Guidance notes for departments - Oxford Learning Institute ...

Oxford Learning Institute
University of Oxford
PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT AND REVIEW (PDR)
Guidance notes for departments introducing PDR for support staff and
academic-related staff
Introduction
1. This note provides guidance for academic departments on the introduction or updating of
Personal Development Review (PDR) schemes for academic-related and support staff.
(Separate arrangements continue to apply for academic staff: see paragraph 7 below;
and departments and divisions will be consulted during 2009/10 on review arrangements
for research staff: see paragraph 8 below).
2. The University does not have a single scheme for the annual review of academic-related
and support staff. Instead, the Personnel Committee agreed in 2007 a set of principles to
underpin the introduction of departmental review schemes. These are now usually
known as „Personal Development Review‟ (PDR), in preference to the term „appraisal‟.
3. The introduction of PDR within departments is supported by the Oxford Learning
Institute. If you would like support in setting up or reviving a departmental scheme, or
have any questions about the content of these guidance notes, please contact in the first
instance: pdadministrator@learning.ox.ac.uk. The Learning Institute can arrange
departmental briefings for staff on the introduction of new schemes and provide training
for reviewers and staff in the skills underpinning PDR (e.g. giving and receiving
feedback). In addition, an optional on-line training course for reviewers will be available
from TT10.
4. The key principles underpinning the operation of PDR for academic-related and support
staff are summarised here and reproduced in full at Annexe A. Departments are
encouraged to introduce their own PDR schemes for these staff in line with the
principles.
PDR integrates the achievement of departmental and divisional objectives with
support for individuals‟ personal and professional development.
It is integrated with existing staff management processes: the expectation is that
individuals will be reviewed annually by their line manager or supervisor as part
of a continuing dialogue throughout the year.
PDR is based on an initial self-assessment by the individual in advance of the
annual discussion: reviewees reflect on their own performance over the previous
year and propose appropriate work objectives for the coming year and areas for
future development.
The principle of „no surprises‟ should guide the review discussion: both parties
share their reflections in advance of the discussion; and reviewers should not
raise for the first time during a PDR substantive issues in relation to an
individual‟s performance in the role.
PDR should not be used as the primary means of managing poor performance;
and there is no direct link between PDR and salary, promotion, or discipline, for
which separate procedures exist. (See sections 10 and 11 of the guidance notes,
on how the outcomes of PDR might inform decisions on merit pay and regrading).
I:\PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT\Policy work\Personal development review\Liisa\Guidance notes.doc

Oxford Learning Institute
University of Oxford
5. Standard templates are available to support departments in introducing or updating PDR
schemes: these can be adapted as necessary to suit the local context and culture, in
consultation with staff. Sample templates are given at Annexe B. These reflect the
experience and practices of those departments across the University who have
introduced PDR schemes since 2007.
6. Staff in the University Administration and Services are covered by a single scheme,
though there are some local variants on this. For details, see:
http://www.admin.ox.ac.uk/personneluas/staffdev/index.shtml#_Toc192402455
7. Staff in Library Services, Computing Services and some other ASUC departments are
also reviewed under separate schemes which reflect the University‟s general principles.
For details contact your local HR manager or personnel administrator.
8. Academic staff continue to be appraised under the University‟s existing scheme which
provides for a discussion once every five years. For further guidance, see:
http://www.admin.ox.ac.uk/ps/staff/academic/appraisal/guidance.shtml
9. During 2009/10, departments and divisions will be consulted on review arrangements for
research staff, in line with the University‟s revised Code of Practice for the Employment
and Career Development of Research Staff. The Code envisages that research staff will
be included in departmental PDR arrangements and, pending the outcome of the
consultation, existing departmental schemes should be open to those members of
research staff who seek an annual review meeting.
2

