Summer Project s

8/6/2019 Summer Project s

1/52

SUMMER PROJECT

ON

CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

SYSTEM AT RASHTRIYA CHEMICALS AND

FERTILIZERS LTD

SUBMITTED BY

ATUL GAIKAR

SARAJABEEN SHAIKH

RAVI TEMBHARE

COMPLETED UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF

MR. UMESHKUMAR MOTE

ASST. H.R. MANAGER

PREFACE


2/52

Efficient management of human, technical and financial resources is a very important foraccomplishment of objectives of any business .Every manager has to perform certain

functions to coordinate the efforts of the people working under him for effectiveness andefficient use of physical resource. The quality of performance of these functions

determines the success of any organization to a great extent.

This is true both at all levels. With the rapidly changing socio economicenvironment and growing industry throughout world, Human Resource Management has

become a very challenging job. Todays managers are required possess certain relationand conceptual skills in addition to wide reservoir of knowledge. Studying the

management science and practicing the principle and techniques of management can helpacquire these skills. My project is an attempt to provide an efficient aid to the

development of an understanding of the basic concept that relates to the practices of performance appraisal at RCF Ltd; the employees approach towards the existing

performance appraisal system and its comparison with companies from the same sector.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT


3/52

At the very outset, we would like to extend my sincere gratitude to Mr. C.V. Talegaonkar(Dy. H.R.Manager) and Mr. Umeshkumar Mote (Sr. H.R.Officer) for giving me the

assistance for my summer training at Rashtriya Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. andenabling me to benefit from this enlightening experience.

We would like to thank Mr. S.M. Kekan (Chief Training Manager) for giving me the

opportunity to work with RCF Ltd. for my summer internship.

We would like to thank the management and HR staff of RCF Ltd. for providing me thefacilities and whole hearted cooperation during my tenure as a summer trainee.

At last no words would suffice to express my deep sense of thanks to the innumerable

people we met during the research for the constant encouragement and support during thecourse of the project.

TABLE OF CONTENTS:


4/52

y ABOUT FERTILIZER SECTOR IN INDIA

y About RCF Ltd.

y Performance appraisal

y Objectives ofPerformance Appraisal System

y Hypothesis

y Research methodology

y Performance Appraisal System at RCF Ltd.

y Results

y Data Analysis and Interpretation

y Limitation of Study

y Recommendations

y Conclusion

INTRODUCTION


5/52

ABOUT FERTILIZER SECTOR IN INDIA

Agriculture accounts for nearly 1/4th of India's GDP (Gross Domestic Product)

and more importantly, about 2/3rd of the country's population is dependent on agriculture

and allied activities for their livelihood. Successive Five Year plans have stressed on self-

sufficiency and self-reliance in food grains production and concerted efforts in thisdirection have resulted in substantial increase in agriculture production and productivity.

This is clear from the fact that from a very modest level of 52 million tons in 1951-52,

food grain production rose to above 206 million tons in 1999-2000. Behind India's

success story of not only meeting total requirement of food grains but also having their

exportable surplus, the significant role played by chemical fertilizers is well recognized

and established beyond any doubt.

Chemical fertilizers have played a vital role in the success of India's green

revolution and consequent self-reliance in food-grain production. The increase in

fertilizer consumption has contributed significantly to sustainable production of food

grains in the country. The Government of India has been consistently pursuing policies

conductive to increased availability and consumption of fertilizers in the country. The

production of nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizer together has increased from mere 0.3

lacks MT in 1950-51 to about 147 lacks MT in nutrients terms in 2001-02. Since there

are no commercially viable sources of potash in the country, its entire requirement is met

through imports. The overall consumption of fertilizers in nutrient terms currently is

about 175 lacks MT per annum.

As of now, the country has achieved near self-sufficiency in production capacity

of urea and DAP, with the result that India could manage its requirement of these

fertilizers from indigenous industry and imports of all fertilizers except MOP have

presently been nominal.

Over the last five decades, the production of nitrogenous and phosphatic

fertilizers taken together has increased from a mere 0.3 lack MT in 1950-51 to 146.28lacks MT in nutrients terms in 2001-02.

The Indian fertilizer industry has succeeded in meeting almost fully the demand of all

chemical fertilizers except forMOP. The industry had a very humble beginning in 1906,

when the first manufacturing unit of Single SuperPhosphate (SSP) was set up in Ranipet

near Chennai with an annual capacity of 6000 MT. The Fertilizer & Chemicals

Travancore of India Ltd. (FACT) at Cochin in Kerala and the Fertilizers Corporation of


6/52

India (FCI) in Sindri in Bihar were the first large sized -fertilizer plants set up in the

forties and fifties with a view to establish an industrial base to achieve self-sufficiency in

food grains. Subsequently, green revolution in the late sixties gave an impetus to the

growth of fertilizer industry in India. The seventies and eighties then witnessed a

significant addition to the fertilizer production capacity.

Company Profile


7/52

About RCF Ltd.Rashtriya Chemicals and Fertilizers Limited, a Government of India Undertaking is one

of the largest integrated Fertilizer and Industrial chemicals complexes in our country. It

was incorporated on 6th March 1978 on reorganization of the erstwhile Fertilizer

Corporation of India Ltd.(FCI Ltd.) and National Fertilizer Limited. (NFL) RCF has

always selected the best available technology at the time of inception of every plant and

followed it up with up-gradation from time to time to improve energy efficiencies and

make the plants eco-friendly and competitive.

The first phase plants of Trombay Unit, Ammonia, Urea, Complex Fertilizer Suphala

(15:15:15), Sulfuric Acid and Nitric Acid were commissioned in October-November,

1965. In the second phase, Methanol Plant was put up in 1966 which was known as

Trombay II diversification. This was followed by further diversification schemes, which

included Ammonium Bicarbonate Plant, Sodium Nitrite/Nitrate Plant, Methylamines

Plant, Concentrated Nitric Acid Plant, and Phosphoric Acid Plant.

Further expansion in terms of Nitric Acid Plant, Complex FertilizerAmmonium Nitrate

Phosphate (20.8:20.80:0), additional Steam Generation and Water Treatment Plant,

Bagging and Effluent Treatment Plant was commissioned in 1979. This was termed as

Trombay-IV expansion. In 1977 further expansion (Trombay-V) was launched which had

one Ammonia and one Urea Plant with Associated Gas Compressor, Steam Generation,

Water Treatment and Bagging Plant. This project was commissioned in 1981.

RCFs Thal plant is located about 100 kms from Mumbai. The plant capacity for urea is

1.5m tonn/annum. Spread over an area of 600 acres has an investment of about Rs 890

crores. The Thal plant was started on 17 Oct 1984.

MISSIONRCF as a corporate body and Government of India undertaking is responsible to the

people of India, the Government as owner, Government as Government, Consumers,

Employees, the Society at large and Posterity. The company is simultaneously

accountable to all these agencies that have a stake in its successful operation, growth and

welfare.

