Performance Management and Development System

United Nations ST/AI/2021/4 Secretariat 13 August 2021 21-11428 (E) 270821 *2111428* Administrative instruction Performance Management and Development System The Under-Secretary-General for Management Strategy, Policy and Compliance, pursuant to section 4.2 of the Secretary-General’s bulletin on procedures for the promulgation of administrative issuances (ST/SGB/2009/4), and for the purpose of updating the policies and procedures for performance management and development, pursuant to staff rule 1.3, promulgates the following: Section 1 Scope of application All staff members who hold appointments of at least one year (except for staff at the levels of Under-Secretary-General and Assistant Secretary-General, staff members who sign a senior manager’s compact with the Secretary-General and staff performing the functions of Resident Coordinator) shall have their performance evaluated in accordance with the Performance Management and Development System. The present instruction does not apply to staff members holding temporary appointments, who may be evaluated under the provisions of the administrative instruction on administration of temporary appointments (ST/AI/2010/4/Rev.1). Section 2 Purpose, roles and responsibilities 2.1 The key goals of the Performance Management and Development System are to establish a framework that allows for the fair and equitable evaluation of the performance of staff members and to foster a culture of regular feedback. 2.2 Staff members, including first and second reporting officers, have a duty to fulfil their obligations and to be active participants in the development and assessment processes, was well as to fully comply with the procedures established herein. Heads of entity1 have a duty to ensure that staff members fully comply with the obligation under staff rule 1.3 (c). __________________ 1 For the purposes of the present instruction, the term “entity” means a department or an office, including an office away from Headquarters, a special political or peacekeeping mission, a regional commission, a resident or regional coordinator office or any other unit tasked with programmed activities. ST/AI/2021/4 21-11428 2/13 2.3 The purpose of the Performance Management and Development System is also to improve the delivery of programmes by optimizing individual performance at all levels, which it will achieve by: (a) Promoting a culture of accountability and adherence to United Nations standards of conduct; (b) Promoting a culture of high performance, personal and professional development and continuous learning; (c) Empowering managers and holding them responsible and accountable for managing their staff; (d) Encouraging a high level of staff participation in the planning, delivery and evaluation of work; (e) Recognizing successful performance and addressing underperformance fairly and equitably. 2.4 The function of the Performance Management and Development System is to promote communication between staff members and supervisors throughout the performance management and development cycle, including on the goals and key results to be achieved and the success criteria by which individual performance will be assessed. The System enables a culture that promotes continuous learning and personal and professional development, recognizes successful performance and addresses performance shortcomings. 2.5 The Performance Management and Development System is supported by an electronic application that captures the main stages of the performance process, namely the workplan and the end-of-cycle performance review. The application also acts as a reporting tool that provides key metrics in support of the performance management and development cycle. Section 3 Performance management and development cycle 3.1 The performance management and development cycle should normally be 12 months, beginning on 1 April of each year and ending on 31 March of the following year. However, as provided in sections 3.2 and 3.3, the performance period may be shorter or longer than the 12-month cycle, normally no less than 6 months or longer than 18 months. 3.2 When a staff member takes up new duties upon recruitment, transfer or assignment in the course of the cycle, an individual workplan should normally be established within the first two months of assumption of the new functions. If a staff member actively serves with a Secretariat entity for less than six months during the cycle, no performance document is required to be completed. 3.3 Upon a staff member’s separation from service, or when a staff member takes up new duties upon reassignment or transfer, the performance document shall be completed by the staff member and his or her supervisor for the period between the beginning of the performance period and the date of reassignment, transfer or separation. If the staff member performs the same functions but serves under successive supervisors during the year, the supervisor of the staff member at the time at which the cycle ends shall complete the end-of-cycle evaluation, and prior supervisors should be consulted or, if applicable, act as additional supervisors for the relevant workplan goals. 