Professional Documents
Culture Documents
DEVELOPMENT OF
A PERFORMANCE
MANAGEMENT
SYSTEM
10
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION AND DESIGN OF THE STUDY
INTRODUCTION
If you don‟t measure it, people will know you‟re not serious about delivering it.
1
D.D.Elash, “Managing Peak Performance”, In: “Performance Management Concepts,
Matrices and Cases”, Raju, P. V. L. [Editor], ICFAI Books, ICFAI University Press, 2003,
p.10.
2.Promod Kumar, “Changing the Ground Rules”, Human Capital, 1998(Jan), p.24.
11
today are in a hurry and want to make it faster than ever before and also faster
than every one else around not only in their immediate environment, but also in
4
the entire industry. Performance descriptions and predictions play important
5
roles in all personnel decisions.
recognition.
6
performance expectations, and role of performance feedback. In modern
1. Pradeep Kumar, “Faster, Farther and by Friday”, Human Capital, 1998(Jan), p.28.
2. F.J.Landy and J.L.Farr, “Performance Rating”, Psychological Bulletin, 87(1), 1980 p.72.
3.R. B. Bretz Jr., G.T. Milcovitch, and W. Read, “The Current State of Performance
12
performance. When the performance is managed effectively, what else is there
and makes them inspiring for the employees to adopt and own. The leaders
also encourage, motivate, guide the employees to perform. They review the
winners out of all their employees, while achieving the objectives of the
organisation.
this way, the manager needs systems and processes to set goals and targets,
The leader also needs to have the skills to motivate, get the feedback, listen
and observe the performance and efforts and intervene at the right time to
make or help make corrections. He plays the role of a planner and coach and
ensures performance and results, while taking the team along and keeping
them motivated.
13
Performance
behaviour and tasks, or defining the results that are to be achieved, or defining
7
the situations in which these should happen or, all of the above.
„what we do„, but by „what we produce‟. It is the outcome and the results of
spoilage, rejection rates, achieving sales quota and the like which can be
8
accordance with standards set in these quantitative terms.
10.A. M. Mohrman, Jr.,et al., Designing Performance Appraisal Systems: Aligning Appraisal
and Organisational Realities”, Jossey- Bass, Oxford, 1990, p.110.
11. V.P.Michael, Human Resources Management and Human Relations, Himalaya Publishing
14
Standards are the desired or intended levels of achievement that can be
is rarely straightforward. If they are set too high, then failure to perform to
standard will demotivate people and if set too low, poor performance becomes
intended performance.
that performance standards are set not only for measures of volume of work
but also for the quality factors attached to the activities concerned. In moving
behind the old cliché, „if you aren‟t measuring it, you aren‟t managing it‟.
the employees against the traits on a ratio scale ranging from unsatisfactory
15
degree of subjectivity and errors. The newer method shifted the emphasis
away from inferred traits and focused more on observed behaviour of results
which required a kind of contact between the superior and subordinate where
its aspects and in all parts of the organisation and its processes. Organisations
satisfaction.
component based appraisal systems. In some of the small and medium sized
appraising performance. Appraisal reports are given by senior officers to the top
management. At the time of promotion decisions, the top management takes the
16
At the other extreme, there are organisations that have performance
appraisals that aim simultaneously at different objectives like data generation for
personnel decisions like rewards, promotions, job rotations, transfers and creation
and recognized, at the concept level, this is not one of the aspects typical
more likely to buy into the performance agreement if he or she has had a chance
9
to contribute to the setting of performance objectives. Performance management
is not really used as an integral system of management, but used as a tool to decide
increments and promotions. Even when it is used as such, it is not used in its true
process.
9 L. Branham. “Keeping the People who Keep You in Business: 24 Ways To Hang On To
Your Most Valuable Talent”, American Management Association, New York, 2001, p.55.
