PROJECT REPORT

On
PACE – Performance and Competence for Excellence,
The Performance Management System at
NTPC

Under the supervision of: Submitted by:

Prof. Abdul Qadir Anjusha Nair

PGDM(Services)
PGSF0905

JAIPURIA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT

NOIDA

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
1|Page
This project would not have been possible without the help of many people who have
contributed their efforts in this project.

Firstly, I would like to convey my profound indebtness to my project guide at NTPC ltd.,
Ms. Smita Menon, HR dept., for her invaluable advice, guidance and time that she has
offered in the completion of this project. This project would not have been possible
without her guidance and support.

I would also like to thank Ms. Poornima Chaturvedi , NTPC ltd. who also helped me
in the fulfillment of this project. Not to forget, the employees of NTPC, the project would
not have been completed had they not helped me with filling up the questionnaires.

Finally, I would like to thank my Mentor, Prof. Abdul Qadir, for his valuable guidance
and suggestions in the making and improvement of this project report

ANJUSHA NAIR

2|Page
 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

PACE is the performance management system for the executive employees at NTPC.
This system was implemented in the year 2004 in NTPC.

Earlier the performance appraisal system was more of a subjective sort of sought of
system i.e., earlier there weren’t any set targets or key performance areas for the
employees, it was just the performance they made and the feedback on it was given to
the employees on a yearly basis.

Now the PACE has become more objective – oriented, i.e., there are set KPA’s for the
employees. The key performance areas include;

Technical knowledge, Business attitude, Strategic thinking, Resource management,

Communication skills, System thinking, Interpersonal competencies, Employment skills

There is a basic question that would come to anyone’s mind that why is PACE only for
the executive employees and why not for the non-executive employees as well. It is so
because the employees at the non-executive levels may not be able to understand the
whole PMS system as some of them at different levels may not be that educated to
understand the system; i.e., they might not be well-versed with the system, and
therefore will not be able to work according to the system and therefore they have a
different appraisal system.

NTPC has been striving to meet the objective of developing performance culture
through this system called “Performance And Competence for Excellence” i.e. “PACE”.

This report concentrates on the study of the “Performance And Competence for
Excellence” system at NTPC and to check its effectiveness and further to suggest and
recommend any possible ways to improve and strengthen its PMS.

To check the effectiveness of this system a survey with a help of questionnaires had
been conducted. Around 300 executive employees had filled up the questionnaire with
the help of which analysis had been done.

3|Page
 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The objective of the study is basically to know about the effectiveness of performance
management system – PACE at NTPC. This objective has been further divided into the
following key areas;

 To carry out an assessment on the performance appraisal of the company and

what kind of performance management system has been implemented in the
company.
 To examine the gap between the required performance and the actual
performance.
 To determine the key places in the performance management system of the
company which are supposed to be enhanced.
 To forecast the performance management system at NTPC.
 To find out the effectiveness of performance management system on NTPC.
 To find out key points in satisfaction and improve the ways of satisfying the
employees.
 To provide an overall sketch of how effective the performance management
system has been.

SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The present study is conferred to the Executive employees of NTPC Ltd., wherein all
the executives of different sections of NTPC come under the purview of this study. All
the major aspects that affect the assessment of performance appraisal needs in an
organization fall under the purview of the study.

4|Page
 CONTENTS

S.no Topic Page no.

i. Certificate from the mentor
ii. Summer internship completion certificate from the
organization
iii. Acknowledgement 2
iv. Executive summary 3
v. Objective of the study 4
vi. Scope of the study 4
1. Chapter 1 6 – 12
COMPANY PROFILE
 a brief introduction of the organization 6
 vision and mission of the organization 6
 the core values 7
 corporate objectives 7 – 10
 list of awards 10 – 11
 HR vision 11
 No. of executives at NTPC – EOC 12

2. Chapter 2 13 – 36
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
 Research topic 13 – 35
 PMS at NTPC 13 – 31
 Changes made in PACE 31 – 35
 Sampling Design 35
 Data used in study 35 – 36
 Tool and Techniques used 36

3. Chapter 3 37 – 42
LITERATURE REVIEW
Chapter 4 43 – 98
DATA ANALYSIS AND MAJOR FINDINGS
 Question wise analysis and interpretation 43 – 55
 Grade wise analysis and interpretation 55 – 97
 Major Findings 97
 Limitations 98

Chapter 5 99 – 100
SUGGESTIONS AND CONCLUSION
BIBLIOGRAPHY 101
APPENDICES 102 – 103
5|Page
 CHAPTER 1

COMPANY PROFILE

NTPC Limited is the largest thermal power generating company of India. A public
sector company, it was incorporated in the year 1975 to accelerate power development
in the country as a wholly owned company of the Government of India. At present,
Government of India holds 89.5% of the total equity shares of the company and FIIs,
Domestic Banks, Public and others hold the balance 10.5%. Within a span of 31 years,
NTPC has emerged as a truly national power company, with power generating facilities
in all the major regions of the country. Based on 1998 data, carried out by Data monitor
UK, NTPC is the 6th largest in terms of thermal power generation and the second most
efficient in terms of capacity utilization amongst the thermal utilities in the world.

NTPC Limited Formerly known as National Thermal Power Corporation. The Group's
principal activities are engineering, construction and operation of power generating
plants and providing consultancy to power utilities in India and abroad. The Group
operates through two segments. Power Generation includes generation and sale of
bulk power to SEBs/State Utilities. Others provide consultancy, project management
and supervision, maintenance services, power trading and distribution of bulk power.
The Group has generated 170.88 billion units of electricity in 2006.

Vision of NTPC:

“A world class integrated power major, powering India’s growth, with increasing
global presence”

Mision of NTPC:

“Develop and provide reliable power, related products and services at

competitive prices, integrating multiple energy sources with innovative and eco
– friendly technologies and contribute to society”

6|Page
The Core Values (B-COMIT):

 Business Ethics
 Customer Focus
 Organizational & Professional Pride
 Mutual Respect and Trust
 Innovation and Speed
 Total quality for Excellence

Corporate Objectives:
In pursuance of the Vision and Mission, the following are the Corporate
Objectives of NTPC:
To realize the vision and mission, eight key corporate objectives have been identified.
These objectives would provide the link between the defined mission and the functional
strategies.

 Business Portfolio Growth

 to further consolidate NTPC’s position as the leading thermal power generation
company in India and establish a presence in Hydro power segment.
 To broad base the generation mix by evaluating conventional and non –
conventional sources of energy to ensure long run competitiveness and
mitigate fuel risk.
 To diversify across the power value chain in India by considering backward and
forward integration into areas such as power trading, transmission, distribution,
coal mining, coal beneficiation, etc.
 To establish a strong services brand in the domestic and international markets.

 Customer Focus
 To foster a collaborative style of working with customers, growing to be a
preferred brand for supply of quality power.

7|Page
  To expand the relationship with existing customers by offering a bouquet of
services in addition to supply of power e.g. trading, energy consulting,
distribution consulting, management practices.
 To expand the future customer portfolio through profitable diversification into
downstream businesses, inter alia retail distribution and direct supply.
 Ensure rapid commercial decision making, using customer specific information,
with adequate concern for the interests of the customer.

 Agile Corporation
 to ensure effectiveness in business decisions and responsiveness to changes
in the business environment by:
 Adopting a portfolio approach to new business development.
 Continuous and co – ordinated assessment of the business environments
to identify and respond to opportunities and threats.
 To develop a learning organization having knowledge based competitive
edge in current and future business.

 Performance Leadership
 to continuously improve on project execution time and cost in order to sustain
long run competitiveness in generation.
 To operate and maintain NTPC stations at par with the best - run utilities in the
world with respect to availability, reliability, efficiency, productivity and costs.
 To effectively leverage information technology to drive process efficiencies.\
 To aim for performance excellence in the diversification businesses.
 To embed quality in all systems and processes.

 Human Resource Development

 To enhance organizational performance by institutionalizing an objective and
open performance management system.

8|Page
  to align individual and organizational needs and develop business leaders by
implementing a career development system.
 To enhance commitment of employees by recognizing and rewarding high
performance.
 To build and sustain a learning organization of competent world – class
professionals.
 To institutionalize core values and create a culture of team – building,
empowerment, equity, innovation, and openness which would motivate
employees and enable achievement of strategic objectives.

 Financial Soundness
 To maintain and improve the financial soundness of NTPC by prudent
management of the financial resources.
 To continuously strive to reduce the cost of capital through prudent
management of deployed funds, leveraging opportunities in domestic and
international financial markets.
 To develop appropriate commercial policies and processes which would ensure
remunerative tariffs and minimize receivables.
 to continuously strive for reduction in cost of power generation by improving
operating practices.

 Sustainable Power Development

 To contribute to sustainable power development by discharging corporate
social responsibilities.
 To lead the sector in the areas of resettlement and rehabilitation and
environment protection including effective ash – utilsation, peripheral
development and energy conservation practices.
 To lead development efforts in the Indian power sector through efforts at policy
advocacy, assisting customers in reform, disseminating best practices in the
operations and management of power plants etc.

9|Page
 Research and Development
 To pioneer the adoption of reliable, efficient and cost – effective technologies
by carrying out fundamental and applied research in alternate fuels and
technologies.
 To carry out research and development of breakthrough techniques in power
plant construction and operation that can lead to more efficient, reliable and
environment friendly operation of power plants in the country.
 To disseminate the technologies to other players in the sector and in the long
run generating revenue through proprietary technologies.

NTPC LIST OF AWARDS FOR EXCELLENCE IN PERFORMANCE :

NTPC Limited has been ranked top awardee for MoU Award for Excellence in
Performance, instituted by DPE, consecutively for two years, 2004-05 and 2005-06
with 'Excellent' rating. Dr. Manmohan Singh, Hon'ble Prime Minister of India presented
the MoU Awards to Shri T. Sankaralingam, CMD, NTPC Ltd.
 NTPC-AN EMPLOYER OF CHOICE: NTPC has been ranked fifth among the top
ten “Best companies to work for in India” by Mercer HR Consulting-Business Today
Survey 2005.

 CONSULTANCY: NTPC provides consultancy in all its aspects of power plant

construction and management right from concept of commissioning and beyond.
Combining the technical, managerial and financial skills, it provides the holistic
solutions to power businesses all over the world,

 NTPC DISTRIBUTED GENERATION: NTPC Limited has initiated the concept of

electrification of remote villages by setting up Distributed Generation projects and
demonstrating a sustainable business model leading to integrated growth of villages
for achieving the goal of "Electricity for all".

 ENVIRONMENT-GREEN POWER: NTPC delivers power at minimal environment

cost, and achieves it. Right from the stage of its project conceptualization,

10 | P a g e
 technology selection to operations, care is taken to preserve the natural ecology
and minimize environmental impact.

 CENPEEP: The Center for Power Efficiency & Environmental Protection, resource
center for state of art technologies for performance optimization, continues to strive
for performance optimization of power plants.

NTPC Limited has been presented Scope Meritorious Award for Best Practices in
Human Resource Management – Shri presented 2004-05 for Innovative Human
Resource Management Practices well integrated with the business requirements of the
Company. Sontosh Mohan Dev, Hon’ble Minister of Heavy Industries and Public
Enterprises to Shri T. Sankaralingam, CMD, NTPC Limited in New Delhi, on 8th
November 2006. Shri Chandan Roy, Director (Operations), NTPC Limited has been
conferred with Eminent Engineer Award by the Institution of Engineers (India), for his
distinguished services in Engineering Sector during the year 2006 in the area of NCT
of Delhi.  

On the occasion of Power Line magazine’s Tenth Anniversary celebrations, on 11th

October, 2006 in New Delhi, Mr. Sushi Kumar Shinde, and Union Minister of Power
presented “Expert Choice Awards” to honor the leading achievers in the power sector.
NTPC was recognized as the "Best Organization in Central Sector".

HR VISION

“To enable our people to be a family of committed world class professionals,

making NTPC a learning organization”.

No. Of executive employees in NTPC - EOC : grade wise total

11 | P a g e
GRADE MALE FEMALE TOTAL

E1 27 18 45
E2 29 7 36

E2A 157 31 188

E3 198 30 228

E4 106 13 119

E5 127 11 138

E6 221 16 237

E7 287 15 302

TOTAL 1297 143 1440

CHAPTER 2

12 | P a g e
 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Research Topic – PACE - THE PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM @

NTPC

Objectives:

 To accomplish organizational goals through a system of performance

assessment linked to company’s objectives.
 to facilitate fulfillment of individual aspirations and promotion of professional
excellence.
 To encourage a two – way communication process between the appraise and
the reporting officer for binging objectivity in performance appraisal system.
 To evaluate the potential of the executive to assume higher responsibilities
along the hierarchy.
 To involve the appraise through various stages of performance management,
thereby reducing the performance gaps.
 To map competencies and potential of executives for enabling the
organization to source the talent generally from within the company for
meeting organizational growth.
 To involve the executive to share the responsibility and become accountable
for efficient management of the business for result oriented performance
through mutual involvement.
 To provide a transparent system to help each executive to evaluate his own
performance and develop himself with the help of reporting officer.
 To provide for removal of differences, if any, in performance appraisal
through intervention of the reviewing officer.

13 | P a g e
Focus Of Performance Management:

 The focus of the performance management system for senior executives is to

appraise them on different components of managerial responsibilities,
consisting of performance, generic managerial competencies, values and
potential, totaling to 100 marks.
 The performance component as identified and measures evolved would have
50% wieghtage in total appraisal.
 The company’s concern for actualization of organizational core values is
reflected in the performance management and is assigned a weightage of
15% in appraisal.
 Generic Managerial competencies exhibited by an Appraise while discharging
duties have been given 20% weightage in appraisal.
 The Company’s concern for actualization of organizational Core Values is
reflected in the Performance Management and is assigned a weightage of
15% in appraisal.
 The Performance Management System brings to focus important managerial
attributes and strikes a balance between ‘Performance’ and other aspects of
managerial talents/skills. Executives will have a set of Key Performance
Areas to be identified through discussion and achieve them during the
performance period.
 The system is to develop the competencies by involving the executive in
setting targets and identifying Key Performance Areas.
 To utilize the Performance Management System for facilitating individual
career development and bring organization - wide HR intervention at senior
levels to bridge competency gaps.

PERIODICITY:

 The Performance Appraisal Period would run concurrent with the financial
year i.e. from 1st April to 31st March.

