The Foreign Service Journal, July-August 2010

O ne of the hottest issues of the past several months has been ePerformance, a new application automating the processes of counseling and performance review, which the department plans tomakemandatory. AFSA’s Labor Management Office has received more complaints about this than about any other issue this year. In theory, ePerformance is an excellent idea, one whose appeal is evident tome as amanagement officer. Theoretically, it makes writing Employee Evaluation Reports easier andmore standardized, by populating certain fields automatically. It eliminates delays in trans- mitting EERs, makes it possible for posts andWashington offices tomonitor com- pliance with deadlines and, when a prob- lem occurs, makes it easy to identify the person responsible. It also serves as aman- agement control to ensure that employees receive the coun- seling to which they are entitled, which is essential to fair eval- uations of performance. Because it addresses a number of long- standing human resources concerns, Washington is under- standably excited about implementing it as soon as possible. However, in practice, like many new applications, it was released to the field riddled with bugs. Some were built into the application: for instance, the absence of amechanismalert- ing the writer when a space restriction is reached, and a dis- crepancy between e-forms and ePerformance with regard to the number of lines of characters that can be entered. Other glitches resulted fromproblems in the general human resources environment: for example, the auto-populated fields drew information from the Global Employee Management System, and many GEMS entries were not up to date. Still other problems resulted from discrepancies between the real-world process of performance evaluation andHR’s need to standardize andmanage an enormous work force. For exam- ple, positions are listed in GEMS with the greatest standard- ization possible, meaning that every political officer is a polit- ical officer, and every information management officer is an informationmanagement officer. In the real world, most posi- tions are assigned a working title, but a division chief, office director or section head is not referred to by the same title as his or her subordinates. While the department has expressed openness to enabling working titles to be used, that has not yet happened. Additionally, in response to AFSA’s request to delay world- wide implementation, the department compromised by implementing the application only domestically this year. In theory, that meant that the applicationwas to be used by those with the easiest access to assistance. In practice, it meant that domestic employees (as well as those whoworked overseas but had a domestic rater) felt disadvantaged. To be fair, some of the bugs were related simply to the new- ness of the application. The department investedheavily in teach- ing people to use the new application, pro- viding online training, short courses, help desks and built-in tutorials; but the appli- cation was sufficiently different frompre- vious systems to make the transition dif- ficult. Through the entire phase-in, AFSA reg- ularly conveyedmember complaints to the Bureau of Human Resources, andHR did take steps to address them, though not, in most cases, during the past rating cycle. AFSA therefore pushed the department to recognize, in the promotion precepts, the transitional nature of this rating sea- son. As a result, the precepts negotiated betweenAFSA and the department admonish selection board members to take into account both the flaws in the application and the effect of the new process on components such as position titles. We will continue to request the inclusion of similar phrasing for the next three years, so that future boards will be aware that this issue occurred in 2010 EERs. AFSA is aware that the department is currently making improvements to ePerformance, andwe are collaborating with management to ensure that FSmember concerns are addressed. We will also continue to urge the department to delay mak- ing the new process mandatory until all deficiencies are cor- rected. In a system as competitive as ours, even very small dis- crepancies can be the difference between a promotion and no promotion, or even serve as the basis for selection out. With that in mind, it is absolutely essential that all employees are rated on equal terms, in equal ways, and on a level playing field. While recognizing the many potential benefits of this new rat- ing and management tool, AFSA will do everything it can to ensure that this good idea is not made mandatory before its time. ❏ ePerformance: A Great Idea Whose Time Has Not Yet Come V.P. VOICE: STATE ■ BY DANIEL HIRSCH Your chances for promotion are better if you act as if your future were entirely in your hands. J U L Y - A UGU S T 2 0 1 0 / F OR E I GN S E R V I C E J OU R N A L 61 A F S A N E W S