17
International Development and Engineering Associates Ltd (IDEA-the
management system, which will tune in the employees with its strategic direction
and facilitate the employees to perform better. The organisation went through a
process of identifying the strengths and weaknesses of the system, examined the
performance appraisal systems in a few other organizations and the industry trends
itself.
end of the performance period with the sole objective of rewarding or punishing
the employees. They required a tool to justify the rewards or punishments and
performance appraisals were used as one. It was more of a post-mortem at the end
perceptions, since the assessments were not based on clearly drawn key result
18
information was not possible due to the same reasons. Whereas, the modern
the over all objective of helping individuals to perform better and the organisation
was a year-end process and essentially a format. Employees were required to fill in
the format and the supervisors were expected to „assess‟ the performance of the
specific scale. So it did had all the typical disadvantages of an appraisal system
and was essentially viewed as a ritual, which needed to be complied with, before
and process, rather than a staff-driven rating scale and forms. The IDEA‟s
It ought to have clarity about the success for individuals, teams, units, and the
company, instead of fastening with the ambiguity and inconsistency around „what
it takes to make it‟ in different units, at different levels for different managers. The
19
most important problem in IDEA was that the performance appraisal system did
not meet its own stated objectives. The real issues in the performance
measurement are: what to measure, how to measure and how to use the results of
performance.
Performance Appraisal System was carried out (as case studies), to have more
insights into the process and nature of the appraisal systems, towards development
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
20
This section presents discussions of research that deal with the aspects
concerning the call for evolving a performance management system. This section
Performance Facets
contextually oriented facets. It has raised the question of whether the attributes that
individual job tasks) could be different from those that lead some applicants to
excel in other aspects of job performance (e.g. working well with others).
10
Day and Silverman (1989) in their study on “Personality and job
11
Motowidlo and Van Scotter (1994) tested the distinction between task and
contextual performance using supervisory ratings of over 400 Air Force mechanics
10
D.V.Day and S.B.Silverman, “Personality and Job Performance: Evidence of Incremental
Validity”, Personnel Psychology, 42(1), 1989, pp.25-36.
11 S.J.Motowidlo and J.R.Van Scotter, “Evidence that Task Performance should be Distinguished
from Contextual Performance”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(4), 1994, pp.75-80.
21
in their study “Evidence that task performance should be distinguished from
contextual performance” showed that both task and contextual performance factors
12
Hunt (1996) in his study “Generic work behavior: an investigation into
from over l8, 000 employees in 42 different entry-level jobs in retail settings,
13
Arvey et.al. (1997) in their study “Individual differences in emotionality
12 S.Hunt, “Generic Work Behavior: An Investigation into the Dimensions of Entry-level, hourly
Job Performance”, Personnel Psychology, 49(1), 1996, pp.51-83.
22
individual differences in emotionality might also predict contextual aspects of
performance.
14
Cascio (1995) in his study “Whither industrial and organizational
Psychology in a changing world of work?” argued that the nature of work was
changing and were the different definitions of what jobs and job performance were
all about. There appeared to be a general move toward more flexible definitions of
work roles and jobs, where jobs were viewed as dynamic and more
interchangeable and were defined with less precision. The focus was on the
personal competencies required to perform various work roles and jobs rather than
a narrow review of specific tasks and duties inherent in fixed jobs and work roles.
15
Bommer et.al. (1995) in their meta-analytic study “On the
14
W.F.Cascio, “Whither Industrial and Organizational Psychology in a Changing World of
Work?” American Psychology, 50(11), 1995, pp.928 –939.
15
W.H.Bommer, J.L. Johnson, G.A. Rich, P.M. Podsakoff, and S.B. MacKenzie, “On the
Interchangeability of Objective and Subjective Measures of Employee Performance: A Meta-
Analysis”, Personnel Psychology, 48(3), 1995, pp.587-605.
23
subjective measures of employee performance. Using meta-analytic techniques to
corrected mean correlation between the two types of measures was .39 (.32
observed), suggesting that the two measures were significantly and moderately
related but not totally substitutable. Subsequent moderator analyses revealed that
when objective and subjective measures tapped the same construct, their
convergent validity improved substantially and that the measures were reasonably
Sources of Rating
16
Hedge and Borman (1995) in their study “Changing conceptions and
that different rater types (i.e. peers, self, subordinates) would capture different and
16
J.W.Hedge, W.C.Borman, Changing Conceptions and Practices in Performance
Appraisal”, In: The Changing Nature of Work, A Howard [Editor], San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass, 1995, pp.451-481.
24
might be used for measurement purposes, and that attitudes toward appraisal
17
Viswesvaran et.al. (1996) in their meta analytic study “Comparative
ratings appeared to have higher interrater reliability than peer ratings (r = 0.52 for
supervisors, r = 0.42 for peers) and that intrarater estimates of reliability (e.g.
that the use of intrarater reliability estimates to correct for measurement error
would lead to potentially biased research results and recommended the use of
18
Schrader and Steiner (1996) in their study “Common comparison
17
C.Viswesvaran , D.S.Ones, F.L.Schmidt, “Comparative Analysis of the Reliability of Job
Performance Ratings”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(5): 1996, pp.557-574.
