Help
Attached File(s)
-
KPI1.jpg (43.39K)
Number of downloads: 93
Kpi Key Performance Indicators
#1 Guest_ACC's Nightmare_*
Posted 04 January 2004 - 12:55 AM
kpi1
#5
Sigurd 
- Newbie
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 0
- Joined: 05-January 04
Posted 09 January 2004 - 06:18 PM
All of the stuff is absolutely fascinating. Understanding of the internal dynamics of ACC, I reckon, is a crucial ingredient for successful skirmishing, and guerrilla actions, against the usurping tyrants. A pyrrhic victory is better than no victory at all! Has anyone got anything available of similar kind for complex personal injuries and/or serious injuries?
Sigurd Volsung
Sigurd Volsung
#6
Down
- Newbie
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 0
- Joined: 16-September 03
Posted 25 February 2004 - 08:56 AM
ACC returns $243.3 million surplus – 6 September 2002
ACC has recorded a before-tax surplus of $243.3 million for the 2001/02 annual year, turning around the previous year’s $313.1 million deficit before tax.
ACC’s income for the year ended June 30 was $2,455.1 million with net levy income totalling $2,323.7 million, reserves income returning $128.8 million and other income of $2.6 million.
Over the same period ACC paid out $1,579.3 million to accident victims, with $865 million spent on rehabilitation and $714.3 million in compensation benefits.
Higher-than-expected rehabilitation and compensation costs, and a lower returns in the global investment market following September 11, saw ACC’s before tax surplus come in $47.5 million under budget.
ACC’s reserves pay for the future costs of long-term injuries, as many victims are dependent on ACC assistance for decades.
ACC’s investment portfolio, currently $3.6 billion, returned 3.85% for the year, well ahead of market benchmarks and significantly better than the negative returns reported by many fund managers.
Over the past 10 years ACC’s investment of reserves has returned 10.68% p.a., well ahead of the 8.81% p.a. benchmark. New Zealand investments account for 72% of ACC’s reserves portfolio.
ACC’s assets increased by $502 million to $4.282 billion, while claims liability (the estimated cost of existing claims requiring future expenditure) dropped to $7.5 billion, down from $8.3 billion five years ago. Unfunded liability is now $3.6 billion, compared with $6.8 billion five years ago, consistent with the move to a fully funded-position.
This year, for the first time, ACC was independently appraised by an external rating agency, AM Best. It was rated A+ (superior), one rating below AM Best’s top rating and generally the best rating a non-multinational organisation can achieve.
In ACC’s Annual Report, tabled in Parliament today, Chairman David Caygill said ACC’s major challenge for the year had been ensuring a smooth implementation of the expanded benefits and scope of ACC, as set out in the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2001.
“The new Act is a significant piece of work affecting every staff member and every facet of the way ACC conducts its business,” he said. “Almost half of ACC’s staff had been involved in analysis and implementation of the changes, which were planned and managed in considerable detail.”
Mr Caygill noted that levy rates for employers had remained at $0.90c per $100 of payroll for two years running. Under the private market employers paid an average of $1.20 to $1.25.
Some levies had increased in line with costs rising due to increases in the seriousness and duration of injuries, especially farmers among the self-employed, and motorcyclists.
Mr Caygill said ACC had also been able to lower some levy rates as a direct result of its drive to improve rehabilitation and to shorten the time claimants required ACC services and compensation.
At the end of 2001/02, 14,518 claimants had been receiving weekly compensation for more than 12 months, down from 16,373 the previous year and half of the 28,926 five years ago. At the same time, claimant satisfaction improved to 78%, up from 71% five years ago.
Chief executive Garry Wilson said creating a safety culture had been top of ACC’s priority list for the year, with a major initiative being the nationwide launch of 23 ThinkSafe community plans.
“We have over 70 injury prevention consultants working intensively in local communities to promote workplace safety, Down With Speed, SportSmart, RugbySmart, vehicle safety belt projects and slips, trips and falls prevention,” Mr Wilson said.
“The Corporation has also developed stronger injury prevention partnerships with agencies like Police, Water Safety New Zealand, the Land Transport Safety Authority and the New Zealand Rugby Football Union,” Mr Wilson said.
“While it is too soon to tell the impact of these initiatives, ACC’s work with employers and sports bodies suggests very positive outcomes.
“The introduction of ACC’s WorkSafe management system in companies with previously high injury rates has seen reductions of over 20% in some cases and new entitlement claims for rugby and league have dropped by about 15% over the last five years.
“Our overall injury and death rates are still high but in many areas we are not achieving good results by international standards.”
Mr Wilson said most accounts had performed up to expectations although the Motor Vehicle Account’s deficit of $166.4 million was an area of concern that would need to be addressed.
He said ACC was easily outperforming the Australian accident insurance and motor vehicle personal injury markets in terms of lower levies and better return-to-work rates.
“New Zealand businesses are now $200 million a year better off than when the private sector provided workers’ compensation, and $876 million better off than they would be across the Tasman, where the average rate is NZ$2.42,” he said.
Statement of financial performance
2002 2001
REVENUE ...$000
...$000
Levy and other income
2,326,308
1,975,206
Investment income
128,841
222,953
Total income 2,455,149 2,198,159
EXPENDITURE
Rehabilitation benefits
864,961
784,139
Compensation benefits
714,375
710,070
Adjustment to claims liability
359,474
765,642
Other operating costs
273,000
251,458
Total expenditure 2,211,810 2,511,309
Surplus/(deficit) before tax 243,339 (313,150)
ENDS
Further information or copies of the Annual Report:
James Funnell
ACC media unit
Phone: (04) 918 4291 or 025 281 6982
http://www.acc.org.nz/about-acc/press-rele...---6-september/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Longer term Catalyst claimants to be returned to ACC Management - 1 September 2003
The Accident Compensation Corporation has confirmed today that all Catalyst claimants—numbering about 3,000—are to be returned to ACC for case management over the next few months.
ACC has decided to phase out the contract with its subsidiary, Catalyst, for the management of longer-term claimants. Catalyst Case Managers are all ACC staff, and will continue managing their longer-term claimants within the Corporation's network.
Catalyst will continue its stand-alone commercial activities, which include working with businesses to reduce workplace accident rates and develop safer workplaces, case management of claimants and reducing workplace absentees. This is developing work that ACC expects would increase over time.
ACC processes about 1.4 million claims a year, of which, at any time, there are about 14,000 longer-term claimants—people who have received ACC entitlements for moderate to serious injuries, for longer than 12 months.
Since Catalyst's restructuring into its present form after the change of Government in 1999, the subsidiary company has specialised in managing longer-term claimants identified by independent assessments as being likely to respond to intensive rehabilitation, and be able to return to work or independence within 12 to 18 months.
Currently there are about 14,000 claimants in the long term group. ACC retained case management of 11,000 longer-term claimants. The other 3,000, who were with Catalyst, will be transferred back in the least disruptive manner possible, to ensure well-established relationships between Case Managers and claimants are not destabilised.
After a review, the Corporation decided that the more-than-halving of the number longer-term claimants in recent years showed that need for Catalyst's specialised function had diminished to the point that its retention was no longer appropriate.
