FUJ00156460
FUJ00156460
From: Macdonald
Duncan[/O=EXCHANGE/OU=ADMINGROUP 1/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=MACDONALDD2]
Sent: Fri 25/03/2011 1:45:42 PM (UTC)
To: Jenkins Gareth GIf’
Subject: I RE: AD11_007 Urgent - Performance Plus Appraisal Dates
Thanks
That's more than enough.
Duncan
From: Jenkins Gareth GI
Sent: 25 March 2011 13:45
To: Macdonald Duncan
Subject: RE: AD11_007 Urgent - Performance Plus Appraisal Dates
Duncan,
Over the last year I’ve been working on the following:
1, Atthe start of the year I was doing a lot of HNG-X Support. Specifically making sure Data Migration was
working OK as branches Migrated and also producing weekly reports on numbers of HNG-X sessions that
required recovering. Also hit a few Accounting bugs which needed to be fixed.
2. Working with the counter team to help manage the Peak Backlog
’'m a member of the Business Impact Forum which is trying to close down outstanding Peaks
I’ve been involved in a number of Live support issues — including a couple of cases where POL SAP has had
major accounting discrepancies. In one such case I was able to explain to the POL SAP support team where
they had managed to lose the data in the XI system — even though the XI support team had initially been
unable to find it!
5. I was responsible for a number of CPs in R2:
a. PING
High Value Referrals
Policing MoPs
Policing Card Refunds
Offline Banking
Reason for Stock Adjustments
g. Streamline changes for Accreditation failures
In some cases my involvement was primarily in putting together the high level requirements in the CP and the
detailed design etc was done by development with little further involvement from me. However I was
involved in reviewing all the work and as a contact point with POL — particularly when there were issues.
6. I put together the Migration Strategy for R2 migration and carried this forward and amended it as necessary
for R3 and R4. In all cases I was providing support during the overnight DC migrations. They all went
smoothly.
7. had limited involvement in R3 and R4 other than in Migration
8. I spent some time with POL supporting a series of court cases where POL was prosecuting ex-Postmasters for
Theft where the Post Masters were claiming a problem with the system. Cases were:
a. West Byfleet: For this case I spent some time analysing a year’s worth of transactions and explaining
to the Defence Expert how Horizon worked. I was required to comment on the Defence expert’s
reports and spent a week at the court during the Trail including a full day in the Witness box being
Bw
moans
FUJ00156460
FUJ00156460
examined and cross examined by the barristers. The defendant was found guilty of Theft and Horizon
was given a clean bill of health
Porters Avenue: For this case I attended a pre-trial hearing and commented on some reports
produced by the defence. At the Trial the postmaster was found guilty
Bramwell: For this case I was given very little notice and had to comment on the Defence Expert’s
report at the last minute and then attend the Trial. The trial was really all about how much had been
stolen (the Postmaster claimed to have only stolen £45K and was accused of stealing £76K). When
the defendant was giving evidence I realise how they were mistaken and informed the Barrister and
as a result the Defence accepted that the full amount had been taken.
Rinkfield: Again I had a year’s worth of transactions to analyse working with the same Defence Expert
as for West Byfleet. Having had detailed discussions with the Defence expert (who was always late in
producing reports) and also meetings with the Barrister in Newcastle, I attended the Trail in Carlisle.
At the start of the Trial the Post office did a deal where the Theft change was dropped and the
defendant pleaded guilty and agreed that there was no problem with Horizon, so I wasn’t needed.
9. I’m now working on some R5 and R6 CPs:
a. PO Essentials
b. Client File Delivery where I am supporting Pete J — my role is looking at the accounting implications
and working with the POL SAP team
c. New MA: moving from Streamline to HMS
d. Starting work on switching the A&L interface to Santander
10. I’ve also provided some support for a bid to introduce IntelliQ to POL to help analyse transactions for fraud
For most of these I’ve been working with David Hinde as PM so he may be able to provide some feedback if you need
it.
Does that give you what you need?
Regards
Gareth
Gareth Jenkins
Distinguished Engineer
Business Applications Architect
Royal Mail Group Account
FUJITSU
Lovelace Road, Bracknell, Berl
Mobile
emai
Web:
http://uk.fujitsu.com
I Please consider the environment - do you really need to print this email?
Fujitsu Services Limited, 1d in England no 96056, Registered Office 22 Baker Street, L
This e-mail is only for the use of its intended recipient. Its contents are subject to a duty of confidence and may be privileged. Fujitsu
Services does not guarantee that this e-mail has not been intercepted and amended or that it is virus-free.