VISION


8/52

To be the leader in the Fertilizer Industry by the year 2010 and a major player in global

market

Keeping these aspects in view, RCF has set for itself the following corporate goals -

y To help increase the national agricultural productivity by providing agriculturalinputs and services.

y

To provide the above inputs and services with least consumption of real

resources and at least cost.

y To obtain for it's employees as decent a standard of living and as good a qualityof life as possible, consistent with the general socio-economic conditions in the

country.

y To secure as high a return on the rate of investment as possible, keeping in view

the requirements of other competing objectives.

y To promote self-reliance in all activities in relation to company's operationsincluding process know-how, design and engineering, erection, commissioning,

operations, maintenance of plants and marketing of products.

y To manufacture and market industrial chemicals related to agricultural inputs andalso others based on similar technology and intermediates, by-products, co

products and waste from the main operations.

y To promote, organize, and perform research and development in products,technology, engineering, soil science and agronomy in furtherance of various

corporate objectives.

y To improve the environment and minimize to the maximum extenttechnologically possible, the harmful emissions, atmospheric discharges and

effluents.

y To continuously upgrade the quality of human resources and promoteorganizational and management development.

y To co-operate nationally and internationally in exchange of information andservices of personnel. 8

y To have corporate growth at a pace consistent with availability of resources anddevelopmental needs of the economy.

y To promote specific social objectives such as development of entrepreneurs,ancillary industries, special assistance to SC / ST and other backward classes.


9/52

ORGANIZATIONAL CHART


10/52

HIERARCHY OF HR DEPARTMENT


11/52

CURRENT STATUS

Thal Plant: Main Plant

Plant Unit Capacity/Unit

Ammonia 2 X 1,500 tpd

Urea 3 X 1,725 tpd

Steam Generation 2 X 275 tph, 1x 275 tph Standby

T.G.set 2 X 15 MW

D.M.F. 1 X 2,500 tpy

D.M.A.C. 1 X 5,000 tpy

M.A.- Old 1 X 5,000 tpy

M.A.- New 1 X 6,400 tpy

CO 1 X 1,200 NM3 Per Hr.

Formic Acid 1 X 10,000 tpy

OFF-SITES :

Formic Acid 1 X 10,000 tpy

Product handling and bagging system 6,000 tpd.

Two silos for urea storage 90,000 MT capacity.

Two ammonia storage tanks 25,000 MT capacity.

Water Treatment Plant

Effluent Treatment and Disposal system.

Pollution monitoring and control facilities.

Ammonia dispatch facility.

Agricultural Research Centre.

Industrial Chemicals dispatch facilities.


12/52

INFRASTRUCTURE

y Workshops

y Townships

y Water supply line

y Power supply

y Laboratories

y Railway sidings

y Gas supply line

UTILITIES REQUIREMENTS

y Gas requirement : 3.15 Million Nm3/day from GAIL

y Power requirement : 25 MW from MSEB

y

Water: 56000 cubic meter /day from MIDC

LAND REQUIREMENT

y For plants: 820 acres

y For townships: 300 acres

y For railway siding: 250 acres

ANNUAL PRODUCTION CAPACITY

y Ammonia: 9,90,000 MT per year

y Urea : 17,07,750 MT per year

y Nitrogen : 7,94,104 MT per year

y DMF: 2,500 MT per year

y MAP (Old): 5,000 MT per year

y MAP (New): 6,400 MT per year

y CO: 1,200 Nm3 per hr.

y FA: 10,000 MT per year


13/52

Products at RCFThe main products manufactured at RCF are

1) Ammonium Bicarbonate

2) Ammonium Nitrate (Melt)

3) Anhydrous Ammonia

3a) Refrigerant Ammonia

4) Argon

5) Amines (Anhydrous and Solution)

- Monomethylamine

- Dimethylamine

- Trimethylamine

6) Calcium Carbonate (Dry & Purified)

6a) Chalk (Sludge & impure)

7) Dimethyl Formamide (DMF)

8) Dimethylacetamide (DMAC)

9) Formic Acid

10) Phospho Gypsum

11) Dilute Nitric Acid (58%)

12) Concentrated Nitric Acid (98%, 72% & 68%)

13) Methanol

14) Sodium Nitrite15) Sodium Nitrate

16) Sulphuric Acid For captive consumption

17) Chickton (Liquid Acidifier)


14/52

AWARDS

National Awards

y NATIONAL AWARD FORPRVENTION OF POLLUTION 1992,

presented by President of India, Dr.Shankar Dayal Sharma, on 6thAugust,

1994.

y RAJIV GANDHI ENVIRONMENT AWARD FOR CLEAN

TECHNOLOGY-1993 presented by Smt. Sonia Gandhi on 19thAugust,

1994.

y THE NATIONAL ENERGY CONSERVATION AWARD96, presented

by Prime Minister of India, Mr.H.D.Deve Gowda on 14th

December, 1996.

Other Awards

y JAWAHARLAL NEHRU MEMORIAL NATIONAL AWARD 1993-

94, for excellence in Indian Industries by effective implementation of

energy conservation methods from the International Greenland Society.

y INDIAN NATIONAL SUGGESTION SCHEMES ASSOCIATION

AWARD for excellence in Suggestion Scheme in the year, 1991.

y Grade- A (Excellent) award from Department ofPublic Enterprises in

the year 1989-90.y BEST ORGANISATION award from Indira Gandhi Memorial,

sponsored by APPublic Sector Employees Federation, during the year

1987-88.

ISO CERTIFICATION

RCF has obtained following certification

y

ISO 9001-2008y ISO- 14001- 2004

y OHSAS 18001-2007


15/52

OBJECTIVES

This project aims at studying the system of performance appraisal and its

effectiveness in an organization. Performance appraisal is the most significant and

indispensable tool for the management as it provide useful information for decision

making in area of promotion and compensation reviews. Thus broad objectives of thestudy include:

y To know the present system of performance appraisal.

y To know the extent of effectiveness of the appraisal system.

y To identify and know the area for improvement of the system.

y To know employee attitude towards the present appraisal system.


16/52

HYPOTHESIS

1. The Employees identify the Performance A ppraisal System at RCF to be

effective.

2. Employees at RCF are trained to perform error free Appraisal.

3. Performance A ppraisal System at RCF motivates the employees for better

performance

4. The employees are satisfied with the Appraisal System at RCF.

5. The employees perceive the Performance A ppraisal System at RCF as fair and

just.

6. The Performance Appraisal System at RCF helps improve the commitment of

Employees towards the organization.

7. The Performance Appraisal at RCF is conducted within the given time frame.

8. The Performance A ppraisal System at RCF gives timely feedback to the

employees for improvement.

9. The Performance A ppraisal at RCF is conducted in adherence to the policy

framework.

10.The Performance A ppraisal System at RCF gives good analytical data for the

appraisal of an employee and has become an effective tool for career succession

planning.

