Skill Matrix and Competency Mapping Report

PROJECT REPORT ON
SKILL MATRIX AND COMPETENCY MAPPING
SUBMITTED TO
Textron India Pvt. Ltd.

Global Village, RVCE Post, Mylasandra, Off Mysore Road, Bangalore -560 059, Karnataka, India.
&
BIRLA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGY
GREATER NOIDA
BY JOJAN V. JOSE 09DM050 2010
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the Project Report on SKILL MATRIX AND COMPETENCY MAPPING
Is a bonafide work and it is submitted to BIRLA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGY, GREATER NOIDA BY
JOJAN V. JOSE 09DM050

During the academic year 2009-2010 Under the guidance of
Dr. MANOSI CHAUDHURI (Project Mentor)
BIRLA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGY, GREATER NOIDA 2009-2011

2
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to take this moment to express my deepest gratitude to the group of people without whose help and support I would not have been able to complete this project. I wish to begin by thanking the management at Textron India Pvt. Ltd., especially Mr. N.R. Mohanty (President, Textron India) and Mr. Suraj Chettri (Director, Human Resources) for providing me this great opportunity to work in their esteemed organization. I would also like to thank them for the help, support and guidance that they have provided me with during the course of my project work. I would also like to deeply thank my industry mentor Mr. Surjith Surendran (HR Generalist, Textron) for his valuable insights and constant guidance and support. I express my deep sense of gratitude to the management of BIMTECH for imparting me with the required help. I would like to specially thank my college mentor Dr. Manosi Chaudhuri, for her guidelines, support and motivation which have been a great help to me for this project. A special thanks to all the employees of Textron India Pvt. Ltd., for providing me with the data that I required for the making of the project. I would also like to thank all those people who spent their valuable time in this project, and all those people who directly or indirectly contributed in making this project a success.
Contents
1. Executive Summary 2. Company Profile 2. Introduction 3. Objective 4. Project Scope 5. Theory & Terminology a. Skill Matrix b. Competency Map c. Other Designs for Skill Matrix 6. Research Methodology a. Problem Definition b. Research design c. Sampling d. Data Collection Techniques 7. Research Procedure 8. Observations & Results 9. Recommendations 10. Limitations 11. Conclusion 12. References
4
06 07 17 18 18 20 20 27 30 38 38 38 39 39 40 45 46 47 48 49
13. Bibliography 14. Annexure 1- Sample Soft Skill Matrices 15. Annexure 2 Sample Technical Skill Matrices 16. Annexure 3- Sample Competency Maps
50 51 60 69
Executive Summary
The theme of this project can be stated as Training Need Analysis. The major objectives of the project were: Finding out the skill and competency levels of the employees of Textron India Pvt. Ltd. Comparing with the benchmarks and recording the data for further use. Analysing training needs as per the recorded data.
In order to achieve the foresaid objectives, the tools those were devised and used for each team were: 1. Skill Matrix 2. Competency Maps The skill matrix was developed in consultation with the team leaders and rated by all the members of the team. While the competency map was developed and rated with the help of the skill matrix. The major findings from the exercise were as follows (the findings are for all the 19 teams which were included in the exercise): The complete list of the skills that the organization as a whole possesses i.e. the skills inventory of the organization. The skill levels of each individual employee for each individual skill that is being used by him/her. The pin pointed areas/employees all through the organization that need to be focussed upon for training purposes. The employees who are capable of training other employees and the skills that they specialize in. The competency levels of the organization, the excess or the lack of it with detailed information. The commonalities of the skills among various teams so that these teams could be clubbed together for the training purposes. The exercise covered 135 employees and provided the organization with a tool to plan their training programmes with. In this competitive scenario, giving the right kind of training to the right employees does not only improve the efficiency of the organization but also cuts down cost considerably.
6
Company Profile
Textron was founded in 1923, and has grown into a network of businesses with total revenues of $14.2 billion, and approximately 37,000 employees with facilities and presence in 29 countries, serving a diverse and global customer base. Headquartered in Providence, Rhode Island, U.S.A., Textron is ranked 173rd on the FORTUNE 500 list of largest U.S. companies. Organizationally, Textron consists of numerous subsidiaries and operating divisions, which are responsible for the day-to-day operation of their businesses ("Textron businesses") Textron Inc. started as a small textile company in 1923, when 27-year-old Royal Little founded the Special Yarns Corporation in Boston, Massachusetts.
Textron Businesses: Textron consists of numerous subsidiaries and operating units. These businesses are known by familiar brand names, including Bell Helicopter, Cessna Aircraft, Greenlee and E-Z-GO, among others. Every Textron business is intensely committed to delivering innovative, market-leading solutions that ensure the success of our customers. Textron continues to expand leadership positions in five core business segments: Bell Cessna Textron Industrial Systems Textron information Systems Textron Finance.
Figure showing the various BUs of Textron:
Textron India GTC
Bell 1 Helicopter s E Z - Go 2
Cessna Aircraft
Textron Industrial
Textron Systems
Textron Financial
Greenlee
Jacobsen
Kautex
AAI Corporation
Lycoming Engines
Overwatch
Defence systems
Marine & Land Systems
Bell Helicopter:
With more than 34,000 helicopters delivered to customers around the globe, Bell is teaming with Boeing to introduce leading edge tilt rotor technology into aviation via the military V-22 Osprey. And they are translating this exciting technology into civilian aircraft such as the BA609. In addition to these platforms, Bell manufactures a variety of models of military and civil aircraft, such as our latest - the Bell 429.
Cessna Aircraft: Cessna Aircraft Company is the worlds largest manufacturer of general aviation airplanes. Headquartered in Wichita, Kansas, U.S.A, Cessna designs and manufacturers business jets, utility turboprops and single engine piston aircraft. Some 192,000 Cessna airplanes have been delivered to nearly every country in the world since the company was originally established in 1927.
Citation Aircraft: Cessna's Citation business aviation leadership spans 40 years. The company has delivered more than 6,000 Cessna Citations, making it the largest fleet of business jets in the world. Today, Cessna offers the most comprehensive line of business jets in the industry including the Citation Mustang, Citation CJ1+, Citation CJ2+, Citation CJ3, Citation CJ4, Citation XLS+, Citation Sovereign and Citation X.
9
Propeller Aircraft: In its 80-year history, Cessna has established the standard in the production of single and multi-engine propeller aircraft by delivering more than 154,000 single engine pistons, 16,000 multi-engines and 1,900 Caravan turboprop aircraft. The propeller aircraft produced today are the 162 Skycatcher, 172 Skyhawk, 172S Skyhawk SP, 182 Skylane, T182 Turbo Skylane, 206 Stationair, T206 Turbo Stationair, Corvalis and Corvalis TT and three models of the Caravan single-engine turboprop utility aircraft.
Textron Industrial: 1) E-Z-GO: E-Z-GO is the world's largest manufacturer of golf cars and utility vehicles, including the number-one selling golf car in the world. E-Z-GO golf cars are found on more golf courses around the world than any other brand.
E-Z-Go also produces dependable turf maintenance vehicles, heavy-duty industrial burden carriers, versatile shuttle personnel carriers and rugged ST trail vehicles.
10
2) Jacobsen: Jacobsen manufactures a full range of turf maintenance equipment and utility vehicles for golf courses, sports fields, turf grass production and the large estate lawn care markets.
11
3) Greenlee: A leader in wire and cable installation systems, Greenlee is the premier source for professional wire and cable installation tools and test instruments. The product lines include hole making, wire and cable termination, electrical and communications testing and measurement, bending and pulling, and hydraulic tools
4) Kautex: Kautex is a leading global supplier of plastic fuel systems, including plastic and metal fuel assemblies. In fact, we pioneered the development of plastic fuel tanks. Kautexs Clear Vision System, which provides automotive windshield and headlamp cleaning, is rapidly becoming the leading brand in the global market. Kautex also manufactures blow-moulded ducting and fluid reservoirs, cooling pipes and acoustic components.
12
Textron Systems: Textron Systems, comprises of five businesses including subsidiaries and operating divisions, is known for its unmanned aircraft systems, advanced marine craft, armoured vehicles, intelligent battlefield and surveillance systems, intelligence software solutions, precision smart weapons, piston engines, test and training systems, and total life cycle sustainment services. In 2009, these businesses generated 18 percent of Textron's total revenues. This segment has manufacturing facilities in 3 countries, and approximately 5,600 employees, of which 2 percent are based outside the United States.