3.4 To ensure the timely completion of the performance document, if supervisors separate from the United Nations, it is their responsibility to complete the ST/AI/2021/4 3/13 21-11428 Performance Management and Development System duties required of them before the date of separation. Separation procedures and processing of final entitlements of supervisors may be delayed until any duties relating to the evaluations for which they are responsible are completed. Section 4 Staff members 4.1 All staff members shall fulfil their responsibilities under the Performance Management and Development System. Staff members are responsible for: (a) Understanding the larger organizational goals; (b) Soliciting clarification on individual performance expectations; (c) Participating in a dialogue with the first reporting officer to facilitate the development and finalization of the individual workplan and maintaining milestone discussions during the reporting period. Milestone discussions occur at a frequency agreed upon at the start of the cycle and are recorded by the first reporting officer; (d) Participating in performance conversations with the first reporting officer on recognition of good performance, identifying areas for further development and addressing shortcomings, if any, at the time at which they arise. Performance conversations occur outside the regular intervals set initially for milestone discussions and are not necessarily recorded; (e) Taking steps to complete each stage of the process for which they are responsible without delay; (f) Accepting or declining the invitation to participate in multi-rater, or “360- degree”, feedback evaluations in accordance with section 8.4, if invited to do so. 4.2 Non-compliance with the terms of the present instruction by a staff member should be recorded in the individual performance document and reflected in the overall rating. The staff member prepares and uploads the workplan. Any disagreement between the staff member and the first reporting officer may be resolved with the second reporting officer in accordance with section 5.4. If the staff member does not take the required action in time to submit a workplan for the cycle, the first reporting officer may upload a final workplan to the system. Section 5 Reporting officers and additional supervisors 5.1 A first reporting officer shall be designated for each staff member at the beginning of the performance management and development cycle. The first reporting officer is responsible for: (a) Developing the workplan with the staff member, incorporating appropriate competencies into the workplan and emphasizing core values in support of the performance management process; (b) Conducting milestone discussions at a frequency agreed upon at the start of the cycle, and recognizing good performance and any shortcomings as they become apparent at any time during the cycle, as appropriate, in performance conversations outside the regular intervals set initially for the milestone discussions; (c) Conducting and recording the final evaluation; (d) Advising, supporting and coaching the staff member on professional development and in the development of a personal and professional development plan; ST/AI/2021/4 21-11428 4/13 (e) Developing a performance improvement plan in consultation with the staff member in the case of performance shortcomings or underperformance, if applicable; (f) Ensuring that the performance documents of their supervisees are completed in accordance with the prescribed procedures. 5.2 The first reporting officer should normally be the supervisor of the staff member. However, under exceptional circumstances, heads of entity may approve, when warranted, a first reporting officer who is not the staff member’s supervisor, but who is in a position to fulfil the roles and responsibilities of a first reporting officer as outlined in the present instruction. 5.3 Up to two additional supervisors may be designated when a staff member works for more than one supervisor more than 25 per cent of the time or on assignments of at least 30 working days, provided that such arrangements are put into place with the agreement of the first reporting officer at the work planning stage, at the beginning of the additional assignment or when the staff member’s supervisor changes during the cycle. 5.4 The second reporting officer, who should normally be the first reporting officer’s supervisor or the equivalent, is responsible for: (a) Ensuring that the first reporting officer understands and applies the principles and procedures of the Performance Management and Development System; (b) Holding the first reporting officer accountable for developing, in a timely manner, together with their staff, workplans with fair, realistic and consistent performance expectations and ensuring linkages between the priorities of the entity and the work unit with the individual workplans; (c) Holding the first reporting officer accountable for the timely completion of the staff member’s end-of-cycle evaluation; (d) Providing regular feedback on and evaluating the first reporting officer’s ability to manage and support the performance of his or her supervisees; (e) Resolving disagreements between the staff member and the first reporting officer in the implementation of the Performance Management and Development System; (f) Overseeing the establishment and implementation of a performance improvement plan in case of performance shortcomings or underperformance, as provided for in section 10 of the present instruction. 5.5 Second reporting officers also have the broader responsibility of ensuring that the Performance Management and Development System is consistently and fairly applied across work units by all first reporting officers who report to them. The second reporting officer should ensure fairness and consistency throughout the cycle, in particular when defining performance expectations and communicating performance standards. The second reporting officer should ensure that: (a) There is consistency between the comments on and the overall rating of individual staff members for a given performance management and development cycle; (b) Ratings and comments given are factually sound, free of bias, constructive and consistent; (c) Managers incorporate appropriate competencies into the workplan and emphasize core values in support of the performance management process. ST/AI/2021/4 5/13 21-11428 5.6 The second reporting officer shall oversee the multi-rater, or “360-degree”, feedback evaluations. 