University of Kent

Yes all employees of the University come under this policy, unless they are under the probation procedure.

Any issue with performance should be picked up with the staff member as soon as possible following the most recent incident, through an informal discussion or formal if a performance management process is already underway. Where time is allowed to lapse after the incident before raising this, it may become inappropriate to take action.

Your HR Adviser can be contacted for advice before you begin to tackle the issue and it can be useful to talk through the issues before you meet with the member of staff. Throughout the informal process HR will provide you with advice and support. If you need to move to the formal process HR will take a more active role and participate in the meetings.

Sickness should be dealt with through the Managing Sickness Absence Policy. If the absence is for a few days the process should continue normally and the member of staff should receive a copy of the PIP. If the sickness is for a prolonged period that could have an impact on the PIP, it is likely that the timescales will have to be revised in discussion with the individual upon their return to work. Advice can be sought from your HR Adviser regarding how to run the two processes concurrently.

The Manager should look into anything the member of staff raises that they see as mitigating circumstances. If the issues raised are health related then an Occupational Health referral should be made asking specific questions around the impact of any condition on the member of staff’s ability to carry out their role and whether any adjustments are required. The department should then consider any recommendations made by Occupational Health, and if applicable how they can be accommodated incorporating them into any performance management targets being set. Further advice can sought from your HR Adviser.

The evidence should be reviewed by the manager, and the member of staff should be invited to discuss it. It could result in the 3 options below:

1. If following the conversation it emerges that member of staff’s performance has not fallen below a satisfactory level the process will end here.
2. If the additional evidence/documents and subsequent conversation with the member of staff establish that there are more instances of unsatisfactory performance than first thought, the Performance Improvement Plan should be redrafted in consultation with the member of staff to ensure further targets are identified.
3. If it is established that there may now be a conduct issue, the manager should advise the member of staff that this will be investigated and addressed. Advice should be sought from your HR Adviser concerning the severity of the conduct issue and whether it can be addressed as part of the performance management process.

Consideration needs to be given to any issues raised by the staff member and specific methods of doing this will depend on the workload planning appropriate to the staff group. For Academic members of staff the WAM should be consulted and discussed with the member of staff. For all other staff members the operational tasks in their role should be considered and where it is unclear whether the workload is an issue, staff members should be engaged to monitor operational tasks over a set period of time. Once this has been undertaken the outcome should be incorporated into the performance targets either through responding to the staff member’s concerns or by making any adjustments required with a view to improving performance to the required level.

It is not necessary to establish enough evidence to prove or disprove a view point, and judgements can be made on the basis of reasonable belief provided a balanced view has been taken. In order to do this, where possible speak informally to other team members who may have additional evidence. If no one else has been involved then both sides should be reviewed, and a balanced judgement should be made. If a judgement cannot be reached HR can advise.

Any mitigating circumstances raised by the individual need to be considered. The manager should talk through with the individual what the implications of not meeting a specific target are, and why the individual feels the way they do. The Manager should clarify to the individual that it is not a personal criticism, and that they are responsible for the team/department’s delivery/achievement of targets, and therefore it is their responsibility to set targets for the individual. 

Any instance where a member of staff is not performing part of their role to a satisfactory level should be addressed. The member of staff should be praised for the work that they are doing to a high standard and as with any case of unsatisfactory performance time should be taken to explore why they are not performing in that area and what support can be given to enable them to do so. If the duties are not dissimilar to the duties the member of staff is performing well consideration should be given to whether the issue is performance or conduct related.

The informal and formal stages follow the same process, however the informal stage is designed to try and resolve the issue at the lowest level, whereas the formal stage gives a further chance under this procedure for improvements to be made before the process moves to disciplinary.

Any mitigating circumstances raised by the individual should be considered. The situation should be referred to HR, Counselling, or Occupational Health as appropriate, and the individual should be made aware of the grievance process and how to try and resolve their grievance informally, in the first instance. The Manager should engage with the individual and try to resolve the issue with the individual, it may be worth considering whether a third party can be involved to alleviate some concerns. Performance management will still continue, however if a formal grievance is raised the process may need to be put on hold while the grievance is investigated.

If a task only occurs on an annual basis it is likely to draw out the process because that point in the year will need to be reached before the manager can clarify whether the target has been met.

Should this be the case, the manager should alert the member of staff about the areas required for improvement as soon as this is picked up.

This will broadly depend on specific circumstances and HR can support the manager in consideration of these. Where the circumstances continue to impact on their role for six months, other alternatives should be discussed with the individual that could include a longer term or permanent change.

The length of time that has elapsed since the performance or conduct issue was raised should be considered against the mitigating factors put forward that resulted in the situation being classed as temporary. Human Resources should be consulted about what is reasonable, and the best way to proceed.

Consideration should be given to the time lapse between the satisfactory completion of the performance targets and the point at which unsatisfactory performance reoccurs. Where the time lapse is reasonable, a broad guideline being a year, the process can be picked up where it finished and it will not go back to the start.

A record would not be kept on an individual’s personal file until the process became formal. Managers may keep basic records of informal action for up to a year for reference.

This is dependent on who chaired the disciplinary panel, but broadly speaking, for staff in grades 1-6 it would normally be the next most senior manager, and staff in grades 7 and above would be chaired by the Deputy Vice Chancellor.

Dismissal is the final stage of the disciplinary process and would normally only apply following unsuccessful informal and formal steps providing clarity to any individual on what is required, understand mitigating circumstances and support them to achieve what is required. Very few circumstances could be considered gross misconduct, which could potentially result in the dismissal of an individual being recommended from a single disciplinary hearing under the formal process. For any action under the formal process, HR will support and guide managers as appropriate. Procedures can be found on the HR website under information for managers.

No. Whatever is mentioned in a reference must be justifiable and supported by evidence in the event that it is challenged. If the reference asks for evidence of performance, and the unsatisfactory performance has been addressed through either the informal or formal process and there has been no improvement, you may wish to make some factual references. If you are specifically asked for comments on your member of staff’s performance and are unsure what you should say Human Resources can be contacted for advice.

No. The only circumstances under which the performance management process would continue would be if the member of staff took up a position in the same department that encompassed a number of tasks from their last role that were not being met to the required standards.

If the issue has been resolved and is more than a year old the records should be destroyed.