11.The Performance appraisal system at RCF identifies the Training and

Development needs of the employee.

12.The evaluating authority for the appraisal of an employee in the prevailing

Performance Appraisal System is perceived to be appropriate.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY


17/52

The project work has been carried out in three stages, a structured questionnaire with

objective and question was communicated tested and finalize. During the second stage,

the questionnaire was administered to the employees at RCF Ltd. by contacting them.

The work relating to data entry compilation, data analysis and report writing constituted

the third stage. Interview index was also used at some places to get information on the

project subject. The details of the methodology adopted are presented below:

Data Collection:-

Data is collected through primary and secondary sources.

Primary Source of Data:-

y Survey carried out in RCF Ltd. And Methodology used is questionnaires.

y Also the methodologies like interview and observation are used as primary data.

Secondary Source of Data:-

y Office Records.

y Reference books

y Websites.

The Questionnaire

Keeping in view the objective of the study, questionnaire was designed and tested on few

employees. After getting the proper response and sanction from the concerned

department the questionnaire was finalized.

Response to Questionnaire

In all 170 questionnaires were given to employees falling in the category of supervisors

and above. The researcher individually contacted the employees to get response on the

questionnaire.

Records from the HR department were checked for secondary data.

Data entry and analysis

It has been an uphill task to enter the enormous data received through the questionnaire

which consisted of nearly 12 questions. Response to the descriptive questions thoughvery few but was valuable for the purpose of study. Hence these were further structured

in time with the system adopted for compilation and data analysis.

A summated rating scale is used for scaling. A summated scale consists of a series a

statements to which the subject is asked to react. The scale consists of only those

statements that seem to be definitely favorable or definitely unfavorable to the issue.


18/52

Sampling:-

It is the study of relationships existing between a population and various samples

drawn from this population. The sample so selected has to be truly representative of the

population so as to result in valid and reliable conclusions. The parts of the population

that are selected constitute the sample, the technique involve in selecting them is called as

sampling technique and the study based on these principle is called sample survey.

In this project work the sample size include employees of all departments.

For project, a sample size 35% was collected.

o The Confidence level was set at 90%

o The confidence interval was set at 5%

o Total Population size was 490.

Determination of Sample size:-

The larger your sample size, the more sure you can be that their answers truly reflect the

population. This indicates that for a given confidence level, the larger your sample size,

the smaller your confidence interval. However, the relationship is not linear (i.e.,

doubling the sample size does not divide the confidence interval).

Confidence interval:-The confidence interval is the plus-or-minus figure usually

reported in newspaper or television opinion poll results. For example, if you use a

confidence interval of 4 and 47% percent of your sample picks an answer you can

"sure"that if you had asked the question of the entire relevant population between 43%

(47-4) and 51% (47+4) would have picked that answer.

Confidence level:-

The confidence level tells you how sure you can be. It is expressed as a percentage

and represents how often the true percentage of the population who would pick an answer

lies within the confidence interval. The 95% confidence level means you can be 95%

certain; the 99% confidence level means you can be 99% certain. Most researchers use

the 95% confidence level.


19/52

PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL SYSTEM

DEFINITION:

Performance appraisal is the process of evaluating the performance and

qualifications of the employees in terms of the requirements of the job for which he

is employed, for the purpose of administration including placement, selection for

promotions, providing financial rewards and other actions which require differential

treatment among the members of a group as distinguished from actions affecting all

members equally.

The performance appraisal is a formal means of communication between a

supervisor and an employee that provides an opportunity to acknowledge mutual

understanding of job duties and responsibilities and to discuss performance expectations

and future objectives for the position. The performance appraisal process is the

culmination of all informal communications and training that has occurred during the

rating period. Permanent employees are evaluated during the annual performance

evaluation cycle. Supervisors are not limited to establish evaluation cycles, but can build

on that structure to maintain a positive flow of communication and feedback.

Appraisal is like being in the Olympics of management. Few

P

eople ever get thechance to participate; even fewer are true masters

PURPOSE:

The overall objective of performance appraisal is to improve the efficiency of an

enterprise by attempting to mobilize the best possible efforts from individuals employed


20/52

in it. Such appraisals achieve four objectives salary review, the development and training

of individuals, planning job rotation and assistance promotions.

Performance appraisal has been considered as a most significant and

indispensable tool for an organization, for the information it provides, is highly useful in

making decisions regarding various personal aspects such as promotion and merit

increases. Performance measures also links information gathering and decision making

processes which provides a basis for judging the effectiveness of personnel sub divisions

such as recruiting, selection, training and compensation. They help pinpoint weak areas

in the primary system (example: - marketing, finance and production). It is easier for

mangers to see which employees need training or counseling, because jobs are grouped

by categories (example: - production foreman, sales manager, financial analyst).

Valid performance data are available, timely, accurate, objective, standardized

and relevant, management can maintain consistent promotion and compensation policies

throughout the total system.

Effective performance appraisal system contains two basic systems operating in

combination.

y An evaluation system

y A feedback system

BENEFITS:

The process provides opportunities for individuals to:

y Understand and clarify their job role and responsibilities.

y Know how they contribute towards the achievement of the companys aim and

objectives.

y Discuss the standards of performance expected for their job.

y Get constructive feedback from their line managers, which can enable the

employees to bring about changes in their behaviors, attitudes, skills and

knowledge and set realistic goals for themselves.y Discuss views and ideas on how their job role could be improved.

y Understand their line managers role, responsibilities and priorities.

y Performance appraisal generates significant, relevant and useful information

about the promote ability and potential of employees. The information is used to

assess the organizations internal supply of human resources and availability of

managerial personnel for succession and planning.


21/52

y Information gathered through performance appraisal provides inputs for making

decisions concerning salary administration, financial incentives, appreciations,

additional responsibilities, promotion etc. On the basis of this, achievers and poor

performers can be given appropriate signals.

THE EVALUATION PROCESS

Established Performance

Standard.

Communicate Performance

establishment to Employees.

Measure Actual Performance.

Compare Actual Performance With

Standard.

Discuss The Appraisal With The Employee.

If Necessary, Initiate Corrective Action


22/52

THE EVALUATION PROCESS

1. ESTABLISH PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

At the time of designing a job and formulating a job description, performance

standards are usually developed for the position. These standards should be clear and not

vague, and objective enough to be understood and measured. These standards should bediscussed to find out which different factors are to be incorporated, weights and points to

be given to each factor and these then should be indicated on the Appraisal Form, and

later on used for appraising the performance of the employees.

2. COMMUNICATE PERFORMANCE EXPECTATIONS TO THE

EMPLOYEES

The next step is to communicate these standards to the employees, for the

employees left to themselves, would find it difficult to guess what is expected of them.

To make communication effective feedback is necessary from the subordinate to the

manager. Satisfactory feedback ensures that the information communicated by the

manager has been received and understood in the way it was intended.

