Message-ID: <11734047.1075850596581.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 03:47:00 -0700 (PDT) From: gary.smith@enron.com To: cindy.olson@enron.com, elizabeth.tilney@enron.com, david.oxley@enron.com, mary.joyce@enron.com, robert.jones@enron.com, marla.barnard@enron.com, kalen.pieper@enron.com, drew.lynch@enron.com Subject: Stan Horton memo Cc: tim.o'rourke@enron.com, steven.kean@enron.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ANSI_X3.4-1968 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Bcc: tim.o'rourke@enron.com, steven.kean@enron.com X-From: Gary P Smith X-To: Cindy Olson, Elizabeth Tilney, David Oxley, Mary Joyce, Robert W Jones, Marla Barnard, Kalen Pieper, Drew Lynch X-cc: Tim O'Rourke, Steven J Kean X-bcc: X-Folder: \Steven_Kean_Nov2001_5\Notes Folders\Prc X-Origin: KEAN-S X-FileName: skean.nsf Per your request, below is the memo that Stan Horton sent out to all ETS=20 employees discussing the PEP and PRC processes. It was distributed on May 30, 2001 as part of our mid-year communication effor= t. Sorry I'm so tardy with this; I almost forgot. Future requests for=20 information will be written down. Gary From: ETS General Announcement/ET&S/Enron@ENRON=20 [mailto:IMCEANOTES-ETS+20General+20Announcement_ET+26S_Enron+40ENRON@ENRON.= com ] On Behalf Of Stan Horton, Chairman & CEO@ENRON Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 12:26 AM To: Enron Transportation Services Everyone - All@ENRON Subject: PEP/PRC Process While you have received previous correspondence about the PEP system and th= e=20 PRC process, today, I want to share with you what these processes mean to E= TS=20 and why they are core to our company=01,s continued success. =20 I believe that any review process must accomplish certain objectives: ? Identify Talent. First, a review system must help us identify the future= =20 leaders of functional areas and of our organization. One of the things I= =20 like best about the PRC process is that it gives me and the entire ETS=20 leadership team an opportunity to learn about talented employees at all=20 levels of our organization and across Enron. =20 ? Demand Performance. Second, I believe a review process should hold all= =20 employees accountable for performance. Performance means understanding ho= w=20 ETS makes money and adds shareholder value as well as what role an employee= =20 plays in delivering these results. This is true whether you are ensuring= =20 continued safety and reliability, scheduling daily transportation or=20 negotiating commercial arrangements. If you=01,re unclear on what performa= nce=20 means in your area, please ask your supervisor to spend time during the=20 mid-year review process helping to define performance for you. ? Provide Feedback. Third, a review process should provide employees with= =20 feedback to help improve performance and determine career plans. Without= =20 feedback, employees operate in a vacuum in understanding what their=20 supervisor expects of them and what they can do to succeed in their current= =20 role and in their careers. While it is never easy to hear constructive=20 feedback, I ask that you keep an open mind and gain as much information as= =20 you can from the process. Keep in mind that it is hard to give feedback as= =20 well. I am grateful to those mentors in my career who were willing to=20 provide me with the feedback and advice that has helped me to succeed. We are well on our way to making the PEP/PRC process a good vehicle for=20 accomplishing these objectives. Last year was the first year that many of= =20 our employees were introduced to the PRC and, accordingly, people tended to= =20 focus on the process itself. Last year we learned a great deal and made= =20 changes for the better this year. =20 I=01,m confident that this year we can focus on giving and receiving feedba= ck. PEP and PRC fit our ETS and Enron values. While ETS is full of individual= s=20 that typify the Enron values, PEP and PRC help us to identify talent, to=20 demand and reward performance and to provide important feedback to each=20 employee. =20 Stan