Dept

Form Type

Apprasial Form Comments

Perormance Planning Comments

Appraisal Delivery

Performance Assessment Comments

Performance Review Comments

Human Resources

Professional & Technical

The need for frequent feedback lessens with experience. My supervisor was always available if needed, but there was little need to ask "how am I doing?"

The merit portion of the process became a numbers game. Most employees knew going in that they would receive a 2% regardless of what they did. This was the majority assessment in my assigned department and also reflected the sentiments of most other departmental Generalists.

Human Resources

Professional & Technical

Meetings were positive at all times.

I was always able to discuss my performance appraisal with my manager. She always has constructive discussions on ways for me to improve. She is doing an excellent job!

Human Resources

Administrative

z

z

z

z

z

Human Resources

Administrative

Didn't have goals or expectations.

Supervisor didn't sit down and discussed weaknesses and ways to improve. Supervisor said here is your evaluation, read, sign and make copy for your self.

No conversation of performance, no compliments on a job well done. Lack of communication.

It doesn't matter if you give them a list of your accomplishments and achievements. If they like you they'll give you a good rating.

(5 mins), I was athe one asking the questions, what's my merit going to be? why?? I asked her if my work wasn't good, what I did wrong? She said there was nothing wrong with my work, my work was always on time and done correctly, that she had no complaints on it, but I got a 1%, she said because I was not available for my departments. I had letters from the departments that I work that I was always available and ready to assist...Basically they base their merits on who they like better not on the quality of work. Getting that low of a merit makes an employee want to quit. Entering merits of employees who you showed and corrected their work getting a 4% gets you mad, all that effort that you put in doing your job and superv. not appreciating that....All the hispanics that receive language pay on this section got the same rating 1% and the others got 2%, which made us think that they gave us that % so that we could all be making the same amount of money. One last thing why is (comment stopped)

Human Resources

Supervisory & Managerial

Supervisors at everylevel should be directed to give written comments on the forms that can be shared with the employees vs. just indicating which category the employee fit with a check or circle...

While I have no complainsts, My situation is not the model for how to do this process. I did follow the process with my direct reports.

The door to my superbisor(s) is always open and there is not a thing I can't or have not been able to go to them regarding.

I'll do better on my part as well next time.

While the desired results you have listed above did not take place in the appraisal setting. We have reqular discussions, I get regular feedback and got good feedback on a particular long-term project. We have good chemistry. Also, my supervisor has addessed an issue with me that needed to be corrected.

Human Resources

Professional & Technical

My Customer's input/feedback was not included as a part of my appraisal. This should have been the most critical part.

I did not have a planning session with my manager. I was instructed to complete the form, sign and turn it in.

Bad!

My Customer's feedback was not included in the assessment phase.

The performance appraisal process lacks management commitment and quality. The mechanical part of completing forms and turning them in on time has been satisfied.

Human Resources

Professional & Technical

The grade should be based on the number ratings you recv. ex. if you recv. all 2's then you should have recv fully successful.

There was never a decussion we was just told to sign the form.

We was told to sign a blank appraisal form. Then they came back at the end of the review period and told us what I rating was. Which I appealed.

There is no one on one to tell you how well you are doing through out the appraisal period.

You should have some type of one on one at least 3 months into the review period. That has not been done as of this moment for the next review period coming in October.

Human Resources

Professional & Technical

I liked the format and definitions on the form.

I liked the description of the Generalist's duties and also the process we went through to arrive at the description.

My supervisor went the extra mile to analyze each employee's performance and evaluate appropriately.

Very fair.

Fair and equitable.

Human Resources

Professional & Technical

Wasn't completed or processed in a timely manner.

I did not have clear cut departmental goals in which to plan from regarding goals, objectives and projects for the upcoming appraisal period.

Human Resources

Professional & Technical

G's joined together to develop our appraisal form.

I had a change in supervisors.

I plan on taking a moreaggressive approach at my next performance review.

Human Resources

Professional & Technical

I thought the appraisal form was very good and believe little needs to be changed, certainly improved over previous.

The form is good, the procedures are good, there is not enough time to give a lot of attention to it. Dealing with day-to-day operations/problem solving takes up all the time, making additional time for performance review is difficult, too much to do. etc.

Fair Housing

Professional & Technical

This aspect of the performance planning strategy was helpful. My supervisor and I got together to discuss a clear cut strategy for maximizing time and making the sure the work I do is effective.

My supervisor has an open-door policy to discuss issues and concerns regarding our jobs with her at any time.

Fair Housing

Administrative

NONE

NONE

NONE

NONE

NONE

Code Compliance

Administrative

There needs to be more training for both the supervisors and the field employees, who don't understand the categories - or refuse to read them.

City Auditor

Supervisory & Managerial

to general and not objective

planned by mgt. and expected to agree and sign.

mgt expected you to agree and sign

Communicatio n & Information Services

Supervisory & Managerial

I created my own performance plan which I submitted to him. He made minor adjustments and just gave it back.

