What are the principles of leadership performance appraisal?

The design of leadership performance appraisal system must establish that leadership performance is a more systematic and comprehensive concept, and the system should be a value standard system that can reflect multiple goals of public management, rather than the traditional single "efficiency orientation". So what are the principles of leadership performance evaluation?

Principle of performance evaluation of leaders: Value-oriented principle The performance of leaders does not reflect general management efficiency, but pursues higher value management benefits. A certain achievement is always associated with a certain value goal. The essence of performance is to achieve the output of organizational goals, which is manifested in the success of achieving organizational goals. Therefore, the process of leading cadres to create performance is the process of pursuing organizational goals. Following the principle of value orientation requires us to focus on the main social contradictions faced and solved by social development at this stage, rather than covering all aspects.

The main social contradictions are different, the overall value orientation of social development is different, and the index system for evaluating leadership performance is also different. The thought of ruling for the people and the people-oriented Scientific Outlook on Development established at the 16th National Congress of the Communist Party of China have expressed the basic social value orientation of the ruling party and the broad masses of the people, and played a decisive role in determining the performance evaluation index system. The design of the index system must generally reflect the principle of adhering to Scientific Outlook on Development and the "five overall plans" put forward by the Central Committee.

Principle of leadership performance evaluation: principle of legitimacy The performance of the party and state organs is the result of the management subject ruling according to the national functions and public power entrusted by the Constitution and administrative regulations. Mainly reflected in two aspects. First, the efficiency and achievements of the organs in performing their management functions to the public are mainly reflected in the relationship between administrative input and administrative output; Second, the social benefits and social impacts of public goods and services provided by the government are mainly manifested in the relationship between public supply and public demand. Senior and middle-level civil servants in leadership positions bear important political and legal responsibilities in these two aspects. All manifestations of leadership performance should be regarded as legal and legally authorized organizational behavior, which is by no means an individual's random behavior, nor a market behavior that can be self-financing like an enterprise.

Principle of leadership performance evaluation: functional basis principle Under the condition of socialist market economy, our government is gradually changing from "omnipotence" to "limited responsibility", and more emphasis is placed on providing public services to meet public needs. It is emphasized that the government should do something in the market economy, mainly through policy services and other means to carry out macro-control, simplify administrative examination and approval, strengthen macro-management functions, weaken micro-management functions, and transfer the functions exercised by social organizations to social organizations, so that the market and the government are in a proper position. When designing the performance evaluation index system, we should fully consider the requirements of transforming government functions and grasp the performance standards. The main indicator must be the performance in fulfilling the leadership functions of the party and government, and we can't put all the projects and indicators of various organizations in the whole society on ourselves, especially those that need enterprises and markets to play a role.

There are different levels of leadership functions and different professional divisions, thus forming a vertical central government and local governments at all levels, and horizontal government functional departments, such as health departments, environmental protection departments, education departments and so on. Therefore, different management subjects, that is, different public service providers, mean that the nature, content and methods of public affairs they manage are different. Their performance goals and evaluation items are also different. Different performance goals and evaluation items will have different evaluation criteria.

Principle of leadership performance evaluation: principle of public satisfaction Whether the leadership activities meet the needs of the public is an important basis for leadership performance evaluation and a criterion that must be followed in designing the index system. Social public satisfaction is mainly reflected in two aspects in the design index system: First, whether the work of party and government organs and leading cadres can meet the interests of the general public is always relative. This degree of satisfaction can be divided into satisfaction, comparative satisfaction and dissatisfaction. At the same time, different levels of public satisfaction are also relative. The second is how to treat and deal with the social problems strongly reflected by the masses in the process of leadership activities.

This problem is also closely related to the satisfaction of the public. Whether the leaders have established channels and mechanisms for information exchange and communication with the public, and whether they have answered and dealt with the problems reflected by the public in time should be regarded as an important coefficient of the evaluation index system. Because the process of leadership performance appraisal is to improve and respond to the public's effective supervision and criticism of leading cadres by evaluating and dividing the performance of different levels, and it is also a process of improving leadership efficiency, ability, service quality and public responsibility.