Laserfiche WebLink
In addition to the quantitative rating for each performance criteria, the evaluation instrument <br />• allows space for individual Selectmen to make written comments. These comments are included <br />in the evaluation report. Each statement is followed by the initials of the Selectman who <br />submitted the statement. <br />Please be aware of a correction on page 3, under Communications with Employees. "Needs to <br />spend more time visiting offices and talking with and listening to employees", should by followed <br />by a JV. <br />It must be noted that these comments are the opinions of individual Selectmen are not intended <br />to represent the views of the Board of Selectmen and, in fact, in many cases do not. <br />The Second Part of this Evaluation Assesses Mr. Whritenour relative to the completion of a <br />series of 23 management objectives concerning five areas of responsibilities ... these being Town <br />Operations, Financial, Collective Bargaining, Communications and Other. These objectives <br />were set last fall through discussions between the Executive Secretary and the BOS. <br />Each Selectman provided an assessment as to the degree to which each objective has been met. <br />A rating of 5 indicates the objective has been fully met; a rating of 4 indicates the objective is <br />nearly complete; 3 indicates the objective has been partially completed; 2 indicates that action <br />toward meeting the objective has been initiated; and, 1 indicates the objective has not been met. <br />For the seven objectives under Town Operations, Mr. Whritenour receives an aggregate <br />• assessment of 3.4 which is approximately half -way between objective has been partially met and <br />objective is nearly complete. It is noted that for three of these seven objectives (manage <br />organizational issues for BOS, improve working relations and support among departments and <br />analyze personnel procedures), one Selectman rates Mr. Whritenour's performance as <br />I... objective has not been met ... while the other four Selectmen rate each as 3 or better. <br />n <br />LJ <br />For the three objectives under Financial, Mr. Whritenour receives an aggregate assessment of <br />4.3, which is slightly better than objectives are nearly complete. It is noted that for one <br />objective (set up meetings with BOS, Fincom and School Committee re: FY94 budget), one <br />Selectman rates Mr. Whritenour's performance as 1 ... objective has not been met ... while the <br />other four Selectmen rate the objective a 5, for being fully met. <br />For the two objectives under Collective Bargaining, Mr. Whritenour receives an aggregate <br />assessment of 4.0, which indicates the objectives are nearly complete. <br />For the seven objectives under Communications, Mr. Whritenour receives an aggregate <br />assessment of 3.6, which is about half -way between objectives are partially completed and <br />objectives are nearly complete. It is noted that for two objectives (provide Executive Secretary <br />schedule and summarize agenda items at meetings), one Selectman rates Mr. Whritenour's <br />performance as I ... objective has not been met ... while the other four Selectmen rate each as 3 <br />or better. <br />Mashpee Board of Selectmen - September 7, 1993 <br />Summary Report - Annual Evaluation of Robert Whritenour <br />