Oxford Learning Institute
University of Oxford
Introducing departmental PDR schemes for academic-related and
support staff
Checklist of questions
Departments are invited to consider the following questions before introducing or updating
PDR schemes.
What local arrangements will there be for consultation with the staff concerned
1. The principles agreed by the Personnel Committee require departments to make
appropriate arrangements for local consultation on the development of PDR. That
consultation is expected to cover:
how PDR will be integrated with existing staff management processes in the
department
how the record of the discussion will be agreed between reviewer and reviewee
how agreed training and development needs arising from PDR will be collated
and acted on
how other individual or collective actions identified through PDR will be reviewed.
2. Experience across the University has shown that PDR is likely to be most effective, and
to be more readily accepted by staff, where staff are consulted in the early stages of
designing and developing a new scheme:
Some departments have set up a working group of representatives of each of the
categories of staff who will be covered by a scheme, to consider what
departmental purposes and objectives the scheme can support and what
arrangements need to be made locally for the processes outlined above.
Other departments have adopted a two-stage approach to the introduction of
PDR. In the first stage, a basic outline of the scheme and its associated
paperwork has been presented to those who will be reviewers under the scheme
(sometimes following input from an advisory group). The scheme has then been
adapted in the light of comments from reviewers, before a final version is
circulated to all staff.
How will the department ‘own’ the scheme
3. PDR is also likely to be more effective if it is seen by staff to be „owned‟ by the
department and to have the support of the Head of Department:
Could the Head of Department write a preface to the scheme, showing how it
supports departmental aims or objectives
Could the Head introduce or attend any briefings arranged to launch the
scheme
Does the scheme paperwork incorporate the department‟s name and logo and
reflect its usual house style
3

Oxford Learning Institute
University of Oxford
When will PDR discussions be held
4. The expectation is that PDR discussions are held annually. Departments are free to
decide at which point in the year to schedule discussions:
Some departments conduct PDRs at the same time each year, often during
Trinity Term/the Long Vacation (this means the outcome of the discussions can
be used, with the consent of the individual, as one piece of evidence to inform
merit review: see paragraph 10, below). Other departments hold PDRs
immediately after the merit round, during Michaelmas Term. Holding all
discussions at the same time simplifies the administration and monitoring of PDR
and makes it easier to integrate the process with departmental planning and act
on any outcomes of PDR at departmental level.
Other departments hold PDRs on the anniversary of an individual‟s appointment
to a post, so that discussions are scheduled throughout the year. This spreads
the load for reviewers and reinforces the focus on the individual, but makes it
harder to link PDR with other departmental processes, and more difficult to
collate and act on training and development or other needs at the level of the
department. It also makes the administration and monitoring of the scheme more
complex.
How will the scheme be integrated with departmental planning processes
5. PDR is intended to integrate planning to meet departmental and University objectives
with review of individuals‟ performance and consideration of the support needed to
achieve future objectives. It integrates a review of objectives set the previous year and
the setting of new objectives for the coming year with an opportunity to discuss
individuals‟ development in and beyond the role.
6. Whenever PDR discussions are held within your own department, it is helpful for the
departmental objectives for the next year to be agreed and circulated in advance of
PDRs, so that individuals can take account of higher-level objectives in proposing their
own goals for the coming year; and the department objectives can in turn inform the PDR
discussion.
How will PDR be integrated with existing staff management processes
7. The expectation is that individuals will be reviewed by their line manager or supervisor as
part of a continuing dialogue throughout the year. Before PDR is introduced,
departments will need to consider the following questions:
Does each individual in the Department know who their manager/supervisor is for
the purposes of PDR, and for continuing support throughout the year
Are all managers and supervisors clear about their responsibilities for managing
staff, and the role of PDR in relation to those responsibilities (The PDR
handbook for reviewers of academic-related and support staff provides further
guidance).
Does each individual have an up-to-date job description In the first year of
operation of a scheme, reviewees may not have detailed objectives covering
each area of their work, and they may not have had the opportunity for some time
to review their job description: the current job description provides a useful
starting point for the discussion.
4