14 | P a g e
  The System provides for setting up of Key Performance Areas (KPAs) and
reviewing the same in two half-yearly periods.

 The first half year is from 1st April to 30th September and the second half-
year is from 1st Oct. to 31st March.

 While reviewing the KPAs of the first half-year, the targets for Key
Performance Areas for the second half year are evolved.

 While reviewing the KPAs of the first half year, the targets for Key
Performance Areas for the second half year are evolved.

 At the end of the Performance Appraisal year, the review for the second half
of the year is undertaken. The review would also involve annual appraisal of
KPAs, Competencies, Values and Potential Appraisal .

COMPONENTS OF PERFORMANCE REVIEW:

 The Performance Management System, consisting of the following components

is implemented through ‘Performance Appraisal Form’.

 PART I – PERFORMANCE

o Part IA: first half year performance

o Part IB: second year performance

Review of KPA’s for 2nd half year

o Part IC: annual performance

o Part ID: comments on performance

 PART II – competencies

 PART III – values

 PART IV – potential appraisal

 PART V – performance and potential profile

15 | P a g e
 PART I-PERFORMANCE:

 Part IA: FIRST HALFYEAR PERFROMANCE

o The System provides for the Reporting Officer (Appraiser) and the
executive (Appraise) to identify through discussion and agree upon a
set of Key Performance Areas (KPAs) in brief at the beginning of the
first half-year.

o While identifying KPAs, actual ‘Measures’ for each KPA is to be

defined and written. The Measure could have Quantitative Targets,
Time Schedule for achieving KPAs fully/partially, Qualitative
Improvements etc., based on the nature of the KPA item

o The KPA Targets may be having different weightings and limited to 8

Key Performance Areas only. The idea is to enable the executive to
focus on given deliverables and not miss important critical areas.

o The KPAs should be more focused, concrete and measureable. They

should be more than the “Norm” i.e. normal standard of performance
expected. The KPAs reflect ‘Stretch Standard’ which is in excess of
“Norm”. The KPAs should be ‘SMART’ i.e. Specific, Measurable,
Agreed (mutually arrived at by the Appraiser and the Appraise), Realistic
and Time-Bound.

o One of the KPAs should be “Staff Development”, as building a

performing team is an essential target for senior executives. The
measures for this could be man days of training & development
activities for the Unit/ Department/function vis-a-vis the Company’s
training targets, HR initiatives like Professional Circles, Quality Circles,
and Suggestion Scheme etc.

16 | P a g e
 o The Appraiser and Appraise jointly evolve KPAs, define measures and
allocate marks for each KPA at the beginning of first half-year by 15th
April.

o The Performance under Part IA is jointly reviewed and performance

evaluated at the beginning of 2nd half year and not later than 15th
October.

o At the time of joint review, actual achievement is briefly recorded against

each KPA and marks obtained w.r.t. each KPA is indicated in relevant
column.
o The aggregate of marks obtained for different KPAs is worked out and
indicated as aggregate of IA. Both the Appraise and the Reporting
Officer sign the Part IA.

 PART IB – SECOND HALF YEAR PERFORMANCE

o The System helps to review the Key Performance Area Targets for the
Second Half-Year based on the evaluation of 1st half-year KPAs
depending on actual achievements.

o The reworked KPA targets are briefly recorded, ‘Measures’ for each
KPA defined and Marks allocated. KPAs which extend beyond the
1st half year may be re-recorded in the targets of the 2nd half-year.
o The KPAs may undergo change owing to target accomplished, new
targets coming up, change of role etc.

o The Performance Evaluation of 2nd half-year Performance is jointly

undertaken on completion of 2nd half year/Annual Performance year
and not later than 15th April.

o During the Performance Evaluation, the actual achievement is

assessed against each KPA and marks obtained against each KPA
are indicated.

17 | P a g e
 o The marks obtained are aggregated at the bottom out of 50 marks as
aggregate.

 PART IC: ANNUAL PERFORMANCE

o This part consolidates the 1st half-year and 2nd half-year Performance
of the Appraise by aggregating Performance Marks obtained in Part IA
and Part IB.

o The Annual Performance Marks out of 50 marks be computed based

on the formula mentioned in Part 1C and marks obtained be indicated
in the Box.

o The marks so obtained out of 50 would be the marks secured for

“Annual Performance” in the achievement of KPAs.

o The Appraise and the Reporting Officer would jointly endorse the
Annual Performance by signatures.

 PART ID: COMMENTS ON PERFORMANCE

o Part I related to Performance gets completed on filling up of Part ID by

the Reporting Officer at the end of Appraisal year.

o In Part ID the Reporting Officer offers comments w.r.t. KPAs,

Measures, Achievements and sums up in brief the Performance profile
of the appraise in writing. It would provide a pictorial description on the
performance of the appraise for the year.

o While summarizing the performance, the Reporting Officer would bring

out summary of Key Performance Areas achieved in the year; point
out positive personality factors that were observed during the
performance, unfavorable situations that were encountered by the
appriase during the period, favourable conditions that prevailed in the

18 | P a g e
 situation and finally mention the negative personality factors which
were observed and which came in the way of achieving KPAs, if any.

o The Reporting Officer should base the evaluation of the performance

based on the data collected during the performance period. It is therefore
desirable to maintain a diary for monitoring the performance and
providing feedback from time to time during the relevant performance
period.

 DETERMINATION OF INPUT FOR PART IA AND PART IB:

o Key Performance Areas (KPAs) are such critical areas of performance,

which though constitute few in number, would have major impact on
Business/Targets of the Units/Functions.

o The input for identification of Key Performance Areas, Measures and

allocation of marks to different KPAs will have to be derived and
worked out from the Annual Performance Targets of the Project,
Station, Division, Department and Function as the case may be .

o Similarly, the KPA inputs and measures are also derived from the
MOU Targets set for the financial year which flows down from
Corporate level to different Units and Functions across the
Organisation.

o Another source for KPAs is the functional role & responsibility being
discharged as Unit Head, Functional Head, Head of Department, etc.
In addition, KPAs could be arrived from the Business Plans for the
Unit/Function, Corporate Plan, Recommendations of Study Groups,
Task Forces, R&M Plans, Long Term and Short Term Plans etc. These
are only indicative.

o The various activities/sub-activities associated with KPAs should be

separately discussed including ‘Measures/Standards’ for each of them.
Therefore a separate diary for details and for monitoring periodically is
preferred.

19 | P a g e
 o KPA-Measures should be preferably fixed on a reasonable range of
performance target instead of a fixed target, so that other factors
affecting performance could be accounted for and a reasonable
assessment is made.

o The range of performance measurement could be ‘Good’ which

amounts to meeting the ‘Norm’, ‘Very Good’ would be a range of
performance which would be superior to the ‘Norm’ but cannot be
classified as ‘Outstanding’. The range of measure for ‘Outstanding’ is
a stretch target which could be achieved by best efforts, optimal
utilisation of resources.
Similarly, allotment of marks should be on a range linked to the extent of
achievement of targets whether it is in range of ‘Good’, ‘Very Good’ or
‘Outstanding’. For performance below ‘Good’ also, marks are allotted
commensurate with performance level.

o Therefore, at the beginning of the year, it is essential to discuss the

KPAs, Measures and Marks awarded to different KPAs by the
Reporting Officer with the appraise for 1st half-year performance.

o Similarly, at the beginning of 2nd half-year, the KPAs and Measures

are assessed and Marks allotted for the 1st half-year, and a new set of
KPAs, Measures and Marks are arrived at for 2nd half-year
Performance period.

 ALTERATION OF KPA’s UNDER SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES

Circumstances may arise when due to the revision of business plans, certain
KPAs may lose relevance in spite of the best efforts put in by the appraise as
the target may be abandoned. For example, new project identified may be
abandoned and or may be relegated to lower priority after substantial
activities undertaken. Under such circumstances, the following system may
be followed:

20 | P a g e
 o If the KPA was substantially achieved before abandoning of the target/the
area of activities, then the appraise should be assessed based on the
results achieved by him. Suitable remark should be reflected in the
achievement column, against the KPA and fair assessment of KPA may
be made and marks awarded judiciously.

o In circumstances when a person’s responsibility gets changed due to

addition/deletion of certain assignment, then assessment should be
carried out and marks awarded to each of the KPA which loses relevance
in the revised responsibility, provided a minimum of 3 months has been
spent in the appraisal year. If the change is earlier to 3 months replace
KPAs by new set of KPAs commensurate with revised responsibility.

o In cases where the person is transferred out of the present role after
completion of 3 months of the appraisal year then his Performance
Management System should be completed for that period before release.
On his joining the new place of posting, the KPAs for his new
responsibility is again discussed and arrived at his new place of posting.

o In case any KPAs lose relevance within three months of the

commencement of the relevant half year the same may be replaced by a
new set of KPAs by following all the systems provided for evolving KPAs,
measurement, etc.

 PART II : COMPETENCIES
 EVALUATION OF COMPETENCIES:
o The System envisages evaluation of competencies of the executives
on two broad categories namely, Technical/Functional Areas and
Managerial Competencies.
o The purpose of this Part is to identify whether the Appraise has the
right balance between functional and managerial competencies in

21 | P a g e
 order to find roles for which he can be groomed like ‘Generalist’ or
‘Specialist’ and provide suitable career paths based on the
competencies.
o To reward Appraise not solely on the performance but also on the
competencies, as performance may be influenced by several other
factors on which executive has no direct control
o Competency based evaluation would help the organisation to take
systematic steps for bridging the competency gaps.

 COMPETENCIES AND RATINGS:

o Competencies: The competencies and the ascribed meaning/ability to be

assessed are as under:

A. Technical knowledge :

Knowledge and understanding of all aspects of the work of the

organization, as well as the present assignment which the
executive is presently doing.

B. Business attitude:

The ability to identify opportunities, use data for making effective

business decisions on time, identify the strengths and weaknesses
of the existing system and take action as required. Considers all
departmental/division’s performance in line with the targets and
goals of the company.

C. Strategic thinking:

The ability to understand situations and to generate alternate

strategies, plans and tactics. Capacity to conceptualize long term
role based on operational analysis and assessment of policies and
procedures having impact on business strategies of the company.

D. Resource management:

22 | P a g e
 The ability to allocate and optimally utilize the resources in a cost
effective way.

E. Communication skills:

Ability to communicate ideas and information effectively through

both written and oral presentations, to convert ideas into action
plans after ensuring their acceptability to present company’s
policies and objectives to groups within and outside.

F. Systematic thinking:

Ability to see linkages between situations that are not obviously

related, using common sense, past experience and rules to
identify key underlying issues in their proper perspective for taking
necessary action.

G. Interpersonal competence:

To promote open and constructive relationships with all; the ability

to understand the nature and dynamics of interaction with others;
respecting individuals as they are and exhibiting tolerance for
differences and disagreements based on rational and objective
grounds.

H. Empowering skills:

The ability to delegate authority to the subordinates while retaining

responsibility thus, contributing to the development of the
subordinates. Willingness to consult and involve subordinates in
decision making thereby espousing confidence in subordinates.

o RATINGS OF COMPETENCIES:

 The competencies are evaluated annually on a five-point rating scale-

1,2,3,4 & 5 - the rating 1 being the lowest end of the scale and 5 being
the highest on the scale.

23 | P a g e
  Based on the competencies observed, the Reporting Officer would
classify each competency on a scale of 1 to 5.

 The Reporting Officer would discuss each competency (A to H) with

the Appraise and plot the rating.

 The competencies all together have a weightage of 20% in the total

Performance Appraisal.

 The aggregate of the rating of each competency is to be arrived at the

bottom of the ratings column. Thereafter the aggregate rating is to be
converted to marks out of 20 using the Conversion formula (based on
the maximum attainable marks of 40 i.e. 8 competencies x 5
maximum rating = 40).
 The marks so obtained out of 20 are indicated in the Box at the
bottom of Part II.

 The Part II is duly signed by the Appraise and the Reporting Officer.

 The review of competencies and completion of Part II for the previous

appraisal year is done at the end of Appraisal year, not later than 15th
April.

 PART III : VALUES

 VALUE ACTUALISATION:
o Adoption of the Company’s Core Values in the business dealings is one
of the essential duties of employees at all levels.
o Especially Senior Executives who occupy leadership positions in the
Company, have a major role in the actualization of Core Values by being
‘Role Models’ in observing and practicing them and thereby leading by
example.
o Hence due emphasis is laid on the Core Values demonstrated by the
executive in his day-to-day business dealings and 15% weightage has

24 | P a g e
 been ascribed in the Performance Appraisal to the process of Value
actualisation exhibited by the executive.

 COMPANY VALUES AND RATINGS:

o The Corporate Values ‘COMIT’ and the indicative observable behavior in
respect of each value is as under:
A. Customer focus:
The Executive has conviction that the customer (Internal & External)
is the center of all activity; he is courteous, sincere, patient and
sensitive to the customers and honours commitments on time .
B. Organizational pride:
The Executive holds the company in high esteem and rejoices in
belonging to it; he demonstrates loyalty and commitment to the
organisation and has a sense of ownership and belongingness with
it.
C. Mutual respect and trust:
The Executive has high regard for and faith in the fellow
organisational members; he believes in collaboration and openness
and has good team spirit.
D. Initiative and Speed:
The Executive believes in taking the first step, thinking new and
ahead and being swift without compromising on quality; he is creative
and innovative and has the willingness to experiment and take risks.
E. Total Quality:
The Executive believes in pursuing excellence in all spheres of
activity; he makes continuous efforts in improving standards of
performance, systems and processes.

25 | P a g e
 o Each value has to be evaluated through discussion on a rating scale of 1
to 5 the rating 1 being the lowest and 5 being the highest.

o The Reporting Officer would evaluate the Appraise on each of the Value
and mark the rating for each value. The ratings are then aggregated at
the bottom of the rating column out of maximum of 25.
o The ratings so obtained would be converted to 15 marks by the
conversion formula given.
o The marks obtained out of 15 marks are written in the Box.
o The Part III is signed jointly by the Reporting Officer and the Appraisee.
o The evaluation of Values and completion of Part III for the previous
appraisal year is done at the end of Performance Appraisal Year, not
later than 15th April.

 PART IV : POTENTIAL APPRAISAL

 EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL:
o Potential is a component related to “Competencies” of Part II. It seeks to
achieve one of the major objectives of the Performance Appraisal
System, namely evaluating the suitability of the executive to assume
higher responsibilities along the hierarchy.

o In due course of time, the appraisal of ‘Potential Component’ may be

done through Assessment Centers or with the help of such other means,
to make the appraisal more broad-based.

o The personality profile of each individual based on the Assessment

Centre or with the help of other process can become available to the
Reporting Officer to enable him to evaluate potential of the appraise with
more objectivity.

