There is a consensus across the civil service that none of the current performance management systems are fit for purpose and they need a complete rethink. The only question is, why is it taking the government so long to admit it?
Introduced across the civil service over the past five years, we already know current Whitehall performance management is discriminatory. The overwhelming view of the civil servants we represent is that it is unfair, divisive, used to bully staff, demotivates people and takes up lots of time without being relevant to day-to-day work. The system has been tweaked along the way but the most contentious feature remains – forced ranking, with bonuses for the top 25% and career threats for at least the bottom 5%.
In short, it is counterproductive and a waste of time and resources. In the Ministry of Defence (MoD), we decided to try to quantify this waste and the results shocked even hardened trade unionists like myself. Almost £100m is squandered on this farce every year, in our department alone.
We used MoD data from 2013/14 and detailed feedback from our members to calculate the amount of time staff at all levels spend fulfilling the requirements of the process from the beginning, through the mid-term review to the end-of-year report. This is time they could be spending doing their actual jobs.
We were careful to base our workings on conservative estimates for salaries as well as time spent, which means our figure of £98m – effectively to administer £17.5m performance bonus money – could be an underestimate. Over the five years from 2015 to 2020, this would be almost half a billion pounds. In one government department.
Given the eye-watering costs, we have repeatedly asked the MoD to identify the tangible benefits. We are still waiting, though many senior managers tell us privately that they struggle to justify the time spent on performance management.
Every civil servant reading this will understand the heart-sinking feeling when the mid- and end-of-year reviews come around, in October and April respectively. The hours and days you can ill afford to devote to justify yourself in an absurd forced ranking beauty contest, or for managers trying to compare apples and oranges among their staff.
One my colleagues who has staff reporting responsibilities said to me recently the system had not increased productivity, improved team cohesion or demonstrated any other positive benefit related to output. “If it has, I have not seen any evidence of it,” my colleague said.
This week we are stepping up our opposition to performance management across Whitehall and asking the MoD, and the wider civil service, to consider what it brings to the party.
We are saying, be honest, accept it is a failed experiment and look at what can be done instead with the bonus element of the pay pot, to give all staff some financial comfort when pay is still being held down.
No sensible organisation would persist with a process that sees excessive time and resources thrown at a setup that returns lower morale, discrimination, inconsistency and bad feeling. Rip it up and start again.
Chris Dando is defence sector group president for the PCS union.
Talk to us on Twitter via @Guardianpublic and sign up for your free weekly Guardian Public Leaders newsletter with news and analysis sent direct to you every Thursday.