Oxford Learning Institute
University of Oxford
8. There are some exceptions to the principle of individuals being reviewed by their line
manager:
Where an individual has more than one manager, or has day-to-day tasks mostly
allocated by a project manager separate from his/her line manager, you will need
to reach agreement on who should conduct the review. The discussion itself
should not usually be conducted by more than one reviewer but the reviewer may
seek feedback from the other manager in advance of the discussion, with the
agreement of the reviewee.
In the rare cases where there is a breakdown in the line manager relationship,
how will the scheme provide for individuals to have an alternative reviewer
9. PDR should not be used as the primary means of managing poor performance; and
there is no direct link between PDR and salary, promotion, or discipline, for which
separate procedures exist. For further details on the role of PDR in managing
performance, see the PDR handbook.
10. As outlined above, PDR is conducted separately from, and at a different time to,
consideration of merit pay. However, if the review of the past year indicates that
performance has been exceptional, information from the PDR can be used, with the
consent of the individual, to inform further consideration under any arrangements for
merit review.
11. Similarly, a PDR discussion should not be used primarily to discuss re-grading of a post.
However, if it is clear from the discussion that the role has changed significantly during
the year, or is likely to change significantly, submitting a post for re-grading might be one
of the agreed outcomes of the discussion.
How will individuals prepare for the discussion
12. The individual begins the PDR process by reflecting on their own performance over the
previous year and proposing appropriate work objectives for the coming year and areas
for future development. These reflections are then shared with the reviewer in advance
of the discussion and reviewers flag up at this stage any additional topics they want to
cover during the discussion. How will you structure this advance preparation – through a
standard template or a list of reflective questions emailed in advance to the reviewee.
Should the scheme incorporate feedback
13. Seeking feedback is an optional part of PDR; and you will need to consider whether and
how you want to incorporate feedback in your scheme. The aim of eliciting feedback
from others is to secure a more rounded view of the individual‟s work over the previous
year, and to hear a broader spread of ideas on how certain aspects of the job might be
done differently. The feedback can come from colleagues within the department or
others, within the University or externally, with whom the individual works closely or for
whom they provide a service. You can use a short form to elicit feedback, or an email.
Reviewers will need to agree with the individuals they manage who it would be
appropriate to contact; and what form the feedback should take: e.g. should comments
be sent directly to the individual and the reviewer, or should they be sent only to the
reviewer
5

Oxford Learning Institute
University of Oxford
How will you safeguard and act on records of the discussion
14. Departments need to consult locally on what arrangements should be made to record
PDR discussions and to store PDR records safely. You will also need to consider
whether you wish anyone other than the reviewer and reviewee to see the agreed record
of the meeting. Some departments have a procedure called „grand-parenting‟, whereby
the agreed record is also seen by the reviewer‟s line manager, or by the Head of
Department.
15. Most departments use a template to record the discussion (see Annexe B) which can be
completed by either reviewer or reviewee. The aim is to reach consensus on an agreed
record of the meeting but, if this is not possible, it is preferable to record significant areas
of disagreement in a way that both parties are happy with, rather than spend
considerable time trying to reach agreement. The completed form needs to be signed by
both reviewer and reviewee.
How will you share and act on agreed training and development needs, or other needs that
require action at the level of the department
16. Introducing a PDR scheme can raise individual expectations about the support that staff
will receive in the role. Before introducing a scheme, you will need to consider what
support is available to individuals; and how you will record, collate and act on the needs
identified through PDR:
How will you record individual‟s agreed training and development needs Most
departments have a separate form, or part of the form, which records any agreed
needs and which both parties agree to share on a selective basis with others
(e.g. the departmental administrator or Management Group)
What arrangements can be made locally (within the department or cognate
departments, within a building or across the division) to provide development
opportunities for staff (e.g. through local mentoring, work-shadowing or
secondment arrangements)
Are all staff and reviewers aware of the University‟s central training and
development provision See:
http://www.ox.ac.uk/sg/working_at_oxford/training_development/index.html
What percentage of the department‟s budget can be set aside to cover any
training and development needs arising from PDR that are not covered by the
University‟s central provision How will the department collate and act on these
needs
How will the department identify any collective needs arising from PDR (e.g. the
PDR process might indicate a shared need for support in a particular software
package or set of skills, that is best met at the level of the department, rather than
by individual participation in courses).
How will the actions arising from PDR be followed up throughout the year
17. Although PDR is an annual process, the expectation is that it will be integrated with dayto-day
management processes. Some departments include explicit provision for review
of the outcomes of PDR, at three-monthly, or six-monthly intervals. Others make less
formal provision for the actions arising from PDR to be reviewed during regular one-toone
meetings between reviewers and individuals.
6