1) AAI Corporation: AAIs innovative aerospace and defence technologies include unmanned aircraft systems, training and simulation systems, automated aerospace test and maintenance equipment, armament systems, aviation ground support equipment, and logistical, engineering, and supply chain services. 2) Lycoming Engines: Currently, more than half the world's general aviation fleet, both rotary and fixed wing, is powered by Lycoming piston engines. Lycoming produces the most complete line of horizontally opposed, air cooled four, six, and eight cylinder aircraft engines available, with power ranging from 100 to 400 HP.
13
3) Overwatch: Overwatch is the leading provider of commercial, off-the-shelf image exploitation and geospatial analysis software tools, and a world-class provider of multi-source intelligence framework solutions for the warfighter, first responder and counterterrorism analysts.
4) Textron Defence Systems: Textron Defence Systems develops and manufactures state-of-the-art smart weapons; airborne and ground-based sensors and surveillance systems; and protection systems for the defence, aerospace and homeland security communities 5) Textron Marine & Land Systems: Textron Marine & Land Systems is a world leader in the design, production and support of advanced marine craft, light armoured combat vehicles, turrets and related subsystems.
Textron Financial: Textron Financial is a diversified commercial finance company that provides financing programs for products manufactured by its parent company; Textron Inc. Current specialties include Aviation Finance and Golf Equipment Finance. The company also manages a portfolio of receivables which originated in various businesses, including Asset-Based Lending, Distribution Finance, Golf Mortgage Finance, Resort Finance and Structured Capital.
14
VISION AND STRATEGY: Strategy: Textron strategy is to create superior shareholder value by building world-class competencies in: Enterprise Management - building, deploying and leveraging world-class operating capabilities through a focus on customers, people and processes Portfolio Management - identifying, selecting, acquiring and integrating the right mix of businesses that will drive higher performance while benefiting from our Enterprise Management capabilities.]
Vision: Textron's vision is to become the premier multi-industry company, recognized for our network of powerful brands, world-class enterprise processes and talented people. Textron continues to grow as an industry leader with strong brands such as Bell Helicopter, Cessna Aircraft, Kautex, Lycoming, E-Z-GO, Jacobsen and Greenlee, among others. Textron Six Sigma: Textron have adopted a disciplined, data-driven approach to problem-solving and performance improvement. In addition to the traditional Six Sigma elements of Variation Reduction and Design for Six Sigma, Textron's approach includes the discipline of Lean Manufacturing - most commonly known through the Toyota Production System. This unique combination of all three disciplines makes Textron Six Sigma a more comprehensive, continuous improvement program than those with similar names implemented by other companies. Supply Chain Management: Textron are building competitive advantage by addressing all aspects of the supply chain from raw materials to after-market service. Across the enterprise, they are leveraging their purchasing, increasing their level of global sourcing from low-cost regions, and optimizing their manufacturing footprint. Textron is also focused on building strong talent and material
15
savings processes as well as driving a broader implementation of the Lean systems, processes, and tools of Textron Six Sigma to achieve more dramatic improvement within our manufacturing operations. Shared Services Textron has internal shared service organizations to assist their businesses at a lower cost and with greater speed and efficiency than a traditional decentralized model. These shared services include Human Resources, IT and Finance, all of which are offering the benefit of common services and resources across our diverse businesses. CULTURE AND VALUES: A Culture of Continual Improvement Textron has transformed itself in recent years by applying Textron Six Sigma methods and Lean processes to move closer to their goal of becoming the premier multi-industry company. They use consistent processes and methods at their businesses around the globe so no matter where you are in the world, youll be speaking the same language as your colleagues. Much of the innovation at Textron comes about through partnering and teamwork. Project teams are made up of individuals from various functions or business units throughout Textron who bring their skills together to achieve results. A Vision of Inclusion Textron actively recruits diverse individuals who bring rich experience, skill, talent, perspective and culture to the company. The culture and values are rooted in the belief that the success of the whole begins with the contributions of each individual. "We need to maintain a culture that supports a balanced cross-section of men and women from around the world. People have to want to come here and stay here, and they have to feel good about it. They have to feel safe. We are fully committed to building an inclusive, respectful culture so Textron can remain a strong, viable global company." Scott Donnelly President and Chief Executive Officer
16
Introduction
In this age of cut throat competition, companies around the world are looking for that one thing that could give them the edge. And over the period of time they have come to realise that the advantage that they were looking for are their employees. The human factor in companies is way beyond important now as the companies have come to realise that a fighting fit work force with the correct amount of motivation would do the wonders that could not even be done by plain miracles. This project deals with this factor of the corporate world. To keep the work force in the best shape possible the keywords that come into play are Training and Development. It is a critical requirement to train ones employees according to the demands of the job and also according to the demands of the market and customers. But only with the correct knowledge of where the employees stand in terms of their skills, can any organization decide upon what training needs to be imparted to the employees. This is where Skill Matrix and Competency Mapping comes into the picture. Skill matrix in the most basic terms defines the skills and skill levels of each employee, as per his/her perception and also as per the supervisor /team leader /managers perception. While competency mapping deals with a pre defined set of competencies called Lominger Competencies which it relates and links to the skill matrix ratings, so as to find out how good the employees are. These exercises are not meant to rank employees or for compensation purposes. In a nutshell, this is not an exact exercise as performance appraisal. As in performance appraisal there is a more in depth analysis at 180, 270 or 360 degrees. But in this case, all that is being done is a compilation of the ratings in order to have a base on which to plan and schedule the training programs for a whole year. The analysis done in this project is majorly manual. The idea again being finding out areas of weakness and strength in each of the departments according to the bench mark levels set as per the discussions with the supervisor /team leader /manager. The analysed sheets are colour coded so that they can work as a tool for many purposes. Also the competency map is also made in a manner such that it can be used as it is to help plan.
17
Objectives
The theme of the project is Training Need Analysis, based on an exhaustive compilation and analysis of employee skill levels. It is an essential exercise for the organization as it needs to be aware of the competency levels of the employees, so that it can train and develop them, thus improving the Organizational Competency Levels as a whole. This is vital for any organization that intends to survive and stay above the intense competition that exists in the industry today. The various objectives of the project are enlisted below: 1. To create a list of skills required in the various business units and for different job descriptions. 2. To understand the managers perspective of the employee skill level and performance. 3. To understand the employees own perspective of the skills that he/she possesses. 4. To identify the various points where there is a certain need of training. 5. To use the Skill Matrix to map as many competencies as possible for the business units.
Project Scope
This project is an important one when looked at from the Organizations perspective. That is because at any given time, the motto of the organization as concerned with the employees is generally that they become more and more skilled and competent so that they can contribute better to the organizations growth and sustenance. This project gives the organization a lot of concrete data regarding the employee skill levels which can be further used to plan the training content for the employees. Regarding the area that is covered by the project it is as follows: The project was performed for all the employees of Textron India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore. The employees were divided into 19 separate teams as per their area of work.
18
The two main matrix that are to be covered for all are the soft skills matrix and the technical skills matrix The competency map would cover 12 of the Lominger competencies that can be related to the organization and the skills mentioned as in the soft skills matrix. Other than these, 3 other general competencies are also mapped according to the records of the organization.
19
Theory and Terminology