3. MEASURE ACTUAL PERFORMANCE

To determine what actual performance is, it is necessary to acquire information

about it. We should be concerned with how we measure and what we measure. Four

sources are frequently used to measure actual performance:

y Personal observations

y Statistical reports

y Oral reports

y Written reports

4. COMPARE ACTUAL PERFORMANCE WITH STANDARDThe employee is apprised and judged of his potential for growth and

advancement. Attempts are made to note deviations between standard performance and

actual performance.


23/52

5. DISCUSS THE APPRAISAL WITH THE EMPLOYEE

The results of appraisal are discussed periodically with the employees, where

good points, weak points and difficulties are indicated and discussed so that performance

is improved.

6. IF NECESSARY, INITIATE CORRECTIVE ACTIONS

Coaching, counseling may be done or special assignments and projects may be

set; persons may be deputed for formal training courses, and decision making

responsibilities and authority may be delegated to the subordinates. Attempts may also be

made to recommend for salary increases or promotions, if these decisions become

plausible in the light of appraisals.

The details given above may vary from organization to organization but these

steps usually form the principal steps/features of a sound evaluation programme.


24/52

METHODS OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

(a) GRAPHIC RATING SCALE METHOD:

The graphic rating scale method provides a form wherein, for each person who isto be rated, the number of qualities and characteristics are enumerated, e.g. - the

analytical ability, decisiveness, leadership, job performance, emotional stability, etc. One

form of the rating scale is the continuous scale wherein the rater places a mark

somewhere on a continuum as the tabular matter shows.

WORK ATTITUDE

0 5 10 15 20

NO INTERST IN

WORK

INDIFFERENT TO

INSTRUCTION

INTERESTED IN

WORK

ENTHUSIASTIC VIGOROUS

The rating system generally depends on the allocation of marks in order to qualify

Measurement of performance

The exact allocation of marks to differentiate the performance of one individual from

another is, of course, a delicate job. Generally, in the rating, if a man is given 90 marks

and another 88, it is hardly possible to discriminate accurately on this basis. There are

many variations of this method in the graphic form or descriptive form.

(b)EMPLOYEE COMPARISON METHOD

The employee comparison method can be sub divided into two further categories,

viz

RANKING METHOD

The ranking system requires the rater to rank his subordinates on overall

performance. This consists in simply putting a man in a rank order. The major

drawback in this method is that it does not pinpoint the person strength or weaknesses

nor tell us of his absolute worth. This system also cannot be applied in a large

undertaking since simple ranking is a difficult job and has limited utility.


25/52

FORCED DISTRIBUTION METHOD

This method is designed to prevent the supervisors from clustering their men

mostly on the high side or on the low side. It tackles the errors due to excessive

lenience, stiffness and central tendency. It requires the rater to allocate the rating of

his subordinates in a pattern confirming to a normal curve, e.g.: the supervisor must

put 10% of his people in the top few, 20% in the next highest category, 40% in the

middle, 20% in the lower and 10% at the bottom category. Although it is true that

most organizations have a work force whose abilities and performance fall in a

normal curve, yet, this system disregards exceptional cases where most of the person

may fall into the top category or into the lowest category.

(c) CRITICAL INCIDENT METHOD

Some organizations follow this method, which requires every superior to

adopt the practice of keeping a notebook of significant incidents in each employees

behavior that indicates his successful or poor performance. There are specially

designed notebooks containing appropriate characteristics and categories on the basis

of which the performance rating is done. The danger in such a method is that it leads

to a danger where the subordinates feel that their boss is breathing down their necks.

Sometimes, it creates a difficulty in maintaining high morale.

(d) FIELD REVIEW SYSTEM METHOD

The essence of this method is that line officers do not themselves fill up the

rating form; instead representatives of the personnel department come to the shop

floor and interview the supervisors to obtain pertinent information about employees.

This information is then sent to the supervisors for approval. Then, the men are

categorized on this basis. Compared to the system of personnel men assessing

directly, this system has a better potential for objectivity.

(e) FREE FORM ESSAY METHOD

In this form, no scale, checklists or other devices are used, but a supervisor is

simply required to write down his impressions about an individual on a sheet of

paper. This system has obvious limitations.

(f) CHECKLISTS METHOD

Checklist method can also be further sub divided in two broad categories, viz;


26/52

WEIGHTED CHECKLIST METHOD

In this system a large number of statements that describe a particular job

are given. Every statement has a weight or scale value attached to it. While rating

an employee the supervisor checks all those statements that most closely describe

the behavior of the individual under attachment. Averaging the weights of all the

statements checked by the rater then scores the rating sheet. A checklist is

constructed for each job by having persons who are quite familiar with the jobs.

Judges then categorize these statements and weights are assigned to the

statements in accordance with the value attached by the judges. This system,

however, involves too much of staff work and is not feasible in a large

undertaking where great many jobs and men are involved.

FORCED CHOICE METHOD

In this system a rating form is specially constructed for a type or group of

jobs with a group of four to five statements for each factor. The appraiser is asked

to pick up the statement, which is the least applicable to the appraisal. The weight

age assigned to the statements is kept secret from the supervisors. They are only

supposed to give the correct description of the performance of the individual in

terms of the higher officer or the appraiser as to which is in favor and which is

against the individual.

(g) GROUP APPRAISAL METHOD

The group appraisal method is in vogue in some organizations. Decisions

pertaining to promotions, pay increases, job changes and other such issues are

discussed in a meeting between the supervisors and the subordinates.

(h) MANAGEMENT BY OBJECTIVE (MBO)

Douglas McGregor has developed a new performance appraisal technique. His

method envisages a subordinate setting up his own short-term performance goals in

cooperation with his supervisor. The supervisor guides this process to ensure that it is

encouraged to make an analysis of his job, its strengths and weaknesses. Every few

months, the two get together, discuss the progress towards the goals and the

individual participates in the process of evaluation. This method is useful for

executive cadres, but is not applicable in the case of a large work force and has

limitations in the form of availability of time and attention.


27/52

BEHAVIOURALLY ANCHORED RATING SCALE METHOD

BARS combines major elements from the critical incident and graphic

rating scale approaches. The appraisal rates the employee on actual behavior on

the given job rather than the general traits. This method reduces the amount of

judgment required of the rater and relies mostly on raters power of observation.

PAIRED COMPAISON METHOD

This is a modified form of man to man ranking. Herein, each employee is

compared with all others in pair one at a time. The number of times an employee

is judged better than the others determines his rank. Comparison is made on the

basis of overall performance. The number of comparisons to be made can be

decided on the basis of the formula: -

Where N is the number of persons to be compared. This method is illustrated as:

A B C D E FINAL

A- - - + + 3

B+ - - + + 2

C+ + - + + 1

D- - - - + 4

E- - - - - 5

Herein, plus sign (+) implies that the employee is considered better and minus sign (-)

means worse than other employees. In the pairC gets the highest number of plus signs,

therefore, his rank is the highest and so on.