26 | P a g e
 o That would also provide a more detailed prescription of ‘development’
initiatives. This would be possible once the Assessment Centers or any
such other systems are institutionalized and all senior executives are
covered.

o Pending institutionalization of such systems, the Reporting Officer would

objectively evaluate the potential of the assessee based on factual
information observed during assessment year.

 RATINGS ON POTENTIAL:
o The following generic competencies are covered for potential evaluation
of Executives :
A. Team Building:
The executive demonstrates ability to cooperate and interact with
others in a team environment, is able to work collaboratively
instead of competitively, is able to reorganize his own department
while managing diverse and divergent views without losing sight of
the objectives.

B. Conceptual Ability:
The executive demonstrates the ability to understand and forecast
results, sensitive to environment, able to respond to situations
quickly and predict changes.

C. Strategic Vision:
The executive demonstrates the ability to build future scenarios
and to handle change with a focus on long term issues .

D. Leadership Abilities:
The executive demonstrates ability for guiding and facilitating
decision making for achieving goals, generates enthusiasm, pride

27 | P a g e
 and commitment amongst all levels of the organisation, setting an
example for others to emulate.

o The evaluation of ‘Generic Competencies’ for potential Appraisal is done

through discussion on a rating scale of 1 to 5. Rating 1 being lowest and
rating 5 being the highest.
o The evaluation of ‘Generic Competencies’ for potential Appraisal is done
through discussion on a rating scale of 1 to 5. Rating 1 being lowest and
rating 5 being the highest.

o The evaluation of potential is done on each competency and rating given

against each in the rating column by the Reporting Officer.

o The aggregate of all the competencies A to D would be arrived at by

totaling all the ratings. This would be out of 20 marks.

o The Potential Appraisal has a weightage of 15% in the total Performance

Appraisal.

o The rating on potential out of 15 marks is obtained by using the

Conversion formula at the bottom of Part IV.

o The marks so obtained out of 15 marks are written in the Box.

o The Part IV is jointly signed by the Reporting Officer and the Appraisee
at the bottom of the page.

o The appraisal of this Part for the previous appraisal year is done at the
end of Performance Appraisal year, not later than 15th April.

 PERFORMANCE AND POTENTIAL PROFILE

28 | P a g e
 FINAL MARKS SCORED:
o The Part V would sum up all marks scored for the Performance Appraisal
year.

o The marks scored for Part I, Part II, Part III and Part IV is transferred to
this section and entered against respective item.

o The aggregate of the marks scored is arrived at by adding all marks

scored for different components

o This would form the Final score of Performance & Potential Appraisal
rating of the executive out of 100 marks.
 COUNTERSIGNING THE APPRAISAL:
o The Appraisal of the Reporting Officer is duly countersigned by the
Reviewing Officers above in the hierarchy.

o The Reviewing Officers in the hierarchy would go through the

performance of the appraise in totality as finally brought out by the
Reporting Officer inter-alia indicating details of marks scored under
Performance, Competencies, Values and Potential before countersigning
& offering comments if any.

o In case the first Reviewing Officer in hierarchy feels the necessity of

reviewing the appraisal written by the Reporting Officer he would have a
detailed discussion with the Reporting Officer on each of the items and
arrive at a fair decision accounting for the views of Reporting Officer.
Thereafter he should offer comments in the relevant column including
different ratings for each of the items duly substantiated by the facts .

o Similarly if the Second Reviewing Officer has any comments with respect
to the performance and other parameters of evaluation he would duly
discuss with the first Reviewing Officer and arrive at a fair decision,

29 | P a g e
 accounting for the views of the first Reviewing Officer. Thereafter offer
comments and ratings on the Performance of the appraise in the relevant
column.

o Similarly, countersigning authority who is the final authority will offer

considered comments in the final appraisal by him taking into account the
appraisal of the Reporting Officer and the Reviewing Officers. The
decision of the countersigning authority is final.

o The Reviewing Officer / countersigning officer while undertaking review

would be guided by such factors like situations/circumstances that may
have bearing on the overall performance evaluation of the appraise. He
would endeavor to have uniform approach with respect to assessments
brought out by different Reporting Officers under his control.

 REMOVAL OF DIFFICULTIES OF THE SYSTEM:

 Implementation of Performance Management System is very sensitive

and needs to be done with utmost objectivity. Difficulties may crop up in
its implementation while completing the Form.
 Any difficulty or difference that may arise between the Reporting Officer
and the Appraise in the process of implementation of the system needs to
be sorted out through mandatory intervention of the immediate Reviewing
Officer in the hierarchy.

 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SYSTEM:

(i) Regional HR and Unit HR are responsible for implementation by

communicating down the line and facilitating smooth implementation by
extending logistic support, monitoring and retrieval of completed form.

30 | P a g e
 (ii) Regional Head and Project Head would facilitate implementation by
monitoring progress, remove difficulties and ensure completion of appraisal
report and sending to Corporate Center by 15th May every year.

(iii) The primary responsibility for making available of Performance Appraisal

Form and setting the process in motion rests jointly with the Reporting
Officer and the Appraise as per the time frame provided in the System.

 GENERAL

 PERFORMANCE DISCUSSION:

o Performance discussion is one of the important activities to be

undertaken by the Reporting Officer with the Appraise. The process of
discussion needs to be given utmost importance and carried out in a
conducive atmosphere in order to remove any anxiety or tension in the
Appraise.

o The performance discussion calls for creating conducive atmosphere by

putting the Appraise at ease and hence exclusive time and energy is to
be spent on this important activity of discussion and feedback.

o The Reporting Officer need to establish rapport with the Appraise by

spending initially 5-10 minutes for discussion on positive aspects,
accomplishments, understanding the problems faced by the appraise and
actions taken by him for overcoming the same.

o The process of performance discussion is to enable the Reporting Officer

to gather all possible data with respect to performance viz., positive and
negative aspects, situations which contributed to the performance etc.
Therefore, active listening is essential. The Reporting Officer would
facilitate the Appraise to reflect on the performance and on related
issues.

31 | P a g e
  FEEDBACK

(i) Providing performance feedback is a delicate matter and the Reporting

Officer should lead the performance discussion to create a condition for
providing Performance Feedback in the best possible manner.

(ii) The feedback should be focused on the specific performance actions and
not on the personality of the assesse similarly, feedback should be a
regular feature of performance review rather than reserving it for the end of
the performance year. Therefore regular performance monitoring review
and feedback should be carried out during each half year.

(iii) The continuous feedback based on the facts gathered during the period
would provide adequate opportunity to the assesses to take corrective
steps during the remaining part of the performance period.

(iv) Feedback should be aimed more at improving and developing the person
and should be provided with sufficient descriptive way based on data
collected in a non-hurting manner.

CHANGES MADE IN PACE

 The weightings for E1 – E4 has changed. E1 – E5 shall continue to be in the same

role band.
 In E1 – E4, the managerial competencies shall be referred as executive
competencies.
 E6 and above, the weightings shall remain the same.

E1-E3 E4 E5 E1-E3 E4 E5
SNo. PMS Parameter
Existing Revised

1. KPA 65 65 65 80 75 65

2 (a) Functional 10 10 10 10 10 10
Competency
Assessment

32 | P a g e
 2 (b) Executive/Managerial 10 10 10 05 05 10
Competency
Assessment

3 Core Values 05 05 05 05 05 05
Assessment

4 Potential Assessment 10 10 10 Nil 05 10

Total 100 100 100 100 100 100

 E1 – E4 : only 8 competencies.
 Potential component in E1 – E3 removed.

The Norms for KPAs (Mandatory):

 KPA measure can only be one of the three viz., Percentage (%), Time &
Number (Nos.).
 The number of KPA indices should not be more than eight and the number of
constituents of KPAs should not exceed thirty in all including the common
indices.
 Each KPA should carry atleast 3 marks .
 No KPA constituents should have marks in decimals such as 3.5 or 4.5
 E1 to E4 executives shall have only one common index – Development Index
(Development Index means à any effort by the individual contributing towards
professional and organizational development such as QC, PC, NOCET, AIMA,
ISO, 5-S, paper presentation, innovations, teaching assignments, etc)
 E5 to E9 executives to have at least two common indices out of four (HRM
Index, Special Project Index, Cost Optimization Index & CSR Index).

 ANNUAL ASSESSMENT :
Second level review by PMC member:

33 | P a g e
  It has been decided to bring another level of assessment prior to the conduct of
PMC. This second reviewing officer shall also be a member of the PMC and
shall ensure a normal distribution pattern in the assessment of executives
working in his domain prior to the final assessment done by the PMC.
 Every level of assessment shall be done after discussion and consultation with
the immediately next lower level of reviewing officer / reporting officer. Sectional
Head, if any, in the hierarchy before the second level review shall also be
required to sign the report.

PMC member as reviewing officer.

Earlier Revised

Presently, in several cases such as E5/E6 If the PMC member himself is the reporting
level executives directly reporting to ED who officer, the
is in turn also the PMC member, the forms
report need not be sent to any authority above
are being put up to Directors/CMD for review
the PMC level for review i.e., cases of E1 to E4
whereas in such cases the Performance
reporting to GM/ED or E5/E6 reporting to ED
Management Committee consist of members
need not be sent to any higher authority above
of ED/GM level.
the level of PMC.

 NORMALIZATION:

Earlier Revised

As per Clause 6.4 of the PACE policy (Sub The Clause 6.4 of the PACE Policy (Sub

34 | P a g e
 Clause 6), “the final scores and the
reasons for adjustments, (if made), are
documented in the PMS form in the section
provided. An indicative list of reasons for
PMS score adjustments is provided in the
annexure.”
Clause 6) is re-worded as under:
“The final scores and the reasons for
adjustments, (if made), are documented in
the PMS form in the section provided. The
specific reasons for change in scores
which are 5% or more than those awarded
by the reporting officer will be recorded.”

 From 8th January, 2010, PACE became online and is now known as E – PACE or
E – PMS.

 For E1 – E5 level executives E – PACE started on 8 th January, 2010.

 For E6 & above level executives it started on 1 st April, 2010.

 ESS – SAP is being used for E – PMS.

Benefits of E – PMS:

 24 * 7 availability of forms.

 Review progress at any time

 Automatic calculation of marks

 Access through any NTPC location

 Easy monitoring for adherence of PACE calendar.

 Online help member.

SAMPLING DESIGN
For completion of the research work a survey was conducted. Following is the
description of the Sample Design considered for the survey:
Sample Unit:
The sample unit constitutes the Executive Employees of NTPC of the level E1 – E7.

35 | P a g e
Sample Size:
The sample size, which has selected for this project is 300. The sample size
constitutes of the executive employees of NTPC.
Sampling Technique:
The sampling technique used in the study is ‘random sampling technique’.

Collection of Data:
The method of Data collection used in the study is ‘Survey/ Feedback’ methods.

Research Instrument:
The research instrument for the study is ‘Questionnaire/interview’.

DATA USED IN STUDY

The data collected for the purpose of the study has been collected from two main
sources; they are primary data and secondary data;

(a) Primary data: The primary data will be collected through a Questionnaire and
personal interaction. The data will be collected through questionnaire method
because exact and first hand information can be gained. This is more helpful
rather than adopting any other method.
The primary data is collected by having personal interaction with the executive
employees of NTPC – EOC. A detailed questionnaire was given to the
employees which was the primary source of my study.

o The questionnaire consisted of 22 questions

o The employees were requested to select the answer which suited him/her
the
o The total sample of the employees survey was 300 respondents

(b) Secondary Data: The secondary data comprises of information from internal
records of the organization, text books, journals and various literature available
in and outside of the corporation, presentation reports on various topics,
standing orders.

This is the data which is already available, published or unpublished and is

collected from the company records and manuals which are maintained by it.

36 | P a g e
TOOLS AND TECHNIQUES USED FOR ANALYSIS

 MS Excel  MS Word

 Pie - charts

CHAPTER 3
LITERATURE REVIEW
Performance management encompasses the most important people issues in your
organization. Performance management includes the entire relationship you have with
the people you employ.
Performance management is the process of creating a work environment or setting in
which people are enabled to perform to the best of their abilities. Performance
management is a whole work system that begins when a job is defined as needed and
expectations are clearly communicated to the employee. It ends when an employee
leaves your organization.
Many writers and consultants are using the term “performance management” as a
substitution for the traditional performance appraisal system. I encourage you to think
of the term in this broader work system context. A performance management system
includes the following components.

 Develop clear job descriptions.

 Select appropriate people with an appropriate selection process.
 Negotiate requirements and accomplishment-based performance standards,
outcomes, and measures.
 Provide effective orientation, education, and training.
 Provide on-going coaching and feedback.

37 | P a g e
  Conduct quarterly performance development discussions.
 Design effective compensation and recognition systems that reward people for
their contributions.
 Provide promotional/career development opportunities for staff.
 Assist with exit interviews to understand WHY valued employees leave the
organization.
January 25, 2007 - A recent survey conducted by the Institute for Corporate
Productivity (i4cp, formerly the Human Resource Institute) in conjunction with HR.com
suggests that it is futile for an organization to seek the 'one silver bullet' that will
revitalize its performance management (PM) system.
Mark Vickers, senior analyst with i4cp said: "That bullet doesn't exist. That is, there
is no single PM practice that can transform an ineffective system into a good one.
Performance management systems are just that - systems. They require the
coordination of multiple key practices. The more of these practices that are in place,
the more likely a performance management system is to be seen as effective."
Based on data from 1031 respondents, The 2006 Performance Management Survey
indicates that there is significant scope for improvement in the performance
management systems of many companies. Only 8 per cent said that their PM process
contributes to individual performance in a significant way, 45 per cent said that it does
contribute but requires improving, while 47 per cent were not sure if their PM process
makes any contribution. While most companies are facing serious challenges with
regard to their PM systems, many seem aware of which aspects are under-performing.
Correlating performance management processes and the overall perceived
effectiveness of their systems produced a list of nine key practices. The survey
concludes that PM systems are more likely to be seen as effective when they include
the following:

1. Plans for helping employees develop in the work period after the appraisal.
2. Ongoing goal review and feedback from managers.
3. Training for managers on how to conduct a performance appraisal meeting.
4. Metrics of the quality of performance appraisals.
5. Ways of addressing and resolving poor performance.
6. Appraisal information that isn't limited to the judgment of supervisors.