ACC stressed that all Catalyst claimants would continue to receive their appropriate entitlements, and that no redundancies were planned for Catalyst staff.
Fraser Folster
ACC Media Advisor
DDI 04 918 4119
MOB 0274 947 795
http://www.acc.org.nz/about-acc/press-rele...acc-management/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Investment income boosts ACC surplus - 20 January 2004
Strong equity markets, careful investment and solid scheme performance lifted the Accident Compensation Corporation to a better-than-expected surplus of $279 million in the six months ended 31 December 2003.
The first-half surplus compares with $23 million in the same period of 2002.
Chief Executive Garry Wilson said the scheme had performed well with improved processes benefiting claimants and providers to ACC alike.
"We have extended our injury prevention programmes and we have greatly increased the quality of the rehabilitation for many claimants by shortening the waiting time for assessment and treatment," Mr Wilson said.
"We also continue to re-evaluate and improve our claims and provider payment systems and it could soon be possible to initiate rehabilitation processes the day an injury occurs."
Mr Wilson said ACC's strong investment performance had been a factor in the 2004/05 levies that come into force in April remaining steady or reducing.
The investment portfolio now tops $5 billion as the scheme builds reserves to fully-fund the life-time cost of injuries.
Investment income of $271 million exceeded benchmarks and was up from $84 million in the previous period, with strong domestic and international equity returns partially offset by weakness in the domestic bond market.
Non-investment income jumped $121 million to $1321 million, despite little change in levies, because New Zealanders had earned more.
The surplus also took account of a $247 million rise in the claims liability which was based on a forecast at the end of the 2003 financial year.
However, Mr Wilson said ACC's surplus is sensitive to interest rate movements which in turn affect the cost of its liability to long-term claimants.
If rates continue at 6.1 percent for the remainder of the year, ACC's long-term liability will fall by $500 million with a corresponding impact on the year-end surplus.
Richard Braddell
Media Advisor
DDI 04 918 4291
Mob 021 474 240
http://www.acc.org.nz/about-acc/press-rele...0-january-2004/
ACC has recorded a before-tax surplus of $243.3 million for the 2001/02 annual year, turning around the previous year’s $313.1 million deficit before tax.
ACC’s income for the year ended June 30 was $2,455.1 million with net levy income totalling $2,323.7 million, reserves income returning $128.8 million and other income of $2.6 million.
Over the same period ACC paid out $1,579.3 million to accident victims, with $865 million spent on rehabilitation and $714.3 million in compensation benefits.
Higher-than-expected rehabilitation and compensation costs, and a lower returns in the global investment market following September 11, saw ACC’s before tax surplus come in $47.5 million under budget.
ACC’s reserves pay for the future costs of long-term injuries, as many victims are dependent on ACC assistance for decades.
ACC’s investment portfolio, currently $3.6 billion, returned 3.85% for the year, well ahead of market benchmarks and significantly better than the negative returns reported by many fund managers.
Over the past 10 years ACC’s investment of reserves has returned 10.68% p.a., well ahead of the 8.81% p.a. benchmark. New Zealand investments account for 72% of ACC’s reserves portfolio.
ACC’s assets increased by $502 million to $4.282 billion, while claims liability (the estimated cost of existing claims requiring future expenditure) dropped to $7.5 billion, down from $8.3 billion five years ago. Unfunded liability is now $3.6 billion, compared with $6.8 billion five years ago, consistent with the move to a fully funded-position.
This year, for the first time, ACC was independently appraised by an external rating agency, AM Best. It was rated A+ (superior), one rating below AM Best’s top rating and generally the best rating a non-multinational organisation can achieve.
In ACC’s Annual Report, tabled in Parliament today, Chairman David Caygill said ACC’s major challenge for the year had been ensuring a smooth implementation of the expanded benefits and scope of ACC, as set out in the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2001.
“The new Act is a significant piece of work affecting every staff member and every facet of the way ACC conducts its business,” he said. “Almost half of ACC’s staff had been involved in analysis and implementation of the changes, which were planned and managed in considerable detail.”
Mr Caygill noted that levy rates for employers had remained at $0.90c per $100 of payroll for two years running. Under the private market employers paid an average of $1.20 to $1.25.
Some levies had increased in line with costs rising due to increases in the seriousness and duration of injuries, especially farmers among the self-employed, and motorcyclists.
Mr Caygill said ACC had also been able to lower some levy rates as a direct result of its drive to improve rehabilitation and to shorten the time claimants required ACC services and compensation.
At the end of 2001/02, 14,518 claimants had been receiving weekly compensation for more than 12 months, down from 16,373 the previous year and half of the 28,926 five years ago. At the same time, claimant satisfaction improved to 78%, up from 71% five years ago.
Chief executive Garry Wilson said creating a safety culture had been top of ACC’s priority list for the year, with a major initiative being the nationwide launch of 23 ThinkSafe community plans.
“We have over 70 injury prevention consultants working intensively in local communities to promote workplace safety, Down With Speed, SportSmart, RugbySmart, vehicle safety belt projects and slips, trips and falls prevention,” Mr Wilson said.
“The Corporation has also developed stronger injury prevention partnerships with agencies like Police, Water Safety New Zealand, the Land Transport Safety Authority and the New Zealand Rugby Football Union,” Mr Wilson said.
“While it is too soon to tell the impact of these initiatives, ACC’s work with employers and sports bodies suggests very positive outcomes.
“The introduction of ACC’s WorkSafe management system in companies with previously high injury rates has seen reductions of over 20% in some cases and new entitlement claims for rugby and league have dropped by about 15% over the last five years.
“Our overall injury and death rates are still high but in many areas we are not achieving good results by international standards.”
Mr Wilson said most accounts had performed up to expectations although the Motor Vehicle Account’s deficit of $166.4 million was an area of concern that would need to be addressed.
He said ACC was easily outperforming the Australian accident insurance and motor vehicle personal injury markets in terms of lower levies and better return-to-work rates.
“New Zealand businesses are now $200 million a year better off than when the private sector provided workers’ compensation, and $876 million better off than they would be across the Tasman, where the average rate is NZ$2.42,” he said.
Statement of financial performance
2002 2001
REVENUE ...$000
...$000
Levy and other income
2,326,308
1,975,206
Investment income
128,841
222,953
Total income 2,455,149 2,198,159
EXPENDITURE
Rehabilitation benefits
864,961
784,139
Compensation benefits
714,375
710,070
Adjustment to claims liability
359,474
765,642
Other operating costs
273,000
251,458
Total expenditure 2,211,810 2,511,309
Surplus/(deficit) before tax 243,339 (313,150)
ENDS
Further information or copies of the Annual Report:
James Funnell
ACC media unit
Phone: (04) 918 4291 or 025 281 6982
http://www.acc.org.nz/about-acc/press-rele...---6-september/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Longer term Catalyst claimants to be returned to ACC Management - 1 September 2003
The Accident Compensation Corporation has confirmed today that all Catalyst claimants—numbering about 3,000—are to be returned to ACC for case management over the next few months.
ACC has decided to phase out the contract with its subsidiary, Catalyst, for the management of longer-term claimants. Catalyst Case Managers are all ACC staff, and will continue managing their longer-term claimants within the Corporation's network.
