1

Strategic Performance Management System

The Strategic Performance Management System (SPMS) is a mechanism that links employee
performance with organizational performance to enhance the performance orientation of the
compensation system. It ensures that the employee achieves the objectives set by the organization
and the organization, on the other hand, achieves the objectives that it has set as its strategic plan.
The SPMS Objectives are: (a) to concretize the linkage of organizational performance with the
Philippine Development Plan, Agency Strategic Plan, and Organizational Performance Indicator
Framework OPIF; (b) to ensure organizational and individual effectiveness by cascading institutional
accountabilities to the various levels of the organization; and (c) to link performance management
with other HR systems.
The SPMS has the following basic elements:
a. Goals that are aligned to agency mandate and organizational priorities
b. System that is outputs/outcomes-oriented
c. A team approach to performance management
d. Forms that are user-friendly and shows alignment of individual and organizational goals
e. Information systems that support monitoring and evaluation
f. A Communication plan
More importantly, the SPMS complements the Results-Based Performance Management System
that is implemented by the Office of the President and that links organizational performance to
societal goals. It is also linked to the Performance-Based Incentive System (PBIS) that consists of
the Productivity Enhancement Incentive (PEI) and the Performance-Based Bonus (PBB).

The SPMS Process

The SPMS follows a four-stage cycle, consisting of the following:
1. Performance planning and commitment
During this stage, success indicators are determined. Success indicators are performance level
yardsticks consisting of performance measures and performance targets. These shall serve as
bases in the offices and individual employees preparation of their performance contract and rating
form.
2. Performance monitoring and coaching
The performance of the office and every individual shall be regularly monitored at various levels.
Monitoring and evaluation mechanisms ensure that timely and appropriate steps can be taken to
keep a program on track, and that its objectives or goals are met in the most effective manner.
Managers and supervisors act as coaches and mentors to provide an enabling
environment/intervention to improve team performance, and to manage and develop individual
potentials.
3. Performance review and evaluation
This phase aims to assess both offices and individual employees performance level based on
performance targets and measures as approved in the office and individual performance
commitment contracts.
Part of the individual employees evaluation is the competency assessment vis--vis the competency
requirements of the job. The assessment shall focus on the strengths, competency-related
performance gaps and the opportunities to address these gaps, career paths, and alternatives.
4. Performance rewarding and development planning
The results of the performance evaluation/assessment shall serve as inputs for the agencys HR
Plan, which includes identification and provision of developmental interventions, and conferment of
rewards and incentives.

SPMS Rating Scale

The SPMS uses a five-point rating scale, described as follows:
Rating
Numerical

Adjectival

Outstanding

Very Satisfactory

Satisfactory

Unsatisfactory

Poor

Description
Performance represents an extraordinary level of achievement
and commitment in terms of quality and time, technical skills and
knowledge, ingenuity, creativity, and initiative. Employees at this
performance level should have demonstrated exceptional job
mastery in all major areas of responsibility. Employee
achievement and contributions to the organization are of marked
excellence.
Performance exceeded expectations. All goals, objectives, and
targets were achieved above the established standards.
Performance met expectations in terms of quality of work,
efficiency, and timeliness. The most critical annual goals were met.
Performance failed to meet expectations, and/or one or more of
the most critical goals were not met.
Performance was consistently below expectations, and/or
reasonable progress toward critical goals was not made.
Significant improvement is needed in one or more important
areas.