Performance Management System (PMS)

1. Purpose & Philosophy

The Performance Management System (PMS) at GSIS is designed to support the professional growth, accountability, and continuous development of all staff members while ensuring high standards in teaching, learning, residential life, and professional conduct.

As a fully residential school, GSIS expects every staff member—academic and non-academic—to contribute meaningfully to students’ academic progress, personal growth, emotional well-being, and community life beyond the classroom.

The PMS framework is:

• Transparent, consistent, and evidence-based
• Development-oriented rather than punitive
• Aligned with GSIS’s institutional goals and educational vision

It also outlines corrective measures where performance falls below expected standards.

2. Appraisal Period

• The appraisal cycle follows the academic calendar (July to May).
• PMS is conducted biannually:
  • Mid-Year Review: December
  • Final Review: May

3. Objective Setting (KPIs)

• Each department shall define Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for every staff member.
• KPIs must align with:
  • School-wide objectives
  • Departmental goals
  • Individual Job Descriptions (JD)

Responsibility:
HODs, Section Coordinators, and the HOS are responsible for defining, aligning, and communicating KPIs at the beginning of the academic term.

Clarity of expectations—both individual and collective—is essential.

4. KPI Update on Zoho 

• Once KPIs are mutually agreed upon, they must be uploaded to the Internal Zoho PMS Module.
• The HRMS will serve as:
  • A performance tracking system
  • A feedback and review repository
  • A documentation and evidence platform

5. Observation & Continuous Feedback

GSIS believes that regular observation and constructive feedback are integral to professional growth.

• Classroom walk-throughs and observation of assigned responsibilities will be conducted in a supportive and developmental manner.
• Feedback will:
  • Highlight strengths
  • Identify areas for improvement
  • Be shared promptly after observation or evidence review

Feedback must be ongoing and not restricted to appraisal periods.

6. Appraisal Process

Step 1: Self-Assessment

• All staff must complete a self-appraisal for each appraisal cycle.
• This allows staff to:
  • Reflect on performance
  • Assess achievements and challenges
  • Identify development needs

Self-assessments must be completed on the PMS ZOHO module.

Step 2: Appraiser Feedback

• Conducted by HODs / Coordinators.
• Assessment is based on:
  • Agreed KPIs
  • Development priorities
  • Evidence of performance and impact
• Supporting evidence must be uploaded on HRMS.
• Regular one-on-one discussions are expected throughout the year.

Step 3: Reviewer Feedback

• Conducted by Section Coordinators and the HOS.
• Review includes:
  • Self-assessment inputs
  • Appraiser feedback
  • Alignment with institutional standards

All reviewer comments must be recorded on Zoho

7. Performance Improvement Plan (PIP)

If the appraiser and reviewer are not satisfied with progress:

• The employee will be formally notified in writing.
• A Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) will be initiated with:
  • Clear expectations
  • Defined timelines
  • Review checkpoints

8. Career Progression & Continuity

• Allocation of classes, roles, and responsibilities for the next academic year will be based on:
  • Performance outcomes
  • Initiatives taken
  • Professional growth demonstrated
• The HOS, Coordinators, and HODs are not responsible for employee stagnation if adequate mentoring and counselling have been provided and the employee shows no willingness to grow.
• Based on performance insights and the HOS recommendations, Management reserves the right to:
  • Continue employment, or
  • Discontinue the employment contract at the end of the academic year.

9. GSIS Performance Ratings – What They Mean

At GSIS, meeting expectations is not the same as exceeding them.

Rating 4 – Sets New Standards / Operates at Leadership Level

• Exceptional and rare (Top 5–10%)
• Institutional-level impact
• Leads initiatives adopted beyond one classroom or house
• Shapes academic and residential culture
• Coaches staff and handles complex student matters with maturity

This rating cannot be self-awarded.

Rating 3 – Regularly Exceeds Expectations

• Consistent, visible impact beyond the JD
• Takes initiative without being asked
• Contributes meaningfully to student life, staff support, and school improvement
• Evidence-based and sustained throughout the year

Rating 2 – Consistently Meets Expectations

• Baseline expectation at GSIS
• Performs all academic and residential duties reliably
• Professional, dependable, and present
• Does not consistently go beyond assigned responsibilities

A strong and respectable rating.

Rating 1 – Needs Improvement

• Core expectations are not consistently met
• Requires repeated follow-ups
• Gaps exist in academic delivery, residential duties, or collaboration
• PIP may be initiated

10. PMS Self-Appraisal Guidelines

1. Mandatory Participation

All employees must complete self-appraisal within the prescribed timeline.

2. Self-Rating Eligibility

Employees may self-rate only between Ratings 1 to 3.
Each rating must be supported with justification and evidence.

3. Self-Appraisal Rating Scale

• Rating 1: Acknowledges gaps and willingness to improve
• Rating 2: Meets all JD and KRA expectations
• Rating 3: Demonstrates stretch goals and contributions beyond JD

4. Rating 4 – Restricted

• Cannot be selected during self-appraisal
• Awarded only by:
  • HOD
  • Academic Core Members (ACM)
  • Senior Leadership Team (SLT)

5. Review & Validation

• All self-appraisals will be reviewed by reporting authorities.
• Final ratings will be validated to ensure:
  • Fairness
  • Consistency
  • Alignment with GSIS standards

11. Guidance for HODs & Reviewers

• Ratings must be evidence-based, not sentiment-driven.
• Ask:
  • What has this person created, improved, or changed?
  • Who has benefitted from their work?
• Impact must be consistent, not one-time.
• Do not concur by default—evaluate objectively

Doing your job well is expected. Going beyond it is what changes the rating.”

Important:
Rating 2 is not a penalty. It is the expected professional standard at GSIS.
Ratings 3 and 4 are not rewards for effort—they are recognition for impact.

Conclusion

The GSIS PMS is a developmental system rooted in accountability, growth, and institutional excellence. It reflects the school’s belief that true performance is measured not just by duties fulfilled, but by lives influenced and standards raised.

Confidentiality

• This policy is a confidential document of GSIS.
• No part may be reproduced or transmitted in any form, electronically or mechanically, without prior written permission from School Management.
• Unauthorized reproduction or transmission may lead to civil or criminal liability.

Amendments

The School reserves the right to modify, amend, or alter this policy, wholly or partially, at any time as deemed appropriate.