Catalyst will continue its stand-alone commercial activities, which include working with businesses to reduce workplace accident rates and develop safer workplaces, case management of claimants and reducing workplace absentees. This is developing work that ACC expects would increase over time.
ACC processes about 1.4 million claims a year, of which, at any time, there are about 14,000 longer-term claimants—people who have received ACC entitlements for moderate to serious injuries, for longer than 12 months.
Since Catalyst's restructuring into its present form after the change of Government in 1999, the subsidiary company has specialised in managing longer-term claimants identified by independent assessments as being likely to respond to intensive rehabilitation, and be able to return to work or independence within 12 to 18 months.
Currently there are about 14,000 claimants in the long term group. ACC retained case management of 11,000 longer-term claimants. The other 3,000, who were with Catalyst, will be transferred back in the least disruptive manner possible, to ensure well-established relationships between Case Managers and claimants are not destabilised.
After a review, the Corporation decided that the more-than-halving of the number longer-term claimants in recent years showed that need for Catalyst's specialised function had diminished to the point that its retention was no longer appropriate.
ACC stressed that all Catalyst claimants would continue to receive their appropriate entitlements, and that no redundancies were planned for Catalyst staff.
Fraser Folster
ACC Media Advisor
DDI 04 918 4119
MOB 0274 947 795
http://www.acc.org.nz/about-acc/press-rele...acc-management/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Investment income boosts ACC surplus - 20 January 2004
Strong equity markets, careful investment and solid scheme performance lifted the Accident Compensation Corporation to a better-than-expected surplus of $279 million in the six months ended 31 December 2003.
The first-half surplus compares with $23 million in the same period of 2002.
Chief Executive Garry Wilson said the scheme had performed well with improved processes benefiting claimants and providers to ACC alike.
"We have extended our injury prevention programmes and we have greatly increased the quality of the rehabilitation for many claimants by shortening the waiting time for assessment and treatment," Mr Wilson said.
"We also continue to re-evaluate and improve our claims and provider payment systems and it could soon be possible to initiate rehabilitation processes the day an injury occurs."
Mr Wilson said ACC's strong investment performance had been a factor in the 2004/05 levies that come into force in April remaining steady or reducing.
The investment portfolio now tops $5 billion as the scheme builds reserves to fully-fund the life-time cost of injuries.
Investment income of $271 million exceeded benchmarks and was up from $84 million in the previous period, with strong domestic and international equity returns partially offset by weakness in the domestic bond market.
Non-investment income jumped $121 million to $1321 million, despite little change in levies, because New Zealanders had earned more.
The surplus also took account of a $247 million rise in the claims liability which was based on a forecast at the end of the 2003 financial year.
However, Mr Wilson said ACC's surplus is sensitive to interest rate movements which in turn affect the cost of its liability to long-term claimants.
If rates continue at 6.1 percent for the remainder of the year, ACC's long-term liability will fall by $500 million with a corresponding impact on the year-end surplus.
Richard Braddell
Media Advisor
DDI 04 918 4291
Mob 021 474 240
http://www.acc.org.nz/about-acc/press-rele...0-january-2004/
#7
ANG :)
- Newbie
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 0
- Joined: 15-September 03
Posted 25 February 2004 - 09:44 PM
The Accident Compensation Corporation
ACC claimants requiring 24 hour attendant Care:
For those of you who were injured prior to the new attendant care regulations which established a right to 24 hour care and your caregiver's/family there is an important decision you should all be aware of, ACC v Campbell ( High Court, Wellington 1 March, 14 April 1996 Heron and Ellis, JJ AP 200/95).
This case found that ACC had not been correctly paying claimants or their caregivers their entitlements to attendant care and their caregivers replacement earnings for work they may have had to give up to care for the injured person.
If you think you may be affected by the decision I would advise you to take the case, to your lawyer and put in a claim. Do not first approach ACC as they are trying to minimise the amounts they will have to pay out under the decision. The money you may spend on legal fees will be well worth it. Also be aware that settlements are likely to be taxed at a rate of 33% so any settlement you get needs to cover that - I would suggest an interest payment from ACC for all the years the money was not paid. If any of you affected have questions I would be happy to answer them on the list or by private e-mail.
Errolyn Jones Barrister
Accident Rehabilitation & Compensation Insurance Corporation v Campbell
High Court, Wellington 1 March, 14 April 1996 Heron and Ellis, JJ AP 200/95
Accident compensation Pecuniary loss unrelated to earnings Necessary care for person requiring constant personal attention. Seriously injured claimants requiring care for 24 hours per day. Whether corporation having discretion to fund care for less than 24 hours "Necessary care" Accident Compensation Act 1982, s 80(3)
To Accident Rehabilitation & Compensation Insurance Corporation v Campbell
#8
ANG :)
- Newbie
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 0
- Joined: 15-September 03
Posted 25 February 2004 - 09:47 PM
CPI
Complex Personal Injuries
Introduction:
If you or a person you care for are in need of 24 hour care as the result of an accident for which you have cover under ACC and you fit the following criteria;
1) have a severe brain injury; or
2) are tetraplegic; or
3) as the result of a severe injury are highly dependent upon assistance for personal care and mobility and are likely to remain so for the rest of your life or for at least 24 months; or
4)Require constant supervision during waking hours for security and safety and is likely to continue to require that supervision either for the rest of your life or for the period of at least 24 months
-- then you should be aware that you can claim for 24 hour attendant care and other extra assistance under the Complex Personal Injury Regulations.
#9
Kiwee
- Newbie
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 0
- Joined: 14-September 03
Posted 14 March 2004 - 07:05 PM
" UnumProvident ERISA Case Will Be Heard (PLANSPONSOR.com; one-time registration required) Excerpt: "A Manhattan federal judge refused to dismiss the lawsuit by workers who claim UnumProvident committed ERISA violations by giving bonuses and promotions to its employees based upon the numbers of claims they denied. This scheme, the plaintiffs contend, allows UnumProvident to save money and increases profits, according to a Dow Jones report."
Hmm watch out acc case managers, lessoned learned in the UNUM case can be used to study the ACC management of claims as well
Hmm watch out acc case managers, lessoned learned in the UNUM case can be used to study the ACC management of claims as well
#10 Guest_IDB_*
Posted 18 May 2004 - 11:18 PM
http://management.about.com/cs/generalmana...eyperfindic.htm
Key Performance Indicators (KPI)
From F. John Reh,
Your Guide to Management.
How an organization defines and measures progress toward its goals
Key Performance Indicators, also known as KPI or Key Success Indicators (KSI), help an organization define and measure progress toward organizational goals.
Once an organization has analyzed its mission, identified all its stakeholders, and defined its goals, it needs a way to measure progress toward those goals. Key Performance Indicators are those measurements.
What Are Key Performance Indicators (KPI)
Key Performance Indicators are quantifiable measurements, agreed to beforehand, that reflect the critical success factors of an organization. They will differ depending on the organization. A business may have as one of its Key Performance Indicators the percentage of its income that comes from return customers. A school may focus its Key Performance Indicators on graduation rates of its students. A Customer Service Department may have as one of its Key Performance Indicators, in line with overall company KPIs, percentage of customer calls answered in the first minute. A Key Performance Indicators for a social service organization might be number of clients assisted during the year.