Paired comparison method is easier and simpler than ranking method. But it is

subjective because appraisal is not based on specific job related performance. Secondly, it

becomes very cumbersome when the number of employees to be related is large.

(i)CONFIDENTIAL REPORT METHOD

This is traditional form of appraisal used in most Government organizations. A

confidential report is a report prepared by the employees immediate supervisor. It

covers the strengths and weaknesses, main achievements and failure, personality and

behavior of the employee. It is descriptive appraisal used for promotion and transfer

of employees. But it involves a lot of subjectivity because appraisal is based on


28/52

impression rather than on data. No feedback is provided to the employee. The

employee who is apprised never knows his weakness and the opportunities available

for overcoming them.

(j) HUMAN RESOURCE ACCOUNTING METHOD

Human resource is a valuable asset of any organization. This asset can be

valued in terms of money. When competent and well-trained employee leaves an

organization, the human asset is decreased and vice versa. Under this method,

performance is judged in terms of costs and contribution of employees. Costs of

human resource consist of expenditure on human resource planning, recruitment,

selection, induction, training, compensation, etc. contribution on human resource is

the money value of labor productivity or value added by human resources. Difference

between cost and contribution will reflect the performance of employee. This method

is still in the transition stage and is therefore not popular at present.

(k)ASSESSMENT CENTRE METHOD

An assessment center is a group of employees drawn from different work units.

These employees work together on an assignment similar to one they would be

handling when promoted. The evaluators observe and evaluate employees as they

perform. Experienced managers with proven ability serve as evaluators. They

evaluate all employees individually and collectively by using simulation techniques

like role playing, business games and in basket exercises. Employees are evaluated on

job related characteristics considered important for job success. With assessment

center method, raters personal bias is reduced. But this is a time consuming and

expensive method. Further, the candidate who receives negative report may feel

demoralized.

PROBLEMS OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL


29/52

The ideal approach to performance evaluation is that in which the evaluator is free

from personal biases, prejudices, and idiosyncrasies. However, a single foolproof

evaluation method is not available. Inequities in evaluation often destroy the usefulness

of the performance system- resulting in inaccurate, invalid appraisals, which are unfair

too. There are many significant factors, which deter or impede objective evaluation.

These factors are:

THE HALO EFFECT OR ERROR

LENIENCY/

STRICTNESS

TENDENCY

HALO EFFECT

CENTRAL

TENDENCY

PROBLEMSOF

PERFORMANCE

APPRAISAL

SIMILARITY

ERROR

MISCELLANEOUS

BIASESSOCIAL

DIFFERENTIATION


30/52

The halo effect is a tendency to let assessment of an individuals one-trait

influences the evaluation of that person on other specific traits. The halo effect refers to

the tendency to rate an individual consistently high or low or average on the various

traits, depending upon whether the raters overall impression of the individual is

favorable or not. The halo effects arise when traits are unfamiliar, ill defined and involve

personal relations.

This often occurs when an employee tends to be more conscientious and

dependable, that the appraiser might become biased towards that individual to the extent

that the appraiser rates him high on many desirable attributes; or when the employee is

more friendly or unfriendly towards the appraiser.

LENIENCY OR STRICTNESS TENDENCY OR CONSTANT ERROR

Relative to the true and actual performance an individual exhibits, some

supervisors have a tendency to be liberal in the rating i.e. they consistently assign high

values to the employee, while at other times they may have a tendency to assign low

ratings. The former tendency is known as positive leniency error, while the latter as

negative leniency error.

Both these trends usually arise from varying standards of performance observed

by supervisors and from different interpretation of what they evaluate in employee

performance.

THE CENTRAL TENDENCY PROBLEM

It is the most commonly found error. It assigns average ratings to all the

employees with a view to avoiding commitments or involvement; or when the rate is in

doubt or has inadequate information or lack of knowledge about the behavior of the

employee or when he does not have much time at his disposal. Such tendency seriously

distorts the evaluations, making them most useless for promotion, salary or counseling

purposes.

SIMILARITY ERROR

This type of error occurs when the evaluator rates other people in the same way

he perceives himself. For example, the evaluator who perceives himself as aggressive

may evaluate others by looking for aggressiveness. Those who show this characteristic

may be benefited while others may suffer. This error also washes out if the same

evaluator appraises all people in the organization.


31/52

SOCIAL DIFFERENTIATION

Rating is sometimes impeded by the evaluators style of rating behavior. Pigou

has classified raters as: high differentiators- i.e. using all or most of the scale. He

observes: low differentiators tend to ignore or suppress differences, perceiving the

universe as more uniform than it really is. High differentiators, on the other hand, tend to

utilize all available information to the utmost extend and, thus, are better able to

perceptually deny anomalies and contradictions than low differentiators. Social

differentiators make evaluation using trait criteria unreliable.

MISCELLANEOUS BIASES

Bias against employees on ground of sex, race, religion or position is also

common error in rating. Besides these, there may be opportunity bias, group

characteristic bias and knowledge-of-predictor bias.

PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL SYSTEM AT RCF LTD.


32/52

There are two types of performance appraisal done on the basis of post of the

RCFs employee. They are:

1. Executive performance appraisal system

2. Non-executive performance appraisal system

EXECUTIVE PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL SYSTEM

This system is for performance appraisal for executives of the Grade E-0 to E-9.

GRADE NORMAL DESIGATIONS GROUP

E0 AFM/JR.OFFICER/AMO & EQUIVALENT B

E1 JE/AO GR.II/ASST.OFFICER/JES/MKTG.OFFICER/HR OFFICER & EQUIVALENT A

E2 APE/AO GR.I/AES/SR.MKTG.OFFICER/SR.HR OFFICER & EQUIVALENT A

E3 PE/ASST.FIN.MGR/ES/ASST.MKTG.MGR/ASST HRM &EQUIVALENT A

E4 DY.CE/DY FIN.MGR/ES/DY.MKTG.MGR/DY.HRM & EQUIVALENT A

E5 ADDL.CE/FM/MM/HRM &EQUIVALENT. A

E6 CE/CFM/CMM/CHRM & EQUIVALENT. A

E7 DGM& EQUIVALENT. A

E8 GM& EQUIVALENT. A

E9 ED & EQUIVALENT. A

The Various StepsInvolve are:-

A) PAS 1--------- Self Appraisal Performance Review & Planning and Self

potential appraisal.

I. A ppraisee and A ppraisers Decides Key performance area / Task and Target

assigned to Appraisee for the year along with his individual target and group target and

gets consent from the appraiser. Special Jobs other than tasks given and normal routine

work are mentioned by Appraisee PAS-1 to be submitted through SAP software and a

copy of the same to be retained by the Appraiser.

B) Appraiser and appraisee together take a mid-term review ofPerformance on the

appraisers KPAs/Targets. This is for making any changes in KPAs or Targets.

