Performance and Development Review

About PDR

Performance Assessment Ratings

As part of your Performance and Development Review meeting you will discuss performance assessment ratings and your reviewer will make a recommendation of your overall performance rating for the past year.

Expectations of you and your role may be set at different times during the year. For example, following a 1-1 meeting; as a result of a particular business need or as a result of significant feedback, as well as part of a PDR meeting.

Expectations will reflect your job role and grade, or if you are very recently in post. Expectations include:

  • achievement of agreed performance and development objectives
  • areas from your job role (outlined in the job description and person specification),
  • conduct (what you do and how you do it).

There are FOUR possible performance ratings: 

  • Excellent
  • Very good
  • Good
  • Requires improvement

Performance rating

Indicators may include:

Excellent – significantly and consistently exceeds expectations

  • An exceptional performer who produced outstanding results well beyond specified objectives
  • Exceeded all expectations and objectives for someone working in this role at this grade.
  • Contributed to the success of the School/Department/University by adding significant value well beyond job requirements.
  • Performance, achievements and abilities would be commonly viewed as excellent by the peer community.
  • Role model and/or mentor.

Very good – Consistently meets expectations and exceeds some

  • Achieved all expectations and objectives to a high standard, exceeding expectations in some areas.
  • Is a valued member of the team, providing support and guidance to other team members.

Good – Consistently meets expectations

  • Demonstrated solid, competent and consistent performance to meet expectations.
  • Gets things done and consistently achieves objectives
  • Met expectations appropriate for role and grade.
  • Is a valued member of the team.

Requires improvement – Does not meet expectations in one or more areas*

  • Expectations have either not been met or have been met to less than satisfactory levels for the role and grade.
  • Has not met or has not made sufficient progress towards their objectives or fulfilled the requirements of the role
  • Did not meet all expectations for performance; missed some specified outcomes or produced unsatisfactory results
  • Improvement is needed to achieve the required standard and meet objectives.

* PDRs should be constructive and, where requires improvement is identified, should support the Reviewee to improve their performance. This will be achieved by setting clear performance and development objectives and regularly reviewing progress towards these. Where objectives and expectations are not met in a number of areas or the individual has put in minimum effort then consideration of the University’s capability or disciplinary procedures should be made for which entirely separate arrangements exist.

Please note

It is important in the discussion between the reviewer and the reviewee that reasons for recommended ratings are explained and explored. If there are circumstances where objectives have not been met that are beyond the reviewee control then this may need to be taken into consideration when making the final performance recommendation. Anything that is taken into consideration should be explained clearly on the PDR documentation.

If someone has fallen below expectation in one area, but is very good or excellent in all other areas then the facts, reasons and impact should be fully considered when recommending a performance rating. An explanation of this should happen during the PDR and be recorded on the documentation.

It is accepted that there are always things we can do better and that part of the PDR process is to identify appropriate development objectives. Identifying and setting relevant development objectives should not preclude achievement of the higher ratings.