A STUDY ON THE PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL AND EVALUATION SYSTEM AT WHEELS INDIA LIMITED, PADI, CHENNAI.

Dissertation submitted to the University of Madras in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in Social Work

BY A.M.MAGESH KUMAR (09-PSW-73)

Under the Guidance of Prof. SIMON JOSEPH

DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL WORK LOYOLA COLLEGE (AUTONOMOUS) CHENNAI - 600 034.

NOVEMBER 2010

DEDICATED TO MY BROTHER, MY FRIENDS AND WELL WISHERS

CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL

This is to certify that this project work A STUDY ON PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL AND EVALUATION SYSTEM AT WHEELS INDIA LIMITED, PADI, CHENNAI is an independent work carried out by Mr. A.M.MAGESH KUMAR (09-PSW-73) during the academic year 2010-2011 under my supervision and submitted to University of Madras through Loyola College (Autonomous), Chennai, in partial fulfilment of the requirement for the degree in M.A (Social Work).

Prof. M.R. Arul Raj Head of the Department Department of Social Work Loyola College Chennai -34

Prof. Simon Joseph Research Guide Department of Social Work Loyola College Chennai -34

Date: Place:

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First and foremost I thank my Almighty for helping me do this research successfully. I am very grateful to Rev. Dr. B. Jeyaraj S.J, Principal, Loyola College, Nungambakkam, Chennai- 600034 for having admitted me to undergo the course of Master in Social Work 2009-2011 and also permitting to do this dissertation. I would also like to express my gratitude to Prof. M.R. Arul Raj, Head of Department and to the Co-Ordinator, Prof. Francis Adaiakalam for supporting and guiding me to complete my research study. I also extend my deep sense of gratitude and profound thanks to my Research Guide, Prof. Simon Joseph for his valuable suggestions throughout the research which had been an immense help in bringing out this study to a good shape. I wish to thank Mr. S. Valliappan, HR Deputy Manager of Wheels India Limited, Padi, Chennai for giving me permission for data collection. To conclude, I would like to thank my beloved brother, friends, and well-wishers for supporting me throughout the study. I would like to extend my heartfelt thanks to my friends who have provided their valuable assistance to me and motivated me for completing the project.

Place: Chennai Date: A.M.MAGESH KUMAR

TABLE OF CONTENTS

S.NO 1. 2. 3.

CONTENT

PAGE NO

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

LIST OF FIGURES

iii

LIST OF TABLES

iv-v

4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.

ABSTRACT

vi

CHAPTER-I INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY

15

CHAPTER-II REVIEW OF LITERATURE

6 22

CHAPTER III ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

23 62

CHAPTER IV MAJOR FINDINGS

63 64

CHAPTER V- SUGGESTIONS AND CONCLUSION

65

BIBLIOGRAPHY

vii viii xi xii

APPENDIX-I: QUESTIONAIRE

APPENDIX-II: PERMISSION LETTER

ii

LIST OF FIGURES

S.No 1.

TITLES Age of the respondents

Pg.No 23

2.

Respondents by Marital Status

24

3.

Respondents by Departments

25

4.

Respondents by Educational Qualification

26

iii

LIST OF TABLES
S.No 1. 2. 3. 4. TITLES Distribution of the Respondents by Sex Distribution of the Respondents by Salary Distribution of the Respondents by Work Experience Pg.No 27 28 29

Distribution of the Respondents by Requirement of Performance 30 Appraisal System

5.

Distribution of the Respondents by Satisfaction on Existing 31 Performance Appraisal System

6. 7.

Distribution of the Respondents by Satisfaction on Promotion Chances 32 Distribution of the Respondents in terms of level of Satisfaction with 33 existing allowances

8.

Distribution of the Respondents in terms of preference of appraisal by 34 self and superior

9.

Opinion on how for Performance Appraisal System helpful to win 35 cooperation and Team Work

10. 11. 12. 13. 14.

Opinion on usefulness in reducing grievances among the employees Opinion on change in improving the personnel skills Opinion on effectiveness of training programmes Performance Ratings were done periodically

36 37 38 39

Performance Appraisal System is helpful in identifying strengths & 40 weakness

15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20.

Performance rating is helpful in providing counselling. Promotion is based on Performance Appraisal System Management fixes salary through performance rating Performance rating is the basis for increment Incentive / Disincentive are linked to Performance Appraisal System Performance Appraisal System helps in achieving the target.

41 42 43 44 45 46

iv

21.

Performance Appraisal System increases Employee motivation

47

22.

Performance appraisal system contributes to the overall success of 48 work

23.

It is better to have Separate committee to review the Performance Appraisal System

49

24. 25. 26. 27.

Rating the quality of Induction Training Rating the quality of Skill Training Rating the quality of other Training Programme Performance Appraisal Rating corresponds to the level of Job Knowledge

50 51 52 53

28. 29.

Performance Appraisal Rating takes into account of Work Quality Performance Appraisal Rating corresponds to the level of Rate Production. Piece

54 55

30.

Performance Appraisal Rating corresponds to the level of Communication Skills.

56

31.

Performance Appraisal Rating takes into account of Relationship.

Interpersonal

57

32. 33.

Performance Appraisal Rating takes into account of Team Work. Performance Appraisal Rating takes into account of Policy Compliance.

58 59

34.

Performance Appraisal Rating takes into account of Time Management.

60

35.

Performance Appraisal Rating takes into account of Attendance Regularity

61

36.

Performance Appraisal Rating takes into account of Innovation

62

ABSTRACT

The researcher conducted the study on PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL AND EVALUATION SYSTEM among the employees in the Wheels India Limited, Padi, Chennai. The researcher used Convenient Sampling method. Fifty respondents were chosen and they filled up the questionnaire and the analysis was done based on the data collected from the respondents through questionnaire. The objective of the study was to find out on what areas the organization should improve to increase favourable climate in the organization. The research design used for the study was Descriptive Research design. The main source of data was collected from the respondents through a structured questionnaire and the secondary source of data was got from the interactions and discussions held with Human Resource Manager, staff and websites of the organization. The review of literature deals with the need, approaches and different studies done by other researchers on various topics relevant to the organizational climate. The analysis of data was done based on the objective of the study. Each objective of the study was given due care and tables were arranged accordingly. The findings revealed that following are the areas in which the organization should improve to create a congenial working atmosphere or environment such as work hours, identifying training requirements, providing health care plans, creativity, innovation, etc. The study concludes with a suggestion to focus on a compatible working environment and creating a favourable organizational climate which will enable the employees to contribute their maximum to the organization.

vi

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY

INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLGY Performance Appraisal is an important task in every Organization, Company, Firm, Educational Institution, Corporate Management, Government Departments, for effective and systematic functioning of the Institution. Generally, Performance appraisal means, the systematic and concrete evaluation or examination or identification of the work done by an employee. The top level or the selected Management Leaders will perform or conduct this item of work to enable to assess the workability of an employee in relating to the said organizational goal or objectives. The relative worth and stamina or skill of the employee will be reflected in the reports of the Performance appraisal. As a matter of fact, it is really a tool for invention, discovery, identification, examination and analyzing the relative differences amongst the workers, employees with reference to the standards of the job chart, functions, specifications allotted by the Organization. Various systems of appraisal reflect the comparison of an employee with others for ranking or rating. The most valuable asset for a company is its people. Whist all other assets depreciate over a period of time, people as an asset appreciate over a period of time. Longer a person has been with a company; greater is his value in terms of experience & contribution, and therefore, his price. An organizations goals can be achieved only when people put in their best efforts. How to ascertain whether an employee has shown his or her best performance on a given job? The answer is performance appraisal.

