. 985, PD 1597, Republic Act (RA)
No. 6758, as amended by Senate and House of Representatives JR Nos. 1 and
4, authorized the President to approve policies and levels of allowances and
benefits.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, BENIGNO S. AQUINO III, President of the
Philippines, by virtue of the powers vested in me by the Constitution and
applicable laws, do hereby order:
SECTION 1. Adoption of a PBI System. A PBI system consisting of the
Productivity Enhancement Incentive (PEI) and the Performance-Based Bonus
(PBB) shall be adopted in the national government beginning Fiscal Year (FY)
2012.
a. The PEI, in the amount of P5,000, shall continually be granted across-the-
board, in accordance with the guidelines to be issued by DBM.
b. The PBB, which is a top-up bonus, shall be given to personnel of bureaus or
delivery units in accordance with their contribution to the accomplishment of
their Department’s overall targets and commitments, subject to the following
criteria:
i. Achievement by the Departments of performance targets under their
respective Major Final Outputs (MFOs), and Priority Program/Project
commitments as agreed with the President under the 5 KRAs under EO 43;
and
ii. Accomplishment of good governance conditions set by the Inter-Agency
Task Force (IATF) created under AO 25.
SECTION 2. Guidelines for the PBB. The following guidelines and
principles shall govern the PBB scheme:
a. The PBB shall be characterized as a system of ranking units and personnel
within an organization according to their performance as measured by
verifiable, observable, credible, and sustainable indicators of performance
based on the following pillars:
i. Department’s Major Final Outputs;
ii. Department’s commitments to the President which are supportive of the
priorities under EO 43; and
iii. Good governance conditions to be determined by IATF under AO 25.
b. Flexibility shall be provided to the heads of departments and agencies to
suit the PBB system to the nature of their operations and to drive peak
performers, in terms of the determination of the appropriate delivery units to
be rewarded and the performance indicators to be used; and
c. There shall be appropriate communications strategy and publication of
performance targets and accomplishments in the department and agency
websites and the website for the RBPMS to ensure transparency and
accountability in the implementation of the PBB scheme.
SECTION 3. Performance Categories and Rates of Incentives. The
amount of the PBB shall be based on the performance of the departments,
bureaus or delivery units, and of the individual employees. Department
Secretaries or their duly designated officials shall rank the bureaus or delivery
units, including attached agencies, according to their performance following a
normal distribution.
The PBB shall be distributed according to the following
scheme for FY 2012, without prejudice to the revision
thereof in succeeding years, as may be approved by the
President, upon recommendation of the IATF:
Performance Best Better Good
Category Performer Performer Performer
Best Bureau 35,000 20,000 10,000
Better Bureau 25,000 13,500 7,000
Good Bureau 15,000 10,000 5,000
Bureaus and individuals who receive a Below Satisfactory performance rating
will not be qualified for the PBB.
SECTION 4. Prohibition against the Grant of New and Additional
Increases in the Rates of Existing incentives and Bonuses. The grant of
allowances, incentives and bonuses other than those authorized under SSL III
and any increase in the existing and authorized rates therefor, other than what
is provided for in this EO, shall not be allowed.
Government agencies, including Government–Owned or –Controlled
Corporations (GOCCs), with existing authorized performance-based incentive
or bonus systems shall harmonize the same with the PBB scheme.
SECTION 5. Funding. Funds needed for the grant of the PBB to covered
employees shall be charged against the following:
a. For departments, bureaus, and agencies, including State Universities and
Colleges (SUCs), the necessary funds shall be charged against the
Miscellaneous Personnel Benefits Fund (MPBF) in the General
Appropriations Act (GAA).
b. For GOCCs, the funds required shall be charged against their respective
corporate funds. The use of funds for the purpose shall be subject to the
approval of their respective governing boards in accordance with applicable
laws.
SECTION 6. Coverage. This EO shall cover all departments, agencies,
SUCs, and GOCCs that remain under the jurisdiction of DBM.
SECTION 7. Applicability to GOCCs under the Jurisdiction of GCG. The
Governance Commission on GOCCs (GCG) is encouraged to adopt the
policies and principles contained in this EO and issue the necessary guidelines
for GOCCs under its jurisdiction, pending the formal implementation of the
Compensation and Position Classification System (CPCS) for GOCCS as
mandated under RA 10149.
SECTION 8. Applicability to the Legislative and Judicial Branches, and
Other Offices vested with fiscal autonomy. The Congress, Judiciary,
Constitutional Commissions and the Office of the Ombudsman are
encouraged to adopt the provisions of this EO to be eligible to the PBB.
SECTION 9. Role of the IATF in the grant of the PBB. The IATF under
AO 25 shall formulate and issue the implementing guidelines for this EO. It
shall provide assistance to agencies in the identification of indicators and
targets and implement a validation system for agency reports and
accomplishments.
The IATF under AO 25 may enlist the assistance of other agencies in the
implementation of the provisions of this EO.
The Commission on Higher Education (CHED) shall issue additional
implementing guidelines for SUCs.
SECTION 10. Separability Clause. If any provision of this EO is declared
invalid, or unconstitutional, the other provisions not affected thereby shall
remain valid and subsisting.
SECTION 11. Repealing Clause. All orders, rules, regulations, and
issuances, or parts thereof, which are inconsistent with this EO, are hereby
repealed, amended, or modified accordingly.
SECTION 12. Effectivity. This EO shall take effect immediately upon
publication in a newspaper of general circulation.
Performance Appraisal Methods
http://corehr.wordpress.com/performance-management/performance-
appraisal-methods/
“It is a systematic evaluation of an individual with respect to performance on
the job and individual’s potential for development.”
Definition 2: Formal System, Reasons and Measures of future performance
“It is formal, structured system of measuring, evaluating job related behaviors
and outcomes to discover reasons of performance and how to perform
effectively in future so that employee, organization and society all benefits.”
Meaning of Performance Appraisals

