Regular performance feedback was identified as an area of vulnerability during the 2009 – 2011 Self Study leading up to the Undergraduate Medical Education (UGME) accreditation. While many Departments have some form of performance review in place, there is a great deal of heterogeneity in the frequency and quality of performance feedback.
In the Spring of 2012, under the leadership of Dr. Terry Klassen, Associate Dean Academic, a Steering Committee was formed to examine strategies to develop and implement a faculty-wide performance review process. The Committee started by
- Conducting an environmental scan of academic health sciences centres in North America
- Reviewing the literature to examine characteristics and components of performance review processes of faculty members at academic medical centres
- Conducting a series of meetings and consultations with faculty members, Department Heads and other academic administrators in the Faculty of Medicine
An overview of the results was presented at the last Open Forum in April, 2013.
Performance feedback in the form of consistent and constructive feedback, annually establishing and reviewing career goals and development plans is considered better practice in industry, public service, and Academic Health Science Centre (AHSC)1-7.
In addition, regularly scheduled feedback on academic performance as well as opportunities for professional development to enhance skills and leadership abilities in education and research are Faculty Accreditation Standards for UGME accreditation. A system of annual review of faculty/clinical teaching staff regarding patient care and teaching that involves the opinions of residents is an important standard for the Royal College Post Graduate Medical Education (PGME) accreditation.
1. Curry TH. Faculty Performance Reviews. Effective Practices for Acadmic Leaders, February 2006, 2006. http://www.styluspub.com/Books/Features.aspx (accessed March 30, 2012).
2. Moulin M. Eight Essentials of Performance Management. International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance 2004; 17(3): 110-2.
3. Hewitt Associates . The Current State of Performance Management and Career Development: Survey Findings2010. http://www.aon.com/attachments/thought-leadership/Hewitt_Survey_Results_PerfMgmtCareerDevSV10.pdf (accessed May 8, 2012).
4. Mooney J. A Case Study of Performance Appraisal in a Small Public Sector Organization: The Gaps Between Expectations and Experience: University of Chester; 2009.
5. Muchinsky PM. Psychology Applied to Work. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth; 2006.
6. O'Brodovich H, Beyene J, Tallett S, MacGregor D, Rosenblum ND. Performance of a career development and compensation program at an academic health science center. Pediatrics 2007; 119(4): e791-7.
7. The Royal College General Standards of Accreditation, January 2011, Standard B4 Resources, 2011.