25
performance ratings”, reported the results of a study where they investigated the
ratings. They hypothesized that ratings in which employees were evaluated against
clear and specific objective standards would differ from those in which such
objective criteria were not specified and the standards are ambiguous. Results
supported this proposition. However, ratings made when using internal, relative, or
multiple standards of comparison were not very different from those made under
the more objective conditions both in terms of mean differences and supervisor-
self agreement. Thus, a conclusion that employee standards that involved objective
and specific standards against which to evaluate individuals were the one "best"
method seemed premature given the results of this study. A potential problem with
precise and objective measurement, a condition that did not generalize many
19
Saavedra and Kwun (1993) in their study “Peer evaluation in self-
19
R.Saavedra and S.K.Kwun, “Peer Evaluation in Self-managing Work Groups”, Journal of
Applied Psychology, 78(3), 1993, pp.450-462.
26
20
Campbell and Lee (1988) in their study “Self appraisal in performance
were best suited for developmental rather than evaluative purposes and that self
21
Huber, et.al. (1987) in their study “Judgment by Heuristics: effects of
judgments.
22
Steiner and Rain (1989) in their study “Immediate and delayed primacy
and recency effects in performance evaluations”, reported that the order in which
20
D.J.Campbell and C.Lee, “Self Appraisal in Performance Evaluation: Development Versus
Evaluation”, Academy of Management Journal, 13,1988, pp.302-314.
21
V.L.Huber, M.A.Neale and G.B.Norht Craft, “Judgment by Heuristics: Effects of Rate and
Rater Characteristics and Performance Standards or Performance: Related Judgments”,
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, v: 40, 1987,pp.149 – 169.
22
D.D.Steiner and J.S.Rain, “Immediate and Delayed Primacy and Recency Effects in
Performance Evaluations”, Journal of Applied Psychology, v: 74, 1989, pp.136 –142.
27
good and bad performances were observed affected performance ratings and that
23
Mount and Thompson (1987) in their study “Cognitive categorization and
incongruent with prior expectations. Results indicated that when behaviour was
24
Hagen (1987) in his longitudinal study “Effects of Prior Expectations on
categorize information.
25
Hozlowski and Kirsch (1987) in their study “The systematic distortion of
23
M.K.Mount and D.E.Thompson, “Cognitive Categorization and Quality of Performance
Ratings”, Journal of Applied Psychology, v: 72, 1987, pp.240 – 246.
26
Smither and Reilly (1987) in their study “True Inter co-relation among
27
DeNisi, and Peters (1996) in their study “Organization of Information in
Memory and Performance appraisal process: Evidence from the field”, reported
that structured diary keeping and recall increased ratees positive reactions , recall
and accuracy of rating level and discrimination between and within raters.
28
Robbins and DeNisi (1994) in their study “A closer look at interpersonal
showed (In a well-designed laboratory study) how affect toward ratees can
26
J.W.Smither, R.R.Reilly, “True Inter Co-relation Among Job Components, Time Delay in
Rating, and Rater Intelligence as Determinants of Accuracy in Performance Ratings”,
Organizational Behaviors and Human Decision Process, v: 40, 1987, pp.369 – 391.
27
A.S.DeNisi and L.H.Peters, “Organization of Information in Memory and Performance
Appraisal Process: Evidence from the Field”, Journal of Applied Psychology, v.81, 1996,
pp.717-737.
performs his or her job and is therefore more likely to represent a valid piece of
29
Murphy and Balzer (1989) in their study “Rater error and rating
accuracy”, concluded that correlation between rating errors and accuracy was very
near zero and therefore error measures were not good indicators of rating accuracy.
Therefore raters with large observed correlations may accurately rate performance
30
Schoorman (1988) in his study “Escalation bias in performance
decisions”, reported that supervisors who had a say in the hiring decisions and
performance ratings, whereas those who participated in hiring but viewed the
29
K.R.Murphy, and W.K.Balzer, “Rater Error and Rating Accuracy”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, 74,1989, pp.619-624.