Performance Appraisals is the assessment of individual’s performance in a

systematic way. It is a developmental tool used for all round development of
the employee and the organization. The performance is measured against such
factors as job knowledge, quality and quantity of output, initiative, leadership
abilities, supervision, dependability, co-operation, judgment, versatility and
health. Assessment should be confined to past as well as potential
performance also. The second definition is more focused on behaviors as a
part of assessment because behaviors do affect job results.

Performance Appraisals and Job Analysis Relationship

Job Analysis à Performance Standards à Performance Appraisals

Describe the work and Translate job requirementsDescribe the job relevant
personnel requirement into levels of acceptable or strengths and weaknesses
of a particular job. unacceptable performance of each individual.

Objectives of Performance Appraisals

Use of Performance Appraisals

1. Promotions

2. Confirmations

3. Training and Development

4. Compensation reviews

5. Competency building

6. Improve communication

7. Evaluation of HR Programs

8. Feedback & Grievances

4 Goals of Performance Appraisals

General Goals Specific Goals

Developmental Use Individual needs

Performance feedback

Transfers and Placements

Strengths and Development needs

Administrative Decisions / Uses Salary

Promotion
 Numerous methods have been devised to measure the quantity and quality of
Retention / Termination performance appraisals. Each of the methods is effective for some purposes
for some organizations only. None should be dismissed or accepted as
Recognition appropriate except as they relate to the particular needs of the organization or
an employee.
Lay offs
Broadly all methods of appraisals can be divided into two different categories.
Poor Performers identification
 Past Oriented Methods

Organizational Maintenance HR Planning

 Future Oriented Methods

Training Needs
Past Oriented Methods

Organizational Goal achievements

1. Rating Scales: Rating scales consists of several numerical scales
representing job related performance criterions such as dependability,
Goal Identification
initiative, output, attendance, attitude etc. Each scales ranges from excellent to
poor. The total numerical scores are computed and final conclusions are
HR Systems Evaluation
derived. Advantages – Adaptability, easy to use, low cost, every type of job