Whatever Key Performance Indicators are selected, they must reflect the organization's goals, they must be key to its success,and they must be quantifiable (measurable). Key Performance Indicators usually are long-term considerations. The definition of what they are and how they are measured do not change often. The goals for a particular Key Performance Indicator may change as the organizations goals change, or as it get closer to achieving a goal.
Key Performance Indicators Reflect The Organizational Goals
An organization that has as one of its goals "to be the most profitable company in our industry" will have Key Performance Indicators that measure profit and related fiscal measures. "Pre-tax Profit" and "Shareholder Equity" will be among them. However, "Percent of Profit Contributed to Community Causes" probably will not be one of its Key Performance Indicators. On the other hand, a school is not concerned with making a profit, so its Key Performance Indicators will be different. KPIs like "Graduation Rate" and "Success In Finding Employment After Graduation", though different, accurately reflect the schools mission and goals.
Key Performance Indicators Must Be Quantifiable
If a Key Performance Indicator is going to be of any value, there must be a way to accurately define and measure it. "Generate More Repeat Customers" is useless as a KPI without some way to distinguish between new and repeat customers. "Be The Most Popular Company" won't work as a KPI because there is no way to measure the company's popularity or compare it to others.
It is also important to define the Key Performance Indicators and stay with the same definition from year to year. For a KPI of "Increase Sales", you need to address considerations like whether to measure by units sold or by dollar value of sales. Will returns be deducted from sales in the month of the sale or the month of the return? Will sales be recorded for the KPI at list price or at the actual sales price?
You also need to set targets for each Key Performance Indicator. A company goal to be the employer of choice might include a KPI of "Turnover Rate". After the Key Performance Indicator has been defined as "the number of voluntary resignations and terminations for performance, divided by the total number of employees at the beginning of the period" and a way to measure it has been set up by collecting the information in an HRIS, the target has to be established. "Reduce turnover by five percent per year" is a clear target that everyone will understand and be able to take specific action to accomplish.
Key Performance Indicators (KPI)
From F. John Reh,
Your Guide to Management.
Key Performance Indicators Must be Key To Organizational Success
Many things are measurable. That does not make them key to the organization's success. In selecting Key Performance Indicators, it is critical to limit them to those factors that are essential to the organization reaching its goals. It is also important to keep the number of Key Performance Indicators small just to keep everyone's attention focused on achieving the same KPIs.
That is not to say, for instance, that a company will have only three or four total KPIs in the company. Rather there will be three or four Key Performance Indicators for the company and all the units within it will have three, four, or five KPIs that support the overall company goals and can be "rolled up" into them.
If a company Key Performance Indicator is "Increased Customer Satisfaction", that KPI will be focused differently in different departments.
The Manufacturing Department may have a KPI of "Number of Units Rejected by Quality Inspection", while the Sales Department has a KPI of "Minutes A Customer Is On Hold Before A Sales Rep Answers". Success by the Sales and Manufacturing Departments in meeting their respective departmental Key Performance Indicators will help the company meet its overall KPI.
Good Key Performance Indicators vs. Bad
Bad:
* Title of KPI: Increase Sales
* Defined: Change in Sales volume from month to month
* Measured: Total of Sales By Region for all region
* Target: Increase each month
What's missing? Does this measure increases in sales volume by dollars or units? If by dollars, does it measure list price or sales price? Are returns considered and if so do the appear as an adjustment to the KPI for the month of the sale or are they counted in the month the return happens? How do we make sure each sales office's volume numbers are counted in one region, i.e. that none are skipped or double counted? How much, by percentage or dollars or units, do we want to increase sales volumes each month?(Note: Some of these questions may be answered by standard company procedures.)
Good:
* Title of KPI: Employee Turnover
* Defined: The total of the number of employees who resign for whatever reason, plus the number of employees terminated for performance reasons, and that total divided by the number of employees at the beginning of the year. Employees lost due to Reductions in Force (RIF) will not be included in this calculation.
* Measured: The HRIS contains records of each employee. The separation section lists reason and date of separation for each employee. Monthly, or when requested by the SVP, the HRIS group will query the database and provide Department Heads with Turnover Reports. HRIS will post graphs of each report on the Intranet.
* Target: Reduce Employee Turnover by 5% per year.
What Do I Do With Key Performance Indicators?
Once you have good Key Performance Indicators defined, ones that reflect your organization's goals, one that you can measure, what do you do with them? You use Key Performance Indicators as a performance management tool, but also as a carrot. KPIs give everyone in the organization a clear picture of what is important, of what they need to make happen. You use that to manage performance. You make sure that everything the people in your organization do is focused on meeting or exceeding those Key Performance Indicators. You also use the KPIs as a carrot. Post the KPIs everywhere: in the lunch room, on the walls of every conference room, on the company intranet, even on the company web site for some of them. Show what the target for each KPI is and show the progress toward that target for each of them. People will be motivated to reach those KPI targets.
http://management.about.com/cs/generalmana...perfindic_2.htm
Key Performance Indicators (KPI)
From F. John Reh,
Your Guide to Management.
How an organization defines and measures progress toward its goals
Key Performance Indicators, also known as KPI or Key Success Indicators (KSI), help an organization define and measure progress toward organizational goals.
Once an organization has analyzed its mission, identified all its stakeholders, and defined its goals, it needs a way to measure progress toward those goals. Key Performance Indicators are those measurements.
What Are Key Performance Indicators (KPI)
Key Performance Indicators are quantifiable measurements, agreed to beforehand, that reflect the critical success factors of an organization. They will differ depending on the organization. A business may have as one of its Key Performance Indicators the percentage of its income that comes from return customers. A school may focus its Key Performance Indicators on graduation rates of its students. A Customer Service Department may have as one of its Key Performance Indicators, in line with overall company KPIs, percentage of customer calls answered in the first minute. A Key Performance Indicators for a social service organization might be number of clients assisted during the year.
Whatever Key Performance Indicators are selected, they must reflect the organization's goals, they must be key to its success,and they must be quantifiable (measurable). Key Performance Indicators usually are long-term considerations. The definition of what they are and how they are measured do not change often. The goals for a particular Key Performance Indicator may change as the organizations goals change, or as it get closer to achieving a goal.
Key Performance Indicators Reflect The Organizational Goals
An organization that has as one of its goals "to be the most profitable company in our industry" will have Key Performance Indicators that measure profit and related fiscal measures. "Pre-tax Profit" and "Shareholder Equity" will be among them. However, "Percent of Profit Contributed to Community Causes" probably will not be one of its Key Performance Indicators. On the other hand, a school is not concerned with making a profit, so its Key Performance Indicators will be different. KPIs like "Graduation Rate" and "Success In Finding Employment After Graduation", though different, accurately reflect the schools mission and goals.
Key Performance Indicators Must Be Quantifiable
If a Key Performance Indicator is going to be of any value, there must be a way to accurately define and measure it. "Generate More Repeat Customers" is useless as a KPI without some way to distinguish between new and repeat customers. "Be The Most Popular Company" won't work as a KPI because there is no way to measure the company's popularity or compare it to others.
