日本財団 図書館

共通ヘッダを読みとばす


Top > 社会科学 > 社会 > 成果物情報

“HOW TO WIN PUBLIC CONFIDENCE AS COVERNMENT OFFICIALS"-100 Sheets for Effective&Efficient Public Administration

 事業名 開発途上国等の公務員の人材育成に関するプログラムの開発
 団体名 公務研修協議会 注目度注目度5


Sheet 43

 

"POSTPONING PAY INCREASES"

 

Mr. Yoshida, Director of Planning Division was feeling rather distressed. The deadline for performance rating had finally arrived. He had been promoted to Director six months ago and this was the first time for him to have to evaluate the performance of his staff. He wondered to himself how any individual could properly evaluate another human being. He decided, at all cost, to avoid antagonism and maintain a harmonious atmosphere in the office throughout these performance evaluations.

Performance rating is conducted once a year. Three elements, job performance, ability and attitude towards work are evaluated and graded accordingly, from A to D. An overall rating is calculated from these, and similarly graded A-D. There is no particular formula involved in synthesizing individual elements into an overall rating. The assessor and member of staff involved are required to discuss this final evaluation. Staff must sign their evaluation sheets as proof this dialogue took place.

Evaluation encourages staff to make full use of their aptitude and abilities. It also plans a key role in the training and promotion of staff. There is no concrete rule, however, as to how this evaluation is utilized in the promotion, or other action concerning personnel. The only related rule that exists concerns pay increase. An employee with an overall rating in the top 15% is awarded a special pay increase, while anyone rated D receives no pay increase at all. Between these ratings, employees are given a regular pay increase. Figures for these ratings are fixed as follows. In each division, an overall rating of A is given to a maximum of 5% of staff, and B to a maximum of 20%. Employees who receive an A are automatically awarded a special pay increase. The personnel division awards a special pay increase, at its discretion, to half of those who received a B rating. This special pay increase may not be awarded to the same individual two years in a row.

Mr. Yoshida consulted Mr. Hara, his predecessor over how he had evaluated his staff. Mr. Hara informed him that he had been very careful to award special pay increases evenly among his staff.

Mr. Yoshida went to the Personnel Division and checked past ratings records of his staff and who in particular had received special increases over the last seven years. He decided to award a special pay increase to employees who have not received one in recent years. His division has twenty employees. Of these, one could be awarded an A, and four a B. Within these limitations, he gave an A or a B rating to three employees who have not received a special pay increase over the last seven years. He gave a B rating to two employees who received a special pay increase six years ago.

 

 

 

BACK   CONTENTS   NEXT

 






サイトに関するご意見・ご質問・お問合せ   サイトマップ   個人情報保護

日本財団会長笹川陽平ブログはこちら

日本財団図書館は、日本財団が運営しています。

  • 日本財団 THE NIPPON FOUNDATION



ランキング
注目度とは?
成果物アクセスランキング
3,580位
(34,899成果物中)

成果物アクセス数
1,893

集計期間:成果物公開〜現在
更新日: 2022年8月6日

関連する他の成果物

1.信頼される公務員になるために?効果的・効率的な公務遂行のための100シート?
2.「開発途上国等の公務員の人材育成に関するプログラムの開発」の報告書
3.将来あるべき人事管理を考えるための基礎調査(平成10年)
  [ 同じカテゴリの成果物 ]


アンケートにご協力
御願いします

この成果物は
お役に立ちましたか?


とても役に立った
まあまあ
普通
いまいち
全く役に立たなかった


この成果物をどのような
目的でご覧になりましたか?


レポート等の作成の
参考資料として
研究の一助として
関係者として参照した
興味があったので
間違って辿り着いただけ


ご意見・ご感想

ここで入力されたご質問・資料請求には、ご回答できません。






その他・お問い合わせ
ご質問は こちら から