5.7 A staff member normally has one second reporting officer at any given time in the reporting cycle. The first reporting officer and the second reporting officer should not be the same person. However, under exceptional circumstances and after consultation with the staff member, there may be only one reporting officer when it is not possible to identify two different individuals to be the first and second reporting officers. 5.8 Non-compliance with the terms of the present instruction by first or second reporting officers should be recorded in their performance documents and be reflected in their overall ratings. To this effect, their workplans should include a goal for timely implementation of and compliance with the Performance Management and Development System. Section 6 Priorities of the entity, and work unit and individual plans 6.1 Before the beginning of the performance management and development cycle, and for the purposes of strengthening accountability in the Secretariat, heads of entity should sign a compact with the Secretary-General. Priorities of heads of entity are translated into the workplans of work units in accordance with each entity’s structure. Work unit plans are developed in consultation with staff members concerned on an annual basis, depending on the needs of the entity, and are regularly reviewed by the first and second reporting officers to ensure that the plans remain relevant and achievable. Heads of entity are responsible for ensuring that managers and staff fully understand what is expected of them for the reporting period and how those individual expectations fit into the wider mandates of the entity. Individual plans 6.2 At the beginning of the cycle, supervisors should meet with the staff under their direct supervision to ensure that the objectives of the work unit are understood and that individual workplans are prepared. Supervisors may meet with their staff either as a group or individually. 6.3 First reporting officers shall work with the staff members whom they supervise on the development of the staff member’s individual workplan for the cycle. The work planning stage includes establishing individual performance evaluation criteria by setting goals, key results and achievements, incorporating competencies into the formulation of those goals, key results and achievements and formulating a personal and professional development plan, as follows: (a) Workplan: upon the conclusion of the dialogue and agreement with the first reporting officer, the staff member revises, if necessary, and submits the final workplan to the first reporting officer. The format of the workplan may vary depending on the functions of the staff member, but should include results-oriented elements, such as goals, key results and achievements, actions to take to achieve each goal, key result and achievement and measurement, through a statement of success criteria, performance expectations and behavioural indicators, to evaluate performance at the end of the cycle. When more than one staff member performs similar functions, performance expectations may be collectively developed while allowing for individual variations, where appropriate; (b) Competencies: the organizational competencies listed in the relevant Secretary-General’s bulletin on the subject (ST/SGB/1999/15) define a performance standard against which all staff can be consistently and objectively evaluated. All staff ST/AI/2021/4 21-11428 6/13 members are held accountable for demonstrating the core values. In their dialogue on the workplan, the staff member and the first reporting officer shall list in the workplan the most relevant competencies related to each of the goals, key results and achievements identified for the reporting cycle and, where appropriate, the input from the multi-rater, or “360-degree”, feedback evaluations received during the prior cycle. Specific job-related competencies may be added, where appropriate; (c) Personal and professional development plan: every staff member is expected to complete a development plan. Staff members may indicate competencies that they wish to strengthen and career aspirations for future assignments. Every staff member is expected to set a minimum target of five days for professional development per year in accordance with the Secretary-General’s bulletin on the learning and development policy (ST/SGB/2009/9). Section 7 Performance conversations and milestone discussions 7.1 During the year, the first reporting officer and the staff member should have ongoing performance conversations, whether verbally or in writing, which should be used to acknowledge good performance and address any shortcomings. 7.2 The first reporting officer should conduct milestone discussions at regular intervals agreed upon with the staff member. Such discussions should include progress made and an explanation of any updates to the workplan goals, key results and achievements. The first reporting officer should also note progress made in demonstrating the competencies and in implementing the personal and professional development plan. The staff member may note the progress made towards t he goals set in the workplan, the competencies and the personal and professional development plan. Documentation of the milestone discussions is the responsibility of the first reporting officer. Section 8 End-of-cycle performance review 8.1 After the end of the performance management and development cycle, the first reporting officer and the staff member shall meet, by electronic means if necessary, to discuss the staff member’s overall performance during the cycle. The meeting should be held within three months after the end of the cycle. 