Oxford Learning Institute
University of Oxford
Annexe A: Principles for the introduction of personal development review
for university support and academic-related staff
These principles were agreed by the University‟s Personnel Committee in Michaelmas 2007.
1. All departments will have in place a scheme for personal and career development
review that aims to integrate support for individuals with the achievement of
departmental objectives. Departments will be expected to make appropriate
arrangements for consultation at the local level on the development of such
schemes.
2. All academic-related and support staff within a department will normally be expected
to participate in the departmental scheme. There will be a further central consultation
on the introduction of appropriate arrangements for academic staff, based on these
principles.
3. The scheme will be based on an annual discussion that is integrated with existing
staff management processes and is part of a continuing dialogue between individuals
and their line manager or supervisor.
4. All schemes will adopt the minimum of paperwork that is consistent with safe recordkeeping
and good staff management practice. The Learning Institute will provide
central templates for the processes and paper-work associated with the scheme, that
departments can adopt locally.
5. There will be no direct link between the review process and probation, salary,
promotion, or discipline, for which separate procedures exist. If, however, the review
indicates that performance has been exceptional, or that the job has grown
significantly, information from the discussion can be used with the consent of the
individual to inform the separate procedures for merit reviews or re-grading. The
Learning Institute and Personnel Services will provide guidance to departments, and
training for departmental administrators, on how to coordinate Personal Development
Review with other local staff management processes.
6. The Learning Institute and Personnel Services will consider how local schemes can
best be monitored with a light touch, to ensure consistency of treatment between
individual members of staff.
7. Schemes will incorporate an element of self-evaluation. Individuals will be
responsible for an initial assessment of their own performance against agreed
objectives and for suggesting any areas for future development, including
opportunities to pursue life-long learning. Appropriate feedback on performance will
be provided by the individual‟s agreed reviewer. This will usually be their line
manager or supervisor.
8. It is expected that all schemes will be based on the following framework, and that
departments will make only minor adjustments to this framework where this is
necessary to tailor it to the local context.
a) Individuals will prepare for the annual review discussion by reflecting on their
progress against agreed objectives/core areas of work for the previous year;
considering whether their job description accurately reflects the requirements
of the role; proposing draft objectives for the forthcoming year; and
suggesting any associated training and development needs. It is recognized
that not all members of support staff will have individual objectives specific to
their role.
b) Individuals, and their line managers/supervisors, will share their reflections on
these issues in advance of the discussion (either in writing or orally), to
enable both parties to reflect on the issues raised and to prepare adequately
for the discussion.
c) The annual discussion will cover:
7

Oxford Learning Institute
University of Oxford
a review of progress towards the individual‟s objectives for the previous year
[or, in the first year of operation of the scheme, or where individual objectives
are not appropriate, a review of key activities undertaken]
a review of the core areas of the individual‟s current role and responsibilities
and how these are being interpreted
discussion of successes in achieving objectives, or undertaking activities,
over the past year
the identification of any barriers to the achievement of objectives or activities
and possible remedies
agreement of appropriate objectives or activities for the following year, linked
as relevant to departmental plans and the University‟s Corporate Plan
consideration of the individual‟s immediate development needs, including
training, and other support requirements; and the effectiveness of any training
or development carried out over the previous review period
with the agreement of the individual, discussion of longer-term career
development, including any support required and any opportunities for lifelong
learning.
9. Departments will make locally appropriate arrangements, based on guidance and
templates provided by the Learning Institute, for:
a) individuals and their reviewers to agree a record of the discussion, with a
presumption that the record will be held on the individual‟s personal file
b) collating and acting on agreed training and development needs arising from
the annual review discussions, including mechanisms to ensure that common
themes and training needs emerging from review discussions are picked up
and acted on
c) regular review of other individual or collective actions identified by the annual
review process; and for integration of the review process with existing staff
management procedures.
8

