OSA - Performance Management

[Former Member]

Hello,

I'm in the process of trying to configure performance appraisals in ECC 6.0 that will be used with the BSP pages in ESS/MSS eventually. I have a couple questions below that I cannot figure out through testing and have been unable to find any helpful documentation on a good process. Any information would be greatly appreciated.

1 - As part of the current process, the managers fill out the appraisals, review with the employee, and then they both sign-off. After this, the appraisal then goes to the next level of management for review prior to HR. Is there a way to allow only the manager to enter an appraisal, but allow the appraisee and higher-level manager to then both approve it?

2- So far the only option I've seen is to try and set it up as a part-appraisal process where the employee and manager are the part-appraisals, and then the higher-level manager becomes the final appraisal to show their sign-off. After that I believe we can have HR approve the appraisals in phap_admin_pa. If part-appraisals is the only way to achieve this sign-off, is there a way to copy the values entered by the manager in the part appraisal column over to the final appraisal column that would belong to the higher-level manager? As you can expect executives shouldn't have to re-complete the same questions, but instead just approve the review given by the manager. We can't allow the executives to just sign-off without valid entries in the final appraisal column either because as I understand it that is where the weighting and final calculations are determined from, which we need.

I thought maybe the further participant part would provide an option, but I haven't seen any documentation on how to make that work and so far my testing of that has yet to produce any results.

Thanks,

Eric

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hello Eric,

Answer to your first question:

when you configure your colums , select the colums at the template level and then within the template ,you may want to restrict the column access to 'display' to the appraisee and higher level manager . once you have done this you also need to configure Pushbutton with the status flow which can be done in OOHAP_BASIC.

Answer to your second question:

You might not want to copy the column values of a part appriaser to final appraiser - instead you can have the final approver view the part approvers ratings , this can be controlled again at the template level.

This is a bit tricky - you can user further participants but you need to make it clear in the status flow - as a standard functionality the template flows 2 level .

Hope this gives you some direction mate,

Regards,

Regi

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Thanks Regi. I do have a few follow-up questions.

-Based on your reply I have setup the higher manager and appraisee to have display access only so that only the manager (part-appraiser) can enter ratings. Once this is complete, how do I allow both the employee and higher manager to sign-off on those? Is this were you were talking about the pushbutton? So that they'd still have a pushbutton to mark complete, approved, etc to keep the process moving forward but their columns would have no values?

-If I do allow this, how do I ensure that the managers part-appraisal values are what is used as the final appraisal values? Based on my understanding of the flow, the higher manager would be signing off in the final appraisal column (and would have to be listed as the true appraiser so that they have the last step of the process) which would then contain no values due to the display setting right?

-The question above relates to my previous comment about being able to copy column values. As I understand it, unless I make the manager fill out the form twice, then the higher level manager has to be the true appraiser so that they have the last step. The manager would then just be a part appraiser. Is there a better process here I'm missing? I was also concerned about listing the higher-level manager as appraiser because I was afraid that would make using phap_prepare_pa difficult if the admins want to follow the org structure.