8.2 Before the end-of-cycle evaluation between the first reporting officer and the staff member, the staff member is encouraged to conduct an appraisal of the manner in which he or she implemented the workplan defined at the beginning of the cycle. 8.3 The first reporting officer shall evaluate the extent to which the staff member achieved the goals, key results and achievements set out in the workplan. The first reporting officer shall also consider and comment on the manner in which the staff member demonstrated the core values and competencies incorporated into the goals. The first reporting officer may comment on the staff member’s self -appraisal during the evaluation of the staff member. First reporting officers are encouraged to discuss the career aspirations of staff during the end-of-cycle review. An overall rating of the staff member’s performance shall be given by the first reporting officer pursuant to section 9. 8.4 With regard to multi-rater, or “360-degree”, feedback evaluation, staff with managerial or supervisory responsibilities may be rated in the electronic 360 -degree application by the staff whom they supervise. Such evaluation will be progressively rolled out and expanded to include feedback from peers and supervisors. The first ST/AI/2021/4 7/13 21-11428 reporting officer shall take into account the 360-degree feedback, as well as input from additional supervisors designated in accordance with section 5.2. 8.5 The second reporting officer shall review and endorse, as appropriate, the evaluation of the first reporting officer, in accordance with his or her role as described in sections 5.4 and 5.5. Should the second reporting officer have queries on or concerns regarding the application of the Performance Management and Development System, they should be discussed with the first reporting officer to ensure an overall consistent performance document. 8.6 All parties should electronically sign or acknowledge the completed performance document. The electronic signature of the staff member constitutes an acknowledgement that the performance review has been conducted. It does not indicate that the staff member is in agreement with the evaluation. The rebuttal process outlined in section 15 cannot be initiated unless the staff member has signed off on the finalized evaluation. A performance document submitted for electronic signature to a staff member that the staff member does not sign is considered to be signed by the staff member after 14 days of its receipt by the staff member. A staff member who does not sign the performance document shall be so notified, and the 14-day period for submission of a rebuttal statement by the staff member, pursuant to section 15.1, shall begin as of the date of such notification to the staff member. Section 9 Rating system Individual core values and competencies 9.1 Staff shall be appraised on the basis of the indicators that correspond to each of the core values and competencies as incorporated into the goals, key results and achievements. Such appraisal shall be taken into consideration in the determination of the overall performance rating. 9.2 Evaluation of the level of demonstration of each of the core values and competencies by the staff member during the performance management and development cycle should be based on the degree to which the individual has been observed as acting or behaving in accordance with the particular competency or value and is a basis for staff development. Overall performance rating 9.3 Staff may be given one of the following four overall ratings: • Exceeds performance expectations • Successfully meets performance expectations • Partially meets performance expectations • Does not meet performance expectations 9.4 A rating of “exceeds performance expectations” should be considered in cases in which the staff member has surpassed the defined success criteria and/or performance expectations for the majority of the goals, key results and achievem ents, has continually gone beyond expectations or has significantly surpassed success criteria and/or performance expectations in quantity and quality during the cycle, including in demonstrating core values and competencies, as applicable. 9.5 A rating of “successfully meets performance expectations” should be considered in cases in which the staff member has fully achieved the defined success criteria and/or performance expectations for the majority of the goals, key results and ST/AI/2021/4 21-11428 8/13 achievements during the cycle, including in demonstrating core values and competencies, as applicable. 9.6 The ratings of “exceeds performance expectations” and “successfully meets performance expectations” establish full satisfaction with the work performed and justify awarding a salary increment in accordance with section 16.3. The ratings shall be so viewed when staff members are considered for selection for a position without prejudice to the discretionary authority of the Secretary-General to appoint staff members. 9.7 A rating of “partially meets performance expectations” should be considered if the staff member did not meet the defined success criteria and/or performance expectations for some of the goals, key results and achievements but demonstrates potential for and a commitment to developing and applying the required skills. 