Administrative Reviews

Annual Performance and Five-Year Reviews for Administrative Personnel

Annual Review

According to University Handbook for Appointed Personnel chapter 5.2, “Each administrator’s performance will be evaluated in writing on a scheduled basis at least once every 12 months” by their immediate supervisor with respect to their leadership in building trust, fostering collaborations, maximizing resources, achieving results and instilling inclusive excellence. Input from faculty and staff, and a self-assessment is included in the annual review process. Administrator reviews are conducted by their supervisor and can use the Career Conversation format which emphasizes a coaching approach to enhance performance.
This new administrator annual review survey as a tool can be used to facilitate, obtain and organize input from the administrator's direct reports (staff and faculty) on an annual basis. It is a simple and straightforward way to collect information for the annual performance evaluation. The survey template is available in Qualtrics and guidelines (see FAQs) on how to use the survey as part of the career conversation.

Five-Year Review

As detailed in the University Handbook for Appointed Personnel chapter 5.3, the administrative review (commonly known as the five-year or fifth-year review) provides an opportunity for assessing the performance of administrative personnel over a five-year period. It is a more comprehensive tool for performance assessment than the annual performance review because it provides an opportunity to assess long-range goals and objectives.  Such reviews appropriately take into consideration the progress of the unit over the period reviewed and the role of the administrator in this development.  The administrative review evaluates the administrator's leadership in developing partnerships and managing resources to build capacity and improve performance based upon criteria established by the University, feedback from the administrator's supervisor as well as from those whom the administrator supervises. 

Review Criteria

Administrative reviews of heads, directors, deans, vice presidents, and other administrators are guided by a set of administrative expectations to help focus and standardize the review process. Performance metrics are utilized to align assessments of administrators with the progress of their units and to base assessments on actual performance.

The review also includes, but is not limited to, an assessment of the performance of the administrator with respect to building trust, fostering collaboration, leveraging resources, and achieving results.  Assessments of these aspects of administrators’ leadership draw upon written input from appropriate personnel, including faculty, staff and students, where appropriate:

  1. Building trust by communicating a guiding vision, operating in an ethical manner, being accessible and responsive, maintaining composure, and acknowledging the lessons to be learned from missteps;
  2. Fostering collaboration by effectively managing conflicts, forging partnerships and advancing shared purposes in a manner that includes diverse perspectives in collaborative decision making;
  3. Maximizing resources by recruiting and retaining high quality coworkers, helping them develop through coaching and assessment, improving operational effectiveness, and advancing data-based planning;
  4. Achieving results by identifying opportunities, challenging received assumptions, taking strategic risks, and advancing innovations in a decisive and strategic manner that is attuned to the priorities of the unit and university. 
  5. Inclusive excellence by building an equitable, interdisciplinary work climate that values collaboration and empathy, advances and supports diverse perspectives and experiences, and responds to bias.