Oxford Learning Institute
University of Oxford
Annexe B Suggested templates to support the introduction of PDR for
academic-related and support staff.
1. Most departmental PDR schemes are supported by two standard forms:
A „Form A‟ or equivalent, which both reviewees and reviewers use to prepare in
advance for the PDR discussion
A „Form B‟ or equivalent, which is used to record the discussion.
2. Some departments then use a separate section of Form B to record agreed training
and development needs, other departments use a separate form (Form C).
3. We reproduce in this annexe the paperwork in use within one academic department,
that was developed in consultation with staff
Personal Development and Review Scheme for Support Staff
Introduction by Head of Department
The [Department] is introducing a new “Personal Development and Review Scheme” (PDR).
The scheme is being introduced for support and academic-related (admin) staff in the first
instance and will apply to all such staff whether on fixed-term, permanent or open-ended
contracts. The University‟s scheme for appraisal of academic staff will remain unchanged.
I believe that the scheme will bring considerable benefits to individual staff. Participating in
an annual PDR discussion will enable you to review the progress you have made over the
last year, to discuss what additional support you might need to undertake your work over the
coming year, and, where appropriate, what your further career plans are, and what support
might be available from the department or the central university to help you fulfil those plans.
The new scheme will also enable you, where appropriate, to discuss and agree with your
line manager your forthcoming objectives and to understand how those objectives fit with the
Department‟s strategies for retaining its position of excellence in research and teaching.
Brief Description of the Scheme
1. The intention is that the new PDR scheme will build on existing staff management
processes, such as one-to-one discussions and team meetings and will form part of a
continuing dialogue between individuals and their line manger.
2. The scheme will integrate support for individuals with the achievement of the objectives
of the Department and the Division.
3. The scheme will apply to support and academic-related (admin) staff in the Department
once they have completed their probationary period.
4. The scheme will be based on a confidential annual review discussion normally
conducted by an individual‟s line manager. Within the Department, many members of the
support staff have an operational as well as a line manager and in some cases it may be
more appropriate for the operational manager to conduct the review with input from the
line manager. If the line manager does conduct the review they will ask for input from the
operational manager. In exceptional circumstances, individuals will have the option of
seeking another reviewer.
5. There is no direct link between the scheme and salary, promotion, or discipline, for which
there are separate departmental procedures. If, however, an annual review indicates
that performance has been exceptional, or that the job has grown significantly,
9

Oxford Learning Institute
University of Oxford
information from the discussion can be used, with the consent of the individual, to inform
the separate departmental procedures for merit reviews or re-grading.
6. The review discussion will include a review of the individual‟s performance over the past
year, agreement on appropriate objectives/tasks for the forthcoming year; discussion of
any support needed to achieve those objectives (including training and development);
and discussion of future career plans where appropriate.
7. The process, apart from passing on information about training needs and other points
requiring action by the department, will be confidential between the reviewer and
reviewee.
8. All participants in the scheme, including reviewers, will be expected to take part in a
short training session organised by the Oxford Learning Institute.
9. All participants will be expected to maintain the confidentiality of the process.
The Process in Outline
Once established the PDRs will be conducted on an annual cycle which will be completed by
the end of June each year so the discussions can inform the Merit Review process (see 5
above).
a) Your line manager (or other agreed reviewer) will contact you to say that the review cycle
is underway and to arrange with you a suitable date for the meeting which should be at
least six weeks away.
b) You should prepare for the annual review discussion by completing Section A of the
“prompt sheet” (Annex A). This prompt sheet will be available on-line at [xxx]
c) In completing the prompt sheet, you are invited to reflect on:
the main duties or activities you have undertaken over the previous year and on any
changes to those duties;
your main achievements in fulfilling those duties, including, after the first year, the
extent to which you have met any agreed objectives, and any difficulties or obstacles
you may have encountered;
how your duties, activities and achievements reflect what was anticipated at the start
of the period;
your proposed aims and objectives for the next year and any suggestions for
improvements or changes to the way you work;
any additional support you may need, including training or development.
Where appropriate, you may also want to outline your future career plans and any ideas
for support that the Department or University might provide to you in achieving those
plans.
d) Send your completed prompt sheet to your line manager (or other agreed reviewer) at
least two weeks before the date of the review meeting.
e) You and your reviewer should agree a venue for the review meeting where you feel
comfortable and where the discussion can take place in confidence. The meeting will
generally last around an hour.
f) Your reviewer will then lead the discussion based on the prompt sheet. He or she should
invite you first to give your own reflections; and then give you his or her feedback.
g) Following your meeting your reviewer will draft a short note of the discussion for Section
B of the form and seek your comments on this draft. The note should make clear any
action points and who is responsible for following them up.
h) Any training or development needs or other points requiring action by the department
should be entered in Section C of the form. It should be noted that this part of the form
will be seen by the [Departmental Administrator] and completion of it is voluntary.
i) Once the record has been agreed and all the sections have been signed the reviewer
should:
10