Street Services

Administrative

I didn't agree on my evaluation

Communicatio n & Information Services

Professional & Technical

need new form badly

Desktop Support

Professional & Technical

Job Descriptions did not reflect what we do and we were not allowed to make changes to plan. Plan assumed that all people do the same thing and that since we were in a certain department we only did one thing.

Supervisor discussed our plans with us in groups instead of individually-everyone got the same score even though performance and skill level are different

The list of accomplishments and achievements were not added to my performance plan and was not reflected

Supervisor complained more about his own merit increase or lack of.

Library

I don't know

Waste of time

Library

I don't know

Keying everything in to the City's goals is nice in an "all for one and one for all" kind of way, but renders meaningful evaluation of specific jobs difficult if not impossible. Some of the acrobatics required to make my job responsibilities fit under city goals were worthy of Cirque de Solez.

No, during the year, the PP is ignored. Only when deadlines roll around is it worried about, and then it's obsessive.

Communicatio n & Information Services

Professional & Technical

Only room for 4 project/goals, which isn't always enough and supervisor has can NOT add additional project/goals. That seems like a major flaw and is a drawback.

Environmental & Health Services

Administrative

Ridiculous!!!! Even my supervisor said it was an unfair appraisal.

Park and Recreation

Supervisory & Managerial

The money and time spent in developing and training people to use the new format was not justified. It seemed much like a rehash of the old form.

Public Works & Transportation

Professional & Technical

The process is polluted.

process is polluted.

process is polluted.

Process is polluted

Process is polluted. I was not eligible for a merit increase. This is not sour grapes. The system is a big sham.

Park and Recreation

Professional & Technical

After speaking with other employees I feel the form was not easy to understand for some people.

Again many employees signed this form without truly understanding what was going on.

My supervisor and I did not really have any discussions about performance and the need to improve. I have not had any problems exceeding performance standards

We did not have any examples of needed improvement

City Manager’s Office

Administrative

I never saw my appraisal, because I was on suspension. When I returned, I was told that because the incident was so close to the appraisal time, I would not get a raise. So you have double standards and you make up the rules as you go.

they were ok

I was doing really good and worked hard throughout the year.

It was really a messed up time. No followup at all. I don't believe it was due to anything that my immediate supervisor, but those above her that made the decision.

As I stated, I don't think my immediate supervisor was able to really make any decisions about this review process. You have double standards and they apply to the people that are not in the "click".

Internal Control

Professional & Technical

My appraisal was based on the department and not my individual work.

I was rated on two responsibilites and not all of my duties and a responsibilities. I was praised all year long by my manager and others but those comments were not included in my performance appraisal.

Communicatio n & Information Services

Administrative

I feel that the performance review is subject to feelings of a superivisor's personal feelings or that of upper management. The rating system is easily manipulated for the desired scores. The performance review is burdensome and time consuming and the results are not worth the time and effort that it takes an employee to fill out the information.

Street Services

Administrative

No one was judged truthfully in the appraisal form. People unjustfully received raises that did not deserve them.

People are being put in position that have nothing to do with there performance plan

My Supervisor changed 5 times in the course of 10 months

No meetings no talks

Employees truely deserving merit raises received none, but employees being here less than 6 months and having accidents on there records received 4 and 5 percents. Where is this fair.

Street Services

Administrative

I was evaluated by a Supervisor who knew me only 2 weeks...she was given information on me by a Manager that I worked in his office about 3 weeks while he was at another office. I asked the Supervisor to talk to the Supervisor or Manager that I had previously worked for the past 4 years about my work ethics and performance. I received a "2" for the 1st time in my 25+ years.

Street Services

Supervisory & Managerial

Duties changed, but the new duties were not listed for most of the year. I was evaluated with no way to gauge or suceed in the new undefined duties. Pulled my entire score straight down.

The current evaluation is pretty much left up to the supervisor. There is no concrete way for the employee to make sure they are succeding in their performance. Too suggestive.

I received nothing on the new performace plan until it was time to sign it this May.

I had no idea what the goals were for me on the new plan, therefore could not generate the successes being looked for to make sure I had a good review.

This old review gave one bench marks. You do this, you get this score, or this one or that one. You add them all up this is what you got, no muss no fuss no arguement. You knew what you were getting if you did what you were requested to do in the time frame provided. This new one my score depended on how the supervisor 'felt' about my performance and how much money the department had to parcel out. This score will follow me for a long time. It would have been nice if it had been performance based entirely, and not influanced by the budget that the department had.

Communicatio n & Information Services

I don't know

The results are predetermined by budgetary constraints and do not reflect actual perfomance.

I didn't need any performance improvement.

I wasn't given enough time or clear instructions to make my list of accomplishments and acheivements. I still don't know what they are really asking for.

It's not taken seriously nor seems important because everyone knows that the budget is the controlling factor not employee performance.

Library

Supervisory & Managerial

My supervisor gave me a great rating -- but because of the mandated 2% average merit, 2% was what I received. Intellectually, I know that my work is appreciated, but it felt somewhat like getting an empty box of delicious cookies.