This section is majorly divided into two categories which explain the topics given below in detail with samples: 1. Skill Matrix 2. Competency Map
Skill Matrix
The skill matrix is a tool for determining a lot of skill related aspects of the organization and its employees. The skill matrix can be used to identify the following: The skills required for working in any particular team or position. Identify the Skill Inventory of the Organization The level of skills (Ratings) The Required/ Preferred level of skills The combination of skills that could be formed (Competencies) The points where skill improvement is required The people who could impart training on certain specific skills (Experts)
The skill matrix can be designed in various ways as per the requirement of the organization and the results that are expected out of the matrix. This specific matrix is designed to scale each employee on the various skills that are chosen as per the requirement of Textron India Pvt. Ltd. The X-Axis of the matrix contains the names of the employees of a particular team while the Y-Axis contains the names of the skills. There are two separate kinds of skill matrix that are used in this project: - the Soft Skill Matrix and the Technical (Hard) Skill Matrix. The Skills mentioned on both of these kinds vary. Samples of these skill matrices are given below:
20
S.NO.
Rating
EMP.NO.
Written Oral Presentation Listening Telephone Meeting Management Behavior Flexibility People Perception Leadership Group Process Persistence Negotiation/Conflict Management Team Player Persuasiveness / Influence Stress Mgmt. Innovation / Creativity Adaptability Energy Initiative Professional Development Personal Development Time Management Integrity Planning Follow up Problem Analysis Project Management Decisiveness Judgment Organizational Sensitivity/Perception Delegation
Employee Development
Performance Coaching Performance Management Participative Management
Cultural Perception
SOFT SKILL MATRIX (SAMPLE)
21
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 EMPLOYEE 1 EMPLOYEE 2 EMPLOYEE 3 EMPLOYEE 4 EMPLOYEE 5 EMPLOYEE 6 EMPLOYEE 7 EMPLOYEE 8 EMPLOYEE 9
4 Proficient
5 Excellent( Trainer)
Weak
Average
Good
Benchmark
SAMPLE
SKILL MATRIX
NAME
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Communication Interpersonal Personal / Motivational Administrative
SOFT SKILL NAMES
RATINGS TO BE FOLLOWED
BENCHMARK RATINGS FOR EACH SKILL
EMPLOYEE NAMES (SPECIFIC TEAMS)
SPACE FOR PROVIDING RATINGS
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Managerial 3 3
S.NO.
Rating
EMP.NO.
Automotive Sheet metal Hydraulic Casting & Machining GD&T Tol Stake-up Linear Analysis Non-Linear Analysis Weldments ECO View / e Edit ECO Closing Oracle 11i View Oracle 11i Exporting Data Management Adobe Illustrator Adobe Frame Maker Product Knowledge Authoring Skill Web Development
SPACE FOR PROVIDING RATINGS
Unigraphics NX-6 Surface Modeling Parametric Modeling User Defined Function UG Routings UG Customization MS Excel MS Power Point MS Project Plan Team center application TCe Customization
TECHNICAL (HARD) SKILL MATRIX- (SAMPLE)
22
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 EMPLOYEE 1 EMPLOYEE 2 EMPLOYEE 3 EMPLOYEE 4 EMPLOYEE 5 EMPLOYEE 6 EMPLOYEE 7 EMPLOYEE 8 EMPLOYEE 9
4 Expert (Trainer)
No Knowledge
Just Aware/Novice
Fully Competent
Benchmark
SAMPLE
TECH SKILL MATRIX
Capable With Assistance
NAME
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
RATINGS TO BE FOLLOWED
TECHNICAL SKILL NAMES
EMPLOYEE NAMES (SPECIFIC TEAMS)
BENCHMARK RATINGS FOR EACH SKILL
3 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 2
The skills names used in the technical skill matrix vary for each team and are mainly populated by discussing with the Team Leaders for each specific team. While the soft skills matrix used has a common set of skills for all the teams. These skills are mainly divided into five types:
1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Communication Interpersonal Personal/Motivational Administrative Managerial
The meanings of the terminology used for the soft skills are given below:
Communication Skills Written The capability of the individual to clearly communicate via any written mode of communication like letter, memo, emails etc. This mainly refers to the clarity, correctness and effectiveness of the communication. Oral- The capability of the individual to clearly communicate via oral mode of communication like discussion, lecture etc. This mainly refers to the clarity, correctness and effectiveness of the communication. Presentation- The capability of the individual to clearly present his/her thoughts, opinions and ideas to another person or group of people. This mainly refers to the clarity, correctness and effectiveness of the communication. Listening- The capability of the individual to listen, grasp and understand whatever is spoken to him/her. The ability to recall the same when needed with correctness and completeness also gives an insight into the listening effectiveness. Telephone The capability of the individual to communicate clearly, effectively and correctly via a telephone. Meeting Management The capability of the individual to plan, inform and conduct a meeting. This involves all the aspects of a meeting like location, atmosphere, agenda, and involvement. The individual should be capable enough to bring together the right people at the right time to discuss and bring out results in a focussed and efficient manner.
23
Interpersonal Skills Behaviour Flexibility- The capability of the individual to change his/her behaviour according to the situations and circumstance to bring out a favourable result or solution. Especially needed when dealing with other employees. People Perception- This refers to the level of understanding that the individual has regarding the people he/she might be working with or might be in acquaintance with. The understanding of how others think, behave and act is a part of this skill itself and is an integral part for team building or leading a team. Leadership- The capability of the individual to lead a certain group of people to achieve a desired result or goal. This skill deals with empowering, guiding, motivating and controlling the team so as to get a combined effort towards goal attainment. Group Process- The capability of the individual to work in and as a part of a group. This skill mainly refers to the cohesiveness or abrasiveness that might be created by the individual and the effect of the same on the group. Persistence- The capability of the individual to have and impart a never dying attitude to all around. The skill means to identify the resolute character that the individual might possess. Negotiation/Conflict Management- The capability of the individual to handle a conflict situation. This is the most important interpersonal skill and thus is more weighted. The individual must have the presence of mind and the clarity of thought and words in order to calm down a nasty situation and bring the wheels back in control. Team Player- The capability of the individual to get along with the team and work as an integral part of it for the benefit of the whole team. This measures the spirit that an individual brings to the team. Persuasiveness / Influence- The capability of the individual to persuade and influence the other members of the team, department or the organization. The image and authority that an individual can build up in front of the other employees is a critical factor for this as it directly influences how others perceive the individual.
