DDA SUBGROUP REVIEW OF COMPARATIVE EVALUATION DESCRIPTORS
Document Type:
Collection:
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST):
CIA-RDP85B01152R000400490007-6
Release Decision:
RIPPUB
Original Classification:
K
Document Page Count:
4
Document Creation Date:
December 21, 2016
Document Release Date:
June 2, 2008
Sequence Number:
7
Case Number:
Content Type:
MEMO
File:
Attachment | Size |
---|---|
CIA-RDP85B01152R000400490007-6.pdf | 193.78 KB |
Body:
Approved For Release 2008/06/02 : CIA-RDP85B01152R000400490007-6
to
I
MEMORANDUM FOR: DDA/Career Management Officer
SUBJECT: DDA Subgroup Review of Comparative
Evaluation Descriptors
1. Two subgroups, Office of Data Processing and Office of
Security, support retaining the four Comparative Evaluation
Descriptors. The Office of Security suggested minor changes in
wording:
CATEGORY I - Should clearly indicate that the employee is
a true "super star" and is an absolute
certainty in the_rater"s mind to be on a fast
care..er track. ee with the one suggestion
to change the wording "work performance clearl
y
suggests" to "work
performance clearly indicates"
a high potential for rapid career growth.
CATEGORY II - Should be worded to describe employees who in
the rater's mind are capable of successfully
competing for promotion and assignment to
positions of higher responsibilities.
CATEGORY III - Should be reserved for employees who have, in
all likelihood, peaked and have realized their
potential. These would be employees who are
making valuable contributions and have no
personal or discipline problems. The wording
in Category III describing individuals capable
of performing successfully at a higher level.
of responsibility should be deleted.
CATEGORY IV - Like Category I, should be a nonhedging
category. This category would contain employees
who have serious work or discipline problems.
Placing employees in this category would
unequivocally state that something has to be
done, i.e., counseling, training or separation.
STAT
Approved For Release 2008/06/02 : CIA-RDP85B01152R000400490007-6
Approved For Release 2008/06/02 : CIA-RDP85B01152R000400490007-6
2. Four subgroups, Offices of Finance, Information Services,
Medical Services and Training and Education, support a five tier
system.
OFFICE OF FINANCE:
CATEGORY I AND II - No change.
CATEGORY III - Valuable contributors and those who may
develop high potential.
CATEGORY IV - Employees who are making a limited
contribution; have specific deficiencies
noted in one or more areas which are
deemed to be correctable by career actions,
i.e., counseling, reassignment, training,
etc., and have probably realized their
full potential.
CATEGORY V - Have noted deficiencies which clearly
illustrate substandard performance as
compared with his/her peers. Have
limited value to the Agency and against
whom adverse actions may be warranted.
OFFICE OF INFORMATION SERVICES:
CATEGORY I - These are employees whose personal history
and work performance clearly indicates a high
degree of potential for rapid career growth
into positions of increasingly greater respon-
sibility. Employees in this Category are
judged to possess experience, knowledge, and
talents which presently are clearly exceptional
in comparison with their peers. This
evaluation should be reflected in career actions
that enhance employees' talents and exploit
their potential.
CATEGORY II - These are employees whose personal history and
work performance indicate the capability to
assume greater responsibilities. Employees in
this Category are evaluated as presently
displaying above average knowledge, talent,
and commitment... Career actions should enhance
the employees' skills and further develop their
potential.
Approved For Release 2008/06/02 : CIA-RDP85B01152R000400490007-6
Approved For Release 2008/06/02 : CIA-RDP85B01152R000400490007-6
CATEGORY III - These are employees whose personal history
and work performance show that they are
performing a valuable service in their present
assignments. They may be capable of performing
successfully at a higher level of responsibility
but their knowledge and skills need to be
expanded further in the present assignment or
through lateral. assignment(s). Career actions
should provide the opportunity to receive the
needed experience/training.
CATEGORY IV - These employees are performing satisfactorily
but are close to realizing or have realized
their potential. Many employees in this
Category are providing valuable service in their
present assignment and lateral assignments may
not contribute much toward enhancing their
talents or their value to the career subgroup.
In these cases, career actions should provide
for their continued work satisfaction.
CATEGORY V - These are employees whose overall work
performance reflects a specific deficiency in,
or inability to meet, important aspects of
work requirements which unduly limits their value
in their assignment or current career area.
Employees in this Category may have potential
for growth, but their deficiencies are such as
to interfere with or preclude improved performance
in the current assignment or further development
in the career area. These employees will be
advised of their deficiencies and placement in
this Category. Counseling or remedial training
is to be provided. Career actions will be taken
to establish whether the talents of some of
these employees can be utilized or potential
realized in another career function or service
within the Agency. The deficiencies in work
performance or behavior of some employees in
this Category may require their reassignment,
demotion or separation.
OFFICE OF MEDICAL SERVICES:
Supports the five descriptors. Per Chief, Psychological
Services Staff, five-category system was used in the past as
a criterion measure in test evaluation research and found that
the system as such works
Approved For Release 2008/06/02 : CIA-RDP85B01152R000400490007-6
Approved For Release 2008/06/02 : CIA-RDP85B01152R000400490007-6
I
OFFICE OF TRAINING AND EDUCATION:
CATEGORY I AND II - Remain the same.
CATEGORY III - Too broad, containing both employees doing
very well and those who are performing at
a less than satisfactory level but not
poorly enough to place in Category IV.
Remaining categories should be one for those
employees who are performing well and have
probably reached their potential and another
for those who, although their performance
is not at the bottom category level, are in
need of management attention because of
performance concerns. This would allow a
more meaningful evaluation, more positive
reactions from employees receiving a
"valuable contribution" descriptor, and
better indicators for counseling employees
whose performance is not up to the standard
expected.
3. The Office of Logistics was the only subgroup favoring a
six-tier system. Reasoning cited for this ranking system listed
below:
a. Confusion caused by overlapping terminology between
categories in the current system would be eliminated;
b. Career Service Panels would have a clearly defined
base from which to recommend career actions
(promotions, training, reassignments, counseling,
etc.);
c. More meaningful feedback would be available to
employees regarding their relative standing with
peers; and
d. Panel members would be obliged to conduct a more
in-depth, comprehensive review of employees under
their purview in order to ensure placement in the
appropriate category.
STAT
Approved For Release 2008/06/02 : CIA-RDP85B01152R000400490007-6