CMI Level 6 Award in Public Service Leadership (QCF)

CHARTERED-MANAGEMENT-INSTITUTE

vocational

Performance management in public service leadership involves systematically setting and agreeing clear, measurable objectives that align team members’ work with organisational goals and public accountability frameworks. Leaders must assess performance through ongoing monitoring and formal reviews, providing constructive, evidence-based feedback that motivates improvement while maintaining professional standards. Crucially, this element covers identifying and implementing appropriate support for underperformance, as well as understanding and correctly applying disciplinary and grievance procedures when informal development fails, ensuring fair and lawful practice in a public service context.

Objectives

Exam Tips

Pitfalls

Key Terms

Mark Points

What You Need to Demonstrate

Key skills and knowledge for this topic

Award credit for demonstrating the ability to negotiate and agree SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound) objectives with individuals, clearly linking these to the wider public service strategic plan and accountability requirements.
Award credit for producing a performance assessment that uses objective data and observed behaviours, and for delivering feedback that balances recognition of strengths with specific, actionable areas for improvement.
Award credit for correctly diagnosing performance gaps and recommending a range of support options (e.g., coaching, training, adjustments) before considering formal procedures, showing a developmental approach.
Award credit for accurately applying each stage of the organisation’s disciplinary and grievance procedures to a given scenario, referencing policy documentation and demonstrating awareness of statutory requirements and natural justice.

Marking Points

Key points examiners look for in your answers

Award credit for demonstrating the ability to negotiate and agree SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound) objectives with individuals, clearly linking these to the wider public service strategic plan and accountability requirements.
Award credit for producing a performance assessment that uses objective data and observed behaviours, and for delivering feedback that balances recognition of strengths with specific, actionable areas for improvement.
Award credit for correctly diagnosing performance gaps and recommending a range of support options (e.g., coaching, training, adjustments) before considering formal procedures, showing a developmental approach.
Award credit for accurately applying each stage of the organisation’s disciplinary and grievance procedures to a given scenario, referencing policy documentation and demonstrating awareness of statutory requirements and natural justice.

Examiner Tips

Expert advice for maximising your marks

💡In assignment scenarios, always explicitly reference the specific disciplinary/grievance policy of the public service organisation (e.g., local authority, emergency service) – generic approaches will be penalised.
💡When demonstrating feedback skills in role-plays, use a coaching model (e.g., GROW) and show active listening; assessors look for a leadership style that empowers rather than dictates.
💡Link every performance objective back to a relevant public service accountability measure (e.g., response times, satisfaction levels) to demonstrate strategic alignment and earn higher marks.
💡For written work on support and improvement, include a range of evidence-based interventions (e.g., mentoring, job shadowing, peer learning) and justify choices with reference to learning styles or adult learning theory.

Common Mistakes

Pitfalls to avoid in your exam answers

Conflating performance improvement feedback with disciplinary action, leading to a failure to use supportive interventions first and potentially escalating issues unnecessarily.
Setting objectives that are either too vague to measure or disconnected from the organisation’s priorities, undermining the performance review process.
Neglecting to maintain contemporaneous written records of performance discussions and agreed actions, which weakens the evidence base for both development and formal proceedings.
Assuming that underperformance is always due to individual capability or conduct without considering systemic issues, resource constraints, or personal circumstances that may require support or reasonable adjustments.

Key Terminology

Essential terms to know

Be able to identify and agree performance objectives, Be able to assess performance and provide feedback, Be able to understand performance support for improvement, Be able to understand and apply the organisation’s disciplinary and grievance procedures

Ready to test yourself?

Practice questions tailored to this topic

CMI Level 6 Award in Public Service Leadership (QCF)

What You Need to Demonstrate

Marking Points

Examiner Tips

Common Mistakes

Key Terminology

Ready to test yourself?

Related Topics in CHARTERED-MANAGEMENT-INSTITUTE vocational Public Services

Collaborative Public Services Project

Developing Public Service Teams.

Performance management

Planning to Meet Public Services Customer Requirements