24
Personal / Motivational Skills Stress Management- The capability of the individual to keep his/her cool in a stressful situation and not let it affect the quality or the quantity of work that is being accomplished. This is directly linked to the decision making skills as well as the mind should not be subdued by the stress while taking critical decisions. Innovation / Creativity- The capability of the individual to bring forth new and varied ideas which could be used directly or indirectly for the betterment of the organization, its processes, people or customer. Adaptability - The capability of the individual to quickly get in line with the circumstances as they are and then yield out of it the best results possible. The individual should have the physical and mental flexibility in order to be able to adapt to the conditions and work in them. Energy- The capability of the individual at all times to keep a good energy level which would keep him/her going strong and also would motivate the people that surround as well. The individual should not bring in disinterest, boredom, lethargy or any such negative energy attitudes to the work place as it could affect others as well. Initiative- The capability of the individual to take the first step in any issues that might require him/her to do so. This could be a new venture, a stand against incorrect procedures or practices, or any such activities. Professional Development- The capability of the individual to constantly improve his/her works efficiency, quality and scope. The individual should always strive to better self in the profession that he/she might be pursuing. Personal Development- The capability of the individual to constantly improve his/her self as a person. This deals with discipline, concern, values etc. The individual should not only grow as a professional but should also try to improve as a person. Time Management- The capability of the individual to make the most efficient and optimum use of the time that is allotted to him/her. Wasting time or slogging without results is a negative to this skill. The individual should be capable of planning and executing in strict accordance to schedules. Integrity- The capability of the individual to adhere to a strict moral and ethical code. The individual should be unbiased and a steadfast follower of values at the work place.
25
Administrative Skills Planning- The capability of the individual to understand the on goings and plan the future courses of actions accordingly. The individual should be capable of covering all aspects of the issue while planning. Follow up- The capability of the individual to keep tracking the progress of any activity and push through the bottle necks that might hinder the process. Problem Analysis- The capability of the individual to understand the problem in its completeness. The individual must be able to see the bigger picture while he/she should also give attention to minor nuances and details.
Project Management- The capability of the individual to plan, organize, execute and monitor the on goings of a complete project. This would include man, machine, material and money. Decisiveness- The capability of the individual to quickly understand the situation at hand and take a decision based on logic and experience. The quality of the decision is of great importance as it is the deciding factor. Judgement- The capability of the individual to judge the situation at hand correctly so as to come down to a quality decision. Organizational Sensitivity/Perception- The capability of the individual to understand the organization and its working in the complete sense. The individual should be clear about the organizations vision, mission, goal, values and culture. He/she should also be very clear about the role that he/she plays and the importance of his/her actions to the organization as a whole.
Managerial Skills Delegation- The capability of the individual to successfully allot the correct work to the correct people so as to bring up the efficiency of the team and the organization as a whole. Employee Development- The capability of the individual to develop his/her subordinates professionally and personally in order to strengthen the team and also develop the employees as assets. Performance Coaching- The capability of the individual especially the team leaders or managers (mentors) to guide their subordinates in improving their performance.
26
Performance Management- The capability of the individual to manage the performance of their subordinates in all aspects. This deals not only with improving the skills, but also correcting mistakes, planning goals etc. Participative Management- The capability of the individual to get into the team that he/she leads and manage them being one of them and not as their leader. This skill improves the level of the trust that the employees have in the manager and thus the manager is able to keep the team motivated. Cultural Perception- The capability of the individual to understand all the culture based issues and situations that could arise in his/her team and be prepared to prevent it or face it. The manager should have the understanding of different cultures and their ways and beliefs, in order to successfully be able to acquire this skill.
Competency Map
Competency can be defined as a group of skills taken together to achieve a desired task. In this project the competencies used are taken from the Lomingers set of competencies (119 defined competencies). There are 13 such competencies and 2 general competencies. The exercise has been performed for all the teams and the competencies used are based on the soft skill matrices, except the 2 general competencies which have been mapped using company employee records. The competencies are mapped according to a legend prepared after discussion with the mentors which is given further ahead. According to that legend the skills are segregated and averaged out to give a competency rating. Then the competency rating is compared according to the scale given below:
RATING SCHEME USED

