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

Efficient management of human, technical and financial resources is a very important for accomplishment of objectives of any business .Every manager has to perform certain functions to coordinate the efforts of the people working under him for effectiveness and efficient 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 economic environment and growing industry throughout world, Human Resource Management has become a very challenging job. Todays managers are required possess certain relation and conceptual skills in addition to wide reservoir of knowledge. Studying the management science and practicing the principle and techniques of management can help acquire 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

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. and enabling 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 the facilities 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 the course of the project.

TABLE OF CONTENTS:

y ABOUT FERTILIZER SECTOR IN INDIA y About RCF Ltd. y Performance appraisal y Objectives of Performance 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

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 selfsufficiency and self-reliance in food grains production and concerted efforts in this direction 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 146.28 lacks MT in nutrients terms in 2001-02. The Indian fertilizer industry has succeeded in meeting almost fully the demand of all chemical fertilizers except for MOP. The industry had a very humble beginning in 1906, when the first manufacturing unit of Single Super Phosphate (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

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

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 Fertilizer Ammonium 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.

MISSION
RCF 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

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 agricultural

inputs 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 quality

of 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 operations

including 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 and

also 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 extent

technologically possible, the harmful emissions, atmospheric discharges and effluents. y

To

continuously upgrade the quality of human resources and promote

organizational and management development. y

To

co-operate nationally and internationally in exchange of information and

services of personnel. 8 y
To

have corporate growth at a pace consistent with availability of resources and

developmental 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.

ORGANIZATIONAL CHART

HIERARCHY OF HR DEPARTMENT

CURRENT STATUS
Thal Plant: Main Plant Plant Ammonia Urea Steam Generation T.G.set D.M.F. D.M.A.C. M.A.- Old M.A.- New CO Formic Acid OFF-SITES : Formic Acid Product handling and bagging system Two silos for urea storage Two ammonia storage tanks Water Treatment Plant Effluent Treatment and Disposal system. Pollution monitoring and control facilities. Ammonia dispatch facility. Agricultural Research Centre. Industrial Chemicals dispatch facilities. 1 X 10,000 tpy 6,000 tpd. 90,000 MT capacity. 25,000 MT capacity. Unit Capacity/Unit 2 X 1,500 tpd 3 X 1,725 tpd 2 X 275 tph, 1x 275 tph Standby 2 X 15 MW 1 X 2,500 tpy 1 X 5,000 tpy 1 X 5,000 tpy 1 X 6,400 tpy 1 X 1,200 NM3 Per Hr. 1 X 10,000 tpy

INFRASTRUCTURE y y y y y y y Workshops Townships Water supply line Power supply Laboratories Railway sidings Gas supply line

UTILITIES REQUIREMENTS y y y Gas requirement : 3.15 Million Nm3/day from GAIL Power requirement : 25 MW from MSEB Water: 56000 cubic meter /day from MIDC

LAND REQUIREMENT y y y For plants: 820 acres For townships: 300 acres For railway siding: 250 acres

ANNUAL PRODUCTION CAPACITY y y y y y y y y Ammonia: 9,90,000 MT per year Urea : 17,07,750 MT per year Nitrogen : 7,94,104 MT per year DMF: 2,500 MT per year MAP (Old): 5,000 MT per year MAP (New): 6,400 MT per year CO: 1,200 Nm3 per hr. FA: 10,000 MT per year

Products at RCF
The 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 Nitrite 15) Sodium Nitrate 16) Sulphuric Acid For captive consumption 17) Chickton (Liquid Acidifier)

AWARDS

National Awards
y NATIONAL AWARD FOR PRVENTION OF POLLUTION 1992, presented by President of India, Dr.Shankar Dayal Sharma, on 6th August, 1994. y RAJIV GANDHI ENVIRONMENT AWARD FOR CLEAN TECHNOLOGY-1993 presented by Smt. Sonia Gandhi on 19th August, 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 199394, 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 of Public Enterprises in the year 1989-90. y BEST ORGANISATION award from Indira Gandhi Memorial, sponsored by AP Public Sector Employees Federation, during the year 1987-88.

ISO CERTIFICATION
RCF has obtained following certification y y y ISO 9001-2008 ISO- 14001- 2004 OHSAS 18001-2007

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 the study include:

To know the present system of performance appraisal.

To know the extent of effectiveness of the appraisal system.

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

To know employee attitude towards the present appraisal system.

HYPOTHESIS

1. The Employees identify the Performance Appraisal System at RCF to be effective. 2. Employees at RCF are trained to perform error free Appraisal. 3. Performance Appraisal 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 Appraisal 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 Appraisal System at RCF gives timely feedback to the employees for improvement. 9. The Performance Appraisal at RCF is conducted in adherence to the policy framework. 10. The Performance Appraisal 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

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 y Survey carried out in RCF Ltd. And Methodology used is questionnaires. Also the methodologies like interview and observation are used as primary data.