38 | P a g e
 7. A PM system that is consistent across the whole organization.
8. Some form of multi-rater feedback.
9. Employees can expect feedback on their performance more often than once a
year.

Kevin Oakes, i4cp's CEO, commented: "Performance management tends to be a

work in progress. PM technology is increasing in popularity, but without a solid process
already in place it's not going to make a significant difference. The good news is that
the data shows that many companies today are getting more serious about
implementing tighter performance management processes."

The Performance Development Process (PDP) Meeting:

 Establish a comfortable, private setting and rapport with the staff person.
 Discuss and agree upon the objective of the meeting, to create a performance
development plan.
 The staff member discusses the achievements and progress he has accomplished
during the quarter.
 The staff member identifies ways in which he would like to further develop his
professional performance, include training, assignments, and new challenges and
so on.
 The supervisor discusses performance for the quarter and suggests ways in which
the staff member might further develop his performance.
 Add the supervisor's thoughts to the employee's selected areas of development
and improvement.
 Discuss areas of agreement and disagreement, and reach consensus.
 Examine job responsibilities for the coming quarter and in general.
 Agree upon standards for performance for the key job responsibilities.
 Set goals for the quarter.
 Discuss how the goals support the accomplishment of the organization's business
plan, the department's objectives and so on.

39 | P a g e
 Agree upon a measurement for each goal.
 Assuming performance is satisfactory; establish a development plan with the staff
person that helps him grow professionally in ways important to him.
 If performance is less than satisfactory, develop a written performance
improvement plan, and schedule more frequent feedback meetings.
 Remind the employee of the consequences connected with continued poor
performance.
 The supervisor and employee discuss employee feedback and constructive
suggestions for the supervisor and the department.
 Discuss anything else the supervisor or employee would like to discuss, hopefully,
maintaining the positive and constructive environment established thus far, during
the meeting.
 Mutually sign the performance development tool to indicate the discussion has
taken place.
 End the meeting in a positive and supportive manner. The supervisor expresses
confidence that the employee can accomplish the plan and that the supervisor is
available for support and assistance.
 Set a time-frame for formal follow up, generally quarterly.

Following the Performance Development Process Meeting:

 If a performance Improvement plan was necessary, follow up at the designated

times.
 Follow up with performance feedback and discussions regularly throughout the
quarter. (An employee should never be surprised about the content of feedback
at the performance development meeting.)
 The supervisor needs to keep commitments relative to the agreed upon
development plan, including time needed away from the job, payment for
courses, agreed upon work assignments and so on.
 The supervisor needs to act upon the feedback from departmental members
and let staff members know what has changed, based upon their feedback.

40 | P a g e
  Forward appropriate documentation to the Human Resources office and retain a
copy of the plan for easy access and referral.

Success Story in Performance Management:

For those of you who feel that the staff person who needs a formal Performance
Improvement Plan (PIP) will never succeed in your organization, here is a success
story. The newly promoted plant manager of a 150 person organization was failing
miserably in the key deliverables his boss expected. A formal PIP was developed that
cited eleven goals and their measures of success. A ninety day time frame was
provided as these goals were challenging and not short term.
The manager was given a strong, supportive environment in which his supervisor's
expectations for his success were a key factor. And guess what? He succeeded
beyond our wildest dreams. All he had needed was serious direction about what he
needed to do to succeed.
So, I am a believer in the power of a well-planned, measurable PIP that is reinforced by
positive and expressed supervisory support and encouragement.

Performance Management: Performance Improvement Plan

The Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) is designed to facilitate constructive

discussion between a staff member and his or her supervisor and to clarify the work
performance to be improved.
It is implemented, at the discretion of the supervisor, when it becomes necessary to
help a staff member improve his or her performance.
The PIP differs from the Performance Development Planning (PDP) process in the
amount and quantity of the detail. Assuming an employee is already participating in the
company-wide PDP process, the format and the expectation of the PIP should enable
the supervisor and staff member to communicate with a higher degree of clarity about
specific expectations. In general, people who are performing their jobs effectively, and
meeting the expectations of the PDP process, will not need to participate in a PIP.

41 | P a g e
In all cases, it is recommended that the supervisor’s supervisor and the Human
Resources department review the plan. This will ensure consistent and fair treatment of
employees across the company. The supervisor will monitor and provide feedback to
the employee regarding his or her performance on the PIP and may take additional
disciplinary action, if warranted, through the organization's Progressive Discipline
Process, if necessary.
The supervisor should review the following six items with the employee when using the
document.

1. State performance to be improved; be specific and cite examples.

2. State the level of work performance expectation and that it must be performed on a
consistent basis.
3. Identify and specify the support and resources you will provide to assist the
employee.
4. Communicate your plan for providing feedback to the employee. Specify meeting
times, with whom and how often. Specify the measurements you will consider in
evaluating progress.
5. Specify possible consequences if performance standards are not met.
6. Provide sources of additional information such as the Employee Handbook

CHAPTER 4

DATA ANALYSIS, INTREPRETATION AND FINDINGS

42 | P a g e
The data analysis has been done question wise as well as according to the grades of
the executive employees. The present study is carried out by administering
questionnaire of 22 questions and a sample of 300 employees/respondents. The
analysis has been done both question wise as well as grade wise.

Question – wise analysis

Q.1 The ability to deliver performance commitments strongly influences career

advancements at this organization.

STRONGLY AGREE
11%
STRONGLY DISAGREE
19%

DISAGREE
12%

AGREE
35%

NETITHER A/D
22%

It is true that an employee’s ability to deliver performance commitments or say

good performance influences his / her career advancements. Through this pie
chart we can understand that whether the executive employees of NTPC also
feel that their performance commitments strongly influence their career
advancements.

Out of 300 employees, 36% of them agree to the point that the ability to deliver
performance commitments strongly influences the career advancement at
NTPC, and 11% of them actually strongly agree to this point. Only 12% of them
disagree that it is no so, and 19% strongly disagree. Rest of 22% of the 300
employees actually neither disagrees nor do they agree to the fact. For them it’s
the midway.

Q.2 My manager gives me regular performance feedback so that there are no

surprises at the end of the performance cycle.

43 | P a g e
 STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
12% 6%

DISAGREE
24% AGREE
37%

NETITHER A/D
21%

Managers should keep on giving feedback to their employees on their

performance.

When asked the question that does there manager give them regular feedback
on their performance 37% of them agreed to this and 6% strongly agreed, so we
can say that 43% of the employees actually feel that yes their manager gives
them regular feedback. 24 % and 12% of the employees disagree and strongly
disagree to this point, i.e., in all 36% of them disagree that their manager
doesn’t give them regular feedbacks and they do get surprises at the end of the
performance cycle due to this. Rest 21% neither agree nor disagree.

Q.3 Career goals and performance gaps are considered while nominating
employees to any training program.

STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 7%
16% AGREE
24%

DISAGREE
22%

NETITHER A/D
31%

The reason for nominating a employee for a training program is either his/her
poor performance or say the gaps between the standard performance and the
actual performance. The other reason is his/her career goals.

In this question 24% of the 300 employees agree that career goals and
performance gaps are considered while nominating the employees to any

44 | P a g e
 training program and 7% strongly agree to the point, i.e. in total 31% of them do
think that yes career goals and performance is considered while nominating
them for training. 22% and 16% of them disagree and strongly disagree to the
point respectively and think that it is not so. The rest of 31% of the employees
think neither way.

Q.4 HR is able to effectively answer system related queries put forward by me.

STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE

12% 10%

AGREE
DISAGREE 25%
25%

NETITHER A/D
28%

HR is a important part of any organization. Therefore, it is very important that

the HR dept. of the organization works in the interests of the employees and
helps them and answers there related queries if any.

35% of the employees agree (25% - agree, 10% - strongly agree) that HR is
able to effectively answer their queries. 37% of the employees (25% - disagree,
12% - agree) feel that HR does not effectively answer to their queries. The rest
28% of the employees think neither way.

45 | P a g e
Q.5 there is regular documentation of individual’s work which can be easily be
referred to during annual performance appraisal.

STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE

13% 10%

AGREE
26%
DISAGREE
24%

NETITHER A/D
28%

It is also important that the work done by the employees should be documented
individually so that it can be later used for any sought of reference for
performance appraisal of the employees.

35% of the employees ( 25% - agree, 10% - strongly agree) that their work is
documented so that it can be referred for their performance appraisal. 37% of
the employees (24% - disagree, 13% - strongly disagree) feel that their work is
not documented regularly and therefore it effects their appraisal. 28% don’t feel
either way.

Q.6 my manager explains me the reasons for change in marks, if any, after
normalization.

STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 10%
17%

AGREE
27%

DISAGREE
21%

NETITHER A/D
25%

46 | P a g e
 A good manager should always encourage his co – workers to work effectively.
For encouraging them he/she needs to communicate with them. Communication
with them might also include explaining them the reasons for any sought of
change in their marks during the performance appraisal.

37% of the employees (27% - agree, 10% - strongly disagree) accept the point
that there manager does explain them the reasons for change in marks, if any,
after normalization. 38% of the employees (17% - strongly disagree, 21% -
disagree) don’t think that their manager gives them the reason for any change in
marks, if any. 25% don’t think either way.

Q.7 I feel PMC marks are in line with my actual performance.

STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 7%
16%
AGREE
28%

DISAGREE
22%

NETITHER A/D
26%

35% of the employees (28% - agree, 7% - strongly agree) that there PMC marks
are in line with their actual performance. 39% of the employees (23% - disagree,
16% - strongly disagree) feel that their PMC marks are not in line with their
actual performance. 26% of them feel neither way.

Q.8 my manger directly addresses issues of poor performance.

47 | P a g e
 STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 7%
17%
AGREE
26%

DISAGREE
16%

NETITHER A/D
33%

As said earlier a good manager should always encourage and motivate his co –
workers to work effectively. A manager can also directly address issues of poor
performance to his/her employees without being rude.

33% of the executive employees (26% - agree, 7% - strongly disagree) feel that
manager directly addresses their issues of poor performance. 33% of the
employees (16% - disagree, 17% - strongly disagree) feel that their manager
does not directly address issue of poor performance with them. 34% of them
feel neither way.

Q.9 my performance has a significant impact on my rewards.

STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
13% 13%

DISAGREE
20%

AGREE
29%

NETITHER A/D
25%

Performance does have a significant impact on the rewards which includes the
incentives and bonuses given to the employees.

Out of 300 executive employees 42% i.e. (29% - agree and 13% - strongly
agree) feel that their performance actually has an impact on the rewards and
incentives that they get. 33% of the employees (20% - disagree, 13% - strongly

48 | P a g e
 disagree) feel that the reward system is not based on the performance. 25% of
them feel neither way.

Q.10 my manger is able to effectively explain my performance gaps to me.

STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE

13% 9%

DISAGREE AGREE
22% 29%

NETITHER A/D
27%

Again this question deals with how much a manager is able to motivate his
employees. This also includes explaining the employees about the difference or
the gaps between the standard and the actual performance.

38% of the executive employees (29% - agree, 9% - strongly agree) feel that
their manager explains them and helps them with the gaps in the performance.
35% of the employees (22% - disagree, 13% - strongly disagree) feel that their
manger does not help them in understanding their performance gaps. 27% of
them don’t feel either way.

Q.11 HR helps me in understanding the PACE process.

STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 10%
16%

DISAGREE AGREE
16% 28%

NETITHER A/D
29%

As said earlier HR is a important part of any organization. HR should help its

employees in understanding the different processes related to HR in the
organization.

49 | P a g e
 38% of the employees (28% - agree, 10% - strongly agree) think that the HR
dept. does actually help them in understanding the PACE process. 33% of them
( 17% - disagree, 16%- strongly disagree) think that the HR dept. does not help
in understanding the PACE process. 29% of them feel neither way.

Q.12 my manger takes time to help each employee achieve their best.
STRONGLY AGREE
12%
STRONGLY DISAGREE
19%

DISAGREE
14%
AGREE
34%

NETITHER A/D
21%

Again this question is related to how much a manger contribute towards the
betterment of its employees and how much he helps them in achieving their
best.

46% of them (34% - agree, 12% - strongly agree) feel that their manager takes
out time to help each employee achieve their best. 33% of them (14% -
disagree, 19% - strongly disagree) feel that their manager does not take time to
help them to achieve their best. 21% of them feel neither way.

Q.13 I set my KPA’s at the beginning of performance cycle.

STRONGLY DISAGREE
10%
DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
16% 18%

NETITHER A/D
16%
AGREE
40%

This question is related to how much a employee is himself interested in

bringing up his career. Setting up the KPA’s and then working according to the
set KPA’s will surely help in bringing up his / her performance.

50 | P a g e
 58% of the executives (40% - agree, 18% - strongly agree) agree that they set
their KPA’s and the targets at the very beginning of their performance cycle.
Only 26% of them say that they don’t do so. 16% of them said neither do they
agree on this point, nor do they totally disagree.

Q.14 my manger helps me understand that how my work contributes to

organization’s goals.
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
12% 13%

DISAGREE
18%

AGREE
30%

NETITHER A/D
26%

This question again deals with the manager’s contribution towards the
betterment of the employees career. 44% of the executives (31% - agree, 13% -
strongly agree) agree that their manager helps them in understanding how their
work contributes to organizational goals. 20% of them don’t agree to this point
and 26% feel neither way.

Q.15 HR provides regular training and reading material to help employees

understand PMS better.

STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE

14% 10%

DISAGREE
15%
AGREE
29%

NETITHER A/D
31%

This question again tells us how much important a role of HR is an organization.

Providing regular training and reading material to the employees in
understanding the PMS is also an important role that a good HR plays.

According to this pie – chart 39% (10% - strongly agree, 29% - agree) think that
the HR dept. at NTPC provides regular training and reading material to help

51 | P a g e
 employees understand the PMS process better. Whereas, 30% of the
employees (14% - strongly disagree, 16% - disagree) feel just the opposite. The
rest of 31% of the employees don’t think either way.

Q.16 My manager inspires me to higher levels of performance.

STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE

12% 13%

DISAGREE
18%

AGREE
30%

NETITHER A/D
27%

According to this pie – chart 43% of the employees (13% - strongly agree, 30% -
agree) have said that their managers do inspire them to achieve higher levels of
performance. Comparatively only 30% (12% - strongly disagree, 18% -
disagree) say that it is not so and their manager doesn’t help them with
improving their performance. The rest 27% feel neither way.

