Performance Appraisal

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 Prof. Simon Joseph

Head of the Department Research Guide

Department of Social Work Department of Social Work

Loyola College Loyola College

Chennai -34 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

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

S.NO CONTENT PAGE NO

1. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTi

2. LIST OF FIGURESiii

3. LIST OF TABLESiv-v

4. ABSTRACTvi

5. CHAPTER-I –INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY 1 – 5

6. CHAPTER-II –REVIEW OF LITERATURE 6 – 22

7. CHAPTER III – ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION 23 – 62

8. CHAPTER IV – MAJOR FINDINGS 63– 64

9. CHAPTER V- SUGGESTIONS AND CONCLUSION 65

10. BIBLIOGRAPHY vii

11. APPENDIX-I: QUESTIONAIREviii – xi

12. APPENDIX-II: PERMISSION LETTERxii

ii

LIST OF FIGURES

S.No

TITLES Pg.No

1. Age of the respondents 23

2. Respondents by Marital Status 24

3. Respondents by Departments 25

4. Respondents by Educational Qualification 26

iii

LIST OF TABLES

S.No TITLES Pg.No

1. Distribution of the Respondents by Sex 27

2. Distribution of the Respondents by Salary 28

3. Distribution of the Respondents by Work Experience 29

4. Distribution of the Respondents by Requirement of Performance

Appraisal System

30

5. Distribution of the Respondents by Satisfaction on Existing

Performance Appraisal System

31

6. Distribution of the Respondents by Satisfaction on Promotion Chances 32

7. Distribution of the Respondents in terms of level of Satisfaction with

existing allowances

33

8. Distribution of the Respondents in terms of preference of appraisal by

self and superior

34

9. Opinion on how for Performance Appraisal System helpful to win

cooperation and Team Work

35

10. Opinion on usefulness in reducing grievances among the employees 36

11. Opinion on change in improving the personnel skills 37

12. Opinion on effectiveness of training programmes 38

13. Performance Ratings were done periodically 39

14. Performance Appraisal System is helpful in identifying strengths &

weakness

40

15. Performance rating is helpful in providing counselling. 41

16. Promotion is based on Performance Appraisal System 42

17. Management fixes salary through performance rating 43

18. Performance rating is the basis for increment 44

19. Incentive / Disincentive are linked to Performance Appraisal System 45

20. Performance Appraisal System helps in achieving the target. 46

iv

21. Performance Appraisal System increases Employee motivation 47

22. Performance appraisal system contributes to the overall success of

work

48

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

Appraisal System

49

24. Rating the quality of Induction Training 50

25. Rating the quality of Skill Training 51

26. Rating the quality of other Training Programme 52

27. Performance Appraisal Rating corresponds to the level of Job

Knowledge

53

28. Performance Appraisal Rating takes into account of Work Quality 54

29. Performance Appraisal Rating corresponds to the level of Piece

Rate Production.

55

30. Performance Appraisal Rating corresponds to the level of

Communication Skills.

56

31. Performance Appraisal Rating takes into account of Interpersonal

Relationship.

57

32. Performance Appraisal Rating takes into account of Team Work. 58

33. Performance Appraisal Rating takes into account of Policy

Compliance.

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

v

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 organization’s 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.

1

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

employee’s 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 employee’s 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:

To Study on Performance Appraisal and Evaluation System at Wheels India Limited in

Padi, Chennai.

Specific Objectives:

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.

4

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 employee’s 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 individual’s 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.

5

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.

6

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 employee’s 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.

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

It is the systematic examination of an employee’s 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.

7

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

foisted on them by ivory – tower staff consultants who have no comprehension of the

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.

8

1.4. Steps of Performance Appraisal:

1.5. The Way Forward Process

9

1.6. Process 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

Performance Appraisal

Competencies Rewarding PerformanceCareer Development & Succession Planning

Training & Development

I. Establish Performance Standards

Performance standards serve as benchmarks against which performance is measured

Standards should relate to the desired results of each job

II. Communicate the Standards

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

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

Better understanding of his role in the organization—what 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.

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

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

performance.

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

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 employee’s

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 individual’s 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 rater’s 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 is a formal management system that provides for the evaluation of the

quality of an individual’s performance in an organization.

- Dessler, “Performance appraisal has the means to evaluate an employee’s current and past

performance relative to the employee’s performance standards. It is a process which involves

creating work standards; evaluate employee’s 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 staff’s working output as well as staff’s punctuality.

15

2.1.2. Knowledge and skills (Aspect 2): This aspect evaluates the staff’s 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):

Staff’s 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, mission-

oriented, 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. Bacal’s 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 non-

probationary career employee. An employee’s 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 employee’s 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 subordinate’s 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 Motowidlo’s (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 co-

evolve 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 data’s collected from the respondents.

Data’s are tabulated using Bar Diagram, Pyramid, Pie chart and Simple Table

Figure -1

Age of the respondents

22%

46%

12%

6%

14%

Below 20 21-26 27-30 31-40 41-46

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.

23

Figure 2

Respondents by Marital Status

80%

20%

UG PG

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

UG PG Diploma Others Total0

20

40

60

80

100

120

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

Figure 4

Respondents by Educational Qualification

UGPG

DiplomaOthers

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Percentage

Figure-4 (Pyramid Diagram) shows the distribution of respondents by Educational

Qualification.

The above table inferred that 16 percent of the respondents are Under Graduate, 4 percent of

the respondents are Post Graduate, and 50 percent of the respondents are Diploma and 15

percent of the respondents had general studies after plus two level.

