Performance Management Analysis – HCC Foundation

[Audio] Hi everyone, this is Julio Sulbaran. In this presentation, I'm going to walk you through the performance management system we use at the HCC Foundation, known as SOAR, and how it works in Workday. I'll explain the process, share what's working well, and highlight areas that could be improved—especially for a finance leadership role. Let's get started.

[Audio] The SOAR evaluation follows a clear, structured timeline. Employees start by completing their self-evaluation. Supervisors then review it, apply the SOAR rubric, and enter their final ratings in Workday. Throughout the year, the system supports quarterly check-ins, goal tracking, and HR involvement when needed. Workday handles most of the workflow automatically, which helps keep the process organized and consistent.

[Audio] HCC uses Workday as the hub for everything performance-related. Self-evaluations, supervisor ratings, goals, competencies, and quarterly feedback—everything lives in one place. Workday also alerts HR when improvement plans are needed and calculates the final score based on SOAR's rating scale. It really does streamline the admin side of the process. But as we'll see later, the system is very broad, and some specialized roles—like Finance Manager—aren't fully captured by the current criteria.

[Audio] The self-evaluation gives employees space to highlight what they've accomplished during the year. It's a great opportunity to bring attention to work that may not always be visible. For finance roles, this is where employees can document things like meeting close deadlines, improving reconciliations, tightening internal controls, or supporting system upgrades. It sets the tone for a more meaningful conversation with the supervisor.

[Audio] The SOAR rubric defines what each score means, from Outstanding to Unacceptable. It focuses mainly on competencies like cooperation, initiative, adaptability, and communication. The rubric helps create consistency across departments because it requires examples when a rating is above or below Satisfactory. But these rubrics don't include technical competencies—like accuracy in financial reporting or audit readiness—which are essential in finance positions. That gap is important.

[Audio] In Workday, employees must keep at least two active goals—one tied to their department and one tied to personal development. For a Finance Manager, meaningful goals should have measurable outcomes. For example: completing month-end close within five business days, maintaining zero unreconciled variances, or hitting P-Card implementation milestones. Clear goals make it easier to track progress and support accountability.

[Audio] Supervisors also get evaluated on a separate set of competencies. These include things like conflict resolution, delegation, and setting performance expectations. These are important for any leader. But again, for roles in finance, it would be helpful if supervisory expectations connected more directly to financial oversight, internal controls, and compliance responsibilities. Right now, those parts aren't reflected in the SOAR rubric.

[Audio] The quarterly feedback check-ins are built to maintain communication throughout the year. They allow issues to be discussed early instead of waiting until the annual review. That's a great feature. However, finance work moves on a monthly cycle—monthly closes, reconciliations, investment reporting, and audits. So quarterly check-ins are helpful but not always enough to keep financial operations aligned.

[Audio] SOAR includes oversight from HR, especially when ratings fall below expectations. Workday helps standardize ratings, documentation, and alerts. This improves fairness and transparency. That said, we could strengthen the process even more by adding calibration meetings or standard documentation templates so that evaluations are more consistent across supervisors and departments.

[Audio] When we look at the Finance Manager role specifically, several key findings stand out. First, the SOAR competencies are too general—they don't measure technical finance responsibilities. Second, because the system relies heavily on supervisor judgment, ratings can be inconsistent. Third, quarterly check-ins don't match the monthly rhythm of finance work. Fourth, goals don't always include measurable KPIs. And finally, the evaluation system focuses heavily on soft skills but doesn't emphasize critical financial priorities like accuracy, auditing, internal controls, and donor fund accountability.

[Audio] To improve the evaluation process for the Finance Manager role, a few enhancements would make a big difference. We should add finance-specific performance metrics—things like month-end close timeliness, reconciliation accuracy, and audit preparedness. Monthly check-ins would align better with financial cycles. Training supervisors to reduce rater errors would support more consistent scoring. We should also use measurable KPIs that follow the Management by Objectives model. A formal development plan for the Finance Manager—such as Blackbaud certifications or GAAP training—would support growth. A standard documentation template would make evaluations more consistent, and tying evaluations directly to the Foundation's strategic priorities would help reinforce the importance of accuracy, controls, and donor stewardship. Together, these improvements would make the process more relevant and more effective..

[Audio] To wrap up, the SOAR system in Workday provides a solid structure for performance management, but it can be strengthened—especially for finance roles. By adding clearer metrics, improving alignment with financial operations, and increasing consistency, we can build a more accurate and supportive evaluation system. Thank you for taking the time to watch this presentation..