Reinforcement of organizational needs can be evaluated, large number of employees covered, no formal training
required. Disadvantages – Rater’s biases

Documentation Validation Research

2. Checklist: Under this method, checklist of statements of traits of
employee in the form of Yes or No based questions is prepared. Here the rater
For HR Decisions
only does the reporting or checking and HR department does the actual
evaluation. Advantages – economy, ease of administration, limited training
Legal Requirements
required, standardization. Disadvantages – Raters biases, use of improper
weighs by HR, does not allow rater to give relative ratings
Performance Appraisal Process

3. Forced Choice Method: The series of statements arranged in the blocks

1. Objectives definition of appraisal of two or more are given and the rater indicates which statement is true or
false. The rater is forced to make a choice. HR department does actual
2. Job expectations establishment assessment. Advantages – Absence of personal biases because of forced
choice. Disadvantages – Statements may be wrongly framed.
3. Design an appraisal program

4. Forced Distribution Method: here employees are clustered around a

4. Appraise the performance
high point on a rating scale. Rater is compelled to distribute the employees on
all points on the scale. It is assumed that the performance is conformed to
5. Performance Interviews
normal distribution. Advantages – Eliminates Disadvantages – Assumption of
normal distribution, unrealistic, errors of central tendency.
6. Use data for appropriate purposes

5. Critical Incidents Method: The approach is focused on certain critical

7. Identify opportunities variables
behaviors of employee that makes all the difference in the performance.
Supervisors as and when they occur record such incidents. Advantages –
8. Using social processes, physical processes, human and computer
Evaluations are based on actual job behaviors, ratings are supported by
assistance
descriptions, feedback is easy, reduces recency biases, chances of subordinate
improvement are high. Disadvantages – Negative incidents can be prioritized,
Difference between Traditional and Modern (Systems) approach to Appraisals
forgetting incidents, overly close supervision; feedback may be too much and
may appear to be punishment.
Categories Traditional Appraisals Modern, Systems Appraisals

6. Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales: statements of effective and

Guiding Values Individualistic, ControlSystematic, Developmental, ineffective behaviors determine the points. They are said to be behaviorally
oriented, Documentary Problem solving anchored. The rater is supposed to say, which behavior describes the employee
performance. Advantages – helps overcome rating errors. Disadvantages –

Leadership Styles Directional, Evaluative Facilitative, Coaching Suffers from distortions inherent in most rating techniques.

7. Field Review Method: This is an appraisal done by someone outside

Frequency Occasional Frequent
employees’ own department usually from corporate or HR department.
Advantages – Useful for managerial level promotions, when comparable
Formalities High Low information is needed, Disadvantages – Outsider is generally not familiar with
employees work environment, Observation of actual behaviors not possible.