32
Ferris et.al. (1994) in their article “Subordinate influence and the
performance. They tested their model using a sample of 95 staff nurses and 28
nurse supervisors and found a good fit; supervisors' affect toward subordinates
33
Kane (1994) in his study “A model of volitional rating behavior”,
developed a model of the determinants of rater error, hypothesizing that such error
into ratings.
showed that individuals who reviewed but did not rate the previous performance
previous performance
Raters Training
35
Woehr (1994) in his study “Understanding frame-of-reference training:
the impact of training on the recall of performance information”, stated that the
primary goal of Frame of Reference Training (FOR) is to train raters to share and
average, and poor performers for each behavior dimensions. It helped raters
34
H.C.Sumer and P.A.Knight, “Assimilation and Contrast Effects in Performance Ratings:
Effects of Rating the Previous Performance on Rating Subsequent Performance”, Journal of
Applied Psychology, 81(4), 1996, pp.436-342.
favourability.
37
Hedge and Kavanagh (1998) in their study “Improving the accuracy of
reduced leniency and halo but also reduced accuracy. They concluded that rater
38
Athey and McIntyre (1987) in their study “Effects of rater training on
36
D.T.Stamoulis, and N.M.A.Hauenstein, “Rater Training and Rating Accuracy: Training for
Dimensional Accuracy Vs Training for Ratee Differentiation”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, v.78, 1993, pp.994-1003.
37
J.W.Hedge and M.J.Kavanagh, “Improving the Accuracy of Performance Evaluations,
Comparison of three Methods of Performance Appraiser Training”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, v.73, 1998, pp.68-73.
38T.R Athey, and R.M McIntyre, “Effects of Rater Training on Rater Accuracy: Levels-of-
Process in Theory and Social Facilitation Theory Perspectives”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, v.72, 1987, pp.567-572.
33
39
Stamoulis and Hauenstein (1993) in their study “Rater training and rating
40
Lathan and Mashall (1982) in their study “The effects of Self –Set ,
41
Latham et.al . (1988) in thier study “Resolving scientific disputes by the
Latham Dispute regarding participation in Goal Setting”, stated that goals assigned
39
D.T.Stamoulis and N.M.A.Hauenstein, “Rater Training and Rating Accuracy: Training for
Dimensional Accuracy Vs Training for Ratee Differentiation”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, v.78, 1993, pp.994-1003.
40 G.P. Latham, and H.A.Marshall, “The Effects of Self –Set, Participatively Set and Assigned
Goals on Performance of Government Employees”, Personnel Psychology, v: 35, 1982, pp.
399-404.
41G.P.Latham, M.Erez and E.Locke, “Resolving Scientific Disputes by the Joint Designs of
Crucial Experiments by the Antagonists, Applications to the Erez-Latham Dispute Regarding
Participation in Goal Setting”, Journal of Applied Psychology, v: 73, 1988, pp.753-772.
34
42
Latham and Yukl (1976) in their study on “Effects of Assigned and
participation in goal setting resulted in setting more difficult goals: this, in turn
increased performance.
43
Locke (1991) in his study on “The motivation sequence, the motivation hub,
and the motivation core” stated that goal Motivation increased participation in Goal
setting , commitment to goals , and belief that the goals could be achieved .
44
Latham (2002) on his study on “The Reciprocal Effects of Science on
Practice, The insights from the Practice and science of Goal Setting”, stated that
45
Ilgen et.al. (1979) in their study on “Consequences of Individual
42
G.P.Latham, and G.A.Yukl, “Effects of Assigned and Participative Goal Setting on
Performance and Job Satisfaction”, Journal of Applied Psychology, v: 61,1976, pp.166-171.
43
E.A.Locke, “The Motivation Sequence, The Motivation Hub, and the Motivation Core”,
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, v: 50, 1991, pp.288-299.
44 G.Latham, “The Reciprocal Effects of Science on Practice, The Insights from the Practice and
Science of Goal Setting”, Canadian Psychology, v: 42,2002, pp.1-11.
appraisals more positively when such feedback was provided under conditions of
accountability or when they were aware of the identity of the subordinates. Under
information.
47
Dorfman et.al. (1986) in their study “Performance appraisal behaviors:
employee satisfaction with the process but did not influence future performance.
48
Pearce and Porter (1986) in their study “Employee responses to formal
46
D.Antonioni, “The Effects of Feedback Accountability on Upward Appraisal Ratings”,
Personnel Psychology, v: 47, 1994, pp.349-356.
appraisal system.
49
Russell and Goode (1988) in their study “An analysis of managers‟
who were satisfied with the performance appraisal in general, might not be
satisfied with the feedback provided. Rather, satisfaction with feedback could be a
Based on the research review the researcher critically reviewed the various
appraisal system, and gained better insight for evolving a new performance
management system.