Q.17 PACE form has a simple and practical format.

STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE

13% 11%

DISAGREE
20%
AGREE
30%

NETITHER A/D
26%

41% of the employees feel that the PACE form has a simple and a practical
format. Whereas 33% of the employees feel just the opposite. 26% of them feel
neither way.

52 | P a g e
Q.18 I am rewarded fairly for the contributions I make to the organization’s
success.

STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 10%
16%

AGREE
29%
DISAGREE
21%

NETITHER A/D
24%

This question deals with how or what an employee feels about the contribution
of an organization in the betterment of his career.

According to the pie – chart only 39% (10% - strongly agree, 29% - agree) agree
to the point that they are rewarded fairly for their contributions towards the
success of the organization. 37% of the employees (16% - strongly disagree,
21% - disagree) feel just the opposite. 24% feel neither way.

Q.19 the performance assessment process helps me improve my performance.

STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE

13% 9%

AGREE
27%
DISAGREE
22%

NETITHER A/D
29%

36% of the employees (9% - strongly agree, 27% - agree) feel that the
assessment process actually helps them in improving their performance.
Whereas 35% of the employees (13% - strongly disagree, 22% - disagree)

53 | P a g e
 disagree that the performance assessment process at NTPC helps them with
the improvement in their performance.

Q.20 managers jointly set goals with subordinates to ensure proper cascading
of targets.
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
13% 12%

DISAGREE
19%

AGREE
32%

NETITHER A/D
23%

44% (12% - strongly agree, 32% - agree) of the employees feel that their
managers help them in setting their goals according to the set KPA’s and the
targets to be achieved by the employee. Whereas 32% of the employees (13% -
strongly disagree, 19% - disagree) think that the manager does not help him/her
with setting up the goals for the performance. 24% of them don’t feel either
way.

Q.21 individual’s career goals, and not only organization’s goals, are taken into
account while setting KPA’s.

STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 9%
19%
AGREE
25%

DISAGREE
21%

NETITHER A/D
26%

Through this question we can understand that while setting the KPA’s or the
targets to be achieved by the employee it is important that not only the
54 | P a g e
 organizational goals are to be kept in mind, but also the individual’s career goals
should be kept in mind.

Only 34% of the executive employees (9% - strongly agree, 25% - agree) think
that individual career goals are kept in mind while setting up the KPA’s.
Whereas 40% of them (19% - strongly disagree, 21% - disagree) feel that the
organization goals are given more importance than individual career goals. 26%
of them feel neither way.

Q.22 the system of Appeals has helped in making PACE process more
transparent.
STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 10%
19%

AGREE
25%

DISAGREE
14%

NETITHER A/D
31%

Once the PACE process is completed, if employees have any problem or they
disagree with the feedback or the marks they have got for the appraisal and
need a clarification for the same, then for such cases there is a system of
appeals. Employees who have problem with their feedback can fill up a appeal
form. 35% of the employees agree that the appeal system makes the PACE
process more transparent, whereas 33% of the employees feel just the
opposite, 32% of the employee feel neither way.

GRADE WISE ANALYSIS

Q.1 The ability to deliver performance commitments strongly influences career

advancements at this organization.

55 | P a g e
 E1 - Q1 E2 - Q1

STRONGLY AGREE
16%
STRONGLY DISAGREE
27%
STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 10%
17%

DISAGREE AGREE AGREE

14% 28% 27%
DISAGREE
11%
NEITHER A/D
20%

NEITHER A/D
31%

E3 - Q1 E4 - Q1

STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 13%
18%
STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 8%
11% DISAGREE
13%
DISAGREE
8%
AGREE
30%

NEITHER A/D
26% AGREE NEITHER A/D
48% 28%

E5 - Q1 E6 - Q1
STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY AGREE
3%
10%
STRONGLY DISAGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 22%
28%

AGREE DISAGREE
31% 6%
AGREE
50%

DISAGREE NEITHER A/D

21% 19%

NEITHER A/D
10%

E7 - Q1

STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE

15%
18%

DISAGREE
15%

NEITHER A/D AGREE

18% 33%

56 | P a g e
 E1 – out of 29 employees who filled up the questionnaire, 38% of them (10% -
strongly agree, 28% - agree) agree that individual’s ability to deliver
performance commitments strongly influences career advencents at NTPC.
Whereas 31% of the employee (17% - strongly disagree, 14% - disagree)
disagree with this point. The rest 31% don’t feel either way.

 E2 – out of 57 employees who filled up the questionnaire, 43% of them (16% -

strongly agree, 27% - agree) agree that individual’s ability to deliver
performance commitments strongly influences career advancements at NTPC.
Wheraes, 38% of them (27% - strongly disagree, 11% - disagree) disagree and
feel just the opposite. The rest 19% netither agree nor disagree on this point.

 E3 – out of 65 employees who filled up the questionnaire, 55% of the employees

agree to the point that good performance influences career advancements at
NTPC. Whereas only 19% feel the opposite. The rest 26% of the E3 level
employees feel neither way.

 E4 – Out of 40 employees who filled up the questionnaire, 42% of the

employees agree to the pont that good performance influences career
advancements at NTPC. Wheras 31% of the employees feel just the opposite.
The rest 27% of the employee feel neither way.

 E5 – out of 39 employees who filled up the questionnaire, 41% of the employees

agree to the point, whereas 49% of the empoyees feel that at NTPC
performance ha no influence on career. 10% of them don’t feel either way.

 E6 – out of 32 employees who filled up the questionnaire, 53% of the employees

agree that the perfromance of an individual does have an impact on his/ her
career. Wheraes only 28% feel just the opposite. The rest 19% of the
employees feel neither way.

57 | P a g e
 E7 – out of 39 employees of this level who filled up the questionnaire, 51% of
the employees agree that the performance of an individual does have an impact
on his/ her career. Whereas 31% of the employee feel that it is not so, the rest
18% of th employees don’t feel either way.

E1 - Q2 Q.2 My manager gives me regular performance

STRONGLY AGREE
3%
STRONGLY DISAGREE
21% AGREE feedback so that there are no surprises at
34%

the end of the performance cycle.

DISAGREE
28%

NEITHER A/D
14%

E2 - Q2

STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 4%
14%
AGREE
33%

DISAGREE
25%

NEITHER A/D
25%

E3 - Q2 E4 - Q2

STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY AGREE

6% 8% STRONGLY DISAGREE 5%
DISAGREE 15%
22%

DISAGREE
18%
AGREE
43%

AGREE
45%
NEITHER A/D NEITHER A/D
20% 20%

E5 - Q2 E6 - Q2
STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 5% AGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
15% 21% 9% 9%
DISAGREE
19%

AGREE
DISAGREE 44%
NEITHER A/D
33% 19%
NEITHER A/D
26%

58 | P a g e
 E7 - Q2
STRONGLY DISAGREESTRONGLY AGREE
8% 8%

DISAGREE
24%

AGREE
39%

NEITHER A/D
21%

 E1 – Out of 29 employees who filled up the questionnaire, 37% of the employees

say that their manager does give their regular performance feedback, whereas 49%
of the employees feel just the opposite.

 E2 – out of 57 employees at this level who filled up the questionnaire, in total 36%
of them said that their manager gives them regular feedback on their performance,
whereas 39% of the employees said that the manager does not give any feedback.
25% felt neither way.

 E3 – out of 65 employees at this level who filled up the questionnaire, in total 53%
of them agree that their managers give them regular feedback on their
performance, whereas 27% of the employees feel just the opposite. 20% of them
feel neither way.

 E4 – out of 40 employees at this level who filled up the questionnaire, in total 47%
agree that their managers give them regular feedback on the performance, whereas
in total 33% of them disagree to this point, and the rest of 20% feel neither way.

 E5 – out of 39 employees at this level who filled up the questionnaire, in total only
26% agree that their managers give them regular performance feedback , whereas
48% of the employees disagree that managers give them regular feedback. The
rest of 26% don’t feel either way.

59 | P a g e
 E6 – out of 32 employees who filled up the questionnaire, in total 53% agree that
their managers do give them regular feedback, whereas 28% feel just the opposite.
The rest of 19% feel neither way.

 E7 – out of 39 employees who filled up the questionnaire, in total 47% agree that
their managers do give them regular feedback, whereas, 32% of them feel just the
opposite. The rest of 21% feel neither way.

Q.3 Career goals and performance gaps are considered while nominating
employees to any training program.

E1 - Q3

STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 7%
14%

AGREE E2 - Q3
31%
DISAGREE
21%

STRONGLY AGREE
7%
AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 20%
16%
NEITHER A/D
28%
DISAGREE
21%

NEITHER A/D
36%

E3 - Q3 E4 - Q3

STRONGLY AGREE
8%
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE
11% 8% 20% AGREE
28%
DISAGREE
20% AGREE
30%
DISAGREE
13%

NEITHER A/D
NEITHER A/D 33%
31%

60 | P a g e
 STRONGLY AGREE AGREE
5% 13% E6 - Q3
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
21% 6%
AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 25%
25%

NEITHER A/D
26%

DISAGREE NEITHER A/D

DISAGREE 22% 22%
36%

E7 - Q3
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
8% 5%
AGREE
DISAGREE 26%
26%

NEITHER A/D
36%

 E1 – out of 29 employees, 38% of them agree that both career goals and
performance gaps are given importance while nominating him / her for a training
program. Whereas, 35% of them feel just the opposite. 27% feel neither way.

 E2 – out of 57 employees, only 27% agree that both career goals and performance
goals are given importance while nominating an employee for a training program,
whereas, 37% of them feel just the opposite. 36% feel neither way.

 E3 – out of 65 employees, 38% agree to the fact and 31% disagree. The rest 31%
don’t feel either way.

 E4 – out of 40 employees, 34% agree to the fact that career goals and performance
goals are kept in mind while nominating an employee for a training program,
whereas, 33% feel the opposite. The rest 33% feel neither way.

61 | P a g e
 E5 – out of 39 employees of this grade, only 18% agree that career goals and
performance goals are given importance while nominating an employee for a
training program, whereas 56% disagree with this point. The rest 26% don’t feel
either way.

 E6 – out of 32 employees of this grade, 31% agree that career goals and
performance goals are given importance while nominating an employee for a
training program, whereas 47% of them feel just the opposite. The rest 22% feel
neither way.

 E7 – out of 39 employees of this grade, 30% agree to the fact, whereas, 34% of the
employee disagree to the fact. The rest 36% feel neither way.

Q.4 HR is able to effectively answer system related queries put forward by me.

E1 - Q4 E2 - Q4
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
11% 9%
STRONGLY AGREE
17%
STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREE
21% AGREE 23% AGREE
10% 30%

NEITHER A/D
28%
DISAGREE
28% NEITHER A/D
24%

E4 - Q4
E3 - Q4
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE 8%
11% 11% 13%
DISAGREE
17% DISAGREE
28% AGREE
21%

AGREE
37%
NEITHER A/D
31%
NEITHER A/D
25%

62 | P a g e
 E5 - Q4 E6 - Q4
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
8% 13%

DISAGREE
28% AGREE STRONGLY AGREE
21% 6%

DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE AGREE

9% 22%
22%

NEITHER A/D
31%
NEITHER A/D
41%

E7 - Q4

STRONGLY AGREE AGREE NEITHER A/D DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE

8% 13%

32% 21%

26%

 E1 - out of 29 employees, 27% of the employees agree that the HR dept at NTPC is
able to effectively answer system related queries put forward by them. 49% disagree
to the fact. The rest 24% feel neither way.

 E2 – out of 57 employees, 39% of the employees agree that the HR dept. answers
their queries. Whereas, 33% disagree. The rest 28% don’t feel either way.

 E3 – out of 65 employees, 48% of the employees agree that the HR dept. answers
their queries whenever they have any, whereas, 28% disagree to the fact. The rest
24% of the employees don’t feel either way.
 E4 – out of 40 employees, 33% of the employees agree to the point, whereas, 36%
of them feel just the opposite. The rest of 31% of the employees feel neither way.

 E5 – out of 39 employees, 33% of the employees agree to the point, whereas, 36%
of them feel just the opposite. The rest of 31% of the employees feel neither way.

63 | P a g e
 E6 – out of 32 employees, 28% of the employees agree to the fact that the HR dept
answers to their queries effectively, whereas, 31% of the employees feel just the
opposite. The rest of the employees, i.e., 41% of them don’t feel either way.

 E7 – out of 39 employees, 34% of the employees say that the HR dept. does help
them out with their system related queries, whereas, 40% of the employees disagree
the point. The rest 26% feel neither way.

Q.5 there is regular documentation of individual’s work which can be easily be

referred to during annual performance appraisal.

E1 - Q5 E2 - Q5
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
11% 9%
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
17% 14%
DISAGREE
23% AGREE
AGREE 30%
21%

DISAGREE
28%
NEITHER A/D NEITHER A/D
21% 28%

E4 - Q5
E3 - Q5
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE 13% 10%
11% 13%
AGREE
DISAGREE 23%
DISAGREE
22% 20%

AGREE
28%

NEITHER A/D NEITHER A/D

27% 35%

E5 - Q5 E6 - Q5

DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE

STRONGLY AGREE 25% 6%
STRONGLY DISAGREE 8%
18% AGREE
21% AGREE
31%

DISAGREE NEITHER A/D

NEITHER A/D 38%
33% 21%

64 | P a g e
 E7 - Q5

DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE

18% 5% STRONGLY AGREE
13%

AGREE
32%

NEITHER A/D
32%

 E1 – out of 29 employees, 35% of the employees agree that regular documentation

of their work is done so that it can been used later for performance appraisal
purposes, whereas, 44% of the employees disagree to this point. The rest 21%
don’t feel either way.

 E2 – out of 57 employees, 39% of the employees agree that regular documentation

of the individual’s work is done, whereas 33% of the E2 grade employees disagree
with this point. 28% of them feel neither way.

 E3 – out of 65 employees, 40% agree that the documentation of individual’s work is

done regularly, whereas, 33% of them feel just the opposite, 27% of them feel
neither way.

 E4 – out of 40 employees, 32% agree that the documentation of their work is done
regularly and is later referred for performance appraisal, whereas, 33% disagree.
The rest 35% of them fee neither way.

 E5 – out of 39 employees, only 28% feel that the documentation of their work is
done regularly for further reference, whereas, 51% disagree that it is so. The rest
21% don’t feel either way.