Secondary Source of Data:y y y Office Records. Reference books 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 though very 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.

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.

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 People ever get the chance 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

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 y An evaluation system A feedback system

BENEFITS: The process provides opportunities for individuals to: y y Understand and clarify their job role and responsibilities. Know how they contribute towards the achievement of the companys aim and objectives. y y Discuss the standards of performance expected for their job. 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 y y Discuss views and ideas on how their job role could be improved. Understand their line managers role, responsibilities and priorities. 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.

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

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 be discussed 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 EMPLOYEES

PERFORMANCE

EXPECTATIONS

TO

THE

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 y y y Personal observations Statistical reports Oral reports Written reports

4. COMPARE ACTUAL PERFORMANCE WITH STANDARD The employee is apprised and judged of his potential for growth and advancement. Attempts are made to note deviations between standard performance and actual performance.

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.

METHODS OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

(a) GRAPHIC RATING SCALE METHOD: The graphic rating scale method provides a form wherein, for each person who is to 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 NO INTERST IN WORK 5 INDIFFERENT TO INSTRUCTION 10 INTERESTED IN WORK 15 ENTHUSIASTIC 20 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.

 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;

 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.

 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 A B C D E + + B + C D + + + E + + + + FINAL 3 2 1 4 5

Herein, plus sign (+) implies that the employee is considered better and minus sign (-) means worse than other employees. In the pair C 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

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

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:

LENIENCY/ STRICTNESS TENDENCY

HALO EFFECT CENTRAL TENDENCY

PROBLEMSOF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

MISCELLANEOUS BIASES SOCIAL DIFFERENTIATION

SIMILARITY ERROR

 THE HALO EFFECT OR ERROR

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.

 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.

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
E0 E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 E7 E8 E9

NORMAL DESIGATIONS
AFM/JR.OFFICER/AMO & EQUIVALENT JE/AO GR.II/ASST.OFFICER/JES/MKTG.OFFICER/HR OFFICER & EQUIVALENT APE/AO GR.I/AES/SR.MKTG.OFFICER/SR.HR OFFICER & EQUIVALENT PE/ASST.FIN.MGR/ES/ASST.MKTG.MGR/ASST HRM &EQUIVALENT DY.CE/DY FIN.MGR/ES/DY.MKTG.MGR/DY.HRM & EQUIVALENT ADDL.CE/FM/MM/HRM &EQUIVALENT. CE/CFM/CMM/CHRM & EQUIVALENT. DGM& EQUIVALENT. GM& EQUIVALENT. ED & EQUIVALENT.

GROUP
B A A A A A A A A A

The Various Steps Involve are:A) PAS 1--------- Self Appraisal Performance Review & Planning and Self potential appraisal. I. Appraisee and Appraisers 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 of Performance 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.

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

(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. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Designation ED/Director Up to GM Up to Dy GM Up to Chief engineer Up to Addl Chief Engineer Up to Dy Chief Engineer Up to Plant Engineer All Workmen Reporting Authority CMD Director ED GM DGM CE & equiv. Dy CE/ Addl CE AFM/JE/APE Reviewing Authority CMD CMD Director ED GM DGM CE or Equiv. PE/Dy. CE Addl CE Controlling Authority CMD CMD CMD Director ED GM DGM 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

GRADE
A0 A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9 A10 A11 A12 A13

NORMAL DESIGATION
JR.PLANT ATTD. & EQUIVALENT PLANT ATTD. GR II& EQUIVALENT PLANT ATTD. GR II& EQUIVALENT PLANT ATTD.GR I& EQUIVALENT SR.PLANT ATTD. /JR TYP.CLERK & EQUIVALENT. TECH. GR III/OPTR.GR. III/NURSE GR.III/TYP.CLERK & EQUIVALENT. FD/MR GRII/TECH.GR.II/OPERATOR GR.II & EQUIVALENT. STENO CLERK/JR. ACCTS. ASSTS/SR.TYP.CLERK &EQUIVALENT. TECH.GR.I/OPTR. GR I/FD/MR GR.I EQUIVALENT. STENO ASST./TYPE.ASST./ACCTS.ASST. & EQUIVALENT. SR.OPTR./SR.TECH./SR.FD/MR/SR/STENO ASST./SR.ACCTS.ASST &EQUIVALENT. SR.OPTR/TECH(SG) & EQUIVALENT SR.OPTR/TECH(SG1)& EQUIVALENT SR.OPTR/TECH (SG2) &EQUIVALENT.