1. Revised KPAs/Targets are filled in Form PAS-2.Revisions if any, must be

endorsed by reviewing authority. Form PAS-2 by retaining a copy with appraiser.

If there is no change in KPAs /Targets as compared to decided in PAS-1,the PAS

2 will indicate NO CHANGE, SAME AS PAS1(1-10th

October)

C) PAS 3 is performed at the end of the financial year.

2. Appraiser will evaluate performance of appraisee against set KPAs/targets.


33/52

3. Duly completed PAS3 are submitted in SAP Software.

The HR Department also sends Training and Development needs to HRD department for

the enhancement of his skills.

Procedures to be followed in case of transfer of appraise:

If an officer is transferred after 4 months from the date of filling PAS1 and

contains specific goals /target to be achieved during the said period, the degree of

achievement of such target may be evaluated in PAS 3 by the original appraiser and sent

to the HR dept to be considered along with the final PAS 3.

Calculation the final score:

For determining the final score only completed months will be considered. Period

of 15 days and more will be considered as a month while periods less than 15 days will

be ignored. In case an assesses has worked for less than 3 months in a department, he will

not be assessed there. However his significant contributions must be communicated by

appraiser/reviewing authority to the HR dept. by submitting a special note.

In cases where an officer gets transferred twice during the year, the dept. where he

has spent the least number of days may be ignored. In such cases only the ratings and

score of only two dept. may be considered for arriving at the final score as per the

formula below:

The Final Score will be calculated as:

M1 stands for marks obtained in each dept.

T1 and T2 stands for number of months worked in each dept.

Evaluation of Performance is Compared of..

1. Score obtained for the set KPAs/targets and task.

2. Score obtained in managerial competencies. The total score is 200

3. Managerial competencies are rated on 5 point Rating Scale

(1-2) poor,

(3-4) average,

(5-6) good


34/52

(7-8) very good

(9-10) excellent.

Defining outstanding and poor performance:

1) The ratings of poor and not so good under the Head Managerial Competencies of

PAS 3 will be communicated to the appraisee.

2) Composite score of both i.e. KPAs and Managerial Competencies will be

considered for evaluating Outstanding and Poor performance (total score out of

200). A score of 184 and above (out of 200) will be considered as overall

outstanding and scores below 132 as overall poor

3) Outstanding and poor ratings should be put up for review/ final acceptance by

higher authorities as per the delegation of power and then should be put up for

CMDs perusal

Delegation of powers for PAS:

Sr. No. Designation Reporting Authority Reviewing AuthorityControlling

Authority

1 ED/Director CMD CMD CMD

2 Up to GM Director CMD CMD

3 Up to Dy GM ED Director CMD

4 Up to Chief engineer GM ED Director

5Up to Addl Chief

EngineerDGM GM ED

6 Up to Dy Chief Engineer CE & equiv. DGM GM

7 Up to Plant Engineer Dy CE/ Addl CE CE or Equiv. DGM

8 All Workmen AFM/JE/APE PE/Dy. CE Addl CE CE or Equiv

NON-EXECUTIVE PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL SYSTEM:

This system is for performance appraisal for non-executives of the Grade A-0 to A-13


35/52

GRADE NORMAL DESIGATION GROUP

A0 JR.PLANT ATTD. & EQUIVALENT D

A1 PLANT ATTD. GR II& EQUIVALENT D

A2 PLANT ATTD. GR II& EQUIVALENT D

A3 PLANT ATTD.GR I& EQUIVALENT C

A4 SR.PLANT ATTD. /JR TYP.CLERK & EQUIVALENT. C

A5 TECH. GR III/OPTR.GR. III/NURSE GR.III/TYP.CLERK & EQUIVALENT. C

A6 FD/MR GRII/TECH.GR.II/OPERATOR GR.II & EQUIVALENT. C

A7 STENO CLERK/JR. ACCTS. ASSTS/SR.TYP.CLERK &EQUIVALENT. C

A8 TECH.GR.I/OPTR. GR I/FD/MR GR.I EQUIVALENT. C

A9 STENO ASST./TYPE.ASST./ACCTS.ASST. & EQUIVALENT. C

A10 SR.OPTR./SR.TECH./SR.FD/MR/SR/STENO ASST./SR.ACCTS.ASST &EQUIVALENT. B

A11 SR.OPTR/TECH(SG) & EQUIVALENT B

A12 SR.OPTR/TECH(SG1)& EQUIVALENT B

A13 SR.OPTR/TECH (SG2) &EQUIVALENT. B

The various steps involved are

1. Workers CR will be maintained for the calendar year.

2. Rating of overall performancea.) total score of 62 and above = outstanding provided no attribute is rated below

good

b.) Total score below 42= average.

3. Evaluation System.

a.)personal attributed are rated on 5 point scale % being the highest

b.) There are 14 attributes which are to be rated on 1 to 5 point scale.5 being the

highest.

c.) CR will carry max. 70 marks.

4. Adverse Entries and Rating of Overall Performance.

a.)Any attribute rated below good will be considered as adverse and will be

communicated to the employee.

b.) Total score below 42 will be considered as average.

ACCEPTING AUTHORITY


36/52

a. OM/HOD is the accepting authority for workmen. However DGM is being a

head of group of plants, all CRs be routed through concerned DGM.

b. Acceptance of concerned GM is essential in case overall performance is rated

outstanding or average.

c.)Assessment.

1. Merit Ranking

The merit ranking will be decided based on the total score of the CRs of

preceding 3 yrs.

2. Merit Ranking For Year 2008 & 2009 assessment

APreviously the merit raking was decided based on the total score ofA ratings

in CRs of preceding 3 yrs. The system has changed for yr 2008 & 2009 .Marks is

allocated to the existing ratings i.e.: 5 to A, 4 to B, 3 to C, 2 to D, and 1 to E

Consider the example: In the year 2008, the total score shall be 230 (2005=80,

2006=80, and 2007= 70) and for the year 2009 the same shall be 220, 2006=80, 2007=70

2008=70). From the year 2010 onwards, it will be 210 i.e.: 70per year.

On the basis of above rating average rating marks for preceding 3 years CRs will

be taken into account for promotion purpose

Adverse rating in individual traits and / or in overall performance will be

communicated to the concerned employee and acknowledgment obtained.

If more than one CR is filed in case of an employee by different supervisors, then

the CR for the period of more than 3 months will be considered.

In respect of regular sportsman, CR indicating the performance in the sports will

be considered.

For the purpose of study, analysis of only the Performance Appraisal System of

the Executive employees was done.

SWOT Analysis of the Performance Appraisal System at RCF Ltd.

1. Strength:

By this performance appraisal system acts as motivating factor for its employees

to a great extent by increasing their efficiency and skills. Extreme responses (good &


37/52

bad) are sent to the reviewing authority for approval. Ratings Below average are

communicated to be appraised.