Statement of the Problem :

The performance of a person working in an organization depends on his own potential effectiveness, technical competence as well as on the design of the competency that he/she performs in an organization. The person who has lack of technical competence and skills, then he/she is lack in his/her skills and hence he/she cannot be effectively performed. The employees are not systematic in their work. The relative worth and stamina or skill of the employee will be reflected in the reports of the Performance appraisal. As a matter of fact, it is really a tool for invention, discovery, identification, examination and analyzing the relative differences amongst the workers, employees with reference to the standards of the job chart, functions, specifications allotted by the organization. This study will assess the performance of an each employee at wheels India limited.

Scope and Purpose of the Study:

Performance is the primary reason for all the ins and outs of the business activities of any organization. All strategic planning and other management functions aim for maximum productivity or excellent performance in their respective departments. Performance must always be are consideration in productivity work because of the clear relationship between the effectiveness of the work of each individual and the output personnel management-hour of age group. This paper therefore soughs to establish the link between the performance and management areas individual an organization. What impact would performance create individual order that the goals and objectives of the organization be accomplished or satisfied? How could every employees performance really contribute or support its mission? This study emphasizes the virtue of esprit de corps. Regardless of what kind of organizations you lead, you must reserve your command authority for those instances when it is appropriate to use it, our aim should be to build are desire individual the individuals individual your organization so that they want to be led by you. This organization consensus for your leadership and the high feeling of spirit associated with it is called esprit de corps. This virtue can be developed and is built on three things: your personal integrity, mutual confidence, and are focus on contribution rather than personal gain. But for the purpose of elucidating some principles individual this paper, it focuses on the third building block, which refers to contribution.
2

METHODOLOGY
General Objectives:
y

To Study on Performance Appraisal and Evaluation System at Wheels India Limited in Padi, Chennai.

Specific Objectives:
y y y y y

To Study the socio-demographic details of the employee. To study the strength and weakness of employees. To study the promotion and other training programme. To study the self evaluation system of the employees. To provide suggestion to the management on improving performance appraisal system.

Field of Study:
The researcher conducted his study at Wheels India Limited in Padi, Chennai. Which has 1037 Employees in 12 Departments. Wheels India Limited is one of the TVS Group of company in Chennai. Wheels India Limited is a manufacturing sector to produce the wheels like car, van, truck, lorry etc..,

Research Design:
The research design adopted by the researcher is Descriptive Research Design. Descriptive Research Design studies are those, which are concerned with describing the characteristics of the particular individual or group. The researcher by using design describes the Performance Appraisal and Evaluation System among the employees at Wheels India Limited.

Universe:
In this study the universe is Wheels India Limited, with 1037 employees.

Sampling Size:
The sampling size for this study is 50.
3

Sampling Technique:
The researcher used Non-Probability Convenience Sampling technique in order to choose 50 respondents from 1037 employees who are been working in Wheels India Limited. There are totally 12 Departments in which 1037 employees were distributed, from which choose the convenient respondents from each departments. Total Universe = 1037 Selected Sample Size = 50

Source of Data:
The sources or this data for this research are both primary and secondary sources. Primary Sources: The primary data was obtained from the respondents through the help of the questionnaire. Secondary Sources: The secondary data was collected from books, articles, journals and net sources.

Tools of Data Collection:

The researcher used questionnaire to collect the primary data from the respondents. A Questionnaire is a research instrument consisting of a series of questions and other prompts for the purpose of gathering information from respondents. Although they are often designed for statistical analysis of the responses, this is not always the case. The reason why the researcher has chose a questionnaire method was that it was found to be convenient for the employees to provide the exact information about them which was given in a questionnaire by taking their time, since they were working in different shifts respectively. The questionnaire consists of 40 questions of which first dimension is 8 questions are based on employees socio-demographic details, the second dimension is 22 questions are based on Performance Appraisal System and the third dimension is 10 questions are based on Performance Evaluation System.

Pilot Visit:
The researcher was guided by Mr.Valliappan who is Asst.HR of the Wheels India Limited for the pilot visit.

Actual Data Collection:

The actual data collection was done during the period of 07.06.2010 to 16.06.2010.

Operational Definition:
Performance Appraisal: Edwin B. Flippo, Performance Appraisal is the systematic, periodic and an impartial rating of an employees excellence in matters pertaining to his present job and his potential for a better job Performance Evaluation: Performance Evaluation may be understood as the assessment of an individuals performance in a systematic way, the performance being measured against such factors as job knowledge, quality and quantity of output, initiative, leadership abilities, supervision, dependability, co-operation, judgment, versatility, health and the alike. Assessment should not be condensed to past performance alone. Potentials of the employee for future performance must also be assessed.

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE

REVIEW OF LITERATURE
INTRODUCTION:
The goals, design and management of the organizational and process levels are part of the system that affects performance (Rummler, Brache, 1990). The Performance System builds on those levels by providing a more micro picture of people and of the immediate environment that surrounds them (Stolovich, 1992). The Human Performance System is viewed in the input-output-feedback perspective. The quality of outputs is a function of the quality of inputs, performers, consequences, and feedback- inputs are those raw materials, forms, assignments, and customer requests that can cause people to perform (Stolovich, et al., 1992). It also includes the performers resources, systems and procedures that represent the performer in to the process level. A factor that affects input is task interference (Rummler, Brache, 1990). The performer must easily recognize the input that requires immediate action. The task should be done without interference from other tasks. Also, adequate resources (time, tools, and information) should be available for performance. Performers are the individuals or groups who convert inputs to output (Stolovich, 1992). Among the factors that affect the performer are the skills and knowledge required of the job. If skills and knowledge are inadequate or missing, job performance is impaired and training may be required for the job. Another factor that affects the performer is his or her own individual capacity. This involves the performers internal capabilities. No matter how supportive their environment or effective their training, they will not be able to do their job if they lack the physical, mental, or emotional capacity to achieve the goals. Appraisals

Feedback tells a performer to change performance or to keep on performing the same way. Without feedback, good performance can Fall off-track and poor performance can remain unimproved.

1.1 Performance Appraisal - Definition

- Cummings, 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 including the salary reviews, the development and training of individuals, planning job rotation and assistance promotions. - Edwin B. Flippo, Performance Appraisal is the systematic, periodic and an impartial rating of an employees excellence in matters pertaining to his present job and his potential for a better job.

Performance Appraisal - Evaluation Techniques:

Performance appraisal (or evaluation) is the HRM activity used to determine the extent on which the employees are performing the job effectively. Performance appraisal can be either Formal, when there is a system set up by the organization to regularly and systematically evaluate employee performance and Informal, when supervisors think about how well the employees are doing. In the following we are referring to formal performance appraisal.

1.2 Characteristics of Performance Appraisal :

The main characteristics of performance appraisal are as follows.
y

Performance appraisal is a process consisting of a series of steps.

It is the systematic examination of an employees strengths and weakness inters of the job.

Performance appraisal is a scientific or objective study.

It is an ongoing or continuous process wherein the evaluations are arranged periodically according to a definite plan.

1.3 Factors Affecting Performance Appraisal Systems

Performance appraisal programs are affected by some factors. Therefore for Implementing good appraisal systems the following are necessary. i. It should be easily understandable. The forms, which are more difficult to read and understand, are not effective performance appraisal systems. ii. The appraisal programs must have support of all line people who administer it. If line people think it is too theoretical, too ambitious, and too unrealistic or that it has been by ivory tower staff consultants who have no comprehension of the

foisted on them

demands on the time of the line operator. iii. The appraisal system should fit the organizational operations and structure the form constructed and the factors framed should be suitable for the organizational culture and structure. iv. The appraisal system should be valid and reliable. v. The performance appraisal programs should have built in incentives. vi. The appraisal form should be periodically evaluated to ensure that it meets its purpose.