Dallas Police

Administrative

This appraisal was the most inaccurate way I have ever seen to "measure performance". When your department is told that the average of your org can be no more than 2% increase (even though it says you are eligible for a 2-4% merit), and there are only four others in your org., how can you believe that one of the four will be given a "0" to allow one other to get the full 4% they may deserve. It would have been much better for morale to give an across the board 2%, which is what the majority had to get anyway. It should not be called "performance plan". This was an insult to all civilian employees!!!

This was a joke!!

My performance was very good, and I had no problems, other than with this performance plan!

This plan does not allow the true employee performance to be rewarded. See my above comments.

This was not a performance assessment, but merely a 2% across the board increase. Employees and the public were grossly mislead by saying that a good employee would receive 2­4%, when it was a given amount that one could receive regardless when the org average must be 2%!!!!!

Water Utilities

Professional & Technical

I was rated on two responsibilites and not all of my duties and a responsibilities. I was praised all year long by my manager and others but those comments were not included in my performance appraisal. Any comments that I had written in response to the performance appraisal was not included and/or accepted by my supervisor.

Communicatio n & Information Services

I don't know

When you spend all your time putting out fires, there is no time to think about goals set.

It is difficult to work to goals when short staffing and poor leadership at the top means you are always in reactive mode. There was also a great disparity of ranking. One supervisor would rank "achieved goals" as average while another ranked that as superior. Even supervisors commented that they did not know how to rank their staff.

An appraisal process that relies on goals set six months ago means squat when we have a management team with the attention span of a gnat. What I actually did had little or nothing to do with those pie in the sky goals set at the beginning because I was always reacting to some crisis or other caused by lack of planning on various projects.

Water Utilities

Professional & Technical

worst appraisal process in all my years of working here

same comments as above worst appraisal process in all my years of working here

still same comments worst appraisal process in all my years of working here

same worst appraisal process in all my years of working here

same comments as above....worst appraisal process in all my years of working here

Library

Operations & Field

I filled out my appraisal form myself, submitted to my supervisor, then I made the recommended changes on the form. Throughout the whole process, I was involved in preparing the form for admission to admin., with the exception of my supervisor summarizing the information I submitted to her and typing that final summary into the form.

Development Services

Professional & Technical

Feedback throughout the year is crucial to developing the leadership for both employee and supervisor.

Keeping a list of accomplishments motivated me to do more.

The review was concise and served as motivation to perform better.  The amount of increase I got could have been handled better. I should have known after my appraisal how much increase I was getting but, I had to wait because of the method of distribution.

Code Compliance

I don't know

I have a very fair supervisor. The other dept. I worked for had supervisors who did not explain performance at all, they did not even know what my job was and could not fairly evaluate any ones performance. I think it would be a good Idea for supervisors to have training so they can better explain this process to employees, based on the extreme difference of supervision styles I have seen between the 2 depts. that I have worked for.

Water Utilities

Professional & Technical

I have never received a completed copy for my records from my supervisor, although I have requested one on three occasions.

my merit increase until much later when the budget analyst in my department alluded to it; my paycheck, however, did not include any increase; the department's budget analyst said it was because my supervisor never processed it; the budget analyst took steps to process it, and I received a retroactive pay increase. I have never received a copy of my performance review from my supervisor although I have requested a copy on three occasions.

Development Services

Professional & Technical

District manager directed supervisors as to what to put on form. No input from employee was welcome.

District manager directed supervisors as to what to put on form. No input from employee was welcome.

District manager directed supervisors as to what to put on form. No input from employee was welcome.

District manager directed supervisors as to what to put on form. No input from employee was welcome.

District manager directed supervisors as to what to put on form. No input from employee was welcome.

Code Compliance

Operations & Field

needs to be studied and re­written to meet job functions

managers that have not been with the emeployee nor the department long enough to evaluate performance

the wording was easy and understandable but not agreeable

performance accessment does not meet the job expectability

The overall performance evaluation was not fair, due to the fact that managers that had only been with the department for a few months, could not access evaluations properly. merit increases were not awarded by accessing work performance. most of the rating and performance description did not properly access the job functions and executions. This evalutation for code field operations should be studied and re-designed to apply to the job function and expectations.

Communicatio n & Information Services

Professional & Technical

I was rated down for not going outside my area of duties after he had told me not to.

WWC

Supervisory & Managerial

Its Works

Water Utilities

Professional & Technical

Supervisor allowed another manager to be in the office during the evaluation despite protests and complaints from all the personnel he supervised. The other manager was not in the chain of supervision (was a manager in a parallel section) and did not have a valid reason to be present during the confidential review session.

City Auditor

Professional & Technical

Another example of more bad "fad management" techniques

Rushed

It is a pity that the employee has to present her/his accomplishments. Shouldn't the supervisor have been keeping track of these all along or is all they do is delegate their work and responsibilities? They will certainly keep track of any defeciencies.

Just justification for keeping merit raises at a minimum across the City.