To over come the problem of rating errors and to improve the accuracy of
the rater (self, Peer by superiors) a participatory approach in „goal setting‟ should
be carried out, that is both the raters (appraisers) and the ratees (appraisees) should
participatively set the goals, which helps in reducing the poor definition of
accuracy and at the same time, the employees are communicated with their targets
49 J.S.Russell and D.L.Goode, “An Analysis of Managers‟ Reaction to their Own Performance
Appraisal Feedback”, Journal of Applied Psychology, v: 73, 1988, pp.63-67.
37
by goals that are to be achieved. All the above, it leads in setting goals that are
The rating error can also be significantly reduced by training the raters on
system and helps in identification of various issues on which adequate care should
between the objective (task) measures and subjective (contextual) measures. The
individual. Hence, the need to include both the objective and subjective measures
highly impacts the effectiveness of the ratings also. Ambiguous subjective and
objective measures lead to various rating errors which undermines the accuracy of
the rating thus affecting the „normalcy‟ (normal distribution) principle of a good
performance against system. More over the rating accuracy is also influenced by
38
the raters influence, memory, affect towards the appraisees (leniency and severity
in rating might take place) and the poor definitions of accuracies as such. The
existing studies dealt with various factors and attributes that influenced the
nature. The existing studies on the performance appraisal facilitated the researcher
systems and helped the researcher in framing guidelines (what to do and what not
management system.
management system.
reasons:
3. To find the major dimensions that influences the appraisees‟ and the
appraisers‟ satisfaction on the Performance Appraisal System.
4. To find out the level of complexity that the appraisers‟ have in appraising
the appraisees under various evaluation dimensions(critical factors and
attributes) and
5. To evolve, implement and review a new Performance Management System
for IDEA.
HYPOTHESES
The researcher has framed the following hypotheses in relation to the
Method
study. It begins with separate sub-sections that detail the study design, data
Study Design
The research was based on the “Participatory Action Research”.
paradigm‟ science. These new assumptions underline the importance of social and
collective processes in reaching conclusions about „what is the case‟, and what the
implications are for change deemed useful by those whose problematic situation
led to the research in the first place. Essentially Participatory Action Research is a
research, which involves all relevant parties in actively examining together current
action (which they experience as problematic) in order to change and improve it.
qualitative and quantitative methods is used. This study is also a mix of qualitative
and quantitative methods. The following are the stages through which the research
progressed:
42
Stage One
Stage Two
Stage Three
Based on the results obtained from the survey and from the inferences
Stage Four
43
Suggestions and constructive criticisms were obtained from the IDEA‟s
Stage Five
Stage Six
being the Human Resource Manager for IDEA has established a good rapport with
the employees. This made the employees very cooperative for the survey. Two
groups of employees were studied: the appraisees and the appraisers. Three
hundred and two (302) employees were surveyed for the study, out of which 260
44
employees were of the appraisee group and 42 employees were of the appraiser
group.
The appraisees should have worked for a minimum of two years in IDEA to
be selected as a sample for the study. Three hundred and sixty-six employees
constituted the appraisee group and out of them three hundred and ten employees
(appraisees) were considered for the study and the remaining fifty six employees
were not considered for the study as they did not satisfy the condition. Employees
formed the middle and senior management levels. There were forty-two
Instrument Design
system was used for the study to solicit the employees‟ response. The survey
for the appraisees and eight major constructs consisting of twenty-nine (24+5)
statements for the appraisers. Except the „evaluation‟ construct for the appraisers
the other construct measures were the same for both the groups. (Vide Annexure J,
was used for all the statements to solicit the response. Based on literature reviews
the following constructs were considered to design the instrument to measure the
goals to be achieved; their involvement in the goal setting process; and on the
nature of their work (whether the work is focused on the goals that had to be
achieved)
This construct measured the employees‟ opinion on the time taken for the
system.
Training
Career Development
role in charting their career development and also collected the opinions on the
mentoring system.
System
46
This construct measured the employees‟ opinions on the „transparency of
Validity
This was intended to collect the employees‟ need for a new performance
appraisal system.
Satisfaction
appraisal system.