1.4. Steps of Performance Appraisal:

Establishing Standards of Performance

Communicating Performance Appraisal

Measuring Actual Performance

Company Actual Performance with Standard laid

Discussion of appraisal with employees

Corrective Actions

1.5. The Way Forward Process

Performance Appraisal

Rewarding Performance

Competencies

Career Development & Succession Planning

Training & Development

1.6. Process of Performance Appraisal

I. Establish Performance Standards
y y

Performance standards serve as benchmarks against which performance is measured Standards should relate to the desired results of each job

II. Communicate the Standards

y

Performance appraisal involves at least two parties, the appraiser who does the appraisal and the appraisee whose performance is being evaluated.

The appraiser should prepare job descriptions clearly; help appraisee set his goals and targets; analyze results objectively; offer coaching and guidance to appraisee whenever required and reward good results

The appraisee should be very clear about what he is doing and why?

III. Measure Actual Performance

y

Performance measures, to be helpful must be easy to use, reliable and must report on the critical behaviours that determine performance

1.7. Benefits of Performance Appraisal:

1.7.1. For the appraisee
y

Better understanding of his role in the organizationwhat is expected and what needs to be done to meet those expectations.

Clear understanding of his strengths and weaknesses to develop himself into a better performer in future.

y y y

Increased motivation, job satisfaction, and self-esteem. Opportunity to discuss work problems and how they can be overcome. Opportunity to discuss aspirations and any guidance, support or training needed to fulfil those aspirations.

Improved working relationships with supervisors.

10

1.7.2. For the Management

y

Identification of performers and non-performers and their development towards better performance.

y y y y y

Opportunity to prepare employees for assuming higher responsibilities. Opportunity to improve communication between the employees and management. Identification of training and development needs. Generation of ideas for improvements. Better identification of potential and formulation of career plans..

1.7.3. For the Organization

y y y

Improved performance throughout the organization. Creation of a culture of continuous improvement and success. Conveying the message that people are valued.

1.8. Methods of Performance Appraisal:

a. Graphic Rating Scale: Graphic rating scale is the oldest and still most used method of evaluation. In this case the rater is presented with a set of traits and is asked to rate the employee on each of them. The ratings can be numeric (from 1 to 5 for example) or alphabetic (such as outstanding, good, satisfactory, fair and unsatisfactory). b. Checklist and Weighted Checklists: A checklist is a set of objectives or descriptive statements. If the rater believes that the employee possesses a trait listed, the rater checks the item; if not, the rater leaves it blank. A rating score from the checklist equals the number of checks. The method was further developed by giving weights (from excellent to poor) to several objectives.

11

c. Forced Choice Method: Forced choice is the technique when the rater must choose from a set of descriptive statements about an employee. The method was developed to substitute graphic rating scales, as graphic rating scales permits to evaluate all the employees high. d. Critical Incident Method: Critical incident technique, a method according to which the rater maintains a log of behavioural incidents that represent either effective or ineffective performance for each employee being rated. The advantage of this method is that the results are less subjective, but this method needs more time to use than the other techniques. e. Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS). The method was developed by Smith and Kendall. The BARS approach relies on the use of critical incidents to serve as anchor statements on a scale. A BARS rating form usually contains 6 to 10 specifically defined performance dimensions, each with 5 to 6 critical incident anchors (both positive and negative). Employees prefer the using of this method instead of others, as it seems that they become more committed, less tense and more satisfied than in case using other methods. f. Essay evaluation: In which the rater is asked to describe the strong and weak aspects of the employees behaviour. Usually, this method is used in combination with other methods. g. Paired Comparison: Paired comparison, used in case there are several subordinates to be ranked. Each employee is paired with every person to be compared with. The rater chooses the better performing subordinate. The number of times that a person is chosen as the better employee is tallied, and results are indexed based on this number.

12

h. 360-Degree appraisal: The 360-degree technique is understood as systematic collection of performance data on an individual or group, derived from a number of stake holders- the stakeholders being the immediate supervisor, team members, customers, peers, and it. i. Assessment centres: An assessment centre is a central location where managers may come together to have their participation in job-related exercise evaluated by trained observers. The most important feature of the assessment centre is job-related stimulations. This stimulation includes the characteristics that managers feel are important for the job. On this basis the evaluators evaluate the employee. j. Management by Objectives (MBO): MBO is more than just an evaluation program and process. It is viewed as a philosophy of managerial practice, a method by which managers and subordinates plan, organize, control, communicate and debate. By setting objectives through participation or by assignment from a superior, the subordinate is provided with a course to follow and a target to shoot for while performing the job.

1.9. Rating Errors:

a. Halo error:

A halo effect takes place when one aspect of an individuals performance influences the evaluation of the entire performance of the individual. b. Spill over Effect:

This refers to allowing past performance appraisal ratings to unjustifiably influence current ratings.

13

c. Leniency or severity: Leniency or severity on the part of the rater makes the assessment a subjective. Subjective assessment defeats the very purpose of performance appraisal.

d. Primacy and Regency Effects:

The raters ratings are heavily influenced either by behaviour exhibited by the ratee during the early stages of the review period (primacy) or by outcomes, or behaviours exhibited by the ratee near the end of the review period (recently).

e. Primary & Regency Effects: Regency of events error raters forget more about past behaviour than current behaviour. f. Central Tendency Errors: Central tendency error the tendency of the raters to assign average ratings for all the dimensions. g. Contrast effects: At the individual evaluation techniques the performance of an employee is requested to be rated independently of the performance of other employees. However, this is in some cases only theory. For example, if the performance of an average colleague is evaluated after the evaluation of an outstanding employee, the average employee can get low ratings.

14

1.10. Performance Appraisal System using Multifactorial Evaluation Model: Performance Appraisal System
Performance appraisal is a formal management system that provides for the evaluation of the quality of an individuals performance in an organization.

- Dessler, Performance appraisal has the means to evaluate an employees current and past performance relative to the employees performance standards. It is a process which involves creating work standards; evaluate employees actual performance relative to those work standards; and giving feedback to employee so as to motivate him or her to improve the job performance or to eliminate performance deficiency.

- Terrence, H. M and Joyce, that, some potential aims of performance appraisal might include identifying particular behaviour or job.

2.0. Performance Appraisal Model:

2.0.1 Performance Appraisal process: Performance appraisal is used by an organization to reward and develop the human resource of the organization to ensure that the organization runs smoothly and grow. Every Year, staffs are required to fill up Yearly Work Plan to report on the progress of the tasks assigned as agreed early of the year. This is done at the beginning and at the middle of the year. At year end, the Yearly Work Plan is used to evaluate the performance of the staff throughout the whole year. The process of performance Appraisal is shown.

2.1. Staff Evaluation:

Four aspects will be taken into consideration when evaluating staff performance and each aspect will index into its sub criteria, as follows:

2.1.1. Working output (Aspect 1): This aspect evaluates the quantity, quality and effectiveness of the staffs working output as well as staffs punctuality.

15

2.1.2. Knowledge and skills (Aspect 2): This aspect evaluates the staffs knowledge and skills in the working field as well as their effectiveness in communication and realization of rules.

2.1.3. Personal quality (Aspect 3): This aspect evaluates the personal quality appreciated by the organization such as discipline, proactive, innovative, cooperativeness and independence.