26

Table.1

Distribution of the Respondents by Sex

S.No Sex Frequency Percentage

1. Male 50 100.0

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 Monthly Salary Frequency Percentage

1. Below 10000 29 58.0

2. 10000-20000 4 8.0

3. 20000-30000 12 24.0

4. Above 30000 5 10.0

Total 50 100.0

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 Year of Experience Frequency Percentage

1. 0-1 13 26.0

2. 1-2 13 26.0

3. 2-3 6 12.0

4. 3-4 5 10.0

5. 4 And Above 13 26.0

Total 50 100.0

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


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


1. Strongly Agree 23 46.0

2. Agree 26 52.0

3. Strongly Disagree 1 2.0

Total 50 100.0

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. Strongly agree 11 22.0

2. Agree 29 58.0

3. Neither Agree nor Disagree 4 8.0


Total 50 100.0

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


2. Agree 17 34.0



Total 50 100.0

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


2. Agree 23 46.0


4 Strongly Disagree 4 8.0

Total 50 100.0

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



2. Agree 23 46.0



Total 50 100.0

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



2. Agree 26 52.0

3. Disagree 1 2.0



Total 50 100.0

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 Opinion on change in improving personnel skills Frequency Percentage


2. Agree 21 42.0



Total 50 100.0

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


2. Agree 31 62.0



Total 50 100.0

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



2. Agree 22 44.0

3. Disagree 1 2.0



Total 50 100.0


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


39

Table.14

Performance Appraisal System is helpful in identifying

strengths & weakness

S.No Performance Appraisal System in identifying strengths & weakness



2. Agree 19 38.0

3. Disagree 2 4.0



Total 50 100.0

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


40

Table.15 Performance rating is helpful in providing counselling.

S.No Performance rating helpful in providing

counselling



2. Agree 17 34.0

3. Disagree 4 8.0



Total 50 100.0

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



2. Agree 22 44.0

3. Disagree 2 4.0



Total 50 100.0

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


42

Table.17

Management fixes salary through performance rating

S.No Management fixes salary through

performance rating



2. Agree 22 44.0

3. Disagree 2 4.0



Total 50 100.0

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

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

S.No Performance rating is the basis for increment Frequency Percentage


2. Agree 22 44.0

3. Disagree 1 2.0



Total 50 100.0

Incentive / Disincentive are linked to Performance Appraisal System

S.No Incentive / Disincentive are linked to

performance Appraisal System



2. Agree 19 38.0



Total 50 100.0

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



2. Agree 24 48.0

3. Disagree 1 2.0



Total 50 100.0


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


46

Table.21

Performance Appraisal System increases Employee motivation

S.No Performance Appraisal System increases

Employee motivation



2. Agree 20 40.0

3. Disagree 1 2.0



Total 50 100.0

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



2. Agree 24 48.0

3. Disagree 1 2.0



Total 50 100.0

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


48

Table.23

It is better to have Separate committee to review the


S.No Separate committee to review the Performance Appraisal System



2. Agree 21 42.0

3. Disagree 1 2.0



Total 50 100.0

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


1. Very good 16 32.0

2. Good 32 64.0

3. Very Poor 1 2.0

4. Poor 1 2.0

Total 50 100.0

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 Percentage

1. Very good 19 38.0

2. Good 22 44.0

3. Fair 9 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.

51Table.26

Rating the quality of other Training Programme

S.No Rating the quality of other Training

Programme


1. Very good 8 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.NoPerformance Appraisal Rating corresponds to the

level of Job Knowledge


1. Fair 25 50.0

2. Good 22 44.0

3. Exceptional 3 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 Quality

S.No Performance Appraisal Rating takes into

account of Work Quality


1. Fair 10 20.0

2. Good 33 66.0


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.NoPerformance Appraisal Rating corresponds to

the level of Piece Rate Production


1. Fair 12 24.0

2. Good 27 54.0


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


1. Fair 13 26.0

2. Good 26 52.0


Total 50 100.0


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.


account of Interpersonal Relationship


1. Poor 1 2

2. Fair 14 28.0

3. Good 25 50.0


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


1. Fair 20 40.0

2. Good 22 44.0


Total 50 100.0


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.


account of Policy Compliance


1. Fair 22 44.0

2. Good 23 46.0


Total 50 100.0


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


1. Fair 15 30.0

2. Good 24 48.0


Total 50 100.0


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


account of Attendance Regularity


1. Competent 20 40.0

2. Good 25 50.0


Total 50 100.0


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


account of Innovation


1. Fair 18 36.0

2. Good 23 46.0


Total 50 100.0


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 offers few practical

suggestions:

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

http://www.hrjournal-apraisal.com/

http://WWW.submitmanagement.com/pac/html

APPENDIX - I

QUESTIONNAIRE

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: Employee Code:

2. Age: Designation:

3. Gender: Male / Female.

4. Monthly income: a) Below 10,000 b) 10,000-20,000 c) 20,000-30,000

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.

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 cooperation and team work


15. The performance appraisal is helpful in reducing grievance among the employees.


16. The performance appraisal is helpful for improving personnel skill


17. Training programmers are effective for individual and organization development


18. The performance ratings were done periodically


19. The performance appraisal system helps to identify the strength and weakness of the employee.


20. The performance rating is helpful for the management to provide employee counseling.


21. Promotion is purely based on performance appraisal.


ix

22. Management fixes salary through the performance rating


23. Performance rating helps to fix increment


24. Transfer, demotion, suspension and dismissal is based on performance appraisal.


25. The desired target of the organization is achieved through the performance appraisal.


26. Performance appraisal increases employee motivation.


27. Appraisal system keeps on the major achievement and failure or success of work


28. Have a separate committee to review the performance appraisal result.


29. How do you rate the organization for the following?

Very good Good Fair Very poor Poor

a) Induction training

b) Skill Training

c) Other (mention)

30. Suggestion: (if any)

xPart- 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

Performance Appraisal

Documents

Transcript of Performance Appraisal