City Attorney

I don't know

"there was only so much money to go around & not everyone would get a raise." I understand that, but it seems to me that when the merit raises were handed out, the procedure to determine who got one & who didn't, was totally unfair. It seemed to be more like a "popularity contest," instead of someone truly being rewarded for their hard work & skills. I received Good-Excellent marks on my evaluation in every category, and did not get a merit increase. While others in my office who did more poorly, did receive a merit increase. In the future, I think there should be more guidelines in place to determine who receives a merit increase, and who should not.There is a lot of employee turnover in the City at the present, with a lot of disgruntled employees. If someone is a hard working, loyal, and trusted employee, they should be rewarded accordingly, not overlooked. A little praise goes a long way. A happy worker is a productive worker.

Public Works & Transportation

Administrative

I did not receive a merit increase because I had not been there long enough.

Communicatio n & Information Services

Professional & Technical

Overly complicated and geared toward being a human resourse's response to a consultant's plan for management. This whole appraisal is a way to reward a select few. You can perform your job perfectly and still be given a middle of the scale score. There is too much weight for the upper end rather than just one level for exceptional effort as there should be.

Water Utilities

I don't know

I am willing to work as needed in other areas of the office.

I work well with others.

I will improve my office skills.

I am willing to work where work is needed.

Over all I enjoy my job and Supervisor.

Equipment and Building Services

Supervisory & Managerial

A merit should be awarded based on the employees performance and not on the difference in the wages that each employee makes. For example, you have three storekeepers D's. One storekeeper's salary is much lower than the other two. The lowest paid storekeeper has a high error rate and a attendance problem, but management wants his merit higher because of he is paid lower than the other storekeepers. Not fair at all.

Mayor & City Council

Administrative

I HATE IT!!!!!!!!!!!

NONE

I HATED THE WHOLE PROCESS

Communicatio n & Information Services

Supervisory & Managerial

It doesen't really matter what type of form you use. Setting boundaries or limitations on the merts amounts for each department may dictate the final outcome

It should be communicated that as goals and priorities change the Performance Planning form should also be changed.

Communicatio n & Information Services

Supervisory & Managerial

I think the form and the process are fine. HOWEVER, CIS and my manager did NOT follow the procedures. They were following the procedures until around October 2004 when they started reorganizing our department. Then everything went to Hell.

I did not know what my goals were and did not have a plan until late March.

I did not get to read my evaluation when I was reviewed. My manager had it in front of her, but did not show it to me. I only saw the signature page. It took about two months of constant bugging her after the fact to get a copy of it.

I took a week of sick time for the first time in years and received a poor rating because of it. I had to threaten to sew to get them to change it to a satisfactory rating. This was the first time since we started pay for performance that I did not receive a supperior or exceeds objectives rating (and remember, CIS was on pay for performance years before the rest of the City was). My current plan is full of goals that can't be met. My manager continually gives me "top priority" assignments that are not on my plan and I am never allowed time to work on the things on my plan. I suppose I should feel lucky, though. I'm one of the few sidelined managers that has a plan at all. Most of them don't have a plan, don't know what they're supposed to be doing, and in many cases don't know who they work for. This place is a real mess and we really wish HR would do something to help us.

Dallas Police

Administrative

This performance appraisal was totally rigged against most employees in order to reward one person a 4% merit increase. Negative remarks that were untrue were added to performance reviews to justify giving lower merit increases. After waiting 4 years for a merit increase, employees should have been given the same amount across the board. This management scheme is highly distructive and has deeply affected employee morale. I cannot say one good thing about the process and it is the worst thing I've seen in employee treatment since working for the City.

I was given a copy and competencies were rated incorrectly. My supervisor told me that even though he made mistakes I would have to appeal the process. Why even bother...for more humiliation?

My supervisor admitted that he did not understand or know what I actually do on my job. He rated me low on areas that I was doing very well and then said he did not know that I was doing those things. He has been in his position for a year. The former supervisor rated me exceeds objective on all categories, but new supervisor rated me without even understanding or knowledge of what all of my duties and responsiblities are.

Communicatio n & Information Services

Supervisory & Managerial

None. Still do not have my promised copy of the complete appraisal.

As of today 08/12, I do not have a performance plan for ending 09/30.

After 20 years of superior/exceed objectives reviews, this is the first that is only satisfactory(fully successful). I feel the rating was predetermined before the actual performance review was even done.

Financial Services

Supervisory & Managerial

The whole process has become so long and time consuming. We are required to prepare our own and then our supervisor agrees or diagrees. You may have been doing an exzcellent job throughout the year but if you did not take on any additional duties/functions you were not granted any more than a 2% increase. Someone who had been barely getting by but was given added responsibility simply because he was there gets a 3% increase. Something is not right here.

It is all done as a rush rush process.

Supervisors have changed 3 times in the past year and we prepare our own appraisals simply because they need to be done.

No feedback just gtiven the % to be received.

