The Bhutanese Leading the way.
PME expected to come up in upcoming Parliament session again
In the Annual Executive Forum organized by the Royal Civil Service Commission (RCSC) in Gelephu in January 2026, with around 90 executives, one of the topics that came up was the forced ranking Bell Curve methodology and Partially Meeting Expectations (PME) rating under the Performance Management System (PMS).
Executives Divided on Bell Curve
The RCSC Chairperson Tashi Pem said that some of the executives supported the Bell Curve system as it provides a clear ranking of staff and allows leaders to put “blame on the system” for that.
At the same time, some others asked RCSC to trust them and give them some flexibility in implementing the system, emphasizing accountablilty for outcomes rather than rigid quotas.
The Chairperson said that RCSC has not decided between these two different feedbacks yet.
Open to Improving the System
The Chairperson stressed that the RCSC is constantly looking at how to better improve the system, by doing research and studying how other countries go about it.
She indicated that RCSC is even ready to be flexible in the future on the Bell Curve and PME, but provided that the performance culture is so strong that performers and non-performers are organically identified so that performers can be motivated by rewards, and non-performers can be helped with additional training and other measures.
Until the above does not happen, the Chairperson made it clear that RCSC will continue to have the Bell Curve and PME under the PMS system.
Chairperson Tashi Pem said it is very easy for the RCSC to issue a notification and do away with the Bell Curve and PME, and go back to the old system, but she then pointed to the other alternative before PMS in 2014 when 99.38 percent of civil servants were rated Outstanding and the remaining 0.62 percent as very good, with no one in needs improvement.
Why RCSC Thinks Civil Servants are Unhappy with Bell Curve
The Chairperson said that one of the main reasons why people were unhappy with Bell Curve and PME is because many leaders are not doing the regular performance appraisal, and it is done only at the end of the year when it is too late. She said it is a communication issue too.
“If someone is not performing and if the manager makes it clear to that person early on, then the person either can change or will at least be aware that a certain rating is coming, but when the appraisal is done at the end then it is too late, and then there is no change and the person is also not prepared for PME,” said the Chairperson Tashi Pem.
She said to address this, the RCSC has been conducting vigorous training for the leaders and reminding them to do regular appraisal so that civil servants know where they stand early on and their performance is tracked continuously.
She said they want the Civil Service leaders to play a more active role in PMS with weekly, monthly and quarterly reviews.
She said right now, people can vent out against the system but the numbers who are unhappy are not so huge based on the appeals.
The Chairperson emphasized that PME should not carry stigma, but be treated as an opportunity to introspect and improve, and ultimately develop a growth mindset.
She said the end goal of PMS is to improve service delivery and performance, and support organizational mandates.
In the performance assessment, there are three parts, with part A being the bio data, Part B being the work output, and Part C being the behavioral indicator and potential.
The Chair said that part A and B are rarely contentious, but it is often in Part C where the issues crop up and markings can go low due to the nature of judgment.
Teachers and Health Professionals
While it is no secret that many civil servants are not happy with the Bell Curve and PME, the biggest opposition to this has come from teachers, given their varied responsibilities and how it cannot be quantified easily.
Teachers and health professionals form 35 and 15 percent of the civil service respectively, and these two are under the maximum strain, be it in terms of attrition levels or their critical nature.
The Chair said RCSC is working to support these two sectors and would welcome ideas to support the professionals in these two sectors.
The Chair said that PMS has provisions to insert even extracurricular activities, and she said while ministries and agencies have to rate 3 percent as PME, but in the case of schools, if their rating is at 90 percent or above under the School Performance Management System, nobody needs come under PME, with 1 percent PME for 80 to 89.99 percent score, 1.5 percent PME for 70 to 79 percent score and 2 percent PME for scores below that.
She said that RCSC is even open to teacher performance being judged under the Bhutan Professional Standards for Teachers (BPST) instead of the current system, but here, BPST will have to developed to a full level.
In terms of health professionals, she said the RCSC is in discussions with the Ministry of Health (MoH) in coming up with a better career progression system for doctors instead of the current wait of 4 to 5 years to get a promotion. She said if a doctor gets certain specializations and sub-specializations then that should be recognized and encouraged so that doctors go for more complex specializations.
In the future, the RCSC will also look at the career path of other health professionals like nurses and allied health staff, but she said they will also need the support of the Pay Commission as a lot of it is linked with salary and perks.
The RCSC has already requested the MoH to study the PMS of larger hospitals in other countries.