Average rating of all the skills included Rating Given 0 to <1.5 1.5 to <2.5 2.5 to <3.5 3.5 to <4.5 Weak Average Good Proficient 4.5 - 5 Expert
27
The legend used for mapping the competencies is given below:

Cultural Perception Participative Management Performance Management Performance Coaching Employee Development Delegation Organizational Sensitivity / Perception Judgement Decisiveness Project Management Problem Analysis Follow up Planning Integrity Time Management Personal Development Professional Development Initiative Energy Adaptability Innovation / Creativity Stress Mgmt. Persuasiveness / Influence Team Player Negotiation/Conflict Management Persistence Group Process Leadership People Perception Behaviour Flexibility Meeting Management Telephone Listening Presentation Oral Written Technical Skill Matrix / Employee Records
1 TECHNICAL / PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION
10 FUNCTIONAL / TECHNICAL SKILLS
2 WORK HISTORY / REQUIREMENTS
COMPETENCY
5 DEALING WITH AMBIGUITY
12 ORGANIZATIONAL AGILITY
3 COMMUNICATION SKILLS
7 CONFLICT MANAGEMENT
13 PEER RELATIONSHIPS
11 INTEGRITY / TRUST
14 PERSONAL LEARNING
6 BUSINESS ACUMEN
4 ACTION ORIENTED
8 CREATIVITY
9 CUSTOMER FOCUS
Sr No
28
15 PLANNING
The General and Lominger Competencies that are used in this project are defined below: Technical/ Professional Education- This competency is mapped according to the employee records of qualification levels and the company requirements. Work History/ Requirements- This competency is mapped according to the employee records of work experience levels and the company requirements. Communication Skills- This competency deals with all modes of communication i.e. written, oral, listening, presentation etc. Action Oriented- This competency defines the focus of the individual towards his/her actions and the goals that need to be achieved. Dealing with Ambiguity- This competency defines the capability of the individual to deal with ambiguous situations with clarity and presence of mind. Business Acumen- This competency deals with the levels of knowledge possessed by the individual regarding the various different aspects of the business. Conflict Management- This competency covers the capability of the individual to deal calmly and cautiously with conflict situations to bring out a solution and good results. Creativity- This competency defines how an individual is able to bring in new ideas and concepts into the work place and also implement it with success. Customer Focus- This competency deals with the ways and means in which the individual is able to keep the customer satisfied. Functional / Technical Skills- This competency includes all the skills covered in the Technical skill matrix. Integrity / Trust- This competency covers the factors that decide the integrity of an individual and the levels of trust that he/she enjoys among peers and others. Organizational Agility- This competency is about the level of energy and alertness that an individual possesses to go through the tasks with ease. Peer Relationships- This covers all the aspects of the relationship that an individual enjoys with his/her peers in the organization. Personal Learning- The ability of an individual to constantly improve self. Planning- The ability of the individual to plan with completeness and clarity.
29
Other Designs for Skill Matrix

A skill matrix is a tool which is not predefined in a hard and fast manner. It is a flexible tool and can be designed for use in specific purposes. The skill matrix that has been used in this research is the basic Employee Vs Skills Matrix as shown below:
Skill 10
Skill 11
Skill 12
Skill 13
Skill 14
Skill 15
Skill 16
Skill 17
NAME
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Emp A Emp B Emp C Emp D Emp E Emp F Emp G Emp H Emp I