Library

Administrative

All of this is well and good in a perfect environment. Employees constantly do above (extra), which takes time a way from the matters at hand. We are expected to which would be fine, but in some cases it is a huge responsibility and burden. For this there is no appreciation, reward, nor insentive. This is an everyday event for some employees, but who cares!

Communicatio n & Information Services

Administrative

This is the first company that I worked for that we had to fill out our own appraisal. In fill it out our self we rated ourself to our performance to have the supervisor or manager to change them. Why have us to fill it out in the first place if you are going to change it.

the over all rating percentage could have been higher. To deal with the cost of living and benefits.

A lost of the Management Staff feels that an employee can't get an outstanding rating. When you can be outstanding in you job.

I think since Managerment get to rate us on our performance, we should have to rate them.

Library

I don't know

It need t be easier to read and understand and to have more room to make our comments

I think so manager don't really understand how to do it

Communicatio n & Information Services

Professional & Technical

The definitions of Performance Ratings are created such that it is easy for a supervisor to rate everyone as 2/Shows Potential. I have been working in the computer field for almost 30 years. I have a degree in Computer Science and have a half-dozen computer certifications. Yet, I was found to "have potential." I was particularly disturbed by the ratings in individual areas. The questions asked on this survey do not provide an accurate appraisal of the form itself. The form was completely understandable, it was just a substandard product.

There was virtually no discussion of my "my job skills, key job responsibilities and the goals expected for me to demonstrate or achieve during the assessment period." Further, despite repeated requests for a copy of my appraisal form, none was ever provided.

My appraisal was given to me a mere six months after I met with my supervisor for a very brief (5 to 10 minutes) meeting where I was presented with the review form to describe my job duties. It did not cover the entire year. Further, I had not received any review at all for the three years prior to being presented with this form and so my past work went unrecognized. I received absolutely zero feedback from my supervisor for the six month period prior to be reviewed and so had no reason to suspect that my grade would be "has potential." If this was the case, why was I not told at some point during the six month period that something was wrong? As I was not given any such feedback, I am forced to conclude that my performance was perfectly satisfactory. But, this was not reflected in my review.

As there was no meeting with my supervisor at the end of my appraisal period, I was unable to generate any list of accomplishments and achievements to submit to him. I have yet to meet with him to determine my responsibilities for the next appraisal period. I did file a grievance against my review, but it was denied. Wrongfully so, I believe.

Again, the meeting with my supervisor on my appraisal was very short and rushed. There was no real opportunity for commentary. I was given the form, asked to sign it and that was that. There was no feedback except for generic comments typed on the form itself. At no time did I, nor have I, receive any indication of a merit increase, let alone how much it might be. My only information on that has been rumor and gossip in the workplace.

City Auditor

Professional & Technical

Upper management kept changing their minds. Inconsistency is the key to confusion.

Manager did a good job of planning and informing.

He is very open, receptive, helpfull and willing to assist in any manner through training (inside and outside the city, as well as, using his time and expertise to assist me in performing to the highest standard/ability I am able to achieve.

Again, with his willingness to assist me to reach my highest level, made me want to excell in my position.

Again, as stated earlier, management above him confused the situation by not making everything clear and on three occassions redoing the evaluation to their liking and not letting the facts speak for themselves. Confusion thusly creates moral problems. However a positive evaluation still came down and I am extremely happy to be employed by the City of Dallas. My job is great (good people to work for and with) and I look forward to more good years with the city, hopefully. I ENJOY coming to work each day.

Water Utilities

Administrative

Part 4 was not filled out.

There one one area that was not mentioned on my Performance Planning responsibilities. This particular area was appraised very low and used as a tool to effectively evaluate my performance level.

I do not feel comfortable discussing my performance with my supervisors. I have been told that I do an exceptional job, and that I am an asset to the office. But every time I have been evaluated, I have, somehow, fallen below expectations.

It is very difficult to be encouraged by supervisors who base their decision-making on how well you are liked, rather than your overall competency. Regardless of the steps taken to be an exemplary employee and create a positive environment, perception takes precedence over competence.

The form is good. However, the evaluation process needs improvement. Employees, overall, were not judged on their competency, but more on how well they are liked.

Water Utilities

Administrative

Some of the work I do was omitted and was not evaluated and given the raise i deserved. I was not given a good review until raise time and then it changed to a bad one. I have my copies if contacted.

When I was given the "Big Rocks" I had a good evaluation, but when the raise came about, it changed.

When given the Appraisal, it was different from the original.

I was not told that the "Big Rocks" would change when raise time came about.

When I went to the Manager, and A D I was given no explaination, other than they knew about the eval's before hand and agreed with the 1% I was given. I left it, because Maria Alicia Garcia was not willing to forsee anything I was talking about and only agreed with the Manager and Supervisor.

Housing

Professional & Technical

Tying the appraisal to a fixed financial target means that we were evaluated to meet a financial target, not evaluated on our actual performance. The evaluation form is fine. Simply don't tie the end result of that appraisal to a specific percentage increase in salary.

