Work reviews

The following paragraphs contain some notes on work reviews / ROGs. Please have a look before you download the ROG form, available in Dutch and English at the bottom of the page.

Why work reviews?

In brief, work reviews or ROGs (Resultaat- & Ontwikkelingsgesprek, or ‘Performance & Development Review’) are about four things: 

1. objectifying: what are your goals, as defined by your position?
2. facilitating: what do you need in order to reach these goals?
3. assessment: do you reach them?
4. follow-up: action, change, professional development.

Properly conducted work reviews are indispensable for any serious HRM policy that will enable individual career development.

Frequency

ROGs are both a duty and a right. All employees are, then, entitled and obliged to have one per year. (Extra reviews can take place at the initiative of your supervisor and/or yourself. This can be occasioned by dissatisfaction on either side, by new opportunities or changing prospects, and so on.)

Effectiveness

What can we do to make ROGs not be a drag, and to make them effective?

• Refer to VSNU job descriptions + Faculty appointment criteria + local aims (Program, Institute) to identify the relevant areas (gebieden) for assessment and aims. LIAS hopes to offer help in this respect, through a new ROG form (below).

• Prepare a thorough annual report (jaarrapport), enabling concise summary of performance in the past year (resultaten), and concise formulation of the aims for the coming year (afspraken).

• In assessment, realize that B means you are doing well, and that A is reserved for exceptional performance; and that it is not particularly strange for C and D to occur for individual areas. C and D become a worry if individual areas show no improvement the next time around, or if they hold for overall performance.

• Ensure that the aims for the coming year are (1) are in sync with the duties as defined by your position, and (2) concrete and SMART: specific, measurable, acceptable, realizable, time-bound.

• In general, ensure that documentation is in order ahead of time and both parties are well prepared, so that during the actual meeting, you can really take time to reflect together on how things are going.

Whose work should be reviewed, by whom?

All those employed for minimally two semesters (ten montsh) are entitled and obliged to have work reviews with their direct supervisors. If your supervisor wishes to consult any third parties, s/he should inform you ahead of time. This may, for instance, happen if your supervisor needs input from others to assess the quality of your teaching.

Normally and preferably, a work review is one-on-one, but both parties are entitled to bring an observer if they wish, with prior notice. If either party has reason to be worried that the meeting will not go well, they can request an HRM official to be present.

Replacement positions are often for shorter periods than a full year, but it is in the interests of the staff member concerned to have their work formally reviewed, through a first meeting (startgesprek) immediately upon appointment, and an assessment meeting (beoordelingsgesprek) toward the end. Also, it will help to make their contributions on the program level more effective.

Logistics

There’s plenty of documentation on work reviews (links are provided in the new form). Here are the basic logistics:

A new ROG form

Anticipating a Uni-level HRM review of ROG practice in 2010-2011, LIAS now uses an adapted version of the Uni-wide ROG form, which we hope is more user-friendly:

Dutch 
English

Comments welcome!