Rewards Individualistic Grouped, Organizational

8. Performance Tests & Observations: This is based on the test of
knowledge or skills. The tests may be written or an actual presentation of
TECHNIQUES / METHODS OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISALS
skills. Tests must be reliable and validated to be useful. Advantage – Tests
may be apt to measure potential more than actual performance. Disadvantages
– Tests may suffer if costs of test development or administration are high.
 9. Confidential Records: Mostly used by government departments,
however its application in industry is not ruled out. Here the report is given in
the form of Annual Confidentiality Report (ACR) and may record ratings with
respect to following items; attendance, self expression, team work, leadership,
initiative, technical ability, reasoning ability, originality and resourcefulness
etc. The system is highly secretive and confidential. Feedback to the assessee
is given only in case of an adverse entry. Disadvantage is that it is highly
subjective and ratings can be manipulated because the evaluations are linked
to HR actions like promotions etc.
10. Essay Method: In this method the rater writes down the employee
description in detail within a number of broad categories like, overall
impression of performance, promoteability of employee, existing capabilities
and qualifications of performing jobs, strengths and weaknesses and training
needs of the employee. Advantage – It is extremely useful in filing
information gaps about the employees that often occur in a better-structured
checklist. Disadvantages – It its highly dependent upon the writing skills of
rater and most of them are not good writers. They may get confused success
depends on the memory power of raters.
11. Cost Accounting Method: Here performance is evaluated from the
monetary returns yields to his or her organization. Cost to keep employee, and
benefit the organization derives is ascertained. Hence it is more dependent
upon cost and benefit analysis.
12. Comparative Evaluation Method (Ranking & Paired
Comparisons): These are collection of different methods that compare
performance with that of other co-workers. The usual techniques used may be
ranking methods and paired comparison method.
 Ranking Methods: Superior ranks his worker based on merit,
from best to worst. However how best and why best are not elaborated in this
method. It is easy to administer and explanation.
 Paired Comparison Methods: In this method each employee is
rated with another employee in the form of pairs. The number of comparisons
may be calculated with the help of a formula as under.
quality of these appraisals largely depend upon the skills of psychologists who
perform the evaluation.
3. Assessment Centers: This technique was first developed in USA and UK
in 1943. An assessment center is a central location where managers may come
together to have their participation in job related exercises evaluated by
trained observers. It is more focused on observation of behaviors across a
series of select exercises or work samples. Assessees are requested to
participate in in-basket exercises, work groups, computer simulations, role
playing and other similar activities which require same attributes for
successful performance in actual job. The characteristics assessed in
assessment center can be assertiveness, persuasive ability, communicating
ability, planning and organizational ability, self confidence, resistance to
stress, energy level, decision making, sensitivity to feelings, administrative
ability, creativity and mental alertness etc. Disadvantages – Costs of
employees traveling and lodging, psychologists, ratings strongly influenced
by assessee’s inter-personal skills. Solid performers may feel suffocated in
simulated situations. Those who are not selected for this also may get affected.
Advantages – well-conducted assessment center can achieve better forecasts
of future performance and progress than other methods of appraisals. Also
reliability, content validity and predictive ability are said to be high in
assessment centers. The tests also make sure that the wrong people are not
hired or promoted. Finally it clearly defines the criteria for selection and
promotion.
4. 360-Degree Feedback: It is a technique which is systematic collection of
performance data on an individual group, derived from a number of
stakeholders like immediate supervisors, team members, customers, peers and
self. In fact anyone who has useful information on how an employee does a
job may be one of the appraisers. This technique is highly useful in terms of
broader perspective, greater self-development and multi-source feedback is
useful. 360-degree appraisals are useful to measure inter-personal skills,
customer satisfaction and team building skills. However on the negative side,
receiving feedback from multiple sources can be intimidating, threatening etc.
Multiple raters may be less adept at providing balanced and objective
feedback.

N x (N-1) / 2

Future Oriented Methods

1. Management By Objectives: It means management by objectives and

the performance is rated against the achievement of objectives stated by the
management. MBO process goes as under.

 Establish goals and desired outcomes for each subordinate

 Setting performance standards

 Comparison of actual goals with goals attained by the employee

 Establish new goals and new strategies for goals not achieved in
previous year.

Advantage – It is more useful for managerial positions.

Disadvantages – Not applicable to all jobs, allocation of merit pay may result
in setting short-term goals rather than important and long-term goals etc.

2. Psychological Appraisals: These appraisals are more directed to assess

employees potential for future performance rather than the past one. It is done
in the form of in-depth interviews, psychological tests, and discussion with
supervisors and review of other evaluations. It is more focused on employees
emotional, intellectual, and motivational and other personal characteristics
affecting his performance. This approach is slow and costly and may be useful
for bright young members who may have considerable potential. However