Communicatio n & Information Services

Professional & Technical

though the years my duties have changed as new software and procedures have been adopted. The form used was at least 5 years out of date and had little to do with the functions I now perform

There has been no planning

My supervisor did not listen to any of my concerns.

Communicatio n & Information Services

Professional & Technical

the biggest problem of the appraisal process. The competence part could use some re-working. The biggest problem is using the Performance Ratings by Grote Consulting. If any supervisor follows the rating definitions to the letter, the five categories might as well be labeled as: 5 - Make sure you know you will never get this rating 4 - If your job is your life, you'll get this. 3 - Where almost everyone goes here. Not so high that raise an red flag, not so low that the employee complains 2 - For the 'real' non-productive employees. They don't get the '1' rating because: 1. Only if the employee is to be RIF'ed. This is too low a rating and the supervisor will have to produce a book to justify giving such bad rating if the employee is not being terminated. The general consensus is, the City management wants everyone to be in the '3' category

The whole plan is to more sure everyone gets the '3' rating. The foundation of the appraisal is flawed.

The whole plan is to more sure everyone gets the '3' rating. Whatever happens during the year matters little.

There was no assessment phase. Everything was rushed. The Assessment was combined with the Review phase.

Library

Professional & Technical

Water Utilities

Operations & Field

Very one sided review.Almost impossible to get a good review.I got the worst review that I've gotten in 20 years with this format.

I was reviewed by two supervisors.One of the supervisors was not my direct supervisor & therefore does not know what I'm actually capable of.The other supervisor was my direct supervisor,but had only been my supervisor for a short time & therefore couldn't evaluate my performance effectively.

Already gave my comments above. (Very one sided review.Almost impossible to get a good review.I got the worst review that I've gotten in 20 years with this format. I was reviewed by two supervisors.One of the supervisors was not my direct supervisor & therefore does not know what I'm actually capable of.The other supervisor was my direct supervisor,but had only been my supervisor for a short time & therefore couldn't evaluate my performance effectively.)

Basically what I gathered from my review was that they don't appreciate my job knowledge.What I need to do is not get behind on my work,which is true but somtimes difficult to achieve,because of the high volume of work I have.

Controllers Office

Administrative

satisfactory

satisfactory

satisfactory

satisfactory

satisfactory

Equipment and Building Services

Professional & Technical

Our section was without a direct supervisor during this time

Library

Supervisory & Managerial

The scale system is unrealistic, to get a 5 is impossible, 4 one must walk on water. Also, one through five is very much like a standard grading system with 3 being average, very conflicting. We were told that no one gets a four or five. So why bother with it at all, completely unfair and transparent. My opinion this is a lot of work for very little. Why not get the employees at living wages and THEN implement a performance plan?

The goals and priorities of the city changed after last performance plan, that aspect was NEVER discussed, nor integrated into our performance plan. Our director said that we needed to make the cities priorities part of our performance and she would hold us accountable during assessment

Code Compliance

Operations & Field

Management was somewhat clear during evaluation, however the entire process was rushed and I was unable to questions some of the ratings because I was constantly told that there was limited time for each employee and to direct all questions (appeals) to assistant director.

During performance planning, I did not entirely get the tools that I needed to meet management expectations. I also has to verbally and e-mail manager more than twice for a copy of my performance plan.

I had very little coaching and positive encouragement throughout the entire year.

I know that the process could have been better.

As stated before, I was limited on the time this was given.

Library

Administrative

I believe it is a waste of time to have an appraisal done. If you are not performing, out you do, but if you are performing your job but you still get called in to do an evaluation and after you finish your evaluation you feel you were not realling doing your job. waste of time. Lowers the morale.

Like this survey, took up my time to complete. A waste of time.

Public Works & Transportation

Administrative

This process is bias because supervisors are able to give those who they "like" higher ratings and the "dislikes" lower ratings. I feel if you are performing a job very well and always meeting deadlines, you deserve better. This process needs to be re-evaluated.

I have been achieving my goals as usually, but when I department has several high performers and have to meet an average, how can one recieve more than the other?

I am still completing my tasks on time and now have new duties. I am waiting on the next review.

My job performance was not a problem, BUT We (the Clerks) have little work in the area. If the performance is based on your duties and responsibities to the department, I feel that if you meet those expectations and deadlines, you should not be graded on "the department not being busy". At times, work may be slow, but it eventually picks up and my tasks are completed and on time and I assist others. I accepted my performance review to prevent any conflicts. I truly believe that a better system should be available for employees so that everyone receives a fair review and employers do not have to pick out employees and then meet an average number for the review. This is not fair and it may cause employee morale to decrease.

Library

Supervisory & Managerial

No planning!

There were no meetings. I just filled out my performance review and turned it in to the Manager.

Every one in the office was informed we would only get a 2% increase no matter great our performance review was. The Department Executives stated to all Library employees, "We would have to have walked on water in order to be elgible for any % above the overall 2% allotted"! This statement was made before the performance reviews were distributed.

Convention and Event Services

Professional & Technical

I have issues with the Appraisal having nothing to do with the raise you get. If your Appraisal is not measured in compensation, what s the incentive to do more and to do better?