Oxford Learning Institute
University of Oxford
Send a copy of Section C of the form to [the Departmental Administrator]
Give a copy of the form to the reviewee
File the original in a secure cabinet
If a line manager leaves the Department, the material relating to the reviews for their
team will normally be passed on to their successor with the consent of the individual
concerned.
In subsequent years the record of the previous year‟s meeting will inform completion of
the prompt sheet by the reviewee.
11

Oxford Learning Institute
University of Oxford
CONFIDENTIAL
Personal Development and Review Scheme for Support and Academic-Related
(Admin) Staff
Prompts for Review
SECTION A: To be completed by the reviewee before the review discussion
NAME …………………………………………………………………………….
REVIEWER ………………………………………………………………………
Please complete this prompt sheet and send it to your line manager or agreed
reviewer at least two weeks before the date that has been arranged for your review
1. Main duties/activities in preceding twelve-month period
2. Major changes in duties/activities
3. Achievements including the extent to which you have met any objectives set in the
previous year.
4. Exploration of whether the duties, activities and achievements reflected what was
anticipated at the start of the period
5. Difficulties/obstacles encountered
6. Objectives/aims for the future
12

Oxford Learning Institute
University of Oxford
7. Suggestions for improvements/changes
8. Support needed to help you achieve your future aims/objectives, including any
training and development needs
9. Career development plans and support needed to achieve these plans
13

Oxford Learning Institute
University of Oxford
CONFIDENTIAL
Personal Development and Review Scheme for Support Staff
SECTION B – To be completed by the reviewer after the review discussion
NAME …………………………………………………………………………….
REVIEWER ………………………………………………………………………
LINE MANAGER …………………………………………………………………
DATE OF REVIEW MEETING ………………………………………………..
Please provide an overview of the review discussion. You may consider highlighting
positive achievements, including the extent to which any objectives have been met,
suggestions for personal and career development, training and development
requirements and any further action you believe to be necessary.
14

Oxford Learning Institute
University of Oxford
Signature of employee ………………………………………………………………
Signature of reviewer ………………………………………………………………
A COPY OF SECTION A AND SECTION B SHOULD BE RETAINED BY THE REVIEWER
AND REVIEWEE ONLY. THE REVIEWER SHOULD ENSURE THAT THE FORMS ARE
TREATED AS CONFIDENTIAL AND KEPT IN A SECURE PLACE.
15

Oxford Learning Institute
University of Oxford
CONFIDENTIAL
Personal Development and Review Scheme for Support Staff
SECTION C: To be completed by the reviewer after the review discussion
NAME …………………………………………………………………………….
REVIEWER ………………………………………………………………………
LINE MANAGER …………………………………………………………………
DATE OF REVIEW MEETING ………………………………………………..
Please provide a list of any training or development requirements that have been
identified in the course of the review and any further action that is required by the
department.
Signature of employee ………………………………………………………………
Signature of reviewer ………………………………………………………………
THIS SHEET WILL BE PASSED TO THE ADMINISTRATOR SO THAT ANY TRAINING
AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS CAN BE FOLLOWED UP. THIS FORM WILL
SUBSEQUENTLY BE STORED ON YOUR DEPARTMENTAL PERSONNEL FILE.
16