GROUP
D D D C C C C C C C B B B B

The various steps involved are 1. Workers CR will be maintained for the calendar year. 2. Rating of overall performance a.) 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

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 A Previously the merit raking was decided based on the total score of A 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 &

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
senior Management Middle Management Supervisory Staff

AWARE UNAWARE PARTY AWARE TOTAL

16 61 44

1 5
8

3 14 18

20 80 70

Total

121

14

35

170

TABLE NO 1

CHART NO 1;
performance appraisal system

80 60 40 20 0

61 44 18

AWARE

UNAWARE

16 1 3 5

14

PARTY AWARE

senior Middle Supervisory Management Management Staff

Data Analysis: Maximum employees are not aware about Performance Appraisal System at
RCF ltd.
perform ance appraisal system

21%

AWARE

UNAWARE 8% PARTY AWARE 71%

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

Level of Employee ANNUAL 6 MONTH

REVIEWS
senior Management Middle Management 10 35

QUARETRLY SPECIFIC DETRMIND TOTAL TERM PERIOD

6
27

3 12

1 6

20 80

Supervisory Staff Total

29 74

17 50

13 28

11 18

70 170

CHART NO 2;
Appraisal take Place Middle Management Supervisory Staff

35 30 25 20 Senior 15 Management 10 5 0

ANNUAL REVIEWS

6 MONTH

QUARETRLY

Senior Management

Supervisory Staff Middle

SPECIFIC DETRMIND TERMINED

Data Analysis: In RCF maximum time appraisal is 6 monthly. Pie Chart:

Appraisal take place at RCF

11% 16% 44%

ANNUAL REVIEWS

6 MONTH

QUARETRLY

29%

SPECIFIC DETRMIND TERM PERIOD

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;

Level of Employee

YES NO CAN'T SAY TOTAL

S enior Management Middle Management Supervisory Staff Total

16 57 51 124

0 3 5 8

4 20 14 38

20 80 70 170

CHART NO 3;
Appraisal conucted as per the company policy
60 50 40 30 20 10 0
Senior Management Middle Supervisory Staff Management
YES NO CAN`T SAY

Data Analysis: In RCF appraisal is conducted according to company policy and need of company. Pie Chart:

Appraisal conducted as per the company policy

22% YES 5% 73% NO CAN'T SAY

Interpretation: Pie- Chart shows that maximum employees are trusts that the appraisal is conducted as per the RCF policy. Very few employees believe that appraisal is not conducted according to RCF policy.

4. How performance appraisal is rewarded? PROMOTION VARIOUS FORMS OF TOTAL Level of CHANGE PERFORM SALARY IN JOB ANCE INCREASES IN GRADE SUPPLEMENTARY Employ TITLE BONUSES COMPENSATION

ee
senior Mangmnt Middle Mangmnt Superviso ry Staff Total 5 18 17 40

7
32 30 69

0 4 3 7

7 26 18 51

1 0 2 3

20 80 70 170

TABLE NO .4;

CHART NO. 4;
35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
Senior Management Middle Management Supervisory Staff

SALARY INCREASES

PROMOTION IN GRADE

VARIOUS FORMS OF SUPPLEMENTARY COMPENSATION

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:
   
H G J

Interpretation In RCF maximum time performance appraisal is rewarded in form of bonus 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;

Level of Employee VERY EFFECTIVE EFFECTIVE NOT EFFECTIVE TOTAL

        !         
G

                  

Senior Management Middle Management Supervisory Staff Total

7 34 27 68

12 42 40 94

1 4 3 8

20 80 70 170

CHART NO .5;
45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
Senior Management Senior Supervisory Staff Management

Very effective Effective

NOT EFFECTIVE

Data Analysis: Employees of RCF are satisfied with the effectiveness of performance appraisal system. Pie Chart: Eff ti r i
"

f l

rf r t
# # # & # # # & $# %

% 40%

FF C IV FF C IV
#

Interpretation Performance 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?

FF C IV

&

&

'

""

TABLE NO. 6;

Le l o Em lo e ONLY ve f p ye
WHEN REQUIRED
senior Management Middle Management Supervisory Staff Total 5 14 10 29

OFTEN BUT NOT ALWAYS

RAELY NEVER TOTAL

0
3 7 10

6 23 21 50

9 40 32 81

20 80 70 170

CHART NO. 6;
40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
Senior Management Supervisory Staff

RAELY

NEVER

Data Analysis: Maximum time employees not get feet back for their performance.

Pie Chart:
Feedback for performance Appraisal

17%
ONLY WHEN REQUIRED

14%
OFTEN BUT NOT ALWAYS

69%
RAELY

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?

