The review initiator's evaluation provides a comprehensive evaluation of the candidate's performance and accomplishments both within and beyond the primary assignment for the period under review. It brings to bear direct knowledge of the candidate as well as knowledge gleaned from letters of reference, the candidate's documentation and other sources.
With input from the candidate, the review initiator solicits letters of reference from persons best able to assess the candidate's performance and accomplishments. In the solicitations the review initiator requests comment on specific activities and contributions. Letters of reference are appropriate for career status and promotion reviews and may be appropriate for greater-than-standard requests and off-cycle reviews.
The review initiator's evaluation avoids repetition of the candidate's self-evaluation. It indicates whether or not there is agreement on the relative importance of the candidate's accomplishments during the period under review. To the extent that the review initiator differs from the candidate in assessing accomplishment, the differences are clearly delineated.
The review initiator works with the candidate in identifying goals and objectives for the next review period. In the evaluation the review initiator indicates whether there is agreement on goals and objectives; if there is disagreement, the review initiator identifies what she/he believes are goals and objectives for the candidate.
The review initiator's evaluation is most helpful in the review process when:
- it is succinct, well organized and coherent.
- it describes clearly the lines of authority in the unit, the scope of the candidate's responsibility, and the length of time such assignments have been in effect.
- it presents a balanced evaluation of the candidate's performance, including problem areas as well as particular strengths.
- insofar as possible, it considers the breadth and quality of the candidate's performance in relation to that typical of other librarians at the candidate's rank.
- it examines the candidate's performance for evidence of continued professional growth during the review period.
- it mentions special circumstances which may have limited the candidate's activity in areas where, given the past record, she/he might have been expected to continue to make significant contributions.
- it documents by specific examples the candidate's judgment, innovative ideas, management skills, or special professional expertise which have had positive influence among her/his colleagues and significant impact on the library programs and services.