2.1.4. Informal Event(s) and Contribution(s) (Aspect 4): Staffs contribution to the organization, community, state, country and international.

2.2 Performance Appraisal System Attributes: Clarity, Openness, and Fairness:

The performance appraisal system must possess the attributes of clarity, openness, and fairness. These attributes are related to the historic values of the student affairs profession. While specific implementation of these attributes may vary, the following should be represented in effective performance appraisal:

2.2.1. Ongoing Review of Position and Performance :

Effective performance appraisal systems conduct ongoing evaluations of both the position and the staff member occupying it. With ongoing position analysis and performance appraisal, there are few surprises, and changes in the environment are quickly incorporated into the official appraisal system.

2.2.2. Job Descriptions:

Job descriptions should be reliable, valid, understandable, and specific enough to provide
direction for staff behaviour. Job descriptions should focus on what the staff member does (e.g. advises the student government association) and what outcomes are expected. These outcomes should be clearly linked to departmental and institutional objectives and needs.

Job descriptions should use action words such "plans" or "supervises" rather than "demonstrates initiative" or "is likable." Job descriptions should provide guidelines for staff so they know the specific behaviours expected to perform.
16

2.2.3. Participatory and Interactive Appraisal: Appraisal system processes should be designed in concert with all stakeholders and open to constant interaction with them. Plans made jointly by staff and administrators have a better chance of working than plans made independently by either party.`

2.2.4. Workable formats that Avoid Systemic Bias: Effective performance appraisal systems must include workable formats that avoid systematic biases. Checklists of performance criteria completed at the same time every year should be avoided. This type of approach simply fails to produce any useful information for individual or organizational improvement. Other biases include giving preferential treatment to some but not all staff, rating all staff the same, being overly lenient or overly harsh toward some or all staff, and practicing conscious or unconscious racial or gender prejudice. Adopting a format that includes the standards of clarity, openness, and fairness and that involves more than one appraiser may help to control some of these biases. 2.2.5. Susan M. Heath field of The Traditional Performance Appraisal Process:

Managers cite performance appraisal as the task they dislike the most. This is understandable given that the process of performance appraisal, as traditionally practiced, is fundamentally flawed. It is incongruent with the values-based, vision-driven, missionoriented, participative work environments favoured by forward thinking organizations today. It smacks of an old fashioned, paternalistic, top down, autocratic mode of management which treats employees as possessions of the company.

2.2.6. Bacals of Performance Management & Appraisal and Work-Related Articles:

Performance management and performance appraisal (or employee reviews, annual reviews, etc) are some of the most misused tools anywhere. A fortune is wasted on inept processes, poor forms, and result from mistaken ideas about what performance management is for, and why we do it.

17

2.2.7. Gerard McLaughlin of How to Prepare for a Performance Appraisal: Performance appraisal should be treated as an ongoing developmental process rather than a formal once-a-year review. Both employee and reviewer to ensure that targets are being achieved should closely monitor it. By preparing yourself diligently and

demonstrating a willingness to co-operate with your reviewer to develop your role, you will create a positive impression.

To enable you to assess your own performance as objectively as possible, try to view it from your manager's perspective. Make sure you are conversant with the company's assessment policies and procedures.

2.2.8. From DULEWICZ: "A basic human tendency to make judgments about those one is working with, as well as about oneself." Appraisal, it seems, is both inevitable and universal. In the absence of a carefully structured system of appraisal, people will tend to judge the work performance of others, including subordinates, naturally, informally and arbitrarily. Performance appraisal systems began as simple methods of income justification. That is, appraisal was used to decide whether or not the salary or wage of an individual employee was justified. The process was firmly linked to material outcomes. If an employee's performance was found to be less than ideal, a cut in pay would follow. On the other hand, if their performance was better than the supervisor expected, a pay rise was in order. 2.2.9. From KREIN:

Appraisers should not confront employees directly with criticism. Rather, they should aim to let the evidence of poor performance emerge "naturally" during the course of the appraisal interview. This is done by way of open-ended questioning techniques that encourage the employee to identify their own performance problems.

18

2.2.10. Finding Performance Appraisals and Evaluation System: Performance Evaluation is a construction process to acknowledge the performance of a nonprobationary career employee. An employees evaluation shall be sufficiently specific to inform and guide the employee in the performance of her/his duties. Performance evaluation is not in and of itself a disciplinary procedure. A formal performance appraisal is an important opportunity to summarize the informal evaluations of the employees performance over a longer period of time. There are many good reasons to conduct a formal performance appraisal if assignments and standards have been clear, if coaching through informal evaluation and feedback has been ongoing, a formal performance appraisal should be merely a summary of what has already occurred. It should include no surprise for the employee or the supervisors. Because both should already know how successful employee has been in meeting performance standard.

2.3. Applying Complexity Theory to Performance Appraisal:

2.3.1. The research agenda in appraisal: - Williams 1998, Performance appraisal is a term that was once associated with a rather basic process of a manager completing an annual report on a subordinates performance. In the early days this would involve giving ratings on a number of scales which focused on attitude and even personality. Progress shifted the focus towards behavior and performance in relation to goals and competencies. Nowadays the term appraisal has evolved into a general heading for a variety of activities including a system for managing organizational performance, a system for managing the performance of the individual and a system for integrating the two.

- Fletcher 2001, Much of the research around appraisal has been centered the use of ratings in appraisal and how to make them more objective and accurate in reflecting performance and it would be difficult to conclude that this has led to any significant improvements in appraisal practice.

19

-Borman and Motowidlos (1993), Contextual performance deals with attributes that go beyond task competence and which foster behaviours which enhance the climate and the effectiveness of the organization. Even given these recent developments in thinking the underlying assumption in the appraisal literature is that the job holder is an individual unit to be isolated and measured. The application of a complexity lens to performance appraisal offers a completely different perspective and shifts the eye towards seeing the individual as part of a system of interrelationships.

2.3.2. Linking complexity to appraisal - The principles The most fundamental assumption is that there is no one objective reality that one can stand outside and measure. Connectivity and interdependence mean that one cannot understand the behaviour of an individual without taking into account their context and web of relationships. The emphasis of this appraisal process is therefore on multi perspectives and 360 degree feedback. In addition this process does not attempt to measure individuals. It focuses instead on the relationships and the interdependencies so the essence of the process is a conversation not a survey. One of the key principles of this approach to appraisal is that the process is owned by the appraisee. The broad purpose is to: improve performance; learn and grow (in other words to survive and thrive) and within that the individual determines; what the purpose is for them personally, who they want feedback from and what questions to ask.

Ownership by the appraisee is one of the principles which enables appraisal to be a self organizing system and it is reinforced in a number of other ways. At a more micro level, the process involves gathering ones appraisers together as a group, looking them in the eye and having a conversation about my performance and my development. The dimensions of appraisal or the questions have not been defined by the organisation. The appraisee with the help of their facilitator will have decided them. The facilitators role is also to allow other themes to emerge which perhaps the appraisers wish to talk about, provided they have a bearing on improve performance, learn and grow. Enormous flexibility is built into the process which allows it to flex with the business, self organise and respond to changes in the environment.
20

The nature of such a group conversation is inherently unpredictable and this is what many people find uncomfortable about the idea of it. The value of pushing appraisal to the edge of chaos is that the participants explore more of the possibility space and order emerges. What has been found is that people not only give feedback they also spontaneously offer support, solve problems and surface broader organizational issues. The interconnectivity frequently stimulates organisational level learning as well as profound individual level learning.

