• Reviewers should complete the PDR meetings with their Reviewees within the defined PDR timeframe.

• Interim 1:1 review meetings should be offered where appropriate, as its recommended PDR objectives are reviewed throughout the year.

• All full time and part time staff are entitled to a PDR.

• Staff appointed on or after 1st October each year will not be required to have a PDR in the following PDR window. They should, however, be given appropriate objectives on commencement of the role or at the conclusion of their probation period if they are on probation for review at the following year’s PDR.

• Refusal to engage appropriately in the PDR process could lead to disciplinary action.

It is important that a discussion takes place regarding performance and a review of objectives is carried out. Setting performance objectives for next year is also required.

There are no ratings given in PDR.

• Setting of performance objectives for future 12 months or beyond.

• Performance objectives should be SMART – Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Time-bound.

• Performance objectives should be linked to School or Professional Service Strategies, which ultimately will link to the University Strategy – Creating Better Futures. Together

• Objectives should be suggested by both the reviewer and the reviewee, but ultimately they have to be agreed by both parties.

• It is recognised that there are scenarios in which objectives and targets maybe become redundant or be superseded by, for example, changing business needs. Reviewers should take this into consideration when undertaking performance assessments. Objectives and targets should be reviewed and updated as appropriate during any interim review meetings.

• Development needs should be agreed with the aim of improving/expanding the reviewees performance abilities and to help them to meet and exceed their objectives.

• Development needs could include both those relevant to the reviewees current role and to future roles within the organisation.

• Development does not have to just mean Organisational Development training courses but could include a range of activities such as collaborations, taking on collegiate roles within Schools, job-shadowing, mentoring, coaching, online courses, volunteering, professional qualifications etc.

• A written record is kept via the online PDR system, recording outcomes of the PDR discussion.

• This should be a mutually agreed record.

• Responsibility to oversee the PDR process lies with Deans or HoD, as appropriate, being responsible for ensuring that meetings have taken place, that agreed management actions are implemented and objectives set are reasonable.

• Development needs will be summarised.

• Deans and HoD are expected to ensure that arrangements are in place to maximise the effectiveness of the PDR conversation by ensuring that reviewees and reviewers are matched appropriately.

• The senior reviewer group will decide who should conduct each member of staff’s PDR at the beginning of each academic year in order to ensure that appropriate training can be completed prior to the PDR round each December.

• For Professional Service roles it would be the expectation that the line manager would be the PDR reviewer, however in larger teams this may be devolved to team leaders or equivalents.

• As the reviewer will be discussing performance with the reviewee, it is essential that the reviewer is more senior to the reviewee.

• If there is an irretrievable breakdown in the relationship an alternative PDR Reviewer can be allocated, although this should be in exceptional circumstances only.

• Clear links are to be made with other relevant systems such as rewards and the capability procedure

• The current Personal Research Plan (PRP) for academic staff will become an integral part of the PDR.