Wrap up. The wrap up is the overall conclusion on the individual contribution, the conduct and the development of the employee. Each of the three topics must be discussed in the wrap up. The wrap up must be formulated carefully: it should reflect the relationship between performance and evaluation/remuneration. Once a year, the employee presents a proposal for the wrap up. The manager can add to and comment on the wrap up formulated by the employee. The wrap up must be finalized by the manager on January 31 at the latest, as part of which the manager awards a score to the employee’s performance. Documentation There are three possible scores for performance: • Exceptionally good year • Successful year • Improvement required In determining the score, the following is also weighed, in addition to the evaluation of general performance: • whether the long-term customer interest has been satisfied; • whether the Rabobank Code of Conduct has been complied with; • whether the employee is aware of potential risks and dilemmas that are connected with his performance, treats these conscientiously and thoroughly weighs up (commercial) goals versus risks; • feedback on the performance of the employee. Specific requirements Additional requirements apply to the documentation for certain groups of employees, including Identified Staff, monitoring positions and employees who are within the scope of the Xxxxxx Xxxx. Those requirements are laid down in the Group Remuneration Policy. Among other things, this means that they are obliged to record annual objectives in advance and include in the wrap up the extent to which those objectives were achieved. Continued development of GROW! Rabobank is a bank in a state of flux. Developments within the organization such as, for example, working in self-organizing teams and Agile working may prompt adjustments to GROW! Labor unions are helping to flesh out those developments. GROW! study arrangement The parties to the CLA will jointly carry out a study which will examine the options for separating GROW! and the annual individual salary adjustment. The study will in any event include the following components: • What would GROW! be like without wrap up/assessment • What would be an appropriate remuneration methodology which is not connected to an assessment? • Examination of options where employees can be recognized and appreciated in a flexible way and at appropriate moments by colleagues and their manager, where possible taking account of the d...
Wrap up. In the event of any termination or expiration hereunder, the Parties mutually agree in good faith to (i) promptly cooperate in winding down all Collaboration activities and completing all assignment-related activities contemplated by Section 4.3, and (ii) destroy or return to each other all Confidential Information in one Party’s possession or control that is owned solely by the other Party and not licensed to such one Party with rights that survive termination or expiration of this Agreement, and, if requested in writing by the other Party, provide a written certificate confirming compliance with this clause (ii) within sixty (60) days of termination or expiration.
Wrap up. Review, Roles and Access, Create Architecture diagram, as well and artifacts from the discovery phase, Identify areas for remediation. And includes the following assumptions:
Wrap up conclusions In conclusion, the partners employed different methods and faced various challenges in identifying tools and sources of information for public procurement of food or catering services. Some partners, such as Malta, Poland, and Hungary, did not identify any specific tools. Finland reported about multiple outlines measures taken in Finland to promote health-promoting and sustainable catering services. Greece identified one online tool for procurement. Denmark utilized several tools, including Excel spreadsheets, document drafter templates, and a digital database. Bosnia and Herzegovina and Austria did not provide information about specific tools. Partners also described their ideal Public Food Procurement tool. Malta and Finland emphasized user-friendliness, accessibility, language options, and integration with key databases. Greece found the Catalogue interesting, while Denmark desired legal content and links to national PFP network. Bosnia and Herzegovina and Austria emphasized language options, ease of use, availability to all participants, and inclusion of regional producers and small and medium enterprises (SMEs). Hungary desired a food catalogue similar to Slovenia's, adapted to national regulations and compatible with existing platforms. Poland sought a tool with specific product quality definitions. Regarding the pilot public tender process, each partner collaborated with food providers in different ways. The willingness of providers to participate varied among partners, with some expressing high interest while others showed little or no interest. Collaboration with food providers occurred through online meetings, emails, phone calls, and visits. Partners approached the implementation of national market analysis differently. Malta and Greece extracted data from websites, while Finland relied on contacts and networks. Denmark utilized historical data and expert knowledge, and Bosnia and Herzegovina obtained information through direct contact and factory visits. Austria relied on pre-existing project experience, and Hungary collected data from online shops. Poland faced challenges with language barriers. The implementation of public tenders also had variations. Some partners gathered information directly from websites, followed instructions from project leaders, or conducted pilot tests using the Catalogue of food. Training and collaboration with food providers were limited in some cases due to capacity constraints or time limitations. Over...
Wrap up. “Bodily injury” or “property damage” arising out of any project in which the insured participated for which a “Wrap-up or Owner Controlled Insurance Plan” was provided.
Wrap up. Much of the management stuff is for iteration 2. It would be nice to see the reason why many records suddenly fail due to an update. NS then asked which requirements should be prioritised and described for iteration 1.
Wrap up. The diverse and complex issues discussed succinctly above require an interdisciplinary and holistic approach to water management as climatic and socio-economic pressures change in the future. The project will promote a set of methodological approaches aimed at addressing these key issues and will prepare a decision-making framework for mountain water management. Short-term solutions to current and future problems of water resource management include, at least from a technological point of view, the construction of reservoirs to buffer the effects of increasing drought, although it is recognized that artificial lakes can also result in negative environmental impacts; there is also a reduction in the social acceptability related to the construction of new dams in many areas. Longer-term solutions require addressing the issues of greenhouse-gas emissions, beyond the 2012 targets imposed by the Kyoto Protocol. Changing land use in catchment areas may also be a means of adapting to the negative consequences of water availability and quality in many mountain regions in a changing climate. While the main focus is on the European case, its strengths and weaknesses are best assessed in a comparative framework. Response strategies are thus studied by contrasting the Europe Alps, with their relatively high level of economic development and robust institutional structure, with Central Asia (Xxxxxxxxxxx,et al. 2007, 2008)where poverty and latent conflict compromise effective water management. This approach permits an evaluation of a range of policy alternatives and may provide some positive recommendations to avoid conflict in a volatile region.
Wrap up. Thank all participants for their contributions. In a circle or arrangement where everyone can see each other’s faces ask all the participants to offer one word summing up how they have felt about the workshop, and one sentence saying what they will take away from it. This keeps the two-way communication open between stakeholders and project partners and keeps ‘the door open’ for future conversations as to how they can take on Road-STEAMer recommendations etc. in their own work.
Wrap up. 11.5.1 In lieu of the insurance requirements set forth in Paragraphs 11.1. through 11.3 hereof, Owner shall have the right to purchase "Wrap-Up" insurance for the Project to protect the interest of Owner, Contractor, any separate contractor and all Subcontractors. In such event, the Contract Sum shall be reduced to reflect the total amount included therein to compensate Contractor and all Subcontractors for the insurance coverage which would have been required under Paragraph 11.1 hereof.
Wrap up. 1. In the event of the termination of any Attachment or this Agreement, County shall be liable to PROVIDER for an amount equal to the value of the Services completed up to the effective date of termination.