Because the nature of the process involves a conversation about how can we work better together? people who are attending for the purpose of giving feedback often find there are development benefits and implications for them too. In other words, co evolution takes place.

Co-evolution is also built into the process through the evaluation approach. From the outset people are invited back to evaluation conversations (again as a group) to discuss how we can make this process work really well for this organization. The assumption is that it will coevolve with other aspects of the organization

2.3.3. Linking complexity to appraisal - The practice: The resultant appraisal system is a face to face, paperless (ie there are no forms) 360 degree appraisal which is owned by the appraisee. This is typically experienced by the appraisee in the following way:

a. You attend an introductory workshop. The emphasis is on: the purpose and principles of this process; the assumptions it is based upon; the freedoms you have as appraisees and the responsibilities; equipping you with the support you need to carry it out and answering all of your questions.

b. Choose a facilitator from the list and arrange to meet with them.

c. Meet on a one to one with your facilitator to plan the appraisal. Together you decide what the purpose is for you, who to seek feedback from, what feedback to seek and how to collect it.

21

d. Collect the feedback. The principle here is face to face as far as possible and the process has been found to work most powerfully when individuals have chosen to gather their appraisers in a room together to do this. Others have chosen to see their appraisers on a one to one basis or to do a combination of the two.

e. Pulling together and reflecting on the feedback with the help of your facilitator f. Contribute to an evaluation discussion to continually co-evolve the process.

22

CHAPTER III

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

INTRODUCTION:
The following are the interpretations and analysis of datas collected from the respondents. Datas are tabulated using Bar Diagram, Pyramid, Pie chart and Simple Table

Figure -1 Age of the respondents

Figure -1(Pie Chart) shows the distribution of respondents according to their age. The above table reveals that 22 percent of the respondents are in the age group of below 20 years, 46 percent of the respondents are in the age group of 21-26 years, 12 percent of the respondents are in the age group of 27-30 years, 6 percent of the respondents are in the age group of 31-40 years and 14 percent of the respondents are in the age group of 41-46 years to this statement.

elow 20

21-26

27-30

31-40

41-46

14% 22% 6%

12%

46%

23

Figure 2 Respondents by Marital Status

UG

PG

20%

80%

Figure -2(Pie Chart) shows the distribution of respondents by marital status.

The above table indicates that 34 percent of the respondents are Unmarried and 66 percent of the respondents are married.

24

Figure 3 Respondents by Departments

120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Percentage

Departments

Figure -3(Bar Diagram) shows the distribution of respondents by Departments.

The above table reveals that 32 percent of the respondents from production department, 4 percent of the respondents from HR department, 2 percent of the respondents from R&D department, 8 percent of the respondents from accounts department and a vast majority 54 percent of the respondents from other departments like Production, Sales etc.,

25

Diploma

thers

Total

Fi E i lQ li i i

Fi li i ti

i t i ti

t l i t t t t t t

t t t

t t t l t

l t

' % &

i l

t t l l

t i l

 

 

$# " !

 




t

 
ti l t

Table.1 Distribution of the Respondents by Sex

S.No 1.

Sex Male

Frequency 50

Percentage 100.0

Total

50

100.0

The above table reveals that 100 percent of the respondents are male.

27

Table.2 Distribution of the Respondents by Salary

S.No 1. 2. 3. 4.

Monthly Salary Below 10000 10000-20000 20000-30000 Above 30000 Total

Frequency 29 4 12 5 50

Percentage 58.0 8.0 24.0 10.0 100.0

The above table indicates that 58 percent of the respondents have received salary below of Rs.10000, 8 percent of the respondents have received salary of Rs.10000-20000, 24 percent of the respondents have received salary of Rs.20000-30000 and 10 percent of the respondents have received salary of Rs.30000 and above to this statement.

28

Table.3 Distribution of the Respondents by Work Experience S.No 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Year of Experience 0-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4 And Above Total Frequency 13 13 6 5 13 50 Percentage 26.0 26.0 12.0 10.0 26.0 100.0

The above table suggests that 26 percent of the respondents have below one years of experience in the organization, 26 percent of the respondents have 1-2 years of experience, 12 percent of the respondents have 2-3 years of experience, 10 percent of the respondents have 3-4 years of experience and 26 percent of the respondents have 4 and Above years of experience.

29

Table.4 Distribution of the Respondents by Requirement of Performance Appraisal System

S.No

Requirement of Performance Appraisal System in their Organization

Frequency

Percentage

1.

Strongly Agree

23

46

2.

Agree

27

54

Total

50

100

The above table reveals that 46 percent of the respondents strongly agree that performance appraisal system were required in their organization and 54 percent of the respondents agree that performance appraisal system were required to this statement.

30

Table.5 Distribution of the Respondents by Satisfaction on Existing Performance Appraisal System

S.No

Satisfaction on Existing Performance Appraisal System

Frequency

Percentage

1.

Strongly Agree

23

46.0

2.

Agree

26

52.0

3.

Strongly Disagree Total

1 50

2.0 100.0

The above table indicates that 46 percent of the respondents strongly agree with existing performance appraisal system, 52 percent of the respondents agree and less 2 percent of the respondents strongly disagree to this statement.

31

Table.6

Distribution of the Respondents by Satisfaction on Promotion Chances

S.No

Satisfaction on Promotion Chances

Frequency

Percentage

1. 2. 3. 4.

Strongly agree Agree Neither Agree nor Disagree Strongly Disagree Total

11 29 4 6 50

22.0 58.0 8.0 12.0 100.0

The above table reveals that 22 percent of the respondents strongly agree with promotion chances, 58 percent of the respondents agree, 8 percent of the respondents have no opinion and 12 percent of the respondents disagree to this statement.

32

Table.7 Distribution of the Respondents in terms of level of Satisfaction with existing allowances

S.No

Satisfaction with Existing Allowances

Frequency

Percentage

1. 2. 3. 4.

Strongly agree Agree Neither Agree nor Disagree Strongly Disagree Total

29 17 1 3 50

58.0 34.0 2.0 6.0 100.0

The above table suggests that 58 percent of the respondents strongly agree with existing allowances, 34 percent of the respondents agree, 2 percent of the respondents have no opinion and 6 percent of the respondents strongly disagree to this statement.

33

Table.8 Distribution of the Respondents in terms of preference of Appraisal by self and superior

S.No

Preference of appraisal by self and superior

Frequency

Percentage

1. 2. 3. 4

Strongly agree Agree Neither Agree nor Disagree Strongly Disagree Total

22 23 1 4 50

44.0 46.0 2.0 8.0 100.0

The above table reveals that 44 percent of the respondents are strongly agree that performance assessed by superior or consultant, 46 percent of the respondents agree, 2 percent of the respondents are undecided and 8 percent of the respondents strongly disagree to this statement.

34

Table.9 Opinion on how for Performance Appraisal System helpful to win cooperation and Team Work

S.No

Performance Appraisal System helpful to win cooperation and Team Work

Frequency

Percentage

1. 2. 3. 4.

Strongly agree Agree Neither Agree nor Disagree Strongly Disagree Total

20 23 3 4 50

40.0 46.0 6.0 8.0 100.0

As for as the opinion on usefulness of performance appraisal system for better co-operation and team work, 20 percent strongly agree, 23 percent agree, 3 percent are undecided and 4 percent strongly disagree to this statement.

35

Table.10 Opinion on usefulness in reducing grievances among the employees.

