Message-ID: <1620603.1075857834613.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 03:02:00 -0800 (PST) From: enron.announcements@enron.com To: all.worldwide@enron.com Subject: Performance Review Process Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ANSI_X3.4-1968 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-From: Enron Announcements X-To: All Enron Worldwide X-cc: X-bcc: X-Folder: \Kevin_Ruscitti_Jun2001\Notes Folders\Discussion threads X-Origin: Ruscitti-K X-FileName: kruscit.nsf With the extension of the PRC to all organizations, questions have arisen= =20 about the results of this process. This memo provides some details about th= e=20 PRC process. First some context: The key to Enron=01,s success is the increasing qualit= y and=20 dedication of our talent. As we continue to attract and retain the very be= st=20 people, we all have continued to raise the performance bar throughout the= =20 organization. At the core of our system are the following principles: ? Hire the best people. ? Provide challenging opportunities. ? Pay well =01( and pay for performance (with bonuses based on merit, not= =20 entitlement). ? Evaluate performance through a rigorous review process. ? Provide clear feedback and direction to employees. The PRC is a critical component of our performance management system. The= =20 PRC is built on this foundation: ? 360 degree performance feedback. ? Review by a broad group, not just the supervisor. ? A relative ranking of performance across Enron to determine promotions an= d=20 to allocate bonus money. In addition to understanding this broad philosophy, we all need to understa= nd=20 the following details: ? Relative ranking. Enron uses the descriptors =01&superior=018, =01&excel= lent=018,=20 =01&strong=018, "satisfactory", =01&needs improvement=018, and =01&issues= =018 to group all=20 employees. This year, =01&relative to his/her peers=018 precedes each of t= hese=20 descriptors. This qualifier confirms what we have done and will continue to= =20 do in practice; that is, evaluate individual performers against their peers= . =20 It is possible, therefore, for someone to perform at the same or higher lev= el=20 compared to prior periods, yet receive a lower rating for the current perio= d=20 if other employees=01, performance raised the bar. ? Teamwork. A relative ranking may invite the view that for one employee t= o=20 gain, others must suffer. However, feedback is explicitly solicited on=20 teamwork when evaluating each individual=01,s performance. Anyone who atte= mpts=20 to gain by withholding information or refusing to collaborate with others i= n=20 the organization will suffer in a relative ranking on this key performance= =20 criterion. ? Preferred distribution. In large part, the quality of our workforce has= =20 been driven by our willingness to make tough decisions. We have consistentl= y=20 captured business opportunities and overcome obstacles because we have made= =20 the choices that had to be made in order to constantly improve our employee= =20 talent base. The preferred distribution (5% superior, 30% excellent, 30%=20 strong, 20% satisfactory, and 15% needs improvement or issues) forces PRC= =20 committee members to identify those who must improve in order to remain at= =20 Enron as well as to single out top talent for special recognition. There is= =20 some flexibility in the system, but every organization must ultimately face= =20 this difficult question: have we achieved the highest level of performance = or=20 are there still improvements that must be made? Few, if any, organizations= =20 adhere exactly to the preferred distribution. Rather, they exercise informe= d=20 discretion in the individual categories and meet a distribution that reflec= ts=20 their groups=01, overall effectiveness and need for improvement. ? Communicating Ratings. Everyone rated =01&satisfactory=018 or below shoul= d know=20 his/her rating. Each organization has determined for itself whether to=20 communicate ratings of =01&strong=018 and above. In all cases, employees w= ill=20 receive feedback about their performance against expectations, areas of=20 success, and areas that need improvement. We hope this answers most of your questions about the PRC process. We woul= d=20 like your feedback and ideas on how to improve the PRC process going=20 forward. Therefore, we will be conducting an eSpeak in the near future, an= d=20 there will be other methods we will create to let us know what you think. = In=20 the meantime, please feel free to consult with your HR Generalist if you ha= ve=20 any immediate questions, comments, or concerns.