It is also important to define the Key Performance Indicators and stay with the same definition from year to year. For a KPI of "Increase Sales", you need to address considerations like whether to measure by units sold or by dollar value of sales. Will returns be deducted from sales in the month of the sale or the month of the return? Will sales be recorded for the KPI at list price or at the actual sales price?
You also need to set targets for each Key Performance Indicator. A company goal to be the employer of choice might include a KPI of "Turnover Rate". After the Key Performance Indicator has been defined as "the number of voluntary resignations and terminations for performance, divided by the total number of employees at the beginning of the period" and a way to measure it has been set up by collecting the information in an HRIS, the target has to be established. "Reduce turnover by five percent per year" is a clear target that everyone will understand and be able to take specific action to accomplish.
Key Performance Indicators (KPI)
From F. John Reh,
Your Guide to Management.
Key Performance Indicators Must be Key To Organizational Success
Many things are measurable. That does not make them key to the organization's success. In selecting Key Performance Indicators, it is critical to limit them to those factors that are essential to the organization reaching its goals. It is also important to keep the number of Key Performance Indicators small just to keep everyone's attention focused on achieving the same KPIs.
That is not to say, for instance, that a company will have only three or four total KPIs in the company. Rather there will be three or four Key Performance Indicators for the company and all the units within it will have three, four, or five KPIs that support the overall company goals and can be "rolled up" into them.
If a company Key Performance Indicator is "Increased Customer Satisfaction", that KPI will be focused differently in different departments.
The Manufacturing Department may have a KPI of "Number of Units Rejected by Quality Inspection", while the Sales Department has a KPI of "Minutes A Customer Is On Hold Before A Sales Rep Answers". Success by the Sales and Manufacturing Departments in meeting their respective departmental Key Performance Indicators will help the company meet its overall KPI.
Good Key Performance Indicators vs. Bad
Bad:
* Title of KPI: Increase Sales
* Defined: Change in Sales volume from month to month
* Measured: Total of Sales By Region for all region
* Target: Increase each month
What's missing? Does this measure increases in sales volume by dollars or units? If by dollars, does it measure list price or sales price? Are returns considered and if so do the appear as an adjustment to the KPI for the month of the sale or are they counted in the month the return happens? How do we make sure each sales office's volume numbers are counted in one region, i.e. that none are skipped or double counted? How much, by percentage or dollars or units, do we want to increase sales volumes each month?(Note: Some of these questions may be answered by standard company procedures.)
Good:
* Title of KPI: Employee Turnover
* Defined: The total of the number of employees who resign for whatever reason, plus the number of employees terminated for performance reasons, and that total divided by the number of employees at the beginning of the year. Employees lost due to Reductions in Force (RIF) will not be included in this calculation.
* Measured: The HRIS contains records of each employee. The separation section lists reason and date of separation for each employee. Monthly, or when requested by the SVP, the HRIS group will query the database and provide Department Heads with Turnover Reports. HRIS will post graphs of each report on the Intranet.
* Target: Reduce Employee Turnover by 5% per year.
What Do I Do With Key Performance Indicators?
Once you have good Key Performance Indicators defined, ones that reflect your organization's goals, one that you can measure, what do you do with them? You use Key Performance Indicators as a performance management tool, but also as a carrot. KPIs give everyone in the organization a clear picture of what is important, of what they need to make happen. You use that to manage performance. You make sure that everything the people in your organization do is focused on meeting or exceeding those Key Performance Indicators. You also use the KPIs as a carrot. Post the KPIs everywhere: in the lunch room, on the walls of every conference room, on the company intranet, even on the company web site for some of them. Show what the target for each KPI is and show the progress toward that target for each of them. People will be motivated to reach those KPI targets.
http://management.about.com/cs/generalmana...perfindic_2.htm
#11 Guest_IDB_*
Posted 18 May 2004 - 11:30 PM
Injury numbers
The total number of claims accepted by ACC is one indicator of injury numbers in New Zealand. While ACC's claims costs are increasing, Figure 2 shows that the total number of claims accepted by ACC has been fairly stable at around 1.4 million per year. The work-related claims9 have shown a gradual decline from 280,000 In 1994-95 to 192,000 in 2001/0210.
Figure 2: Total new ACC/Accident Insurance claims
ACC claims are stable, but work-related claims are declining.
Source: www.acc.co.nz/injury-prevention-statistics-2001 and Department of Labour Workplace Accident Insurance Statistics Report 1999/2000
High-cost ACC claims are decreasing.
Figure 3 shows all 'new entitlement' claims to ACC - that is, claims that incur more than medical or ambulance fees and are more serious and costlinsurance. Work-related entitlement claims and total entitlement claims both show a decrease from the 1994/95 financial year until 2001/0211. ACC data shows that two-thirds of ACC costs are associated with claims with a duration over one year, even though this represents just 12.6% of the total number of claims12.
The decrease in claim numbers per capita is more significant than the trends indicate, since New Zealand's workforce increased from 1.5 million in 1992 to 1.8 million in 2002.
http://www.accforum....-1084879739.gif
Source: www.acc.co.nz/injury-prevention-statistics-2001 and Department of Labour Workplace Accident Insurance Statistics Report 1999/2000
Work-related deaths as measured by ACC are decreasing …
Work-related fatalities
Work-related fatal injury data is collected by several agencies and no agency collects the entire dataset, so trends are difficult to interpret. A data-matching exercise of 1999/2000 fatality data found that the ACC scheme collected 55% of reported fatalities, Workplace Health and Safety Group collected 42%, and transport agencies collected 23%.
ACC's data (Figure 4) shows a significant decrease, from a peak of 103 in 1995/96 to 44 in 2000/0114.
Figure 4: Total new ACC/Accident Insurance fatality claims and fatalities reported to the Department of Labour15
http://www.beehive.govt.nz/briefings/socia...abour/acc.cfm#9
The total number of claims accepted by ACC is one indicator of injury numbers in New Zealand. While ACC's claims costs are increasing, Figure 2 shows that the total number of claims accepted by ACC has been fairly stable at around 1.4 million per year. The work-related claims9 have shown a gradual decline from 280,000 In 1994-95 to 192,000 in 2001/0210.
Figure 2: Total new ACC/Accident Insurance claims
ACC claims are stable, but work-related claims are declining.
Source: www.acc.co.nz/injury-prevention-statistics-2001 and Department of Labour Workplace Accident Insurance Statistics Report 1999/2000
High-cost ACC claims are decreasing.
Figure 3 shows all 'new entitlement' claims to ACC - that is, claims that incur more than medical or ambulance fees and are more serious and costlinsurance. Work-related entitlement claims and total entitlement claims both show a decrease from the 1994/95 financial year until 2001/0211. ACC data shows that two-thirds of ACC costs are associated with claims with a duration over one year, even though this represents just 12.6% of the total number of claims12.
The decrease in claim numbers per capita is more significant than the trends indicate, since New Zealand's workforce increased from 1.5 million in 1992 to 1.8 million in 2002.
http://www.accforum....-1084879739.gif
Source: www.acc.co.nz/injury-prevention-statistics-2001 and Department of Labour Workplace Accident Insurance Statistics Report 1999/2000
Work-related deaths as measured by ACC are decreasing …
Work-related fatalities
Work-related fatal injury data is collected by several agencies and no agency collects the entire dataset, so trends are difficult to interpret. A data-matching exercise of 1999/2000 fatality data found that the ACC scheme collected 55% of reported fatalities, Workplace Health and Safety Group collected 42%, and transport agencies collected 23%.