From: Macdonald Duncan
Sent: 25 March 2011 12:21
To: Jenkins Gareth GI
Subject: RE: AD11_007 Urgent - Performance Plus Appraisal Dates
Gareth
FUJ00156460
FUJ00156460
Give me a list of the main CPs you've worked on in the last year so that I can ‘modernise’ my comments.
Duncan
From: Jenkins Gareth GI
Sent: 25 March 2011 12:14
To: Macdonald Duncan
Subject: RE: AD11_007 Urgent - Performance Plus Appraisal Dates
Duncan,
I’ve had a quick look and my objectives look OK.
Thanks for sorting this out. Do you need anything from me?
Regards
Gareth
Gareth Jenkins
Distinguished Engineer
Business Applications Architect
Royal Mail Group Account
Road,
ss Please consider the environment - do you really need to print this email?
This e-mail is only for the use of its intended recipient. Its contents are subject to a duty of confidence and may be privileged. Fujitsu
Services does not guarantee that this e-mail has not been intercepted and amended or that it is virus-free.
From: Macdonald Duncan
Sent: 25 March 2011 11:47
To: Jenkins Gareth GI
Subject: FW: AD11_007 Urgent - Performance Plus Appraisal Dates
Importance: High
Gareth
Can you please confirm that your objectives are up to date and complete?
I'll hope and get your appraisal done in the next couple of weeks.
Duncan
FUJ00156460
FUJ00156460
From: Applications Division Communications
Sent: 25 March 2011 11:35
Subject: AD11_007 Urgent - Performance Plus Appraisal Dates
Importance: High
FUJITSU RESTRICTED
Applications Division
Announcement
Reference number: AD11_007
For: All Appraisal Managers within Applications Division
Date: Friday 25"" March 2011
Message from: John Hanley, (Managing Director, Applications Division)
Re: Urgent - Performance Plus Appraisal Dates
In order to ensure a fast start to the new financial year, it is vital that the 2010/11 appraisals are
loaded onto the appraisal system by 30th April. I appreciate that this may differ from previous
communications, but it is imperative that we work to the new date to ensure everyone is clear of
the expectations for the coming year. Therefore if you haven’t already done it is important that you
schedule appraisal meetings with your team members as soon as possible.
It is really important that employees receive clear and realistic messages about how they have
done over the year against their objectives and that our Performance Assessment Category (PAC)
ratings reflect this and are applied consistently.
You will be familiar with the definitions of the PAC’s below in the middle column but please
consider the additional comments in blue in the end column which expand on these definitions
and hopefully make clear the results expected in each category. Please think carefully about these
definitions when considering which PAC to award based on the results your team members have
actually delivered against their objectives and performance measures.
Consistently out- Has delivered and can evidence
performs beyond exceptional results time after time
O I Outstanding the agreed tasks that have had a significant impact
and objectives on organisation performance
Frequently Has repeatedly delivered above
exceeds the and beyond what was expected
E I Exceeds agreed tasks and of them and this can be seen in
objectives the results achieved
A Achiever Consistently Has delivered what was
meets the agreed I expected of them across their
tasks and objectives to AS targets
objectives
Has delivered against some of
Meets some of the I their objectives but not against
P Partially Meets I agreed tasks and others with some room for
objectives development to reach the
required standard
Consistently under- I Has not delivered to the required
> performs relative to I standard when assessed against
ZI Umeatiefactey I the agreed tasks stated objectives and role/level
and objectives performance expectations
Should be used for cases where
an appraisal has not been
NS I Not Specified I Not yet rated possible e.g. long term sick,
maternity, new starter
FUJ00156460
FUJ00156460
It is important to remember that someone who is consistently, time after time delivering against their
objectives (an Achiever) has much to be proud of and this should not be seen as an “average”
rating. In order to give your team members a fair PAC rating:
ceee
on most recent events
Focus on outputs and results — not inputs and activities
Consider achievement against each individual objective on its own merits
Avoid “central tendency” by not selecting the middle PAC rating as a default
Take a balanced view of how the team member has done throughout the year — don’t just focus
PACs should be about individual performance and not pay
e Be consistent in the approach you take across your team
e A moderation process will take place to ensure consistency across AD
To support you in completing these activities there is a wealth of information contained within the
Managers Toolkit which can be found here.
For further information please contact Matt George from the Core Division Communications team
FUJITSU RESTRICTED