2. Weakness:

The main weakness of the company is that the company is taking the performance

appraisal in objective wise, while evaluating a particular employee performance, on

objective wise, the employee does not get enough opportunity to express completely and

freely the valid reasons of his/her failure to the organization. Weakness is also

highlighted when RCF India Limited do this performance appraisal procedure annually.

Extreme responses (good & bad) are avoided since such appraisal go to the reviewing

authority.

3. Opportunity:

With the help of this performance appraisal system the employee always get

feedback from the company. He / she can realize easily his/her level of efficiency. By this

performance appraisal system the employee gets enormous opportunity to enhance their

skills by special training and various other managements programme.

4. Threats:

While evaluating an employees performance the performance appraisal system

there is always a chance of fear that those employees who are unable to achieve their

target can take it as a huge setback for them and in the long term it tends to decrease their

efficiency level how good the employee is and thus it effect the overall performance of

the organization.

Data Analysis and Interpretation

1. Are you aware about the Performance Appraisal System at your organization?

Level of Employee AWAREUNAWAREPARTY AWARE TOTAL

seniorManagement 16 1 3 20

Middle Management 61 5 14 80

Supervisory Staff 44 8 18 70


38/52

TABLE NO 1

CHART NO 1;

Data Analysis:

Maximum employees are not aware about Performance Appraisal System at

RCF ltd.

Interpretation:The above pie chart shows that very few employees are aware about Performance

Appraisal System and maximum employees are unaware and partly aware about Performance

Appraisal System at RCF Ltd.

2. When does appraisal take place?

TABLE NO 2

performance appraisal system

16

61

44

1 58

314 18

0

20

40

60

80

senior

Management

Middle

Management

Supervisory

Staff

AWARE

UNAWARE

PARTY AWARE

perfor mance appraisal system

71%

8%

21% AWARE

UNAWARE

PARTY AWARE

Total 121 14 35 170

Level of EmployeeANNUALREVIEWS

6 MONTH QUARETRLYSPECIFIC DETRMIND

TERM PERIOD

TOTAL

seniorManagement 10 6 3 1 20

Middle Management 35 27 12 6 80


39/52

CHART NO 2;

Data Analysis:

In RCF maximum time appraisal is 6 monthly.

Pie Chart:

Interpretation:

In RCF near abut 73% appraisal take place annually & 6 monthly some time

quaretly and specific determined term paned appraisal take by RCF Ltd. It depends on

company policy.

3. Do you think the appraisal is conducted as per the company policy?

TABLE NO. 3;

Supervisory Staff 29 17 13 11 70

Total 74 50 28 18 170

Level of Employee YES NO CAN'T SAY TOTAL

Appraisal take

place at RCF

44%

29%

16%

11%

ANNUAL REVIEWS

6 MONTH

QUARETRLY

SPECIFICDETRMIND TERMPERIOD

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Senior Management Supervisory Staff

SeniorManagement

MiddleManagement

SupervisoryStaff

Middle

Appraisal take Place

ANNUAL

REVIEWS

6 MONTH

QUARETRLY

SPECIFICDETRMINDTERMINED


40/52

CHART NO 3;

Data Analysis:

In RCF appraisal is conducted according to company policy and need of

company.

Pie Chart:

Interpretation:

Pie- Chart shows that maximum employees are trusts that the appraisal is conductedas per the RCF policy. Very few employees believe that appraisal is not conducted

according to RCF policy.

4. How performance appraisal is rewarded?

Appraisal conducted as per the

company policy

73%

5%

22%

YES

NO

CAN'T SAY

SeniorManagement 16 0 4 20



Total 124 8 38 170

Level ofEmploy

CHANGEIN JOBTITLE

PERFORM

ANCEBONUSES

SALARYINCREASES

PROMOTIONIN GRADE

VARIOUS FORMS OFSUPPLEMENTARYCOMPENSATION

TOTAL

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Senior

Management

Middle

Management

Supervisory Staff

Appraisal conucted as per the company policy

YES

NO

CAN`T SAY


41/52

TABLE NO .4;

CHART NO. 4;

Data Analysis:

In RCF Ltd. Performance appraisal is rewarded by bonuses in crease in salary

promotion in grade and change in job title.Pie Chart:

Interpretation

In RCF maximum time performance appraisal is rewarded in form ofbonus that is distribution of profit of company among employees in form performance

related pay (P. R.P) is the good policy of R. C. F. which is given on basis of performance

5. Does performance Appraisal System in your organization is effective?TABLE NO .5;

H

G

J

G

!

V

ee

seniorMangmnt

5 7 0 7 1 20

MiddleMangmnt

18 32 4 26 0 80

Supervisory Staff

17 30 3 18 2 70

Total 40 69 7 51 3 170

Level of Employee VERY EFFECTIVE EFFECTIVE NOT EFFECTIVE TOTAL

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Senior

Management

Middle

Management

Supervisory Staff

SALARY INCREASES

PROMOTION IN GRADE

VARIOUS FORMS OF

SUPPLEMENTARY

COMPENSATION


42/52

CHART NO .5;

Data Analysis:

Employees of RCF are satisfied with the effectiveness of performance

appraisal system.

Pie Chart:

InterpretationPerformance appraisal system is effective in R. C. F. it motivated to

employee for hard work and progress of company. It is rewarded in form of promotion

and bonus which increase sincerity and positive attitude toward work

6. Does the employee get feedback of his/her performance appraisal?

Eff ti f rf r

r i l t

40%

" "

%

"

% V # $%

#FF

#C

&

IV #

#FF

#C

&

IV #

'O

&

# FF # C&

IV #




Total 68 94 8 170

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Senior

Management

Senior

Management

Supervisory Staff

Very effective

Effective

NOT EFFECTIVE


43/52

TABLE NO. 6;

CHART NO. 6;

Data Analysis:

Maximum time employees not get feet back for their performance.

Pie Chart:

Interpretation:Overall all the levels of the management look dissatisfied with the poor level of

feedback given to the appraisal for his improvement in terms of KPA (Key Performance

Areas). Changes must be made in the appraisal system so that timely feedback can be

given to employees so as to gauge their efforts and provide counseling accordingly.

7. Performance Appraisal System is used to identify the training needs of an employee?

Feedback for performance Appraisal

17%

14%

69%

ONLY WHEN

REQUIRED

OFTEN BUT NOT

ALWAYS

RAELY

Level ofEmployeeONLYWHENREQUIRED

OFTEN BUTNOT ALWAYS

RAELY NEVER TOTAL




Total 29 10 50 81 170

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Senior Management Supervisory Staff

RAELY

NEVER


44/52

TABLE NO. 7;

CHART NO. 7;

Data Analysis

From the above pie-chart it is clear that employees have different opinion regarding

whether the Performance Appraisal system identifies the training and development needs

Pie Chart;

Interpretation:

Though Performance Appraisal system can be used to identify the training needs ofan employee, the process must be properly implemented so as the required training canbe imparted. The senior management feels that the PAS effectively identifies the training

and development needs, whereas there is discontent among the middle and supervisorystaff about the effectiveness of the PAS in identifying the training and development

needs.