ACC's data (Figure 4) shows a significant decrease, from a peak of 103 in 1995/96 to 44 in 2000/0114.
Figure 4: Total new ACC/Accident Insurance fatality claims and fatalities reported to the Department of Labour15
http://www.beehive.govt.nz/briefings/socia...abour/acc.cfm#9
#12
doppelganger
- Advanced Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1740
- Joined: 19-September 03
Posted 17 January 2005 - 10:05 PM
Branch Network Key Performance indicators for 2003104
The following Key Performance Indicators are used to measure Branch and consequently Branch Manager performance.
Not all these measures can be assigned at a Case Manager level. The performance measures for Team Managers and Case Managers, although based on these measures, are individually negotiated.
Payment Timeliness - Employed within 7 calendar days
Weighting = 7.5 %
The purpose of this KPI is to ensure the timely payment of Weekly Compensation to Employed claimants. It is measured by the percent of payments of weekly compensation to employed claimants within 7 calendar days of them being entitled to receive weekly compensation.
Payment Timeliness - Self Employed within 12 calendar days
Weighting = 2.5 %
· The purpose of this KPI is to ensure the timely payment of Weekly Compensation to Self Employed claimants. It is measured by the percent of payments of weekly compensation to self-employed claimants within 10 calendar days of them being entitled to receive weekly compensation.
Percent of claimants rehabilitated within Medical Disability Adviser (Max)
Weighting = 5 %
The Medical Disability Adviser is a modelling tool that compares the claimant's injury against the type of work they undertook and returns the theoretical number of days that the claimant should take to return to work/independence. This KPI measures the percent of claimants who are returned to work or independence within the theoretical timeframe
Long Term Weekly Compensation Claimant Net Rehabilitation
Weighting = 10 %
The purpose of this KPI is to manage the number of claimants classified as Long Term Claimants (Receiving entitlement more than 1 year after date they were first entitled to receive that entitlement). This is done in two ways:
· Rehabilitating as many claimants as possible before they have received an entitlement for more than 1 year.
· Rehabilitate and return to work or independence as many Long-Term claimants as possible.
Individual Rehabilitation Plan on current claims which are over 13 weeks old
Weighting = 5 %
· An Individual Rehabilitation Plan (IRP) records all the rehabilitation planed for a claimant's rehabilitation and then records the claimant's progress toward reaching the rehabilitation outcome. The purpose of this KPI is to measure the percent of current Individual Rehabilitation Plans on new and active claims which are more than 13 weeks old.
Individual Rehabilitation Plans on claims as they become 13 weeks old
Weighting = 5 %
The purpose of this KPI is to measure the percent of claims that have a current IRP by the time they become 13 weeks old.
Serious Injury Timely Comprehensive Needs Assessment
Weighting = 5 %
· This KPI measures the percentage of seriously injured claimants who have received a holistic assessment of their full needs.
Payment Accuracy - Error Incidence
Weighting = 5 %
· The purpose of this KPI is to ensure that claims are paid without an error.
Payment Accuracy - Dollar Value
Weighting = 5 %
· The purpose of this KPI is to ensure that payments are made with the correct value.
Rehabilitation Rate - % of claimants rehabilitated within 26 weeks
Weighting = 12.5 %
· The purpose of this KPI is to ensure as many claimants as possible have been rehabilitated before the claim is 6 months old.
Rehabilitation Rate - % claimants rehabilitated within 52 weeks
Weighting = 10 %
· The purpose of this KPI is to ensure as many claimants as possible have been rehabilitated before the claim is 12 months old. Both of these measures relate closely to the MDA measure and are designed to help protect employment and social relationships.
Personal Support on Non Weekly Comp Claims
Weighting = 5 %
· The purpose of this measure is to manage the number of people who receive personal support payments.
Customer Satisfaction - General/overall
Weighting = 15 %
· This KPI measures the percent of claimants who are satisfied or very satisfied with the service provided by ACC.
Customer Satisfaction - Maori
Weighting = 2.5 %
· This KPI measures the percent of claimants, who identify as Maori, who are satisfied or very satisfied with the service provided by ACC.
Customer Sails faction - Pacific
Weighting = 2.5 %
· This KPI measures the percent of claimants, who identify as being from a pacific nation, who are satisfied or very satisfied with the service provided by ACC.
Customer Satisfaction - SI
Weighting = 2.5 %
· This KPI measures the percent of Seriously Injured claimants who are satisfied or very satisfied with the service provided by ACC.
What is the Performance Review System (PRS)?
What is the Performance Review System (PRS)?
Performance management is the process that organisations use to make sure everyone is heading in the same direction, understands what is expected of them and is aware of how they are performing.
The name of ACC's performance management system is the Performance Review System (PRS). The purpose of PRS is to deliver organisational performance.
Overview of PRS
PRS is a process to set, monitor and review individual and team performance.
· PRS links a staff member's objectives and performance with ACC's strategic goals, business plans, and the overall performance of ACC. This ensures that a staff member's contribution links to ACC achieving its goals.
· PRS sets a platform for on-going professional development.
Benefits of PRS
The benefits of PRS are that it:
· Aligns individual, team and organisational performance
· Helps to ensure that we all carry out our responsibilities as best we can.
· Provides a framework for formal and informal feedback for each staff member to know how they are performing throughout the year.
· Initiates skill and behavioural development
· Recognises and rewards achievement.
ACC's performance management philosophy
The focus of performance management at ACC is to provide an ongoing process to develop performance. Both 'what' is achieved (results) and 'how' we work (quality and values) are equally important.
PRS is a partnership between you and your manager:
· Managers are accountable for and assessed on how well they manage people.
· Staff are expected to be active participants, monitoring their performance, articulating their needs and planning their ongoing development.
PRS provides a common performance management framework for the organisation. There is some flexibility to allow divisions to tailor PRS to their business needs.
PRS and ACC strategy
The Performance Review System (PRS) cascades the overall goals and strategies of ACC throughout the whole organ isation, from the top strategic level to the work of each individual staff member. The following diagram explains how ACC's goals and strategies link to the objectives of each individual staff member and the assessment of their performance.
Performance Review System (PRS) Timeline
http://nz.msnusers.c...%20Overview.JPG
See below for further detail on PRS activities and when they are scheduled to occur.
Timeframe Activity & Description
July - August Performance Planning
The staff member and their manager need to:
Set performance objectives and use these to complete a Performance Plan for the performance period. Each staff member has:
· No more than four results objectives.
· No more than four quality objectives.
· Each objective must be weighted 10% or more.
· An objective on the ACC values, worth at least 10% is compulsory for everyone.
· All managers also have a Managing People objective (200/a) and Compliance objective (100/0).
Discuss the areas of development required for the staff member to succeed in their job and meet their career goals. Use this information to complete the Personal
Development Plan.
October Stocktake
The manager and staff member review the staff member's progress against their performance objectives.
The Performance Plan and/or Personal Development Plan are updated with any changes in objectives or circumstances.