S.No

Opinion on usefulness in reducing grievances among the employees

Frequency

Percentage

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Strongly agree Agree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Strongly Disagree Total

16 26 1 4 3 50

32.0 52.0 2.0 8.0 6.0 100.0

Regarding the opinion on usefulness in reducing grievance among the employees 32 percent strongly agree, 52 percent agree, 2 percent are disagree, 8 percent are undecided and 6 percent strongly disagree to this statement.

36

Table.11 Opinion on change in improving the personnel skills

S.No 1. 2. 3. 4.

Opinion on change in improving personnel skills Strongly agree Agree Neither Agree nor Disagree Strongly Disagree Total

Frequency 18 21 6 5 50

Percentage 36.0 42.0 12.0 10.0 100.0

With respect to the opinion on change in improving the personnel skills 36 percent strongly agree, 42 percent agree, 12 percent are undecided and 10 percent strongly disagree to this statement. .

37

Table.12 Opinion on effectiveness of training programmes

S.No

Opinion on effectiveness of training programmes

Frequency

Percentage

1. 2. 3. 4.

Strongly agree Agree Neither Agree nor Disagree Strongly Disagree Total

12 31 5 2 50

24.0 62.0 10.0 4.0 100.0

In terms of the opinion on effectiveness of training programmes 24 percent strongly agree, 62 percent agree, 10 percent are undecided and 4 percent strongly disagree to this statement.

38

Table.13 Performance Ratings were done periodically

S.No

Performance ratings were done periodically

Frequency

Percentage

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Strongly agree Agree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Strongly Disagree Total

13 22 1 8 6 50

26.0 44.0 2.0 16.0 12.0 100.0

The above table reveals that 26 percent of the respondents strongly agree that performance rating were done periodically, 44 percent of the respondents agree, 2 percent of the respondents disagree, 16 percent of the respondents have no opinion and 12 percent of the respondents strongly disagree to this statement.

39

Table.14 Performance Appraisal System is helpful in identifying strengths & weakness

S.No

Performance Appraisal System in identifying strengths & weakness

Frequency Percentage

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Strongly agree Agree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Strongly Disagree Total

15 19 2 7 7 50

30.0 38.0 4.0 14.0 14.0 100.0

The above table suggests that 30 percent of the respondents strongly agree that performance appraisal system useful to identifying strengths & weakness, 38 percent of the respondents agree, 4 percent of the respondents disagree, 14 percent of the respondents have no opinion and 14 percent of the respondents strongly disagree to this statement.

40

Table.15 Performance rating is helpful in providing counselling.

S.No

Performance rating helpful in providing counselling

Frequency

Percentage

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Strongly agree Agree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Strongly Disagree Total

19 17 4 2 8 50

38.0 34.0 8.0 4.0 16.0 100.0

The above table suggests that 38 percent of the respondents strongly disagree that performance useful for providing counselling, 34 percent of the respondents agree, 8 percent of the respondents disagree, 4 percent of the respondents have no opinion and 16 percent of the respondents strongly disagree to this statement.

41

Table.16 Promotion is based on Performance Appraisal System

S.No

Promotion is based on Performance Appraisal System

Frequency

Percentage

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Strongly agree Agree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Strongly Disagree Total

14 22 2 7 5 50

28.0 44.0 4.0 4.0 10.0 100.0

The above table indicates that 28 percent of the respondents strongly agree with promotion based on performance appraisal system, 44 percent of the respondents agree, 4 of the

respondents disagree, 4 percent of the respondents are undecided and 10 percent of the respondents strongly disagree to this statement.

42

Table.17 Management fixes salary through performance rating

S.No

Management fixes salary through performance rating

Frequency

Percentage

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Strongly agree Agree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Strongly Disagree Total

16 22 2 6 4 50

32.0 44.0 4.0 12.0 8.0 100.0

The above table suggests that 32 percent of the respondents strongly agree that management fixes salary through performance rating, 44 percent of the respondents agree, 4 percent of the respondents disagree, 12 percent of the respondents have no opinion and 8 percent of the respondents strongly disagree in their organization.

43

Table.18 Performance rating is the basis for increment

S.No

Performance rating is the basis for increment

Frequency

Percentage

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Strongly agree Agree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Strongly Disagree Total

15 22 1 5 7 50

30.0 44.0 2.0 10.0 14.0 100.0

From the above table it is inferred that 30 percent of the respondents strongly agree that performance rating is the basis for increment, 44 percent of the respondents agree, 2 percent of the respondents disagree, 10 percent of the respondents are undecided and 14 percent of the respondents strongly disagree to this statement.

44

Table.19 Incentive / Disincentive are linked to Performance Appraisal System

S.No

Incentive / Disincentive are linked to performance Appraisal System

Frequency

Percentage

1. 2. 3. 4.

Strongly agree Agree Neither Agree nor Disagree Strongly Disagree Total

20 19 6 5 50

40.0 38.0 12.0 10.0 100.0

The above table inferred that 40 percent of the respondents strongly agree that incentive or disincentive are linked to performance appraisal system, 38 percent of the respondents agree, 12 percent of the respondents have no opinion and 10 percent of the respondents strongly disagree to this statement.

45

Table.20 Performance Appraisal System helps in achieving the target

S.No

Performance Appraisal System helps in achieving the target

Frequency

Percentage

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Strongly agree Agree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Strongly Disagree Total

17 24 1 5 3 50

34.0 48.0 2.0 10.0 6.0 100.0

The above table reveals that 34 percent of the respondents strongly agree that performance appraisal system helps in achieving the target, 48 percent of the respondents agree, 2 percent of the respondents disagree, 10 percent of the respondents are undecided and 6 percent of the respondents strongly disagree to this statement.

46

Table.21 Performance Appraisal System increases Employee motivation

S.No

Performance Appraisal System increases Employee motivation

Frequency Percentage

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Strongly agree Agree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Strongly Disagree Total

18 20 1 6 5 50

36.0 40.0 2.0 12.0 10.0 100.0

The above table inferred that 36 percent of the respondents strongly agree that increases employee motivation through performance appraisal system, 40 percent of the respondents agree, 2 percent of the respondents disagree, 12 percent of the respondents are undecided and 10 percent of the respondents strongly disagree to this statement.

47

Table.22 Performance appraisal system contributes to the overall success of work

S.No

Performance appraisal system contribute to the overall success of work Strongly agree Agree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Strongly Disagree Total

Frequency

Percentage

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

13 24 1 8 4 50

26.0 48.0 2.0 16.0 8.0 100.0

The above table indicates that 26 percent of the respondents strongly agree that performance appraisal system contributes to the overall success of work, 48 percent of the respondents agree, 2 percent of the respondents disagree, 16 percent of the respondents have no opinion and 8 percent of the respondents strongly disagree to this statement.

48

Table.23 It is better to have Separate committee to review the Performance Appraisal System

S.No

Separate committee to review the Performance Appraisal System Strongly agree Agree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Strongly Disagree Total

Frequency

Percentage

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

19 21 1 5 4 50

39.0 42.0 2.0 10.0 8.0 100.0

The above inferred that 39 percent of the respondents strongly agree that performance appraisal system to review the separate committee, 42 percent of the respondents agree, 2 percent of the respondents disagree, 10 percent of the respondents have no opinion and 8 percent of the respondents strongly disagree to this statement.

49

Table.24 Rating the quality of Induction Training

S.No

Rating the quality of induction training

Frequency

Percentage

1. 2. 3. 4.

Very good Good Very Poor Poor Total

16 32 1 1 50

32.0 64.0 2.0 2.0 100.0

The above table reveals that 32 percent of the respondents have rated as very good the quality of induction training, 64 percent of the respondents have rated as good, 2 percent of the respondents have rated very poor in terms of quality of induction training.