9.8 A rating of “does not meet performance expectations” should be considered if the staff member did not meet the defined success criteria or performance expectations for the majority of the goals, key results and achievements and demonstrates an inability to develop and apply the required skills or a lack of commitment thereto. 9.9 A rating of “partially meets performance expectations” or “does not meet performance expectations” indicates the existence of performance shortcomings. Section 10 Identifying and addressing performance shortcomings and unsatisfactory performance 10.1 During the performance cycle, the first reporting officer should continually evaluate performance. When a performance shortcoming is identified during the performance cycle, the first reporting officer, in consultation with the second reporting officer, should proactively assist the staff member in remedying the shortcoming. Remedial measures may include counselling, transfer to more suitable functions, additional training and/or the institution of a time-bound performance improvement plan, which should include clear targets for improvement and a provision for coaching and supervision by the first reporting officer in conjunction with performance conversations, which should be held on a regular basis. 10.2 If the performance shortcoming was not rectified following the remedial measures indicated in section 10.1 and if, at the end of the performance cycle, performance is appraised overall as “partially meets performance expectations”, a written performance improvement plan shall be prepared by the first reporting officer. This shall be done in consultation with the staff member and the second reporting officer. The performance improvement plan may cover up to a six-month period. 10.3 If the performance shortcoming was not rectified following the remedial measures indicated in section 10.1, a number of administrative actions may ensue, including the withholding of a within-grade salary increment pursuant to section 16.4, the non-renewal of an appointment or the termination of an appointment for unsatisfactory service in accordance with staff regulation 9.3. 10.4 If, at the end of the performance cycle, performance is appraised overall as “does not meet performance expectations”, the appointment may be terminated so long as the remedial measures indicated in section 10.1 included a performance improvement plan that was initiated no less than three months before the end of the performance cycle. 10.5 Should unsatisfactory performance be the basis for a decision for non-renewal of a fixed-term appointment, and should the appointment expire before the end of the ST/AI/2021/4 9/13 21-11428 period covering a performance improvement plan, the appointment should be renewed for the duration necessary for the completion of the performance improvement plan. Section 11 Implementation and monitoring by heads of entity 11.1 Heads of entity are responsible for the implementation of the Performance Management and Development System. 11.2 Primary responsibility for the timely execution of, overall compliance with and consistent and fair implementation of the Performance Management and Development System rests with the head of entity, who should promote communication between staff members and their supervisors, encourage regular feedback through performance conversations and milestone discussions and ensure that any change in the mandate or priorities of the entity is communicated to staff. 11.3 The head of entity is responsible for compliance with, and consistency and fairness in the implementation (including ratings) of, the Performance Management and Development System and the provision of other relevant data by no later than 30 June of each year. The executive office or local human resources office of each entity should ensure that completed individual official records are maintained. 11.4 The head of entity shall hold all managers and supervisors accountable for the effective use of the Performance Management and Development System throughout all stages of the process and shall provide advice and recommendations, where warranted. The head of entity should ensure that the entity’s priorities are communicated to all staff members of the entity. The head of entity may also establish performance standards for the entity as the basis for individual success criteria. 11.5 One of the functions of the senior management team of each entity should be to assist the head of entity in establishing a performance management and development strategy for the entity and its implementation, as outlined in section 11.1. 11.6 At least once a year, the senior management team of each entity should d evote a meeting to performance management and development. At that meeting, the team should review staff development and career support needs in the light of strategic human resources management issues for the entity, including training and succession management. The team may also provide guidance on recognition of successful performance and on addressing performance shortcomings at the entity level. Section 12 Joint Monitoring Group 12.1 A Joint Monitoring Group shall be established by each entity or by region or duty station outside Headquarters. The members of the Group shall be appointed by the head of entity. The Group shall normally consist of two members nominated by management, two members nominated by the staff of the entity, in accordance with local practice, and a Chair selected by the head of entity in consultation with the staff. Each member shall serve for a two-year renewable term. 12.2 Each Joint Monitoring Group shall monitor and review the implementation of the