 E6 – out of 32 employees, only 37% agree to the point, whereas, 25% disagree to
the fact. The rest 38% don’t feel either way.

65 | P a g e
 E7 – out of 39 employees, only 45% agree to the point, whereas, 23% disagree to
the fact. The rest 32% feel neither way.

Q.6 my manager explains me the reasons for change in marks, if any, after
normalization.

E1 - Q6 E2 - Q6
STRONGLY AGREE AGREE NEITHER A/D DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE
28% 10%
STRONGLY AGREE AGREE NEITHER A/D DISAGREE

STRONGLY DISAGREE
28%

14% 9%

21% 32%

17% 17% 25%

E3 - Q6 E4 - Q6
STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 13%
18%

STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE

12% 12%
DISAGREE
13%
DISAGREE
22%
AGREE
29% AGREE
35%
NEITHER A/D NEITHER A/D
25% 23%

E5 - Q6 E6 - Q6
STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY AGREE 3%
3% AGREE
AGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE 28%
13% DISAGREE 9%
STRONGLY DISAGREE 22%
26%

NEITHER A/D NEITHER A/D

33% 38%

DISAGREE
26%

66 | P a g e
 E7 - Q6

STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE

15% 18%

DISAGREE
26% AGREE
23%

NEITHER A/D
18%

 E1 – out of 29 employees, 38% of the employees agree that their manager

explains them the reason for the change in the marks, after the normalization,
whereas, 45% of the employees say that their manager does not give any reasons
to them,. The rest of 17% feel neither way.

 E2 – out of 57 employees, 41% of the employees agree that the manager gives
them the reasons for change in marks if any, whereas, 35% of them disagree. The
rest 24% feel neither way.

 E3 – out of 65 employees, 41% of the employees agree to the fact and 34% of
them disagree, and the rest 25% neither do they agree nor disagree.

 E4 – out of 40 employees, 47% of the employees agree that the manager gives
them the reason for the change in marks, whereas, 31% feel just the opposite. The
rest 22% feel neither way.

 E5 – out of 39 employees, only 15% of the employees agree that their manager
gives them the reason for change in marks after normalization, whereas, 52% of
the employees disagree. The rest 33% feel neither way.

 E6 – out of 32 employees, 31% of the employees agree that their manager gives
them the proper feedback related to the change in marks if any and 31% of the
employees disagree on this point, the rest of the employees neither agree nor
disagree.

67 | P a g e
 E7 – out of 39 employees, 41% of the employees agree to the point, and 41% of
the employees disagree. The rest of the employees feel neither way.

Q.7 I feel PMC marks are in line with my actual performance.

E1 - Q7 E2 - Q7
STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY AGREE AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 3% STRONGLY DISAGREE 4%
14% 12% 25%
AGREE
31%

DISAGREE
21%
DISAGREE
26%

NEITHER A/D
31%
NEITHER A/D
33%

E3 - Q7
E4 - Q7
STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 6% STRONGLY AGREE
16% 13%
AGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE
DISAGREE 23%
31%
13%
AGREE
23%

DISAGREE
18%
NEITHER A/D NEITHER A/D
34% 23%

E5 - Q7 E6 - Q7
STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 5% 10%
18% AGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE
24% 19%

AGREE
32%

DISAGREE
23%

DISAGREE NEITHER A/D

NEITHER A/D 16%
34% 18%

68 | P a g e
 E7 - Q7

STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE

13% 11%

DISAGREE AGREE
26% 32%

NEITHER A/D
18%

 E1 – out of 29 employees, 34% of the employees feel that their PMC marks are in
line with their actual performance, whereas, 35% of the employees feel just the
opposite. Rest 31% feels neither way.

 E2 – out of 57 employees, 29% of the employees feel that their PMC marks are in
line with their actual performance, whereas, 38% of the employees disagree to the
fact. The rest of the employees feel neither way.

 E3 – out of 65 employees, 37% of the employees agree to the fact, whereas, 29%
disagree to the fact. The rest of 34% neither agree to the fact nor do they disagree.

 E4 – out of 40 employees, 36% of them agree that their PMC marks are in line with
their actual performance, whereas, 41% of them disagree to the fact. The rest of
the employees 23%, feel neither way.

 E5 – out of 39 employees, 29% of them agree and 42% of them disagree, the rest
19% of them feel neither way.
 E6 – out of 32 employees, 42% of the employees agree that their PMC marks are
in line with their actual performance, and 42% of the employees also disagree to
this point. The rest 16% feel neither way.

 E7 – out of 39 employees, 43% of the employees agree that their PMC marks are
in line with their actual performance, and 39% of them feel just the opposite, the
rest of the employees i.e., 18% of them feel neither way.

Q.8 my manger directly addresses issues of poor performance.

69 | P a g e
 E1 - Q8 E2 - Q8
STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY AGREE
4% STRONGLY DISAGREE 9%
14%

STRONGLY DISAGREE AGREE DISAGREE

25% 36% 14%
AGREE
30%

DISAGREE
18% NEITHER A/D NEITHER A/D
18% 33%

E3 - Q8 E4 - Q8
STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE
5% STRONGLY DISAGREE
14% 15% 13%
DISAGREE AGREE
11% 32%
AGREE
21%
DISAGREE
21%

NEITHER A/D
38% NEITHER A/D
31%

E5 - Q8 E6 - Q8
STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY AGREE
AGREE 9%
3% 21%
STRONGLY DISAGREE AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE
23%
25% 16%

DISAGREE DISAGREE
18% 16% NEITHER A/D
34%
NEITHER A/D
36%

E7 - Q8

STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY

AGREE
5% AGREE
11% 24%

DISAGREE
22%

NEITHER A/D
38%

70 | P a g e
 E1 – out of 29 employees, 39% agree that their manager directly addresses
issues of poor performance with them, whereas, 43% of them disagree to the
fact. 18% feel neither way

 E2 – out of 57 employees, 39% agree and 28% disagree to the point that their
manager directly addresses issues of poor performance with them. The rest
33% neither agree nor disagree.

 E3 – out of 65 employees, 37% of the employees agree, whereas, 25% of them

disagree to the point that their manager directly addresses issues of
performance. The rest 38% of the employees feel neither way.

 E4 – out of 40 employees, 33% of the employees agree, whereas, 36% of them

disagree to the point that their manager directly addresses issues of
performance. The rest 31% of the employees don’t feel either way.

 E5 – out of 39 employees, only 23% agree and 41% disagree and the rest 36%
feel neither way.

 E6 – out of 32 employees, only 25% agree whereas 41% disagree to the point
that their manager directly addresses issues of the poor performance. The rest
of 34% of the employees feel neither way.

 E7 – out of 39 employees, 31% of the employees agree that their manager

gives them the feedback on their poor performance, whereas, 33% of them feel
just the opposite. The rest of the employees feel neither way.

Q.9 my performance has a significant impact on my rewards.

71 | P a g e
 E1 - Q9 E2 - Q9
STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE 11%
17% 17% 14%

DISAGREE
DISAGREE 21%
17% AGREE
AGREE
21% 33%

NEITHER A/D NEITHER A/D

28% 21%

E4 - Q9
E3 - Q9
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY AGREE 10%
8% 14% 15%
DISAGREE
22%

DISAGREE AGREE
18% 28%

AGREE
34%
NEITHER A/D
NEITHER A/D 30%
22%

E5 - Q9 E6 - Q9

STRONGLY DISAGREE
STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
15% 8% 13%
16%
AGREE
28%

DISAGREE AGREE
19% 25%
DISAGREE
26%

NEITHER A/D
23% NEITHER A/D
28%

E7 - Q9

DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE

13% 8%
STRONGLY AGREE
21%

NEITHER A/D
31% AGREE
28%

72 | P a g e
 E1 – out of the 29 employees who filled the questionnaire, 38% of them agree that
their performance has a significant impact on the rewards that they get, whereas,
34% disagree to the point and rest of 28% of the employees feel neither way.

 E2 – out of 57 employees, 44% agree that their performance does have an impact
on the rewards that they get, whereas, 35% of them feel just the opposite. The rest
21% feel neither way.

 E3 – out of 65 employees, 48% agree that their performance does have an impact
on the rewards that they get, whereas, 30% disagree. The rest 22% don’t feel either
way.

 E4 – out of 40 employees, 37% agree, whereas, 33% disagree that their

performance does have an impact on the rewards that they get. The rest 30% feel
neither way.

 E5 – out of 39 employees, 36% agree, whereas, 41% disagree that the

performance does have an impact on the rewards that they get. The rest 23% feel
neither way.

 E6 – out of 32 employees, 37% agree, whereas, 35% disagree that the

performance does have an impact on the rewards that they get. The rest 28% feel
neither way.

 E7 – out of 39 employees, 48% agree, whereas, only 21% disagree that the
performance does have an impact on the rewards that they get. The rest 31% feel
neither way.

73 | P a g e
Q.10 my manger is able to effectively explain my performance gaps to me.

E1 - Q10 E2 - Q10

STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY AGREE

10% STRONGLY DISAGREE
14% 16% 7%
AGREE AGREE
21% 28%

DISAGREE
19%
DISAGREE
28%

NEITHER A/D NEITHER A/D

28% 30%

E3 - Q10 E4 - Q10

STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE

9% 9% 15% 13%
DISAGREE
17%

AGREE
23%
DISAGREE
23%
AGREE
37%

NEITHER A/D
28%
NEITHER A/D
28%

E5 - Q10
E6 - Q10
STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 5% AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
18% 26% 10% 13%
DISAGREE
19%
AGREE
19%

DISAGREE
28%
NEITHER A/D
NEITHER A/D 39%
23%

E7 - Q10
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
8% 8%
DISAGREE
23%

AGREE
44%

NEITHER A/D
18%

74 | P a g e
 E1 – out of 29 employees, 31% of them agree that their manager is effectively able
explain them the reason for gaps in their performance over a period of time,
whereas, 42% disagree that their managers do so. The rest of 27% don’t feel either
way.

 E2 – out of 57 employees, 35% of them agree that the managers help them in
understanding their performance gaps, and 35% of them also disagree that the
managers do so. The rest of 30% don’t feel either way.

 E3 – out of 65 employees, 46% of them agree, whereas, only 26% disagree that the
managers help them in understanding the performance gaps. The rest of 28% feel
neither way.

 E4 – out of 40 employees, 34% of them agree, whereas, 38% disagree that the
managers help them in understanding their performance gaps. 28% of the
employees feel neither way.

 E5 – out of 39 employees, 31% of them agree, whereas, 46% disagree that the
managers help them in understanding their performance gaps. 23% don’t feel either
way.

 E6 – out of 32 employees, 32% of them agree, whereas, 29% disagree that the
managers effectively explain them the performance gaps. 39% feel neither way.

 E7 – out of 39 employees, 51% of them agree, whereas, 31% disagree that the
managers effectively explain them the performance gaps. 18% feel neither way.

75 | P a g e
Q.11 HR helps me in understanding the PACE process

E1 - Q11 E2 - Q11

STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY AGREE

14% STRONGLY DISAGREE 9%
19% AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE AGREE
28% 14% 23%

DISAGREE
25%
NEITHER A/D NEITHER A/D
DISAGREE 25%
21% 24%

E4 - Q11
E3 - Q11
STRONGLY DISAGREE
STRONGLY AGREE
DISAGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE 15% 8%
8% 6%
14%
DISAGREE AGREE
28%
13%

AGREE
40%

NEITHER A/D
36%
NEITHER A/D
32%

E5 - Q11
E6 - Q11
STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
15% DISAGREE 9% 6%
STRONGLY DISAGREE 13%
28%

AGREE AGREE
26% 41%
DISAGREE
5%
NEITHER A/D
26%
NEITHER A/D
31%

E7 - Q11
STRONGLY DISAGREE
11% STRONGLY AGREE
18%

DISAGREE
24%

AGREE
18%

NEITHER A/D
29%

76 | P a g e
 E1 – out of 29 employees, 28% agree, whereas, 48% disagree that the HR helps
them in understanding the PACE process. 24% feel neither way.

 E2 – out of 57 employees, 32% agree, whereas, 44% disagree that the HR helps
them in understanding the PACE process. 23% feel neither way.

 E3 – out of 65 employees, 46% agree, whereas, 22% disagree that the HR helps
them in understanding the PACE process in better way. 38% feel neither way.

 E4 – out of 40 employees, 36% agree, whereas, 28% disagree that the HR helps
them in understanding the PACE process in better way. 36% feel neither way.

 E5 – out of 39 employees, 41% agree, whereas, 33% disagree that the HR helps
them in understanding the PACE process in better way. 26% feel neither way.

 E6 - out of 32 employees, 47% agree, whereas, 22% disagree that the HR helps
them in understanding the PACE process in better way. 31% feel neither way.

 E7 - out of 39 employees, 36% agree, whereas, 35% disagree that the HR helps
them in understanding the PACE process in better way. 29% feel neither way.

Q.12 my manger takes time to help each employee achieve their best.

E1 - Q12 E2 - Q12

STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY AGREE

10% STRONGLY DISAGREE 5%
18%
STRONGLY DISAGREE
24% AGREE
24%
DISAGREE
14%

AGREE
49%
DISAGREE NEITHER A/D
21%
21% NEITHER A/D
14%

77 | P a g e
 E3 - Q12 E4 - Q12
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE
12% 15% 15% 8%
DISAGREE
12%
DISAGREE AGREE
13% 28%

AGREE
NEITHER A/D
34%
26%
NEITHER A/D
36%

E5 - Q12 E6 - Q12
STRONGLY AGREE
5% STRONGLY AGREE
19%
AGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE
29% 29% 25%

DISAGREE
13%
AGREE
DISAGREE NEITHER A/D NEITHER A/D 28%
13% 24% 16%

E7 - Q12

STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 13%
21%

DISAGREE
10%
AGREE
33%

NEITHER A/D
23%

 E1 – out of 29 employees, 34% agree, whereas, 45% disagree that their managers
take time to help them achieve their best. 21% of them feel neither way.

 E2 – out of 57 employees, 54% agree, whereas, 32% disagree that their managers
take time to help them achieve their best. 14% of them feel neither way.

 E3 – out of 65 employees, 50% agree, whereas, 24% disagree that their managers
take time to help them achieve their best. 26% of them feel neither way.