50

Table.25 Rating the quality of Skill Training

S.No

Rating the quality of Skill training

Frequency 19

Percentage 38.0

1.

Very good

2.

Good

22

44.0

3.

Fair

18.0

Total

50

100.0

The above table indicates that 32 percent of the respondents have rated very good the quality of skill training, 64 percent of the respondents have rated as good, and 2 percent of the respondents have rated as fair in terms of quality of skill training.

51

Table.26 Rating the quality of other Training Programme

S.No

Rating the quality of other Training Programme

Frequency

Percentage

1.

Very good

16.0

2.

Good

31

62.0

3.

Fair

11

22.0

Total

50

100.0

From the above table reveals that 16 percent of the respondents have rated as very good the quality of other training programme, 62 percent of the respondents have rated as good, and 22 percent of the respondents have rated as fair in terms of quality of other training programmes.

52

Table.27 Performance Appraisal Rating corresponds to the level of Job Knowledge

S.No

Performance Appraisal Rating corresponds to the level of Job Knowledge

Frequency

Percentage

1.

Fair

25

50.0

2.

Good

22

44.0

3.

Exceptional

6.0

Total

50

100.0

The above table indicates that 50 percent of the respondents have rated as fair the performance appraisal rating correspond to the level of job knowledge, 44 percent of the respondents have rated as good, and 3 percent of the respondents have rated as exceptional to this statement.

53

Table.28 Performance Appraisal Rating takes into account of Work uality

S.No

Performance Appraisal Rating takes into account of Work uality

Frequency

Percentage

1.

Fair

10

20.0

2.

Good

33

66.0

3.

Exceptional

14.0

Total

50

100.0

The above table reveals that a majority 66 percent of the respondents have rated as good that performance appraisal rating takes into account of work quality, 20 percent of the respondents have rated fair and 14 percent of the respondents have rated exceptional to this statement.

54

Table.29 Performance Appraisal Rating corresponds to the level of Piece Rate Production.

S.No

Performance Appraisal Rating corresponds to the level of Piece Rate Production

Frequency

Percentage

1.

Fair

12

24.0

2.

Good

27

54.0

3.

Exceptional

11

22.0

Total

50

100.0

The above table indicates that 54 percent of the respondents have rated as good that performance appraisal rating corresponds to the level of piece rate production, 24 percent of the respondents have rated as fair, and 22 percent of the respondents have rated as exceptional to this statement.

55

Table.30 Performance Appraisal Rating corresponds to the level of Communication Skills.

S.No

Performance Appraisal Rating corresponds to the level of Communication Skills

Frequency Percentage

1.

Fair

13

26.0

2.

Good

26

52.0

3.

Exceptional

11

22.0

Total

50

100.0

The above table indicates that 52 percent of the respondents have rated as good that performance appraisal rating corresponds to the level of communication skills, 26 percent of the respondents have rated as fair and 22 percent of the respondents have rated as exceptional to this statement.

56

Table.31 Performance Appraisal Rating takes into account of Interpersonal Relationship.

S.No

Performance Appraisal Rating takes into account of Interpersonal Relationship

Frequency

Percentage

1. 2.

Poor Fair

1 14

2 28.0

3.

Good

25

50.0

4.

Exceptional

10

20.0

Total

50

100.0

The above table reveals that 50 percent of the respondents have rated as good that performance appraisal rating takes into account of interpersonal relationship, 28 percent of the respondents have rated competent, 2 percent of the respondents have rated poor and 20 percent of the respondents have rated exceptional to this statement.

57

Table.32 Performance Appraisal Rating takes into account of Team Work.

S.No

Performance Appraisal Rating takes into account of Team Work

Frequency

Percentage

1. 2. 3.

Fair Good Exceptional Total

20 22 8 50

40.0 44.0 16.0 100.0

The above table indicates that 44 percent of the respondents have rated as good that performance appraisal rating takes into account of team work, 40 percent of the respondents have rated as fair and 16 percent of the respondents have rated as exceptional to this statement.

58

Table.33 Performance Appraisal Rating takes into account of Policy Compliance.

S.No

Performance Appraisal Rating takes into account of Policy Compliance

Frequency

Percentage

1. 2. 3.

Fair Good Exceptional Total

22 23 5 50

44.0 46.0 10.0 100.0

The above table reveals that 46 percent of the respondents have rated as good that performance appraisal rating takes into account of policy compliance, 44 percent of the respondents have rated as fair and 10 percent of the respondents have rated exceptional to this statement.

59

Table.34 Performance Appraisal Rating takes into account of Time Management.

S.No

Performance Appraisal Rating takes into account of Time Management

Frequency

Percentage

1. 2. 3.

Fair Good Exceptional Total

15 24 11 50

30.0 48.0 22.0 100.0

The above table indicates that 48 percent of the respondents have rated as good that performance appraisal rating takes into account of time management, 30 percent of the respondents have rated as fair and 22 percent of the respondents have rated as exceptional to this statement.

60

Table.35 Performance Appraisal Rating takes into account of Attendance Regularity

S.No

Performance Appraisal Rating takes into account of Attendance Regularity

Frequency

Percentage

1. 2. 3.

Competent Good Exceptional Total

20 25 5 50

40.0 50.0 10.0 100.0

The above table indicates that 50 percent of the respondents have rated as good that performance appraisal rating takes into account of attendance regularity 40 percent of the , respondents have rated competent and 10 percent of the respondents have rated exceptional to this statement.

61

Table.36 Performance Appraisal Rating takes into account of Innovation

S.No

Performance Appraisal Rating takes into account of Innovation

Frequency

Percentage

1. 2. 3.

Fair Good Exceptional Total

18 23 9 50

36.0 46.0 18.0 100.0

The above table reveals that 46 percent of the respondents have rated as good that performance appraisal rating takes into account of continuous improvement, 36 percent of the respondents have rated as fair and 18 percent of the respondents have rated as exceptional to this statement.

62

CHAPTER IV

MAIN FINDINGS

MAIN FINDINGS
INTRODUCTION:
This chapter deals with findings elicited from the study the findings are both positive and negative factors based on the data that the respondents have made available, which were analyzed and interpreted by the researcher. These main findings will help us to understand the factors responsible system at Wheels India Limited, the main findings of this study are discussed below:

A. Socio-Demographic Profile: It is observed that all the respondents are male. In terms of age group less than 46 percent of the respondents were in the age group of 21-26 years, more than half 66 percent of the respondents were unmarried. 26 percent of the respondents have above 4 years of work experience, more than half 58 percent of the respondents have received salary below Rs.10000 and 32 percent of the respondents were working in production department.

B. Performance Appraisal System: It is observed that, more than half 54 percent of the respondents needed performance appraisal system in the organization. 52 percent of the respondents were satisfied with the existing performance appraisal system. More than half 58 percent of the respondents were satisfied on promotion chances. 46 percent of the respondents agree the performance appraisal by self and superior and 46 percent of the respondents as opinion on useful of appraisal system for co-operation and team work. A majority 52 percent of the respondents agree on the usefulness in reducing grievance among the employees. 42 percent of the respondents strongly agree on the effectiveness of training programme. 44 percent of the respondents agree the performance rating were done periodically. 38 percent of the respondents agree on the appraisal system useful to identifying strength and weakness. 38 percent of the respondents strongly agree on the performance rating useful for providing counselling. 44 percent of the respondents agree the promotion based on performance appraisal system and 44 percent of the respondents agree the increment was based on performance rating.