Performance Management and Development System by the entities concerned with respect to the timeliness of the process and compliance with its purpose and procedures, as provided in section 2. Joint Monitoring Groups shall work with the respective entities to support the institutionalization of the Performance Management and Development System. The Joint Monitoring Group may request from the heads of entity statistical information necessary for the discharge of its functions. The Office of Human Resources may provide ex officio support through the provision of such information or the preparation of consolidated reports. ST/AI/2021/4 21-11428 10/13 12.3 The Joint Monitoring Group shall meet once a year, at the end of the performance cycle. It shall report to the Global Joint Monitoring Group no later than 31 July of each year. Joint Monitoring Group reports shall include a compliance review of the end-of-year appraisals and an overall summary of the Performance Management and Development System implementation process in each entity for that year. Section 13 Global Joint Monitoring Group 13.1 The Global Joint Monitoring Group shall be a subsidiary body of the Staff - Management Coordination Committee. It shall be composed of two members nominated by management, two nominated by the staff and a Chair appointed after staff consultation by the President of the Staff-Management Coordination Committee. Each member shall serve for a one-year renewable term. 13.2 The Global Joint Monitoring Group shall meet once a year, immediately prior to the annual meeting of the Staff-Management Coordination Committee. It shall examine policy issues related to the implementation of the Performance Management and Development System across the Organization. It shall review the reports submitted by Joint Monitoring Groups and shall prepare an annual report on the implementation of the Performance Management and Development System in the various entities. The report shall include recommendations regarding the implementation and overall effectiveness of the Performance Management and Development System and shall be submitted to the Staff-Management Coordination Committee for transmittal to the Secretary-General. Section 14 Rebuttal panels 14.1 In consultation with the staff representatives of the entities concerned, the head of entity or his or her representative shall draw up a list of rebuttal panel members composed of three groups of staff members from the entity concerned, in equal numbers. The list shall be composed as follows: (a) Rebuttal panel members designated by the head of entity; (b) Rebuttal panel members designated by the staff representatives of the entity in accordance with local practice; (c) Rebuttal panel Chairs selected by the head of entity after consultation with the staff representatives of that entity. The approved list, subdivided as indicated above, shall normally comprise nine individuals for large entities and six for smaller entities. However, if an entity determines that a larger membership pool is needed, it may expand the membership by adding one or more members to each of the groups specified above. Every effort shall be made to obtain an appropriate geographical and gender balance, where possible. Members must have adequate knowledge and the experience required to review the appraisal and its rating. The head of entity shall inform the staff in writing of the composition of the approved list. 14.2 Rebuttal panel members shall serve for a two-year term. Should a member of the rebuttal panel be assigned to functions outside the entity concerned, the panel member shall be replaced in accordance with the procedure relevant to the group to which the rebuttal panel member belongs. 14.3 If it is not possible to constitute a list from the staff members of that entity, the approved list may include staff members of other entities at the same duty station, ST/AI/2021/4 11/13 21-11428 provided that those staff members have the knowledge and experience required to review the appraisal and its rating. Section 15 Rebuttal process 15.1 Staff members who disagree with a “partially meets performance expectations” or a “does not meet performance expectations” rating received at the end of the performance cycle may, within 14 days of signing the completed performance document, submit to the relevant Executive Officer at Headquarters, or to the Chief of Administration/Chief of Mission Support, as applicable, a written rebuttal statement setting forth briefly the specific reasons that a higher overall rating should have been received. Staff members who have received the rating of “consistently exceeds performance expectations” or “successfully meets performance expectations” cannot initiate a rebuttal. 15.2 The rebuttal statement shall contain the names of the three individuals, one from each of the three groups identified in section 14.1, whom the staff member has selected to serve on the rebuttal panel, each of whose grade is equal to or higher than that of the reporting officer whose evaluation or comments are being rebutted. 15.3 After receiving a copy of the rebuttal statement, the head of entity or his or her representative shall, within 14 days, prepare and submit to the rebuttal panel a brief written statement in reply to the rebuttal statement submitted by the staff member. A copy of the reply to the rebuttal statement shall be given to the staff member. Unless geographical location makes it impractical, the panel shall hear the staff member, the first and second reporting officers and, at the discretion of the panel, other individuals who may have information relevant to the review of the appraisal rating. Telephone statements may also be taken where geographical separation so dictates. 