TABLE NO. 7;

Level of E ployee ALWAYS

senior Management Middle Management Supervisory Staff Total 3 9 9 21

SOMETIMES

RAELY NEVER TOTAL

6
26 24 56

10 25 27 62

1 20 10 31

20 80 70 170

CHART NO. 7;
parformance appraisal to identify training need
30 25 20 15 10 5 0
Senior Management Senior Management Supervisory Staff

RAELY
NEVER

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; Par r ance Appraisal to identify training need
12%

18%

ALWAYS SOMETIMES RAELY NEVER

33% 37%

Interpretation: Though Performance Appraisal system can be used to identify the training needs of an employee, the process must be properly implemented so as the required training can be imparted. The senior management feels that the PAS effectively identifies the training and development needs, whereas there is discontent among the middle and supervisory staff 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

Level of Employee ALWAYS

senior Management Middle Management Supervisory Staff Total 8 34 29 71

SOMETIMES

RAELY NEVER TOTAL

7
29 23 59

3 10 12 25

2 7 6 15

20 80 70 120

CHART NO.8

35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
Senior Management Senior Management Supervisory Staff

RAELY
NEVER

Data Analysis: Majority of employees found the evaluation to be just and unbiased. Many of the employees 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 performance appraisal system are fair and impartial. Pie Chart;

Fair or inpartial rating controlling outhority

9% 14% 42%

ALWAYS SOMETIMES RAELY

35%

NEVER

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 and impartial 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 while evaluating the employee.

Does the Performance Appraisal System help you to develop commitment towards your organization? TABLE NO. 9

9.

Level of Employee
senior Management Middle Management Supervisory Staff Total

YES
18 68 57 143

NO TOTAL 2 20 12 80 13 70 27 170

CHART NO.9
70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 senior Management Supervisory Staff
YES NO

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:

Help to develop commitment toward organization

16% YES NO 84%

Interpretation: The employees have been contented with the Performance appraisal system and perceive 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 better performance?

TABLE NO. 10

Level of Employee
senior Management Middle Management Supervisory Staff Total

YES
15 54 59 128

NO TOTAL 5 20 26 80 11 70 42 170

CHART NO. 10; 60

50 40 30 20 10 0
Senior Management Senior Management Supervisory Staff
YES NO

Data Analysis: The pie-chart reveals that 80% of the employees find the current Performance appraisal system to be motivating. Pie-Chart:
Motivation to work

25% YES NO 75%

Interpretation: All the levels of management are motivated with respect to the monetary and nonmonetary 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?

TABLE NO .11

Level

Empl

ee VERY SATISFIED SATISFIED UNSATISFIED

3 16 5 24 13 52 59 124 4 12 6 22

TOTAL 20 80 70 170

Senior Management Middle Management Supervisory Staff Total

CHART NO .11;
60 50 40 30 20 10 0 senior Management Middle Management Supervisory Staff

VERY SATISFIED SATISFIED UNSATISFIED

Data Analysis: 73% of the employees surveyed are satisfied with the performance appraisal system. Pie-Chart: Sati i r ar r ance rai al tem
14% V S S
32 0) 1 32

13%

7 %

Interpretation: The level of satisfaction is high among all the levels of management with the new performance appraisal system. Previously Confidential Reports system was used to evaluate officers. However the drawback of the previous system has led to the implementation of MBO (Management by Objective) method.

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

4)

ISFI

4)

ISFI
32

4)

ISFI

65

TABLE NO 12

Level f Empl

ee

APPROPRIATE
20 80 70 170

NOT APPROPRIATE
0 0 0 0

Senior Management Middle Management Supervisory Staff Total

CHART NO 12;

80 70 60
Appropriate

50 40 30 20 10 0
Senior Management Senior Management Supervisory Staff

Not Appropriate

Data Analysis: 100% employee is satisfies with evaluation authority for appraisal .
eval ating aut rit f r t e empl apprai ed ee t be

0%

100%

Interpretation: All employees in RCF are believed that evaluating authority is appropriate for appraisal for appraised. They have no doubt about it.

@ 7 8 88 7 @ B A 9 9 @ 7 8 88 7 A 9 9
O I O O I

LIMITATION OF STUDY

Many employees gave safeguarded answers to some crucial questions.

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

Response could not be collected from the total sample selected.

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

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

The higher authority-level employees were out of reach of the researcher due to their frequent visits to different plants.

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

RECOMMENDATION
Concrete efforts should be made to minimize personal bias. 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.

y y

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 y Improve canteen facility. Provide online training for PAS.

CONCLUSION
The Performance Appraisal 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.