78 | P a g e
 E4 – out of 40 employees, 36% agree, whereas, 28% disagree that their managers
take time to help them achieve their best. 36% of them feel neither way.

 E5 – out of 39 employees, 34% agree, whereas, 42% disagree that their managers
take time to help them achieve their best. 24% of them feel neither way.

 E6 – out of 32 employees, 47% agree, whereas, 37% disagree that their managers
take time to help them achieve their best. 16% of them feel neither way.

 E7 – out of 39 employees, 46% agree, whereas, 31% disagree that their managers
take time to help them achieve their best. 23% of them feel neither way.

Q.13 I set my KPA’s at the beginning of performance cycle.

E1 - Q13 E2 - Q13

STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE

10% 10% 14% 18%

DISAGREE DISAGREE
24% 18%

AGREE
41%
NEITHER A/D NEITHER A/D
14% 12% AGREE
39%

E3 - Q13
E4 - Q13
STRONGLY DISAGREE
DISAGREE 5% STRONGLY DISAGREE
DISAGREE 8%
8% STRONGLY AGREE 15%
17% STRONGLY AGREE
23%

NEITHER A/D
21%

NEITHER A/D
26%
AGREE AGREE
49% 28%

79 | P a g e
 E5 - Q13 E6 - Q13
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE
11% 13% 13%
STRONGLY AGREE
19%
DISAGREE DISAGREE
24% 19%

AGREE
37%
NEITHER A/D
16% NEITHER A/D
16% AGREE
34%

E7 - Q13

STRONGLY DISAGREE
13% STRONGLY AGREE
DISAGREE 21%
13%

NEITHER A/D
5%

AGREE
49%

 E1 – out of 29 employees, 52% agree, whereas, 34% disagree that the

employees set their KPA’s at the beginning of the performance cycle. The rest
24% feel neither way.

 E2 - out of 57 employees, 56% agree, whereas, 32% disagree that the employees
set their KPA’s at the beginning of the performance cycle. The rest 12% feel
neither way.

 E3 - out of 65 employees, 66% agree, whereas, 13% disagree that the employees
set their KPA’s at the beginning of the performance cycle. The rest 23% feel
neither way.

 E4 - out of 40 employees, 51% agree, whereas, 23% disagree that the employees
set their KPA’s at the beginning of the performance cycle. The rest 26% feel
neither way.

80 | P a g e
 E5 - out of 39 employees, 50% agree, whereas, 34% disagree that the employees
set their KPA’s at the beginning of the performance cycle. The rest 16% feel
neither way.

 E6 - out of 32 employees, 53% agree, whereas, 31% disagree that the employees
set their KPA’s at the beginning of the performance cycle. The rest 16% feel
neither way.

 E7 - out of 39 employees, 69% agree, whereas, 26% disagree that the employees
set their KPA’s at the beginning of the performance cycle. The rest 5% feel neither
way.

Q.14 my manger helps me understand that how my work contributes to

organization’s goals.

E1 - Q14
E2 - Q14
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
17% 17% 14% 14%

DISAGREE
25%
DISAGREE AGREE
24% 28%
AGREE
28%
NEITHER A/D
19%

NEITHER A/D
14%

E3 - Q14 E4 - Q14
DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
11% 6% 8%
DISAGREE 10%
STRONGLY AGREE 15%
20%

AGREE
36%

NEITHER A/D
NEITHER A/D
32% 31%
AGREE
31%

81 | P a g e
 E5 - Q14 E6 - Q14
STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
8% AGREE DISAGREE 9% 9%
21% 16%
STRONGLY DISAGREE
23%

AGREE
34%

DISAGREE
23% NEITHER A/D NEITHER A/D
26% 31%

E7 - Q14
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
10% 13%
DISAGREE
15%

AGREE
38%
NEITHER A/D
23%

 E1 – out of 29 employees, 45% agree, whereas, 41% disagree that their

managers help them in understanding how their work contributes to the
organization goals. The rest 14% feel neither way.

 E2 - out of 57 employees, 42% agree, whereas, 39% disagree that their

managers help them in understanding how their work contributes to the
organization goals. The rest 19% feel neither way.

 E3 - out of 65 employees, 51% agree, whereas, 17% disagree that their

managers help them in understanding how their work contributes to the
organization goals. The rest 32% feel neither way.

 E4 - out of 40 employees, 44% agree, whereas, 25% disagree that their

managers help them in understanding how their work contributes to the
organization goals. The rest 31% feel neither way.

82 | P a g e
  E5 - out of 39 employees, 28% agree, whereas, 46% disagree that their
managers help them in understanding how their work contributes to the
organization goals. The rest 26% feel neither way.

 E6 - out of 32 employees, 44% agree, whereas, 25% disagree that their

managers help them in understanding how their work contributes to the
organization goals. The rest 31% feel neither way.

 E7 - out of 39 employees, 52% agree, whereas, 25% disagree that their

managers help them in understanding how their work contributes to the organization
goals. The rest 23% feel neither way.

Q.15 HR provides regular training and reading material to help employees

understand PMS better

E1 - Q15
E2 - Q15
STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE 7%
STRONGLY DISAGREE 21% 18%
21% AGREE
DISAGREE 28%
4%
DISAGREE
16%
AGREE
14%

NEITHER A/D
NEITHER A/D 32%
39%

E3 - Q15 E4 - Q15
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
DISAGREE 11% 11% 10% 8%
DISAGREE
12% 15%

AGREE
36%

AGREE
37%

NEITHER A/D
NEITHER A/D 31%
29%

83 | P a g e
 E5 - Q15 E6 - Q15
STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
10% 3%
8% AGREE AGREE
21% 29%
STRONGLY DISAGREE
23%

DISAGREE
29%

DISAGREE NEITHER A/D

23% NEITHER A/D 29%
26%

E7 - Q15
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
DISAGREE
10% 13%
15%

AGREE
38%
NEITHER A/D
23%

 E1 – out of 29 employees, 36% agree, whereas, 25% disagree that HR provides

regular training and reading material to help them understand PMS better.

 E2 - out of 57 employees, 35% agree, whereas, 33% disagree that HR provides

regular training and reading material to help them understand PMS better.

 E3 - out of 65 employees, 48% agree, whereas, 23% disagree that HR provides

regular training and reading material to help them understand PMS better.

 E4 - out of 40 employees, 44% agree, whereas, 25% disagree that HR provides

regular training and reading material to help them understand PMS better.

 E5 - out of 39 employees, 28% agree, whereas, 46% disagree that HR provides

regular training and reading material to help them understand PMS better.
 E6 - out of 32 employees, 32% agree, whereas, 39% disagree that HR provides
regular training and reading material to help them understand PMS better.

 E7 - out of 39 employees, 52% agree, whereas, 25% disagree that HR provides

regular training and reading material to help them understand PMS better.

84 | P a g e
Q.16 My manager inspires me to higher levels of performance.

E2 - Q16
E1 - Q16
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE 9% 9%
14% 14% DISAGREE
19%

DISAGREE AGREE
25% 25%
AGREE
40%

NEITHER A/D
21% NEITHER A/D
23%

E3 - Q16 E4 - Q16
DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE
9% STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE
6%
12% STRONGLY AGREE
15% 18%

DISAGREE
18% AGREE
15%

AGREE
34%
NEITHER A/D
33%
NEITHER A/D
38%

E5 - Q16
E6 - Q16
STRONGLY AGREE
10% STRONGLY DISAGREE
9% STRONGLY AGREE
16%
STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREE
23% AGREE
23% 22%

AGREE
25%

NEITHER A/D NEITHER A/D

DISAGREE
15% 28%
28%

E7 - Q16
STRONGLY DISAGREE
DISAGREE 10% STRONGLY AGREE
13% 15%

NEITHER A/D
21%
AGREE
41%

 E1 – out of 29 employees, 39% agree and 39% also disagree that their managers
inspire them to higher level of performance. The rest 22% feel neither way.

85 | P a g e
 E2 - out of 57 employees, 49% agree and 28% also disagree that their managers
inspire them to higher level of performance. The rest 23% feel neither way.

 E3 - out of 65 employees, 46% agree and 15% also disagree that their managers
inspire them to higher level of performance. The rest 39% feel neither way.

 E4 - out of 40 employees, 34% agree and 33% also disagree that their managers
inspire them to higher level of performance. The rest 33% feel neither way.

 E5 - out of 39 employees, 33% agree and 51% also disagree that their managers
inspire them to higher level of performance. The rest 16% feel neither way.

 E6 - out of 32 employees, 41% agree and 31% also disagree that their managers
inspire them to higher level of performance. The rest 28% feel neither way.

 E7 - out of 39 employees, 56% agree and 23% also disagree that their managers
inspire them to higher level of performance. The rest 21% feel neither way.

Q.17 PACE form has a simple and practical format.

E1 - Q17 E2 - Q17
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
14% 12%
STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 21%
25%
DISAGREE
16%

AGREE
30%

AGREE
18%
DISAGREE NEITHER A/D
18% NEITHER A/D 28%
18%

E4 -Q17
E3 - Q17 STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 8%
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE 15%
8% 8% AGREE
DISAGREE 25%
20%

DISAGREE
20%

AGREE
41 %
NEITHER A/D
33%
NEITHER A/D
2 3%

86 | P a g e
 E5 - Q17 E6 - Q17
STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 10% 9%
15% 13%

DISAGREE AGREE
DISAGREE 28% 22%
18% AGREE
31%

NEITHER A/D NEITHER A/D

26% 28%

E7 - Q17
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
11% 11%

DISAGREE
24%

AGREE
32%

NEITHER A/D
24%

 E1 – out of 29 employees, 39% agree, whereas, 43% disagree that PACE form has
a simple and practical format. The rest 18% feel neither way.

 E2 - out of 57 employees, 42% agree, whereas, 30% disagree that PACE form has
a simple and practical format. The rest 28% feel neither way.

 E3 - out of 65 employees, 49% agree, whereas, 28% disagree that PACE form has
a simple and practical format. The rest 23% feel neither way.

 E4 - out of 40 employees, 32% agree, whereas, 35% disagree that PACE form has
a simple and practical format. The rest 33% feel neither way.

 E5 - out of 39 employees, 41% agree, whereas, 33% disagree that PACE form has
a simple and practical format. The rest 26% feel neither way.

 E6 - out of 32 employees, 35% agree, whereas, 37% disagree that PACE form has
a simple and practical format. The rest 28% feel neither way.

87 | P a g e
 E7 - out of 39 employees, 42% agree, whereas, 34% disagree that PACE form has
a simple and practical format. The rest 24% feel neither way.

Q.18 I am rewarded fairly for the contributions I make to the organization’s

success.

E1 - Q18 E2 - Q18
STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 14% STRONGLY DISAGREE 9%
21% 18%
AGREE
17% AGREE
28%

DISAGREE
18%

DISAGREE
24%
NEITHER A/D
24% NEITHER A/D
28%

E3 - Q18 E4 - Q18

STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY AGREE

STRONGLY DISAGREE 10%
11% 8% 15%

DISAGREE
19%

DISAGREE
AGREE 18% AGREE
34% 31%

NEITHER A/D NEITHER A/D

28% 26%

E5 - Q18 E6 - Q18
STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY AGREE 9%
STRONGLY DISAGREE 8% AGREE
18% STRONGLY DISAGREE 13%
19%

AGREE
31%

DISAGREE
26%
NEITHER A/D
18%
DISAGREE NEITHER A/D
31% 28%

88 | P a g e
 E7 - Q18

STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE

15% 15%

DISAGREE
15%

AGREE
NEITHER A/D 36%
18%

 E1 – out of 29 employees, 31% agree, whereas, 45% disagree that they are
rewarded fairly for the contributions they make towards the organization’s
success. The rest of 24% feel neither way.

 E2 - out of 57 employees, 37% agree, whereas, 35% disagree that they are
rewarded fairly for the contributions they make towards the organization’s
success. The rest of 28% feel neither way.

 E3 - out of 65 employees, 42% agree, whereas, 30% disagree that they are
rewarded fairly for the contributions they make towards the organization’s
success. The rest of 28% feel neither way.

 E4 - out of 40 employees, 41% agree, whereas, 33% disagree that they are
rewarded fairly for the contributions they make towards the organization’s
success. The rest of 26% feel neither way.

 E5 - out of 39 employees, 39% agree, whereas, 43% disagree that they are
rewarded fairly for the contributions they make towards the organization’s
success. The rest of 18% feel neither way.
 E6 - out of 32 employees, 22% agree, whereas, 50% disagree that they are
rewarded fairly for the contributions they make towards the organization’s
success. The rest of 28% feel neither way.

89 | P a g e
 E7 - out of 39 employees, 56% agree, whereas, 30% disagree that they are
rewarded fairly for the contributions they make towards the organization’s
success. The rest of 18% feel neither way.

Q.19 the performance assessment process helps me improve my performance

E1 - Q19 E2 - Q19

STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY AGREE

STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE 5%
10% 14%
17% AGREE
AGREE
17% 27%

DISAGREE
17%
DISAGREE
29%

NEITHER A/D
NEITHER A/D 25%
38%

E3 - Q19 E4 - Q19
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY AGREE
8% STRONGLY DISAGREE 10%
11% 15%
DISAGREE
17%

AGREE
DISAGREE 28%
20%

AGREE
41%

NEITHER A/D
NEITHER A/D 28%
23%

E5 - Q19
E6 - Q19
STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 8% STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
15% AGREE 16% 13%
23% AGREE
16%

DISAGREE
19%

DISAGREE
28%

NEITHER A/D NEITHER A/D

26% 38%

90 | P a g e
 E7 - Q19
STRONGLY DISAGREE
STRONGLY AGREE
8%
13%
DISAGREE
23%

AGREE
21%

NEITHER A/D
36%

 E1 – out of 29 employees, 28% of the employees agree, whereas, 34% of them

disagree that the performance assessment process at NTPC actually helps them in
improving the performance. The rest 38% don’t feel either way.

 E2 - out of 57employees, 32% of the employees agree, whereas, 43% of them

disagree that the performance assessment process at NTPC actually helps them in
improving the performance. The rest 25% don’t feel either way.

 E3 - out of 65 employees, 49% of the employees agree, whereas, 28% of them

disagree that the performance assessment process at NTPC actually helps them in
improving the performance. The rest 23% don’t feel either way.

 E4 - out of 40 employees, 37% of the employees agree, whereas, 35% of them

disagree that the performance assessment process at NTPC actually helps them in
improving the performance. The rest 28% don’t feel either way.