January Interim Review
The manager and staff member conduct a formal interim assessment of the staff member's performance against their objectives.
The Performance Plan and/or Personal Development Plan are updated with any changes in objectives or circumstances.
Note: There are no remuneration changes at this time except for staff rated 'under achieved' who are now rated 'achieved'.
April Stocktake
A second stocktake is conducted in April. See above
(October) for a description of a stocktake.
July Annual Review
Both the manager and staff member prepare for the staff member's annual review interview. Following the interview the manager makes an overall assessment of the staff member's performance for year.
Note: Annual review interviews need to be completed by mid- July as they link to the annual review of remuneration.
Moderation
Each division reviews the provisional PRS ratings from each business unit. Ratings across the organisation as a whole are then reviewed.
Moderation is usually completed by late ]uly.
August Performance Rating
The manager advises the staff member of their final performance rating following completion of the moderation process.
Remuneration
Remuneration adjustments are completed by late August.
Note: Adjustments are completed providing that all recommendations have been approved (and any contractual issues resolved) and notified to Human Resources usually no later than the third week in luly.
Ongoing Regular Coaching and Feedback
Manager coaches the staff member and provides performance feedback throughout the year.
The following Key Performance Indicators are used to measure Branch and consequently Branch Manager performance.
Not all these measures can be assigned at a Case Manager level. The performance measures for Team Managers and Case Managers, although based on these measures, are individually negotiated.
Payment Timeliness - Employed within 7 calendar days
Weighting = 7.5 %
The purpose of this KPI is to ensure the timely payment of Weekly Compensation to Employed claimants. It is measured by the percent of payments of weekly compensation to employed claimants within 7 calendar days of them being entitled to receive weekly compensation.
Payment Timeliness - Self Employed within 12 calendar days
Weighting = 2.5 %
· The purpose of this KPI is to ensure the timely payment of Weekly Compensation to Self Employed claimants. It is measured by the percent of payments of weekly compensation to self-employed claimants within 10 calendar days of them being entitled to receive weekly compensation.
Percent of claimants rehabilitated within Medical Disability Adviser (Max)
Weighting = 5 %
The Medical Disability Adviser is a modelling tool that compares the claimant's injury against the type of work they undertook and returns the theoretical number of days that the claimant should take to return to work/independence. This KPI measures the percent of claimants who are returned to work or independence within the theoretical timeframe
Long Term Weekly Compensation Claimant Net Rehabilitation
Weighting = 10 %
The purpose of this KPI is to manage the number of claimants classified as Long Term Claimants (Receiving entitlement more than 1 year after date they were first entitled to receive that entitlement). This is done in two ways:
· Rehabilitating as many claimants as possible before they have received an entitlement for more than 1 year.
· Rehabilitate and return to work or independence as many Long-Term claimants as possible.
Individual Rehabilitation Plan on current claims which are over 13 weeks old
Weighting = 5 %
· An Individual Rehabilitation Plan (IRP) records all the rehabilitation planed for a claimant's rehabilitation and then records the claimant's progress toward reaching the rehabilitation outcome. The purpose of this KPI is to measure the percent of current Individual Rehabilitation Plans on new and active claims which are more than 13 weeks old.
Individual Rehabilitation Plans on claims as they become 13 weeks old
Weighting = 5 %
The purpose of this KPI is to measure the percent of claims that have a current IRP by the time they become 13 weeks old.
Serious Injury Timely Comprehensive Needs Assessment
Weighting = 5 %
· This KPI measures the percentage of seriously injured claimants who have received a holistic assessment of their full needs.
Payment Accuracy - Error Incidence
Weighting = 5 %
· The purpose of this KPI is to ensure that claims are paid without an error.
Payment Accuracy - Dollar Value
Weighting = 5 %
· The purpose of this KPI is to ensure that payments are made with the correct value.
Rehabilitation Rate - % of claimants rehabilitated within 26 weeks
Weighting = 12.5 %
· The purpose of this KPI is to ensure as many claimants as possible have been rehabilitated before the claim is 6 months old.
Rehabilitation Rate - % claimants rehabilitated within 52 weeks
Weighting = 10 %
· The purpose of this KPI is to ensure as many claimants as possible have been rehabilitated before the claim is 12 months old. Both of these measures relate closely to the MDA measure and are designed to help protect employment and social relationships.
Personal Support on Non Weekly Comp Claims
Weighting = 5 %
· The purpose of this measure is to manage the number of people who receive personal support payments.
Customer Satisfaction - General/overall
Weighting = 15 %
· This KPI measures the percent of claimants who are satisfied or very satisfied with the service provided by ACC.
Customer Satisfaction - Maori
Weighting = 2.5 %
· This KPI measures the percent of claimants, who identify as Maori, who are satisfied or very satisfied with the service provided by ACC.
Customer Sails faction - Pacific
Weighting = 2.5 %
· This KPI measures the percent of claimants, who identify as being from a pacific nation, who are satisfied or very satisfied with the service provided by ACC.
Customer Satisfaction - SI
Weighting = 2.5 %
· This KPI measures the percent of Seriously Injured claimants who are satisfied or very satisfied with the service provided by ACC.
What is the Performance Review System (PRS)?
What is the Performance Review System (PRS)?
Performance management is the process that organisations use to make sure everyone is heading in the same direction, understands what is expected of them and is aware of how they are performing.
The name of ACC's performance management system is the Performance Review System (PRS). The purpose of PRS is to deliver organisational performance.
Overview of PRS
PRS is a process to set, monitor and review individual and team performance.
· PRS links a staff member's objectives and performance with ACC's strategic goals, business plans, and the overall performance of ACC. This ensures that a staff member's contribution links to ACC achieving its goals.
· PRS sets a platform for on-going professional development.
Benefits of PRS
The benefits of PRS are that it:
· Aligns individual, team and organisational performance
· Helps to ensure that we all carry out our responsibilities as best we can.
· Provides a framework for formal and informal feedback for each staff member to know how they are performing throughout the year.
· Initiates skill and behavioural development
· Recognises and rewards achievement.
ACC's performance management philosophy
The focus of performance management at ACC is to provide an ongoing process to develop performance. Both 'what' is achieved (results) and 'how' we work (quality and values) are equally important.
PRS is a partnership between you and your manager:
· Managers are accountable for and assessed on how well they manage people.
· Staff are expected to be active participants, monitoring their performance, articulating their needs and planning their ongoing development.
PRS provides a common performance management framework for the organisation. There is some flexibility to allow divisions to tailor PRS to their business needs.
PRS and ACC strategy
The Performance Review System (PRS) cascades the overall goals and strategies of ACC throughout the whole organ isation, from the top strategic level to the work of each individual staff member. The following diagram explains how ACC's goals and strategies link to the objectives of each individual staff member and the assessment of their performance.
Performance Review System (PRS) Timeline
http://nz.msnusers.c...%20Overview.JPG
See below for further detail on PRS activities and when they are scheduled to occur.
Timeframe Activity & Description
July - August Performance Planning
The staff member and their manager need to:
Set performance objectives and use these to complete a Performance Plan for the performance period. Each staff member has:
· No more than four results objectives.
· No more than four quality objectives.
· Each objective must be weighted 10% or more.
· An objective on the ACC values, worth at least 10% is compulsory for everyone.