But this is not the only way in which a skill matrix can be designed. A few examples of how the skill matrix could be designed in other manners are covered in this section. The major types of designs that have been covered here are:
Skill comparison matrix for teams using similar kinds of skills Skill comparison matrix for the same team but at different times/ time intervals 360 degree ratings for a far more accurate employee skills assessment Skill comparisons for employees based on achievements
There could be many more ways in which one could design the matrix and it is purely organization specific. The organizations needs and what it expects out of the exercise are the factors which directly influence the design of the skill matrix. The above mentioned designs have been thought of using such organizational needs only.
30
Skill 18
Skill 1
Skill 2
Skill 3
Skill 4
Skill 5
Skill 6
Skill 7
Skill 8
Skill 9
S.NO.
Now we could look at the designs in a little more detail. The sample templates which give a clearer idea as to what the results would look like are given along with each design and description.
Skill comparison matrix for teams using similar kinds of skills

So far we had only seen the skill matrix which would compare the skills with reference to each individual employee. Now for example for a common set of skills which is used for all the teams across the organization a comparing chart could be prepared which would give a clearer idea as to which team stands where. Horizontal Axis - This axis holds all the Skill Names which are common to the teams and thus can be used to compare the teams Vertical Axis - This axis holds all the Team Names which are to be compared. Benefits of such a matrix: Concise report as to where each team stands Pin points the areas to be worked upon for each team The ratings can be done via a team meeting, so during the brainstorming the team itself clears out where it stands and thus its an eye opener Areas of strengths of each team is highlighted (Can be used for bringing up other teams) Areas of weakness of each team is highlighted (Can be worked upon by the team, and help can be sought from other teams which are better)
31
Sample template:
SKILL COMPARISON FOR TEAMS USING SIMILAR SKILLS
KNOWLEDGE
Modelling
Analysis
Skill 10 Skill 11 Skill 12
Softwares
Skill 13 Skill 14 Skill 15 Skill 16 Skill 17 Skill 18
Skill 1
Skill 2
Skill 3
Skill 4
Skill 5
Skill 6
Skill 7
Skill 8
TEAM NAME
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
TEAM A TEAM B TEAM C TEAM D TEAM E TEAM F TEAM G TEAM H TEAM I
Skill comparison matrix for the same employee/team but at different times/ time intervals
We have now seen the comparison of employees and skills, and also teams and skills. Now if we assume that an organization is a continuously learning one and needs to keep a constant tab on the progress of the employees. This could be true for smaller growing organizations which need to grow fast and strong but also have lesser number of employees so the task is not that tedious or exhausting. Thus a comparison chart could be prepared for each employee based on the improvements over a period of time. It could be monthly, quarterly or half yearly and could use more extensive rating scales. Horizontal Axis - This axis holds all the Skill Names which are the points on which the employee will be rated all through. Vertical Axis - This axis holds all the Time periods of comparison.
32
Skill 9
S.NO.
Benefits of such a matrix: It helps in following up of the skill updates It shows whether the employee/team is improving, stagnant or becoming worse Tests could be used for the exact ratings which would remove all bias and the by products of office politics. The employee/team will be motivated to continuously work on improving his/her/their skills as its a constant rating process and is being kept for the record. Would help in the final performance appraisal process as a reference if prepared and recorded accurately. Sample template:
SKILL COMPARISON FOR THE SAME EMPLOYEE AT DIFFERENT TIME INTERVALS

MATRIX FOR Employee A
KNOWLEDGE
Skill 1 Skill 2 Skill 3 Skill 4
S.NO.
Modelling
Analysis
Skill 10 Skill 11 Skill 12 Skill 8 Skill 9
Softwares
TIME PERIOD
MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER JANUARY FEBRUARY
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
360 degree ratings for a far more accurate employee skills assessment
This idea was actually suggested by one of the employees of Textron India Pvt. Ltd., while the ratings were being collected. It is a very time consuming exercise with a lot of scope of
33
mistakes being committed. But if done accurately, the quality of ratings that could be generated will be very high. The rating of each employee for each other team member will be taken, rather than just the team leader ratings as done in this research. That is why its called the 360 degree rating scheme. All the data will be then consolidated for the teams specifically and the final result would yield a massive analysed collection of the skills inventory, with a fairly accurate assessment of the skill levels. Horizontal Axis - This axis holds all the Skill Names which are the points on which the employee will be rated all through. Vertical Axis - This axis holds all the Employee Names that belong to the same team, but in each template the person who is rating the other members will be listed first. A special template needs to be prepared for each employee as such. Benefits of such a matrix: Its far more exhaustive research The quality of the outputs is much better The analysis will provide further more details to the managers to work upon Could also point out the employee psychologies to an extent If used properly, could also define the employee relations for the specific teams. Could become a powerful reference for the performance appraisal process if executed and recorded accurately. Could be also used to find out which teams bond better and which dont, thus relate efficiency directly to team cohesion.
34
Sample templates:
360 DEGREE RATINGS FOR MORE ACCURATE SKILL MATRIX

Employee-A's ratings for self and all other team members
Skill 1
S.NO.
KNOWLEDGE
Modelling
Analysis
Softwares
Skill 13 Skill 14 Skill 15 Skill 16 Skill 17 Skill 17 Skill 17 Skill 18 Skill 18 Skill 18
TEAM NAME
EMPLOYEE-A (Self) EMPLOYEE-B EMPLOYEE-C
1 2 3

Employee-B's ratings for self and all other team members
Skill 1
S.NO.
KNOWLEDGE
Modelling
Analysis
Softwares
TEAM NAME
EMPLOYEE-B (Self) EMPLOYEE-A EMPLOYEE-C
1 2 3

Employee-C's ratings for self and all other team members
Skill 1
S.NO.
KNOWLEDGE
Modelling
Analysis
Softwares
Skill 13 Skill 14
TEAM NAME
EMPLOYEE-C (Self) EMPLOYEE-A EMPLOYEE-B
1 2 3
35
Skill comparisons for employees based on achievements