Dallas Fire-Rescue

Professional & Technical

none

none

none

none

I'm not real sure about #29. However, I feel that my supervisor is fair and very understanding as well as easy to work for.

City Auditor

Professional & Technical

I would like HR to define the Superior and Distinquished Rating in the Overall Performance Appraisal section.

My performance review and merit increase was based on the departmental budget, not on my performance. Also, management created a departmental rating formula during the Performance Review Phase, and the employees were not aware of it. There should be a universal rating formula so employees can be treated fair. Also, I reviewed my performance appraisal with my manager on one day, and was told what my merit increase was three days later.

Civil Service

Professional & Technical

The form is fine, it's just how it is used.

There was no real planning. Things were done backward to make it appear so.

No, this was done "seat-of-the­pants". Management is not required to support their assessments or held accountable for ratings. Just another faulty system that is easily circumvented so "liked" employees will be most rewarded. This is just like the old system, the favorites will always benefit the most. There's just limits now on how much. It will be the same every year: "Sorry, I gave you what I thought was right. Gee, you did get a merit increase, what's the problem, you're fully successful?" Meanwhile, the favorites will be given higher ratings and higher raises and the evaluation will simply be written and embellished to justify their reward. Why appeal? The management and/or board will not overturn a supervisor's rating. The appeal process is just window dressing, a way of making the employee think there is fairness in the system.

Supervisor didn't have to justify ratings. "I gave you what I thought you deserved." Performance system is unfair -same people always get the highest raises. For others, it does not matter what you do, you will always get the lowest raise.

Water Utilities

I don't know

I was very disappointed with my evaluation. I think with my years of experience on my job, i should have received something better than POTENTIAL. I have been working for the City for 19 years, I've been in this position for 14 years, I am performing my job duties and duties of a position of a person with a job above mines and doing it well for atleast five years, I've been loaned out to other Division including the City Managrs Office and I am told that I have POTENTIAl of doing my JOB. I do not understand that.

I suggest that and investigation is made within my division because I don't think Management is right. I have never ever got an EVALUATION as insulting as this one. The morale in my Office is terrible because there are PICKS. I mind my BUSINESS and do my work, I guess that I am being punished because I do not laugh and smile in the Manager's face. I do not think that we have a good Manager and I was not satisfied with my 1% Performance evaluation. I am a good worker and I think that I deserve better.

I think my evaluation was an insult and I refused to sign it.

I think the Performance Assessment was an insult and needs to be investigatd.

I think that the process is unfair because if a Manager does not like you for whatever reason he or she choses, He can really destroy you and that is not fair. I had problems and I wen to my Department Human Resource Manager and I received retaliation from my Supervisor and Manager.

Communicatio n & Information Services

Professional & Technical

Changing the form every 2 years makes the process too time consuming and confusing.

Planning was not performed in a timely manner.

Rumor has it that CIS merits were decided in a meeting with the Director by going down a list of employees with no direct review of performance and without the immediate supervisor.

Development Services

Professional & Technical

seems okay, but see my comments later

okay....more comments later

relationship with my supervisor is good, but see my comments later

so far so good...the system up to here is good

regarding this appraisal system. The appraisal works fine, but we were told that our department management mandated a maximum 2% increase even though council authorized 4% for superior performance. Our supervisors were told not to give any superior grading and to limit all increases to 2%. Rumor has it that some grading were even changed by upper managers who had no direct contact with the employees. What good is an evaulation system which cannot deliver a "bell curve" grading??...where department management mandate and adjust figures by averaging gradings and raises??...what good is this appraisal system if superior performance is not rewarded with superior raises and poor performance is allowed to continue?? We have a antiquated civil service system that does not allow termination of poorly performing employees, and a management system that fosters poor performance.

Communicatio n & Information Services

Professional & Technical

My supervisor boss completed it with input from my supervisor.1!!!

I really felt there was no team work I felt like an outsider when working on my performance plan.

This was the most disapointing part of  the appraisal.

I was emailed my appraisal and then asked to fill it out then sign it. no conversation conducted.

Water Utilities

Administrative

No input

City Manager’s Office

Supervisory & Managerial

I was under three different ACMs during the review period. I do not feel that I had a satisfactory evaluation, but given the circumstances, they did their best.

Development Services

Supervisory & Managerial

Part 3 and 4 were confusing to a lot people in all ranks. Everybody had a different idea how the rank system should be used. The ranking of 1 thru 5 was not clear. No guidlines on how to use this Or it was not made clear. There was a sheet handed out that had a rating of 1 thru 5 that gave an expectation of each ranking. Some people used this guideline for the Parts 3 and 4, others said it was just overall and not to be used as a guide for Parts 3 and 4. In my opinion there should be guidlines on the rating of 1 thru 5 for parts 3 and 4 on the form. It allows the reviewer and employee have common ground on how or why the rating is given.