· All managers also have a Managing People objective (200/a) and Compliance objective (100/0).
Discuss the areas of development required for the staff member to succeed in their job and meet their career goals. Use this information to complete the Personal
Development Plan.
October Stocktake
The manager and staff member review the staff member's progress against their performance objectives.
The Performance Plan and/or Personal Development Plan are updated with any changes in objectives or circumstances.
January Interim Review
The manager and staff member conduct a formal interim assessment of the staff member's performance against their objectives.
The Performance Plan and/or Personal Development Plan are updated with any changes in objectives or circumstances.
Note: There are no remuneration changes at this time except for staff rated 'under achieved' who are now rated 'achieved'.
April Stocktake
A second stocktake is conducted in April. See above
(October) for a description of a stocktake.
July Annual Review
Both the manager and staff member prepare for the staff member's annual review interview. Following the interview the manager makes an overall assessment of the staff member's performance for year.
Note: Annual review interviews need to be completed by mid- July as they link to the annual review of remuneration.
Moderation
Each division reviews the provisional PRS ratings from each business unit. Ratings across the organisation as a whole are then reviewed.
Moderation is usually completed by late ]uly.
August Performance Rating
The manager advises the staff member of their final performance rating following completion of the moderation process.
Remuneration
Remuneration adjustments are completed by late August.
Note: Adjustments are completed providing that all recommendations have been approved (and any contractual issues resolved) and notified to Human Resources usually no later than the third week in luly.
Ongoing Regular Coaching and Feedback
Manager coaches the staff member and provides performance feedback throughout the year.
#13
jocko
- Advanced Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 988
- Joined: 15-September 03
Posted 17 January 2005 - 10:29 PM
Customer Satisfaction - General/overall
Weighting = 15 %
· This KPI measures the percent of claimants who are satisfied or very satisfied with the service provided by ACC.
Customer Satisfaction - Maori
Weighting = 2.5 %
· This KPI measures the percent of claimants, who identify as Maori, who are satisfied or very satisfied with the service provided by ACC.
Customer Sails faction - Pacific
Weighting = 2.5 %
· This KPI measures the percent of claimants, who identify as being from a pacific nation, who are satisfied or very satisfied with the service provided by ACC.
Customer Satisfaction - SI
Weighting = 2.5 %
· This KPI measures the percent of Seriously Injured claimants who are satisfied or very satisfied with the service provided by ACC.
What is the Performance Review System (PRS)?
Definitely no incentive to ensure the satisfaction of maoris, pacific islanders or the permanently disabled. ACC is racist and segregationalist, discriminating against polynesians and the long term injured
Weighting = 15 %
· This KPI measures the percent of claimants who are satisfied or very satisfied with the service provided by ACC.
Customer Satisfaction - Maori
Weighting = 2.5 %
· This KPI measures the percent of claimants, who identify as Maori, who are satisfied or very satisfied with the service provided by ACC.
Customer Sails faction - Pacific
Weighting = 2.5 %
· This KPI measures the percent of claimants, who identify as being from a pacific nation, who are satisfied or very satisfied with the service provided by ACC.
Customer Satisfaction - SI
Weighting = 2.5 %
· This KPI measures the percent of Seriously Injured claimants who are satisfied or very satisfied with the service provided by ACC.
What is the Performance Review System (PRS)?
Definitely no incentive to ensure the satisfaction of maoris, pacific islanders or the permanently disabled. ACC is racist and segregationalist, discriminating against polynesians and the long term injured
#14
flowers
- Advanced Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 30
- Joined: 25-March 04
Posted 18 January 2005 - 08:01 PM
Customer Satisfaction - General/overall
Weighting = 15 %
· This KPI measures the percent of claimants who are satisfied or very satisfied with the service provided by ACC.
Customer Satisfaction - Maori
Weighting = 2.5 %· This KPI measures the percent of claimants, who identify as Maori, who are satisfied or very satisfied with the service provided by ACC.
Customer Sails faction - Pacific
Weighting = 2.5 %
· This KPI measures the percent of claimants, who identify as being from a pacific nation, who are satisfied or very satisfied with the service provided by ACC.
Customer Satisfaction - SI
Weighting = 2.5 %
· This KPI measures the percent of Seriously Injured claimants who are satisfied or very satisfied with the service provided by ACC.
What is the Performance Review System (PRS)?
Definitely no incentive to ensure the satisfaction of maoris, pacific islanders or the permanently disabled. ACC is racist and segregationalist, discriminating against polynesians and the long term injured
Now I know why we do not get asked to do their rigged surveys.
No bonus there for them.
Weighting = 15 %
· This KPI measures the percent of claimants who are satisfied or very satisfied with the service provided by ACC.
Customer Satisfaction - Maori
Weighting = 2.5 %· This KPI measures the percent of claimants, who identify as Maori, who are satisfied or very satisfied with the service provided by ACC.
Customer Sails faction - Pacific
Weighting = 2.5 %
· This KPI measures the percent of claimants, who identify as being from a pacific nation, who are satisfied or very satisfied with the service provided by ACC.
Customer Satisfaction - SI
Weighting = 2.5 %
· This KPI measures the percent of Seriously Injured claimants who are satisfied or very satisfied with the service provided by ACC.
What is the Performance Review System (PRS)?
Definitely no incentive to ensure the satisfaction of maoris, pacific islanders or the permanently disabled. ACC is racist and segregationalist, discriminating against polynesians and the long term injured
Now I know why we do not get asked to do their rigged surveys.
No bonus there for them.
#15 Guest_IDB_*
Posted 18 January 2005 - 08:16 PM
Quote
Customer Satisfaction - SI
Weighting = 2.5 %
· This KPI measures the percent of Seriously Injured claimants who are satisfied or very satisfied with the service provided by ACC.
Weighting = 2.5 %
· This KPI measures the percent of Seriously Injured claimants who are satisfied or very satisfied with the service provided by ACC.
hey. looks like they got a few priorities wrong eh?
would it make sense that seriously injured people need the most resources?
so by only measuring 2.5% it makes sence that there is no real incentive to allow the seriously injured the required services for treatment and rehabilitation?
possibly not, files surfacing semm to say 1 = No Rehab needed, entered by someone who is not a doctor, the file therefore remains contaminated for every person who reads that information. if the information is wrong and the information is wrong in a large group of files, then how can the auditor really tell where the money goes if he claimants are not benefitting from it to get better?
they got their priorities and measurements wrong, they have lost sight of the goal.
#16
doppelganger
- Advanced Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1740
- Joined: 19-September 03
Posted 31 October 2005 - 09:24 PM
this should have been given at the time of the orginial request
Attached File(s)
-
KPI1.gif (17.35K)
Number of downloads: 26
#17
doppelganger
- Advanced Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1740
- Joined: 19-September 03
Posted 31 October 2005 - 09:26 PM
#18
doppelganger
- Advanced Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1740
- Joined: 19-September 03
Posted 31 October 2005 - 09:27 PM
#19
doppelganger
- Advanced Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1740
- Joined: 19-September 03
Posted 31 October 2005 - 09:28 PM
#20
doppelganger
- Advanced Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1740
- Joined: 19-September 03
Posted 31 October 2005 - 09:29 PM
