Link: Click to go to Montana State University-Northern's Home page
Administrative Policy and Procedures Manual
Section 800: Financial Affairs
850.3 Employee and Student Incentive Awards Policy
Effective: January 7, 2003

APPENDIX II
Criteria to Evaluate and Prioritize
Nominations for
The Employee/Student Incentive Award Program
At Montana State University-Northern
Return to Policy 850.3

The Committee will use the following criteria to evaluate and prioritize nominations for the employee/student incentive award program at MSU-Northern:

  1. Compare the outcome, accomplishments or savings to what is normally expected from the employee/student, or group or team of employees/students through the duties and responsibilities of their positions.
    1. Those outcomes, accomplishments or savings that exceed expectations by the greatest degree should be given priority for awards.

      For example: Some positions are responsible for managing costs either through audit functions, fund management or through management of benefit or claims payments. Cost avoidance may be an integral part of their duties. There is likely an expectation that the normal completion of duties and responsibilities should result in a certain level of cost savings or cost avoidance.
       
    2. When cost savings or cost avoidance result from the expected performance of regular duties, outcomes should not be given priority for awards.
       
    3. If cost savings or cost avoidance result from activities that fit into one of the following scenarios, they should be evaluated under the employee/student incentive award program:
      1. the saving or avoidance is highly original or creative, involving innovative or novel approaches developed by members of the group or team; or
      2. the saving or avoidance significantly exceeds the level of effort or diligence normally expected from the employee(s)/student(s)' position(s); or
      3. the saving or avoidance requires cooperative work efforts possible only through initiatives of group or team members that go above and beyond what is normally expected through existing work structure or organization.
         
  2. Evaluate the impact of the outcome, accomplishment or saving on delivery of service to the public or other customer.
    1. The outcomes, achievements or cost savings, described in 1.c. above, should be given priority for award.
       
    2. Outcomes, accomplishments or savings having the greatest impact on the well-being of MSU-Northern's so-called "customer" group should be given the highest priority for the award.
       
  3. Evaluate the outcome, accomplishment or savings in terms of how directly and to what degree it contributes to MSU-Northern's objectives, goals and mission.
    1. Outcomes, accomplishments or savings making the greatest contribution towards MSU-Northern's stated objectives, goals and mission should be given the highest priority for award.
       
  4. When evaluating a suggestion, invention or idea, the Committee should consider the following:
    1. Is the suggestion, idea or invention original? Is it highly innovative, representing a significant departure from previous approaches or ideas? Or is it a minor modification to an existing approach?
       
    2. Has the suggestion, idea or invention been fully implemented? To what degree did it require modification or further development before it could be successfully implemented?
       
    3. How important was the suggestion, idea or invention in contributing to the outcome, accomplishment or cost savings? Did it allow a minor improvement in an outcome that would have occurred without the suggestion, idea or invention? Or did it provide the principal impetus or mechanism for an outcome that would not have occurred without the suggestion, idea or invention?
Top