Gregorio Billikopf
21st July 2009, 11:43 AM
Facilitator Evaluation Score Sheet
Negotiated Performance Appraisal
Minimum passing score is 450 points of 500 (90%).
Preliminaries: (50 points)
The negotiated performance appraisal will be judged from the recording of the joint session. The joint session will only be successful if the pre-caucuses have been properly carried out. We will, however, score the following items from the pre-caucus. Was the superior asked:
If the perfect subordinate functioned at 100% capacity, at what capacity level does this subordinate function at? (10 points).
Please attempt to explain how you have come to that percentage? (15 points)
What specific changes would the subordinate have to make in order to improve his or her performance to ___% (15 points).
Do not be afraid to dream! (10 points).Note: These questions should be asked of the superior during the pre-caucus, when the subordinate is not present.
List I (150 points)
Is it the superior—not the facilitator—who invites the subordinate to share List I? (5 points)
In the process of praising the subordinate, the facilitator does not give his or her praise, but rather gives weight to the praise given by the superior? (5 points)
The supervisor explains why each item of praise is important? (15 points)
The supervisor shows enthusiasm through expressions and tone of voice? (15 points)
For every area of praise, the supervisor gives one or two specific examples? (30 points)
The celebration process of reading List I lasted at least 20 minutes—including efforts made by the facilitator to have the superior summarize and expand? (55 points)
Was negativity avoided during List I? (15 points)
The supervisor repeated positive items brought up by the subordinate? (10 points)List II (30 points)
Is it the superior—not the facilitator—who invites the subordinate to share List II? (5 points)
Where specific examples brought up? (10 points)
If applicable, did the subordinate mention that some of the items listed here would also be listed under List III? (15 points)List III (110 points)
Is it the superior—not the facilitator—who invites the subordinate to share List III? (5 points)
The superior thanks the subordinate for reading List III without agreeing with the subordinate? (Thanks for sharing your list. Let me share mine.) (15 points)
Was the methodology of creating a combined subordinate and superior List III followed, avoiding the process of discussing items (OK to clarify, however) in the list before completing List III? (20 points)
Was the subordinate permitted to choose the order of items to be tackled in List III?
Did the subordinate arrive with one or two viable solutions to each issue he or she brought up in List III? (30 points)
Was there a dialogue regarding points in List III? (30 points)List IV (70 points)
Is it the superior—not the facilitator—who invites the subordinate to share List IV? (5 points)
Does the subordinate raise at least one substantive issue related to List IV? (15 points)
Does the superior demonstrate a lack of defensiveness when the subordinate shares List IV? (For instance, by repeating what the subordinate has said regardless of whether he or she agrees with the same?) (20 points)
Is there a dialogue regarding points raised in List IV? (30 points)Final points (90 points)
Have specific goals been agreed to? (30 points)
Have superior and subordinate created a timetable for completing goals? (30 points)
Are these goals related to the preliminary issues brought up in the superiors pre-caucus? (15 points)
Has a date been set for the facilitator to follow-up with the superior and subordinate? (15 points)___________________
Special thanks go to Juan Horacio Grant L. and Macarena Pons P. for making various contributions to this list.
Last update: 24 July 2009
To learn more about how to counduct the Negotiated Performance Appraisal, go to Chapter 12 and Chapter 13 of Party-Directed Mediation: Helping Others Resolve Differences: http://www.cnr.berkeley.edu/ucce50/ag-labor/7conflict/
Negotiated Performance Appraisal
Minimum passing score is 450 points of 500 (90%).
Preliminaries: (50 points)
The negotiated performance appraisal will be judged from the recording of the joint session. The joint session will only be successful if the pre-caucuses have been properly carried out. We will, however, score the following items from the pre-caucus. Was the superior asked:
If the perfect subordinate functioned at 100% capacity, at what capacity level does this subordinate function at? (10 points).
Please attempt to explain how you have come to that percentage? (15 points)
What specific changes would the subordinate have to make in order to improve his or her performance to ___% (15 points).
Do not be afraid to dream! (10 points).Note: These questions should be asked of the superior during the pre-caucus, when the subordinate is not present.
List I (150 points)
Is it the superior—not the facilitator—who invites the subordinate to share List I? (5 points)
In the process of praising the subordinate, the facilitator does not give his or her praise, but rather gives weight to the praise given by the superior? (5 points)
The supervisor explains why each item of praise is important? (15 points)
The supervisor shows enthusiasm through expressions and tone of voice? (15 points)
For every area of praise, the supervisor gives one or two specific examples? (30 points)
The celebration process of reading List I lasted at least 20 minutes—including efforts made by the facilitator to have the superior summarize and expand? (55 points)
Was negativity avoided during List I? (15 points)
The supervisor repeated positive items brought up by the subordinate? (10 points)List II (30 points)
Is it the superior—not the facilitator—who invites the subordinate to share List II? (5 points)
Where specific examples brought up? (10 points)
If applicable, did the subordinate mention that some of the items listed here would also be listed under List III? (15 points)List III (110 points)
Is it the superior—not the facilitator—who invites the subordinate to share List III? (5 points)
The superior thanks the subordinate for reading List III without agreeing with the subordinate? (Thanks for sharing your list. Let me share mine.) (15 points)
Was the methodology of creating a combined subordinate and superior List III followed, avoiding the process of discussing items (OK to clarify, however) in the list before completing List III? (20 points)
Was the subordinate permitted to choose the order of items to be tackled in List III?
Did the subordinate arrive with one or two viable solutions to each issue he or she brought up in List III? (30 points)
Was there a dialogue regarding points in List III? (30 points)List IV (70 points)
Is it the superior—not the facilitator—who invites the subordinate to share List IV? (5 points)
Does the subordinate raise at least one substantive issue related to List IV? (15 points)
Does the superior demonstrate a lack of defensiveness when the subordinate shares List IV? (For instance, by repeating what the subordinate has said regardless of whether he or she agrees with the same?) (20 points)
Is there a dialogue regarding points raised in List IV? (30 points)Final points (90 points)
Have specific goals been agreed to? (30 points)
Have superior and subordinate created a timetable for completing goals? (30 points)
Are these goals related to the preliminary issues brought up in the superiors pre-caucus? (15 points)
Has a date been set for the facilitator to follow-up with the superior and subordinate? (15 points)___________________
Special thanks go to Juan Horacio Grant L. and Macarena Pons P. for making various contributions to this list.
Last update: 24 July 2009
To learn more about how to counduct the Negotiated Performance Appraisal, go to Chapter 12 and Chapter 13 of Party-Directed Mediation: Helping Others Resolve Differences: http://www.cnr.berkeley.edu/ucce50/ag-labor/7conflict/