We have till now used mainly Skill matrices based on two axes. This matrix though has two separate items on the vertical axis which makes it even more concise and sharp. The achievements used in this could be different levels that could be achieved for each skill in the organization. Or these could be awards and recognitions that would be given by the organization or any external agency for a particular skill. Horizontal Axis 1. The outer shell of the axis contains the skill names that each employee needs to be rated on. 2. The inner shell contains the names of the employees, repeated over for each skill that the outer shell contains. Vertical Axis - This axis holds all the Achievements Levels which are to be connected to the skill sets. If need be the achievements can be changed for each skill. Benefits of such a matrix: Clearer picture as the ratings is linked to achievements No chance of bias or favouritism The chart is categorised into skills so easy to interpret and analyse the employee skill levels. The achievements could be in the form of awards, recognitions, targets, numbers etc. Thus it gives a flexibility to the chart The chart could be used to compare employees and also plan the future course of action for each employee based on each skill set as the skills are categorised as shown in the sample template
36
A very strong tool with solid foundation of facts and records for the performance appraisal process. Could be used as a concise evidence book for each decision of the appraisal process.
Sample template:
SKILL COMPARISON FOR EMPLOYEES USING ACHIEVEMENTS
Achievement 10
Achievement 11
Achievement 12
Achievement 13
Achievement 14
Achievement 15
Achievement 16
Achievement 17
Employee Names
Employee A Skill 1 Employee B Employee C Employee A Skill 2 Employee B Employee C Employee A Skill 3 Employee B Employee C
37
Achievement 18
Achievement 1
Achievement 2
Achievement 3
Achievement 4
Achievement 5
Achievement 6
Achievement 7
Achievement 8
Achievement 9
Skills
Research Methodology
Problem definition
The problem in this case is the unavailability of the current positions of the employee skill levels and competency levels. That leaves the management in a blind folded condition with regards to the manner in which the employees are to be trained and developed for the betterment of the organization as a whole. So the problem definition of this project can be put as: Problem Statement- The identification and compilation of the skills inventory of the organization and the individual employee skill levels. Also mapping the competency levels, and comparison of the same with the organizations requirements Approach to the Problem- The approach to the problem is as follows: Designing and developing of the BU specific skill matrix Getting the manager/employee ratings in the matrices Analysing the matrix for the discrepancies from the benchmarked levels Colour coding for easy identification Defining competencies for the organization as per the profile Mapping the competencies with the help of the skill ratings
By following this approach the benefit that could be gained is that the organizational skill inventory and competency level will be recorded in an organized matrix form for easy analysis. This matrix could be further used by the organization as a tool for planning and organizing the training and development programmes for the year.
Research Design
This research did not make use of any of the research tools that are used conventionally. The compilation of data and analysis is done manually using excel sheets. The data collection method is also in the form of ratings which is described in detail further. The research pattern was specifically designed as per the needs and guidelines of the senior management.
38
Sampling
This study was carried out for all the employees of Textron India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore and thus no sampling technique was required. If that be the case it can be said that out of the various companies working in the same field, Textron India Pvt. Ltd. employees were selected for the study. The sample consisted of a total of 135 employees. The remaining number of employees were on tour to the US and thus could not be involved in the exercise. The sample was reached via emails mostly, except for the few cases where the employees had to be approached in person. There was always face to face contact with the team leaders.
Data Collection Techniques

Data was collected from two different sources via emails: 1) The team leaders/ managers/ supervisors ratings (here the rating was given to all team members. 2) The employee self rating (as the name suggests, the employees were supposed to rate only themselves.
39
Research Procedure
Given below is the procedure which was followed for each of the 19 teams for which the exercise was conducted: Step 1: Skill and employee listing Compilation and listing of the current technical skills for all the various business units (BU) while coordinating with the team leaders is first step. In this step the team leader/ manager were approached and the list of technical skills used by the team was populated after brain storming with them. The member list (employee names) of the specific team is also updated during this step. This step also includes the deciding of the benchmarks to be set for each of the skills as per the difficulty level of the skill.
Step 2: Developing BU specific skill matrix (Template). After the lists have been created, the skill matrix template meant for rating is created. A sample of the raw template is given below:
SAMPLE SKILL MATRIX

0 1 2 3 4 NA No Knowledge Just Aware/Novice Cabable With Assistance Fully Competent Expert Not Applicable Bench mark
TEAM-Z FEEDBACK
3
Strength of Materials
3
Experimental Testing
3
Analysis
3
NASTRAN
3
Hypermesh
3
Softwares
KNOWLEDGE
Theory of Elasticity Finite Element Method
Modelling
Dynamics
CATIA V4
CATIA V5
PA TRAN
LS-Dyna
NAME
1 2 4 6 8
EMPLOYEE 1 EMPLOYEE 2 EMPLOYEE 3 EMPLOYEE 4 EMPLOYEE 5
Step 3: Team leader/ manager ratings Once the template is prepared, it is send first to the team leaders/managers via email, for their final approval and ratings. The team leaders/ managers give ratings to all the employees
40
ANSYS
Fortran
Matlab
EMP.NO.
Crash
Static
S.NO.
2D
3D
working in their team. Thus their perception of the employee skill levels is recorded for analysis. A sample template with the team leader ratings is shown below:
SAMPLE SKILL MATRIX

TEAM-Z FEEDBACK
3
3
3
Analysis
3
NASTRAN
3
Hypermesh
3
Softwares
KNOWLEDGE
Modelling
Dynamics
CATIA V4
CATIA V5
PA TRAN
LS-Dyna
NAME
1 2 4 6 8
3 2 4 2 2
3 3 3 3 2
2 1 3 3 3
2 3 2 3 4
3 4 4 4 3
3 3 3 3 3
3 3 4 3 3
4 3 2 3 3
4 3 2 3 3
3 3 3 3 3
3 3 3 3 3
4 3 2 3 3
4 3 1 3 3
2 3 3 3 4
1 3 2 3 3
1 4 3 3 3
1 1 2 2 3
Step 4: Employees self ratings. After the team leader/ manager ratings are received, similar empty templates are sent to the team members via email for the self rating. The employees rate themselves as per their perception of their skill levels. Thus the employees perception is also recorded. A sample of an employee rating feedback is shown below:
SAMPLE SKILL MATRIX