8. How often your supervisor/reviewing and controlling give fair and impartial ratings?TABLE NO .8

Par r ance Appraisal to

identify training need

12%

33%

37%

18% ALWAYS

SOMETIMES

RAELY

NEVER

Level ofE ployeeALWAYS SOMETIMES RAELY NEVER TOTAL




Total 21 56 62 31 170

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Senior Management Senior Management Supervisory Staff

parformance appraisal to identify training need

RAELY

NEVER


45/52

CHART NO.8

Data Analysis:

Majority of employees found the evaluation to be just and unbiased. Many of theemployees have not received training for conducting a performance appraisal. More than

50% of the employees are of the opinion that the ratings given to them in the performanceappraisal system are fair and impartial.

Pie Chart;

Interpretation:

Though very few employees have received formal training for conducting the

Performance Appraisal, more than half of the employees find the process to be fair andimpartial in rating the appraisee. A significant proportion of the employees feel that the

process is not always fair, hence training must be provided to reduce the errors whileevaluating the employee.

Fair or inpartial rating controllingouthority

42%

35%

14%

9%ALWAYS

SOMETIMES

RAELY

NEVER

Level ofEmployeeALWAYS SOMETIMES RAELY NEVER TOTAL




Total 71 59 25 15 120

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Senior

Management

Senior

Management

Supervisory

Staff

RAELY

NEVER


46/52

9. Does the Performance Appraisal System help you to develop commitment towards yourorganization?

TABLE NO. 9

CHART NO.9

Data Analysis:

Majority of the employees are satisfied with the prevailing Performance Appraisal

System and in turn have developed commitment towards the organization.

Pie- Chart:

Interpretation:

The employees have been contented with the Performance appraisal system andperceive it to be fair. This has helped improve the commitment of the employees towards

the company.

10. Does the Performance Appraisal System act as a motivational factor for betterperformance?

Level of Employee YES NO TOTAL

seniorManagement 18 2 20

Middle Management 68 12 80

Supervisory Staff 57 13 70Total 143 27 170

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

senior Management Supervisory Staff

YES

NO

Help to develop commitment

toward organization

84%

16%

YES

NO


47/52

TABLE NO. 10

CHART NO. 10;

Data Analysis:

The pie-chart reveals that 80% of the employees find the current Performance

appraisal system to be motivating. Pie-Chart:

Interpretation:

All the levels of management are motivated with respect to the monetary and non-monetary benefits offered by the organization.

However it has been observed that a few of Middle management and Supervisory staff

feel that fringe benefits do not act as a motivational factor on job.

The recent implementations of the 6th

Pay Commission have enhanced the motivational

level of the employees.

11. You are Satisfied for the Performance Appraisal System in your organization?

Level of Employee YES NO TOTAL

seniorManagement 15 5 20

Middle Management 54 26 80

Supervisory Staff 59 11 70

Total 128 42 170

Motivation to work

75%

25%

YES

NO

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Senior

Management

Senior

Management

Supervisory

Staff

YES

NO


48/52

TABLE NO .11

CHART NO .11;

Data Analysis:

73% of the employees surveyed are satisfied with the performance appraisal system.

Pie-Chart:

Interpretation:

The level of satisfaction is high among all the levels of management with the newperformance appraisal system. Previously Confidential Reports system was used to

evaluate officers. However the drawback of the previous system has led to theimplementation of MBO (Management by Objective) method.

12. The evaluating authority for the employee to be appraised is

Sati i r ar r ance

rai al tem

14%

7(

%

13% V) 0

1

S2 3

ISFI) 4

S2 3

ISFI) 4

5 6S

2 3

ISFI) 4

Level Empl ee VERY SATISFIED SATISFIED UNSATISFIED TOTAL




Total 24 124 22170

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

senior Management Middle Management Supervisory Staff

VERY SATISFIED

SATISFIED

UNSATISFIED


49/52

TABLE NO 12

CHART NO 12;

Data Analysis:

100% employee is satisfies with evaluation authority for appraisal .

Interpretation:

All employees in RCF are believed that evaluating authority is

appropriate for appraisal for appraised. They have no doubt about it.

eval atingaut rit f r t eempl ee t be

apprai ed

100%

0%

7 8 8

9

O8

9

I7 @

A

BO

@

7 8 8

9

O8

9

I7 @

A

Level f Empl ee APPROPRIATE NOT APPROPRIATE

SeniorManagement 20 0

Middle Management 80 0

Supervisory Staff 70 0

Total 170 0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Senior Management Senior Management Supervisory Staff

Appropriate

Not Appropriate


50/52

LIMITATION OF STUDY

y Many employees gave safeguarded answers to some crucial questions.

y Some of them did not fill the questionnaire due to lack of time.

y Response could not be collected from the total sample selected.

y Some of the questionnaire could not be completed due to reasons other than time

Factor.

y The confidentiality of the system created some problem in getting information.

y The higher authority-level employees were out of reach of the researcher due to

their frequent visits to different plants.

y Interviewers were unwilling in answering all the questions of the survey.


51/52

RECOMMENDATION

y Concrete efforts should be made to minimize personal bias.

y Evaluating and controlling authority should be trained well for rating, reviews and

feedback.

y HR Department should seriously follow up the training needs identified during

evaluation.

y HR Department should use appraisal data for decisions like job rotation and job

enrichment.

y Management should conduct seminars, training program for development of

employees.

y Detailed explanation of the ratings for the performance appraisal system must be

communicated so as to avoid the personal biases while evaluating an employee.y Employees should be given a chance to make suggestions regarding the appraisal

and the feedback given to them by supervisor.

y Since most of the ratings are average, bell curve model must be introduced to rate

employees.

y The total number of parameters in the appraisal form must be reduced/

consolidated together.

y Timely feedback must be given to employees, as itll help them to improve

themselves in terms of KPAs.

y 360degrees appraisal shall be implemented.

Other recommendation

y Make judicial use of company email system for approval/permission so as to

avoid the movement of employees to the concerned department to save time.

y Improve canteen facility.

y Provide online training forPAS.


52/52

CONCLUSION

The Performance A ppraisal System in RCF Ltd is implemented with following

objectives:

1. Identifies training and development needs.

2. Facilitates Promotion and Transfers and Termination decisions.3. Clarify an employees job requirement.

4. as a motivational strategy.

5. It measures link information for decision making process.

At the end of the day, what is most desired by all parties concerned is a

transparent and objective performance appraisal. Any performance appraisal system

which helps in achieving this aim would be welcome thing for most employees.

The current KPA system implemented at the company is aimed at achieving all

the above objectives and increasing the productivity of the company through performance

enhancement of its human assets.

Documents

Summer Project s