 E5 - out of 39 employees, 31% of the employees agree, whereas, 43% of them

disagree that the performance assessment process at NTPC actually helps them in
improving the performance. The rest 26% don’t feel either way.

 E6 - out of 32 employees, 28% of the employees agree, whereas, 35% of them

disagree that the performance assessment process at NTPC actually helps them in
improving the performance. The rest 37% don’t feel either way.

91 | P a g e
 E7 - out of 39 employees, 33% of the employees agree, whereas, 31% of them
disagree that the performance assessment process at NTPC actually helps them in
improving the performance. The rest 36% don’t feel either way.

Q.20 managers jointly set goals with subordinates to ensure proper cascading
of targets.

E1 - Q20 E2 - Q20

STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE

11% 14% STRONGLY AGREE
14% 16%
AGREE
18%
DISAGREE
16%

DISAGREE
29%

NEITHER A/D AGREE

NEITHER A/D 36%
29% 18%

E3 - Q20 E4 - Q20

STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE

9% 9% 10% 13%
DISAGREE
17%
AGREE
DISAGREE 18%
25%

AGREE
42%
NEITHER A/D
35%
NEITHER A/D
23%

E5 - Q20 E6 - Q20

STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY AGREE

15% 10% 9%
STRONGLY DISAGREE
22%
AGREE
26%

DISAGREE AGREE
DISAGREE 9% 34%
26%

NEITHER A/D
23%
NEITHER A/D
25%

92 | P a g e
 E7 - Q20
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
13% 13%

DISAGREE
18%

AGREE
38%
NEITHER A/D
18%

 E1 – out of 29 employees, 29% agree, whereas, 43% disagree that managers

jointly set goals with subordinates to ensure proper cascading of targets. The rest of
28% feel neither way.

 E2 - out of 57 employees, 52% agree, whereas, 30% disagree that managers jointly
set goals with subordinates to ensure proper cascading of targets. The rest of 18%
feel neither way

 E3 - out of 65 employees, 51% agree, whereas, 26% disagree that managers jointly
set goals with subordinates to ensure proper cascading of targets. The rest of 23%
feel neither way

 E4 - out of 40 employees, 30% agree, whereas, 35% disagree that managers jointly
set goals with subordinates to ensure proper cascading of targets. The rest of 35%
feel neither way

 E5 - out of 39 employees, 36% agree, whereas, 41% disagree that managers jointly
set goals with subordinates to ensure proper cascading of targets. The rest of 23%
feel neither way

 E6 - out of 32 employees, 44% agree, whereas, 31% disagree that managers jointly
set goals with subordinates to ensure proper cascading of targets. The rest of 25%
feel neither way.

93 | P a g e
 E7 - out of 39 employees, 51% agree, whereas, 31% disagree that managers jointly
set goals with subordinates to ensure proper cascading of targets. The rest of 18%
feel neither way.

Q.21 Individual’s career goals, and not only organization’s goals, are taken into
account while setting KPA’s.

E1 - Q21
E2 - Q21
STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 7% STRONGLY AGREE
14% AGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE 9%
24% 19%
AGREE
26%

DISAGREE
DISAGREE 14%
28%

NEITHER A/D NEITHER A/D

28% 32%

E3 - Q21 E4 - Q21
STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 8% STRONGLY DISAGREE 10%
17% 18%
AGREE
23%
AGREE
33%

DISAGREE DISAGREE
21% 21%

NEITHER A/D NEITHER A/D

21% 28%

E5- Q21
E6 - Q21
STRONGLY AGREE AGREE
5% 18%
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
13% 13%
STRONGLY DISAGREE
28%

AGREE
DISAGREE 23%
26%

NEITHER A/D
26%
NEITHER A/D
23%
DISAGREE
26%

94 | P a g e
 E7 - Q21
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
13% 13%

AGREE
DISAGREE 23%
26%

NEITHER A/D
26%

 E1 – out of 29 employees, 31% agree, whereas, 42% disagree that individual goals
are given equal importance just like organizational goals, while setting the KPA’s.
The rest 27% feel neither way.

 E2 - out of 57 employees, 35% agree, whereas, 33% disagree that individual goals
are given equal importance just like organizational goals, while setting the KPA’s.
The rest 32% feel neither way.

 E3 - out of 65 employees, 41% agree, whereas, 38% disagree that individual goals
are given equal importance just like organizational goals, while setting the KPA’s.
The rest 21% feel neither way.

 E4 - out of 40 employees, 33% agree, whereas, 39% disagree that individual goals
are given equal importance just like organizational goals, while setting the KPA’s.
the rest 28% feel neither way.

 E5 - out of 39 employees, 23% agree, whereas, 54% disagree that individual goals
are given equal importance just like organizational goals, while setting the KPA’s.
the rest 23% feel neither way.

 E6 - out of 32 employees, 36% agree, whereas, 39% disagree that individual goals
are given equal importance just like organizational goals, while setting the KPA’s.
the rest 25% feel neither way.

95 | P a g e
 E7 - out of 39 employees, 36% agree, whereas, 39% disagree that individual goals
are given equal importance just like organizational goals, while setting the KPA’s.
the rest 25% feel neither way.

Q.22 the system of Appeals has helped in making PACE process more
transparent.

E1 - Q22 E2 - Q22

STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY AGREE

STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE 7%
14% 16%
21%
DISAGREE
11% AGREE
32%

AGREE
24%

DISAGREE
21%
NEITHER A/D NEITHER A/D
21% 35%

E3 - Q22 E4 - Q22
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE
DISAGREE 9% STRONGLY AGREE
15% 13%
14% AGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE 13%
21%

DISAGREE
13%

AGREE
29%
NEITHER A/D
41%
NEITHER A/D
32%

E5 - Q22 E6 - Q22
STRONGLY AGREE STRONGLY AGREE AGREE
5% AGREE 3% 22%
23%
STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE
23% 31%

DISAGREE
DISAGREE 6% NEITHER A/D
NEITHER A/D 38%
26% 23%

96 | P a g e
 E7 - Q22
STRONGLY AGREE
8%
STRONGLY DISAGREE
26% AGREE
26%

DISAGREE
13%
NEITHER A/D
28%

 E1 – out of 29 employees, 38% agree, whereas, 42% disagree that system of

appeals has helped in making the PACE process more transparent. The rest 20%
don’t feel either way.
 E2 - out of 57 employees, 39% agree, whereas, 26% disagree that system of
appeals has helped in making the PACE process more transparent. The rest 35%
don’t feel either way.

 E3 - out of 65 employees, 45% agree, whereas, 23% disagree that system of

appeals has helped in making the PACE process more transparent. The rest 32%
don’t feel either way

 E4 - out of 40 employees, 26% agree, whereas, 33% disagree that system of

appeals has helped in making the PACE process more transparent. The rest 41%
don’t feel either way.

 E5 - out of 39 employees, 28% agree, whereas, 49% disagree that system of

appeals has helped in making the PACE process more transparent. The rest 23%
don’t feel either way.

 E6 - out of 32 employees, 25% agree, whereas, 37% disagree that system of

appeals has helped in making the PACE process more transparent. The rest 38%
don’t feel either way.

97 | P a g e
 E7 - out of 39 employees, 33% agree, whereas, 39% disagree that system of
appeals has helped in making the PACE process more transparent. The rest 28%
don’t feel either way.

Research Findings

After the study and analysis of PACE process at NTPC, the research findings on the
Topic are as follows:

1) Employee’s performance has a significant impact on his career advancements at

NTPC. The employees are rewarded fairly for the contributions they make to
success of the organization. But, some employees feel that career goals and
performance gaps are not considered while nominating them for the training
programs. (refer question wise analysis of : Q1,3,9,18,19)

2) Employee’s feel that individual goals are not given much importance as compared
to organizational goals while setting the KPA’s for the performance. (refer question
wise analysis of Q 21.)

3) Employees are not satisfied with the evaluation process in the PACE system. Many
employees have said that their PMC marks are not in line with their actual
performance, also they feel that regular documentation of the individual’s work,
which can help the appraiser in the appraisal of the performance of an individual.
This again effects their marks. (refer Q5, 7)

4) Manager’s at NTPC play a important role in the performance of their subordinates.

Employees agree that their superiors help them out in understanding the
performance gaps, they inspire the employees to higher levels of performance etc.
(refer : Q12, 14, 16)

5) Although most of the employees feel that the PACE form has a simple and a
practical format, some of them feel the HR doesn’t help them out with their queries
related to the system.

6) As it’s a public sector there is no much scope for offering the employees with
regular promotions, there is no scope for improvement in this area as there are
limited resources available with the government and the company itself.

98 | P a g e
Limitations:
The limitations which were faced by me during the research work were as follows:
 While undergoing the tests many Respondents tries to ignore the tests by not
giving the response for all the questions that has been given in the Questionnaire.

 Many respondents seem to be faking the answers or try to manipulate the

answers.

 The Questionnaire has been filled up only by the 300 employees not all the
employees have been covered up in the project as the sample – size.

 Most of the respondents feel it’s worthless and time consuming to fill up this
questionnaire.

 Making the employees to fill –up the Questionnaire is very difficult and tedious.

 The data scored or obtained can be ambiguous as most of the respondents seems
to be manipulating their answers or did not fill up the questionnaire seriously or
importantly.

 Scoring or Interpreting the results is difficult and Time – consuming.

99 | P a g e
 CHAPTER 5

SUGGESTIONS AND CONCLUSION

Suggestions/ Recommendations

The performance appraisal system of NTPC is of good quality. With the introduction of
new system, the E - PMS system is refined further. On the basis of the analysis of
responses and findings I have reached to some conclusions. So taking them into
consideration few steps may be considered to strengthen the performance appraisal
system.

 The system should be made more transparent. This can be achieved by creating
awareness among the employees regarding each and every aspect of the
appraisal process. They should be made aware about the standards and the
criterions for evaluation.

 The appraiser and appraisee should sit together and then the appraiser should
rate the appraisee for his performance and should state the reason for the same.
This will increase the level of transparency and the employee will feel satisfied as
he will have an opportunity to respond at that very moment itself.

 The general belief among employees is that the relations with the superior affect
the evaluation process. This is not good as this creates a sense of favoritism in
the organization. No doubt one should be in pleasing terms with the superior but
that should not affect the evaluation at all. For this the raters should always
consider the performance as the only measure for the evaluation.

 The raters should take note of the critical performance incidents of an individual
so that at the end of the year it should not be that only the recent performances
are given more weightage.

100 | P a g e
 Raters should consider the specific requirements of the people to do the job. They
should help them out by providing necessary skill set to do the job more
efficiently. They should set the goals as per the potential and caliber of the
individual.

 Proper and timely guidance should be provided to the employees working over
there by the reporting officer so that there is no hassle in the work and there are
no blunders in the work carried out by the employees.

 360 appraisal technique can also be implemented.

CONCLUSION
The PMS system is not merely a appraisal program or a control program, it’s more of a
development program which helps the employees in developing themselves according
to their career needs as well as the organizational needs.

NTPC is a PSU that has an excellent HR department and it’s the market leader in the
power sector. The employees are satisfied with their jobs and even though it’s a
government organization, the work culture and ethics are outstanding where slacking
off are frowned upon.

So the employees feel the need to prove themselves and in the process update their
technical and analytical skills so as to improve themselves which in the process helps
the organization too. On the basis of the results of the PACE evaluation the training
needs of the employees is also taken care of.

101 | P a g e
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Books referred to:

 C B Gupta: “Human resource management ”, Sultan Chand and Sons

Publications
 Aswathappa “human resource and personal management”, Tata Mc.Graw Hill
Publications.

 “T.N.Chabbra (2002), “Human Resource Management”, Dhanpat Rai & Co. (P)
Ltd.

Websites:

www.ntpceoc.co.in (HR manual)

www.hrworld.com

Other references:

Presentations and articles and readings on the PMS of the organization given by the
project guide at NTPC.

102 | P a g e
APPENDICES :

PACE QUESTIONNAIRE

The following questionnaire has been designed to study the PACE process and the
factors effecting it. Please give your free and candid opinion. Your answers are
important and shall be treated with utmost confidentiality. Please rate the following
statements on 1 – 5 scale, “1” being “strongly disagree”, by putting a tick mark in the
appropriate cell.

Respondent details:

Grade……………………….. Department…………………………

Neither
Q.n Statement Strongly Disagree agree Agree Strongly
o disagree nor agree
disagree
1 The ability to deliver performance 1 2 3 4 5
commitments strongly influences
career advancements at this
organization.
2 My manager gives me regular 1 2 3 4 5
feedback so there are no
surprises at the end of the
performance cycle.
3 Career goals and performance 1 2 3 4 5
gaps are considered while
nominating employees to any
training program.
4 HR is able to effectively answer 1 2 3 4 5
system related queries put
forward by me.
5 There is regular documentation 1 2 3 4 5
of individual’s work which can be
easily referred to during annual
performance appraisal.
6 My manager explains me the 1 2 3 4 5
reasons for change in marks, if
any, after normalization.
7 I feel PMC marks are in line with 1 2 3 4 5
my actual performance.
8 My manager directly addresses 1 2 3 4 5
issues of poor performance.
9 My performance has a significant 1 2 3 4 5
impact on my rewards.

103 | P a g e
10 My manger is able to effectively 1 2 3 4 5
explain my performance gaps to
me.
11 HR helps me in understanding 1 2 3 4 5
the PACE process.
12 My manager takes time to help 1 2 3 4 5
each employee achieve their
best.
13 I set my KPA’s at the beginning 1 2 3 4 5
of performance cycle.
14 My manager helps me in 1 2 3 4 5
understand, how my work
contributes to organizational
goals.
15 HR provides regular training and 1 2 3 4 5
reading material to help
employees understand PMS
better.
16 My manager inspires me to 1 2 3 4 5
higher levels of performance.
17 PACE form has a simple and 1 2 3 4 5
practical format.
18 I am rewarded fairly to the 1 2 3 4 5
contributions I make to the
organization’s success
19 The performance assessment 1 2 3 4 5
process helps me improve my
performance.
20 Managers jointly set goals with 1 2 3 4 5
subordinates to ensure proper
cascading of targets.
21 Individual’s career goals, and not 1 2 3 4 5
only organization’s goals, are
taken into account while setting
KPA’s.
22 The system of Appeals has 1 2 3 4 5
helped in making PACE process
more transaprent

104 | P a g e