Search:

Custom Search

Readers' Comments

Total Comments: 50
Page 1 of 6

« Previous | Next »

Let Us Now Praise...Ourselves

Why Bell Curve

Engineer
AF
Mon Jun 23, 2008 11:36 PM

Post Reply

I agree with a lot of what you say, yet fail to understand HR's belief in the "bell curve." Applying a bell curve (normal distribution) to an organization most likely is not statistically valid. By definition it is not a "normal" population, so yes, you may have most employees "above average." After all, if you have done your job as supervisor, you've already eliminated the non performers. By your choice, you have set up a group that is not "normal." Another way to think of it, is in your school class, if you take only the "A" students and force fit a bell curve, you can create an average. But reality is even the lowest performing member of the straight "A" students is above the highest "B" student. Forget trying to force fit to a grade school bell curve and instead measure against standards. Then you may well have most employees exceed standards. After all, that is what the ultimate goal of a true PFP system is -- to get all the performance up.

Re: Why Bell Curve

Electronics Technician
DOD
Tue Jun 24, 2008 9:10 AM
A "bell curve" is another term for describing the practice of forced distribution.

Forced distribution of ratings is specifically prohibited in the regulations, but if you call it a "bell curve" that somehow makes it ok.

Re: Why Bell Curve

underpaid peon
da
Tue Jun 24, 2008 2:41 PM
Here at the AMEDD, we were TOLD that our evals would be forced to fit the bell curve. As a result, a lot of above-average performers were rated as average ("valued performer"; what a crock).

Two that I know personally have quit as a result and moved into the civilian sector. I personally am applying for GS positions just to get out of this unfair and idiotic system.

Yup, definitely a great way to ensure we attract and maintain the best.

Re: Why Bell Curve

Supv
DOD
Fri Jun 27, 2008 11:00 AM
I think all the upper managers under NSPS should account for no more than 5% of the 5s. Just because they are doing their job, that makes them a 3. MORE is expected of them even at the 3 level. If they dont take care of the middle, they will be left to do the work by themselves. Who wants to work for someone to takes care of themselves and not any of the employees. This is not what NSPS is supposed to be about. The PRMs should personally review each of their reviews and make sure they deserve the rating and not being greedy, what do they really do to make the agency a better place to work? At their level, the whole agency should be a better place to work, not stay status quo. I think everyone should base their assessment on a customery survey! Hmmmm.

NSPS-what a crock

Forever unappreciated
DoD
Tue Jun 24, 2008 3:24 AM

Post Reply

I did well on my ratings. I got a 4 with 3 shares. I have been with DoD 1 1/2 yrs. I came to DoD with 15 yrs of experience. Learning NSPS was chaos. Figuring out how to write your own eval was painful. Objectives were pre-written for us all
I had 8000 characters and used every bit of it. My eval looked like a resume. At one point I was told to shorten it. I declined. If they gave me 8000 characters I was going to make sure the paypool earned their keep. The trick is aligning each objective with the contributing factors. If you align yourself for a 4-you need to make sure the language is in your eval for that of a 4. I had to help half of my office with their evals because all the NSPS training we had never was transparent enough for workers to be able to write a good eval of themselves.

My supervisor told me that the paypool had called him to double check that I was that good of an employee. Which I am. I didnt know many people in DoD so my merits were strictly based on my work.

Top 3%

Fed Worker
DOD
Tue Jun 24, 2008 5:56 AM

Post Reply

I was in the top 3% of all performers, and thank God I was not in NSPS. Your article sounds like brainwashing for the masses, with this accept that you are average mantra. Well Buddy, some of us are not just average, we are being forced into a corner to accept below average pay. No one likes NSPS, and it is causing many problems with the rank and file. It is a poorly thought out plan, for which you even point out. No, most of us are not going to be happy with it. Providing your own assessment, when it is meaningless is just one giant waste of time. If you cannot say something on four pages, you certainly cannot say it on eleven. It may be time to throw out the baby with the bath water.

Let us now shelve NSPS

Doctrine and Policy Analyst
DoD
Tue Jun 24, 2008 8:04 AM

Post Reply

I think that your article missed the most fundamental underpinning of the story and that is: NSPS promotes unfair evaluations. All supervisors need to honestly communicate up their chain that NSPS is a bad system. It doesn't work. The GS system was a better and more fair system that promoted a better work ethic, it certainly had higher morale for both supervisor and employee. It had more honest feedback and paid much better. The supervisors spent less time doing employee admin duties and more time doing their jobs. There simply is nothing good to say about NSPS and that, my friend is the real story. NSPS is a pig; you can put lipstick on it all you want, but its still a pig.

Re: Let us now shelve NSPS

Telephone Operator
Department of Veterans Affairs
Tue Jun 24, 2008 12:19 PM
You could not have said it better. I had one eval where my supervisor rated me one rating, then when their supervisor reviewed the eval my points were lowered. The higher level supervisor had never seen me work. They are at a seperate location and at that time hadn't even meet me. So what was the point of the whole eval? Why waste my time?

NSPS

Claims Examiner
U.S. Marine Corps
Tue Jun 24, 2008 8:35 AM

Post Reply

There are five claims examiner in my office, we do the same thing, our workload depends on how many claims were receive, so when self evaluation time comes, there is not much to say beside I did X amount of claims, some may do more that others, some may have a large claim that may take longer, when evaulation time came we all recieved 3's. I still don't understand what to pay pool is looking for in the evalution, what too put in it to make a difference.

Re: NSPS

HR
USMC
Thu Oct 30, 2008 12:57 PM
You are what you are, a 3 star....It is what it is deal with it!

Self-Appraisal

Supervisor
DoD
Tue Jun 24, 2008 8:39 AM

Post Reply

A self-appraisal is very important if you are under NSPS! If you rate yourself at the 4 level and can justify the rating in your narrative, the pay pool will have something to work with. Your supervisor makes a recomendation to the pool, but does not have the final say. Ratings and shares are determined by the pay pool. If there is a difference in your rating and your supervisor's, the pool should contact the supervisor to provide an explaination. Remember to start by writing to justify the "3" level, and go from there. Under NSPS, a "3" is nothing to be ashamed of! "4s" are very good, and "5s" walk on water without getting the soles of their feet wet! Your objectives (should) be clear and concise. You have the ability under NSPS to have input into those objectives. You should be able to demonstrate and document your performance at the level you believe you achieved. The individual has a lot of control, but it must be exercised. Don't agree to something you can't meet!

Self-inflation on Applications, too...

H.R. Specialist
V.A.
Tue Jun 24, 2008 8:39 AM

Post Reply

The author writes: "Moreover, studies have shown that poor performers tend to inflate their worth while the best often deflate their own."

The same is true of the application process, which ranks applicants based on how highly they rate themselves. Those who write the best line of bull get the highest scores, and even if it is discovered during the interview process, it isn't corrected. I have seen stellar candidates ranked so low as to be unreachable, while those at the "TOP" get hired, and don't pass probation. This is not efficient government, nor does it truly reflect the real spirit of "MERIT"-based employment.

It's time for an over-haul.

Total Comments: 50
Page 1 of 6

« Previous | Next »

Add a Comment about this Article

** All fields are required.
Note: Your comments will not show up right away. FedSmith.com selects the most insightful comments from our readers for posting. If selected, your comments will show up in the comments section after they have been reviewed and approved. See our terms of use for more information.