Evaluation Factors
namely job knowledge, planning and organizing, team spirit, communication, and
Regression Analysis: The general formula for regression analysis is written below
where Y is the dependent variable, and β (beta) represents the slopes of the
independent variables, labeled X. „X‟ represents the factors and „e‟ (epsilon)
Regression analysis was used to identity the major factors which influenced
the satisfaction of the appraisees and the appraisers on the performance appraisal
system. Satisfaction was treated as „dependent‟ variable and the constructs goal
validity, and the need for new appraisal system were treated as independent
variables.
dependent problem with the sum of squares associated with the independent
freedom, the hypothesis is accepted. This test was performed to find if there is any
dependency between the personal profiles of the employees‟ (age and experience)
and the various dimensions of performance appraisal system. This test was
performed for both the appraisees‟ and appraisers‟ group, considering their
personal profiles.
48
Independent Samples t-Test: The „independent-Samples t test‟ tests the
significance of the difference between two sample means. The t-test is used to
compare the values of the means from two samples and test whether it is likely
that the samples are from populations having different mean values. This test was
used to compare the opinion of the appraisees‟ and the appraisers‟ on the seven
Mean Ranking: The mean is the most common measure of central tendency. The
mean is computed by summing up all the scores in the distribution (X) and
dividing that sum by the total number of scores (N). Mean ranking is a method
used to compare the aggregate scores. It is the simplest form of ranking, where
objects are arranged in some order and the rank of an object is its position in the
order. This ranking method was used to rank the evaluation factors (in the order of
most difficult to least difficult) that the appraisers perceive to have difficulty in
CHAPTERISATION PLAN
comprehensive than performance appraisal and discusses the need and importance
49
of an appropriate performance management system and includes detailed research
This chapter also dwells on the concept of participatory action research and the
its scope.
management process and evolution in India, the stage, and the various phases
the researcher studies also the performance appraisal system, which existed in the
subject organisation before the research process and makes a neutral analysis and
evaluation of the system. It also includes the leaders‟ opinions on the Performance
evolving a new system. There needs to be a participative process so that it gets the
best inputs from various quarters where it has a stake and also will have the
ownership amongst the stakeholders. This chapter describes also the process flow
management process and explains the various steps involved, factors on which the
openness of the system, tracking and using of performance information, the issue
of normal distribution of ratings, the issue of effort versus results while looking at
performance and the like. This dwells also on the review of the new performance
system of IDEA.
This final chapter describes the learning gained while formulating as well
improve his performance. It is not just a process which evaluates the employee
performance and links it with reward or punishment. It should also help the
employee to identify the areas where he has performed well (and how) to draw
action plans to consolidate and sustain his good performance. It should also help in
identifying the areas where he has not performed well (and why) to draw action
process.
performance, (with its inaccuracies) linked with reward and punishment. It was
introspect the evaluation results and draw positive action plans. This was more of
an exception. And most of the times, it ended either with celebration (when the
results were positive) or bitterness (when the results were not positive).
(as case studies) revealed that the effectiveness of any Performance Appraisal
feedback process, and the extent of the objectivity with reference to figures and
facts. The leaders of IDEA (survey) also concurred with the case findings. In
addition to this, they opined that, addressing the issue of normal distribution,
communication of decision process, and resolving the issue of relative ranking are
over, the IDEA employees‟ survey (appraisees and appraisers) revealed that the
employees were not satisfied on their organization‟s old appraisal system. The
performance appraisal system. Both the appraisees and the appraisers have agreed
facets. The other major findings was that , „career development‟ , „training need
identification‟ and „validity‟ were the major factors that influenced the
5. Performance Tracking
6. Performance Evaluation.
system amongst it management team and the employees. The system that was
in an organisation is a journey and not a destination. The factors, which affect the
effectiveness of the systems, are many and dynamic. The expectations from the
employees are also very high and fast changing.So it is a continuous process of
Every year, every six months, it should be bettered and at every time the
perfection. It should also have the courage to completely change the system or go
expectations.
back and expectations from this vital process of Performance Management and
particularly the appraisees feed back. To make that realty, a structured feed back
process was established and implemented in IDEA to elicit employee views on the
following factors.
assesees.
This system was implemented and the results were used for consideration to
fine-tune the system in the next year. This system should serve for a few years to
rediscovered. IDEA need to take this forward and keep improving and
organisation. A good system helps it making this backbone stronger and enduring.
But the spirit behind the use of this system alone gives the life to the organisation.
To Order Full/Complete PhD Thesis
1 Thesis (Qualitative/Quantitative Study with SPSS) & PPT with Turnitin Plagiarism
Report (<10% Plagiarism)
In Just Rs. 45000 INR*
Contact@