Environmental & Health Services

Professional & Technical

YOU NEED TO STOP WAITINGUNTIL THE LAST MINUTE TO GIVE STAFF THE TIMELINES AND WE SHOULD HAVE NO RESTRICTIONS ON THE % THAT AN EMPLOYEE IS ELIGIBLE FOR.

THEY WERE HELD UP IN OUR Department

I HAVE NO PROBLEM SPEAKING WITH MY SUPERVISOR.

YOU MIGHT WANT TO REVISIT WORDINGON THE RATINGS.THERE IS TO MUCH OF A GRAY AREA(1-5), JUST DOES NOT WORK.A PERSON DOES NOT DO THERE JOB, THEY DO THERE JOB, THEY GO ABOVE THEIR JOB DUTIES CONTINUOSLY OR THEY EXCEL ON A DAILY BASIS. WE NEED TO GET A GRIP SO THE EMPLOYEE NOT ONLY UNDERSTANDS BUT CAN HONESTLY, REALISTICALLY RATE THEMSELVES WITHOUT READING IN-BETWEEN THE LINES......

City Attorney

I don't know

We have a customized form for our department. I fill two positions and the evaluation was inappropriate for my duties

There was no discussion of what is expected of me.

Development Services

Administrative

The process was expedited and not thoroughly examined by management. HR needs to a better job in outlining this process for future evaluations.

I felt rushed through this entire process to get something on the table.

I felt my supervisor had a pre­determined evaluation for me. And was unwilling to discuss or re-evaluate the appraisal.

Mayor & City Council

Administrative

Space allowed was not enough. Very general description, not enough space to detail ones daily duties. Our office is so diverse that we can't just be categorized under one umbrella.

The obtions above sometimes don't apply. Some responses don't apply.

Convention and Event Services

I don't know

There was NO planning phase!

There was NO performance assessment phase!

My Supervisor had no part in my performance evaluation, a Manager III die it. The manager evaluated me over a full year, on items of which I was not aware were part of my job, on "I'm not saying you are doing this, but it's something you should watch out for, so I gave you a 2". The performance schedule was not scheduled. I NOT ONCE RECEIVED A COPY OF THE PERFORMANCE FORM UNTILL DAYS AFTER THE FINAL REVIEW. FORMS DON'T MAKE UP FOR LEADERS.

Dallas Police

Administrative

what was the use of the performance review, when our efforts as good dependable, faithful employees always goes unnoticed & unappreciated. & you wonder why moral is down. you have your picks as who will get 4% & the rest of us have to settle for 2% & if we try to fight it we will be targeted. you don't respect us and we don't respect you, just keep your percentage if you don't appreciate us as employees & want to give us something just because we are here. don't give us a little (tease) & take it away with our insurance, or pick and choose who will get the percentage

Water Utilities

Professional & Technical

mandate that no one can receive the highest rating on the review and that everything has to average out to a 2%. Meaning that if someone gets 3% then someone else (even if they performed extremely well has to take less) It is possible to have employees all perform exceptional. Why should someone have to be penalized? This causes animosity among employees and management. I think the employeees moral is already pretty low considering "no raises" and benefit cuts for years. This form of review will not make people work harder as it is intended to do. It is just creating more bad morale. If anything it will decrease work production. Why would you continue to work hard day after day only to be told all you can receive is 2%. Especially when the City is hiring retirees as "Contract Labor" and they are receiving raises every six months when their contracts are renewed. What message is this sending?? There are employees that could be doing the jobs that

Hard to keep up with your job duties when the management in your division/office keeps changing things.

My supervisor is unsure of their job let alone of the job duties of the people being supervised.

difference because we were told that it I did not realize that I had the opportunity to generate a list of accomplishments for my supervisor to review. I don't think it would have made a didn't matter how well you performed no one could receive the highest mark on their review and everyone had to get an average of 2% or someone else would have to take less money. This left it open for the supervisors to pinpoint their favorite people for the 2% or 3% raises. "Favorite People" does not necesarily mean these were the people who produced the most work with little errors. Sometimes it means "Lunch Buddies"!

The reason the City of Dallas had the old "Step Raise" form of reviews and raises was to prevent unethical supervisors/managers from singling out their so called "favorites". It was suppose to prevent someone from bringing in personal prejudices into the review process. Seems like the Supervisors/Managers have been given open and free reign to discriminate.

Development Services

Professional & Technical

I was not elegible for merit this evaluation period.

Communication & Infromation Services

Professional & Technical

I strongly disagree with the performance evaluation, but my supervisor said that things has been decided by her boss, and she has little to do with it. I wrote a full page of comments about the evaluation, but never get feedback.

Economic Development

Professional & Technical

I received high points but the limit on the amount (%) of increase imposed did not allow my supervisor to give me the earned increased

My supervisor is stretched too thin - and simply was unavailable.

This was absolutely the worst time to introduce a new performance review process. The staff I supervisor were very indifferrent to the process. The most I heard from staff was why should I break my neck you can't give me what I deserve anyway.

Capital Improvements

Professional & Technical

The format is set not to recognize achievments