15.4 The rebuttal panel shall prepare, within 14 days of the review of the case, a brief report setting forth the reasons that the original rating should or should not be maintained. In the event that an overall rating should not be maintained, the rebuttal panel should designate the new rating on the performance evaluation. The report of the rebuttal panel shall be placed in the staff member’s official status file as an attachment to the completed performance document. 15.5 The performance rating resulting from the rebuttal process shall be binding on the head of entity and on the staff member concerned, subject to the ultimate authority of the Secretary-General as Chief Administrative Officer of the Organization, who may review the matter as needed on the basis of the record. Any change in the final rating, as well as the date of the decision, shall be communicated to the Office of Human Resources, with an annotation that the rating was changed as a result of a review of the performance management and development rebuttal and including the final rating recommended by the rebuttal panel. 15.6 Should unsatisfactory performance be the basis for a decision of non-renewal of an appointment, and should the appointment expire before the end of the rebuttal process, the appointment should be renewed for the duration necessary for the completion of the rebuttal process. 15.7 The rating resulting from an evaluation that has not been rebutted is final and not subject to appeal. However, administrative decisions that stem from any final performance appraisal and that affect the conditions of service of a staff member may be resolved through informal or formal justice mechanisms. ST/AI/2021/4 21-11428 12/13 Section 16 Performance Management and Development System and salary increments 16.1 Under staff rule 3.3 (a), the granting of salary increments is subject to the satisfactory performance and conduct of staff members as evaluated by their supervisors, unless otherwise decided by the Secretary-General in any particular case. The determination that service is satisfactory with respect to performance, as well as the procedures for withholding a salary increment when such a determination cannot be made, are governed by the provisions of the present section. 16.2 The decision to award or withhold a salary increment on the basis of performance shall be made by the second reporting officer on the basis of the rating awarded by the first reporting officer as reflected in the performance document. 16.3 The following ratings, as specified in section 9.3, shall justify a determination that awarding a salary increment is warranted: • Exceeds performance expectations • Successfully meets performance expectations 16.4 The following ratings, as specified in section 9.3, shall justify a determination that awarding a salary increment is not warranted: • Partially meets performance expectations • Does not meet performance expectations 16.5 When a salary increment is withheld owing to the rating “partially meets performance expectations”, the increment shall be withheld pending the outcome of a performance improvement plan. If the staff member’s performance improves following the completion of the performance improvement plan, the staff member shall be granted the salary increment with effect from the date of successful completion of the performance improvement plan. 16.6 The decision to withhold a salary increment shall be communicated to the staff member in writing before the decision is implemented, with a copy provided to the Office of Human Resources or, in the case of offices away from Headquarters and regional commissions, to the local human resources office. 16.7 Should the Performance Management and Development System rating on the basis of which a salary increment has been withheld be upgraded at a later stage as a result of the rebuttal process described in section 15, and should the new rating justify the award of the salary increment, the increment shall be awarded and made effective as from the date on which it would otherwise have been paid. Section 17 Performance Management and Development System e-forms, learning materials and guidelines 17.1 The Performance Management and Development System e-forms, learning materials and guidelines are available to staff members on the intranet and through their relevant executive office or local human resources office. They shall be updated continually on the basis of best practices and evolving jurisprudence. Formal courses should be provided at least every three years to update and consolidate staff knowledge of the System. All entities should appoint performance management focal points to provide assistance and guidance, as required. 17.2 The Performance Management and Development System learning materials and guidelines are intended solely for general guidance and information. Should there be ST/AI/2021/4 13/13 21-11428 any inconsistency between the guidelines and the text of the present instruction, the provisions of the present instruction shall prevail. Section 18 Entry into force and transitory provisions 18.1 The present instruction shall enter into force on the date of its issuance. 18.2 ST/AI/2010/5 and ST/AI/2010/5/Corr.1 are hereby abolished. However, performance documents issued before the performance management and development cycle 2021/22, as well as any documents created before 31 March 2021, shall be conducted and completed in accordance with the procedures described in ST/AI/2010/5 and ST/AI/2010/5/Corr.1. (Signed) Catherine Pollard Under-Secretary-General for Management Strategy, Policy and Compliance