Operationalizing PMS through PBVI
The Chair said that last year the RCSC requested the Ministry of Finance if the Performance-Based Variable Incentives (PBVI) can be included in the annual budget, but it was let known that there is no fiscal space or resources yet.
She said that PMS will truly work once agencies are given a certain budget to distribute as PBVI. She said this will create peer pressure to identify and reward the performers and not give the same amounts to those not performing as well.
She said RCSC can even question leaders who are distributing PBVI equally to every one which means real evaluation is not happening.
The current incentive under PMS is to get an out of turn promotion in three or four years instead of waiting 4 or 5 years and for those applying for P 1, and above positions there is certain criteria where the certain PMS scores and rating are needed. The “stick” is PME and so far since its start in 2022-23 around 5 civil servants who were rated PME three times consistently had to exit the system.
In 2022-23 there were 525 civil servants placed under PME and in 2024-25 it jumped to 540.
Parliamentary Pressure Grows
The First Session of the Fourth Parliament in early 2024 passed the Motion of the Good Governance Committee of the National Assembly (NA) to do away with the forced ranking or Bell-Curve methodology used in the PMS system with 40 yes votes.
The Prime Minister during the second session in late 2024 presented the position of the RCSC to the NA on the relevance of PMS or MaX and the Bell Curve, and how RCSC as an independent constitutional body retains the exclusive mandate to oversee civil service performance management.
Thus, the RCSC said the resolution from the National Assembly serves as a recommendation and cannot compel changes to the PMS system.
The majority of the NA did not accept this explanation and decided to discuss the matter in the next session which is the summer session of 2025.
During the 2025 summer session, it was resolved and as announced by the Speaker that RCSC would be given one more year to address the NA resolution on doing away with the Bell Curve or the PME. He said most MPs are not satisfied by the response of the RCSC.
The Good Governance Committee is expected to present a report on the issue to the Parliament in the upcoming summer session and before that some meetings are expected between the committee and the RCSC.
No one can predict how the NA will react if there is another no from the RCSC, and what the NA will do thereafter.
The RCSC Chair said, “We will have to seek Parliamentary understanding and support in terms of the aspirations of a civil service transformation for an entrepreneurial bureaucracy. A company creates value for money and brings in the best of corporate governance, and a bureaucracy spends public resources and must do so efficiently.”
She said PMS is not just about PME, but it is also a talent management system and taking care of talented people. She said the currently young people don’t stay for long in the civil service as they are not attracted and find it monotonous or routine once they figure out the system. She said they would like more challenges.
Background of Evaluation
The evaluation before 2006 was attribute based and typically conducted only during promotions and suffered from a lack of objectivity and criteria contamination, with the result that 99.99 percent of civil servants were categorized as outstanding with zero in needs improvement.
From 2006 to 2014 there was the introduction to align performance with the agency vision, but it lacked structured processes and supervisory accountability. There was no performance differentiation.
2015 to 2021 saw the Launch of MaX; Forced Bell Curve Integrated with APA/APT Score. Performance was tied to APAs, with bell curve quotas aligned to Agency Performance Categories. Forced ranking lost effectiveness, as agencies could meet low targets and avoid placing staff in the PME category, undermining the goal of raising civil service performance standards.
As bell curve size was driven by APA, almost all agencies in Category 1 APA need not take out Needs Improvement. So, during this phase, on an average 99.04 percent of civil servants were rated either Outstanding, Very Good or Good and below 1 percent in Need Improvement.
From July 2022, the current system was introduced of a Bell Curve without APA/APT Score.
It introduced IT system-based performance dashboard to monitor alignment of key result areas to individual performance with LFS (Leadership Feedback System).
For Executives and P1, 15 percent were Exceeding Expectation, 80 percent were Meeting Expectation and 5 percent were PME. In the General Category, 7 percent were Outstanding, 15 percent Very Good, 75 percent were Good and 3 percent were Partially Meeting Expectations.
The Chair said that even in South Asia, countries had an indirect Bell Curve with public servants rated as A+, A-, B+, B-, C+, C- and D+ and D- with D falling in the PME. She said in Australia, in certain organizations, there are weekly targets given and weekly evaluations and scores.
The Chairperson said, “We Bhutanese are good at firefighting, but we are still learning to build discipline, rigor and a distinct professional value and culture.”
On the 6.5 percent attrition rate for 2025, she said it includes contract completion and those going from contract to regular employment. She also said that attrition rates among teachers look high as they are the largest chunk of the civil service.