63

48 percent of the respondents agree the performance appraisal helps in achieving the target. 40 percent of the respondents agree that performance appraisal is helpful in motivating the employees. 48 percent of the respondents agree the performance appraisal system have contributes to overall success of work. 42 percent of the respondents agree on the separate committee to review the performance appraisal. A majority 64 percent of the respondents good in terms of quality of induction training. 44 percent of the respondents good in terms of quality of skill training and 62 percent of the respondents good in terms of quality of other training programme.

C. Performance Evaluation System: A majority 66 percent of the respondents take into account of work quality. 50 percent of the respondents correspond to the level of job knowledge. 54 percent of the respondents take into accounts of piece rate production. 52 percent of the respondents take into accounts of communication skills. 50 percent of the respondents correspond to the level of interrelationship among the employees. 44 percent of the respondents take into account of team work. 46 percent of the respondents correspond to the level of policy compliance. 48 of the respondents take into account of time management. 50 percent of the respondents take into account of attendance and 46 percent of the respondents correspond to the level of continuous improvement.

64

CHAPTER V

SUGGESTIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

SUGGESTIONS AND CONCLUSION

INTRODUCTION:
This chapter deals with the suggestion and conclusion on the basis of the analysis and interpretation presented in the previous chapter, the researcher o ffers few practical suggestions:
y

38 percent of the respondents agree the performance appraisal useful to identifying strength and weakness. Organization could concentrate on identifying the strength and weakness among the employees.

Researcher found that performance appraisal system were given the employees promotion chance, Organization could make it half yearly, instead of currently doing it annually the appraisal system.

Conclusion:
Through this research, it was possible for the respondents to come out freely with their suggestion. The company could implement good and possible suggestion given by the respondents. Performance can greatly influence or impact in the following ways: (1) the managers can determine how they can help associates overcome problems they face on the job; (2) associates can identify ways to improve their performance; (3) to consider new objectives or sub-objectives; and (4) for the managers to help associates grow.

65

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS 1. Dr. C.B. Gupta (1996), Human Resource Management, Sultan Chands and Sons, Educational Publisher 2. Pigors and Myers, 1993 Personnel Management, McGraw Hill, New York. 3. C.B. Mamoria, 1996 Personnel Management: Himalayan Publications, New Delhi. 4. Rao T. V, 2000 Human Resource Development, Sage Publications, New Delhi.

JOURNALS:

1. Fletcher, Clive (2001) Performance Appraisal and Management: The developing research agenda. 2. Occupational and Organizational Psychology (2001), 74-473-487. 3. Personnel Today Prof. Batta. K. Dey, Dated on July- September 2008. 4. International Journal of Business, Economics, Finance and Management Science, Dated on 2nd February 2010.

WEBSITES: 1. www.Performanceappraisal.com 2. Performance Appraisal and Evaluation, www.submitmanagement.com/pac/html. PP.1-2. 3. www.hrjournal-apraisal.com.

vii

APPENDIX - I UESTIONNAIRE

A STUDY ON PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL AND EVALUATION SYSTEM AT WHEELS INDIA LIMITED IN PADI, CHENNAI.

Part I: Section A: Demographic Details:

Respondent No: 1. Name: 2. Age: 3. Gender: Male / Female. 4. Monthly income: a) Below 10,000 d) Above 30,000. 5. Educational qualification: A) Under Graduation B) Post Graduation C) Diploma D) Other. 6. Marital status: A) Married B) Unmarried C) Divorced. b) 10,000-20,000 c) 20,000-30,000 Employee Code: Designation:

7. Years of experience: A) Less than 1 yr B) 1-2 yrs C) 2-3yrs D) 3-4yrs E) 4 yrs and above. 8. Departments: a) Production B) HR C) R&D D) Accounts E) Others

Section B: Performance Appraisal System:

9. Performance appraisal system is needed in organization A) Strongly Agree B) Agree C) Disagree D) Neither Agree nor Disagree E) Strongly Disagree 10. Satisfied with the existing performance appraisal system. A) Strongly Agree B) Agree C) Disagree D) Neither Agree nor Disagree E) Strongly Disagree 11. Satisfied with my chances for promotion. A) Strongly Agree B) Agree C) Disagree D) Neither Agree nor Disagree E) Strongly Disagree 12. Satisfied with the allowances provided by my organization? A) Strongly Agree B) Agree C) Disagree D) Neither Agree nor Disagree E) Strongly Disagree. viii

13. The performance of the organization is assessed by self, superior or consultant A) Strongly Agree B) Agree C) Disagree D) Neither Agree nor Disagree E) Strongly Disagree 14. The performance appraisal helps to win co- operation and team work A) Strongly Agree B) Agree C) Disagree D) Neither Agree nor Disagree E) Strongly Disagree 15. The performance appraisal is helpful in reducing grievance among the employees. A) Strongly Agree B) Agree C) Disagree D) Neither Agree nor Disagree E) Strongly Disagree 16. The performance appraisal is helpful for improving personnel skill A) Strongly Agree B) Agree C) Disagree D) Neither Agree nor Disagree E) Strongly Disagree 17. Training programmers are effective for individual and organization development A) Strongly Agree B) Agree C) Disagree D) Neither Agree nor Disagree E) Strongly Disagree 18. The performance ratings were done periodically A) Strongly Agree B) Agree C) Disagree D) Neither Agree nor Disagree E) Strongly Disagree 19. The performance appraisal system helps to identify the strength and weakness of the employee. A) Strongly Agree B) Agree C) Disagree D) Neither Agree nor Disagree E) Strongly Disagree 20. The performance rating is helpful for the management to provide employee counseling. A) Strongly Agree B) Agree C) Disagree D) Neither Agree nor Disagree E) Strongly Disagree 21. Promotion is purely based on performance appraisal. A) Strongly Agree B) Agree C) Disagree D) Neither Agree nor Disagree E) Strongly Disagree

ix

22. Management fixes salary through the performance rating A) Strongly Agree B) Agree C) Disagree D) Neither Agree nor Disagree E) Strongly Disagree 23. Performance rating helps to fix increment A) Strongly Agree B) Agree C) Disagree D) Neither Agree nor Disagree E) Strongly Disagree 24. Transfer, demotion, suspension and dismissal is based on performance appraisal. A) Strongly Agree B) Agree C) Disagree D) Neither Agree nor Disagree E) Strongly Disagree 25. The desired target of the organization is achieved through the performance appraisal. A) Strongly Agree B) Agree C) Disagree D) Neither Agree nor Disagree E) Strongly Disagree 26. Performance appraisal increases employee motivation. A) Strongly Agree B) Agree C) Disagree D) Neither Agree nor Disagree E) Strongly Disagree 27. Appraisal system keeps on the major achievement and failure or success of work A) Strongly Agree B) Agree C) Disagree D) Neither Agree nor Disagree E) Strongly Disagree 28. Have a separate committee to review the performance appraisal result. A) Strongly Agree B) Agree C) Disagree D) Neither Agree nor Disagree E) Strongly Disagree 29. How do you rate the organization for the following? Very good a) Induction training b) Skill Training c) Other (mention) Good Fair Very poor Poor

30. Suggestion: (if any) x

Part- II: Performance Evaluation System:

Performance
(Level achieved for each factor)

Very Poor

Poor

Fair

Good

Exceptional

31.Job Knowledge 32.Work Quality 33.Work Rate 34. Communication 35.Interpersonal Relationship 36.Team Work 37. Policy Compliance 38.Time Planning 39.Attendance

40.Continous Improvement

xi

APPENDIX - II PERMISSION LETTER

xii