TEAM-Z FEEDBACK
3
3
3
Analysis
3
NASTRAN
3
Hypermesh
3
Softwares
KNOWLEDGE
Modelling
Dynamics
CATIA V4
CATIA V5
PA TRAN
LS-Dyna
NAME
1 2 4 6 8
41
ANSYS
Fortran
Matlab
EMP.NO.
Crash
Static
S.NO.
2D
3D
ANSYS
Fortran
Matlab
EMP.NO.
Crash
Static
S.NO.
2D
3D
1 3 4 3 3
Step 5: Consolidation and manual analysis After the manager ratings and the employee ratings are received, both these ratings are consolidated into one sheet such that each employee has two sets of ratings. After this is done, then the ratings are analyzed and colour coded according to the benchmarks fixed in Step-1. There are two major coding that is done: 1) All ratings below the bench mark are put in Red (Points of concern) 2) All expert ratings are put in Green (Potential in house trainers) The benchmarks are put in yellow on top of each skills and the type of rating (team leader self rating, employee self rating or team leaders rating for the employees) is put in blue beside the employee names.
A sample of the analyzed and colour coded sheet is shown below:
SAMPLE SKILL MATRIX

TEAM-Z FEEDBACK
3
3
3
Analysis
3
NASTRAN
3
Hypermesh
3
Softwares
KNOWLEDGE
Modelling
Dynamics
CATIA V4
CATIA V5
PA TRAN
LS-Dyna
NAME
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
TLSR EMPLOYEE 1 EMR
EMPLOYEE 2 TLR EMPLOYEE 1 EMR EMPLOYEE 3 TLR EMPLOYEE 1 EMR EMPLOYEE 4 TLR EMPLOYEE 1 EMR EMPLOYEE 5 TLR EMPLOYEE 1
3 2 3 4 3 2 2 2 4
3 3 1 3 3 3 2 2 3
2 1 3 3 3 3 2 3 4
2 3 3 2 2 3 3 4 3
3 4 4 4 3 4 4 3 2
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2
3 3 1 4 4 3 3 3 2
4 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 3
4 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2
4 3 3 2 1 3 3 3 2
4 3 3 1 3 3 3 3 3
2 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4
1 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 4
1 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3
1 1 2 2 3 2 1 3 3
TLSR-- TEAM LEADER SELF RATING TLR -- TEAM LEADER RATING EMR-- EMPLOYEE RATING
Training Required Potential In-House Trainer
42
ANSYS
Fortran
Matlab
EMP.NO.
Crash
Static
S.NO.
2D
3D
1 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3
Step 6: Brainstorming for discrepancies The analyzed colour coded sheets are then taken to the team leader/manager and a brainstorming round regarding the ratings and the discrepancies is carried out. Corrections in ratings or benchmarks if any are to be incorporated during this step.
Step 7: Identifying the final need in terms of training requirements. The final skill matrix is then ready with the training requirements shown in red and the potential trainers shown in green. The management can further use this tool to plan the trainings for the complete year.
Step 8: Competency Mapping Now competency mapping though carried out with the help of skill matrices is a totally different thing. According to definition a competency is a collection of skills. Now as each skill is a verb which means action, thus a competency can be defined as a complete act made up from the combination of various smaller actions. So to define a competency and map it, the procedure requires one to first find out what all skills are comprised in each of the defined competencies. If the competency be not defined then the skills should be decided upon by thorough brainstorming and looking into each and every aspect of the competency to come up with the list of skills that may be required for the particular competency.
Once the skill matrix is prepared, the last step is to map the competencies. It is done in the following fashion: The skill ratings are segregated for each competency as per the legend shown in Fig. Then the average of the rating (employee and team leader ratings both included) is taken. This average rating is then compared to the scale shown in Fig. Then in the final step, the ratings are marked on the competency map.
43
Sample pieces of the competency maps are shown below:
CORE COMPETENCY REQUIREMENTS

Sr No NAME
ACTION ORIENTED WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
DEALING WITH AMBIGUITY WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
BUSINESS ACUMEN WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
1 2 3 4 5

Sr No NAME
CONFLICT MANAGEMENT WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
CREATIVITY WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
CUSTOMER FOCUS WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
1 2 3 4 5
44
Observations and Results

The observations and results that were gathered from the research for the 19 teams of Textron India Pvt. Ltd., was submitted at the end of the internship period to the organization and cannot be shared in this report for the sake of organizational privacy and confidentiality. However, for the reviewer to get a feel of the final analysed sheets, a sample sheet collection of the skill matrices and the competency map for 8 sample teams (Team A to Team H) has been provided as annexure to this report. The names used in these sample sheets are dummy names and any similarity is coincidental. The annexure details are given below:
Annexure 1 Analysed sample soft skill matrices (Team A-Team H)
Annexure 2 Analysed sample technical (hard) skill matrices (Team A-Team H)
Annexure 3 Competency maps (Team A-Team H)
45
Recommendations
The following are the recommendations based on the observations and results gathered from the research:
1. Employees should be clearly explained regarding the objective of conducting the exercise and also the importance of such exercise to their own selves, so that there is a cent percent involvement from the employees side. This would also help in speeding up the exercise as the doubts regarding the procedure and the expectations from it could be cleared out in the initial phases itself. 2. The exercise should be carried out in 360 degrees as it would strengthen the authenticity of the ratings and would give a clearer picture as to the exact skill and competency levels of the employees. 3. The exercise should be carried out with the involvement of the senior management as it would bring more quality to the ratings collected. 4. Use of occasional skill tests within the department could help the employees keep a track of where exactly they stand and thus would help them put more authentic ratings when asked to. 5. The trainings should be planned with the involvement of the employees as well (not only the team leaders) so that there are no low yield trainings being held. This would cut down the costs of training further. 6. The experts in the ratings marked green should be further investigated in detail and if found satisfactory should be made use of as in house trainers. This would cut the trainer costs for the company. 7. Further, the findings of the exercise could be shared with the employees in a manner deemed fit by the senior management, so that the employees are clear about the areas in which they are lacking, and thus from their own side ca start working on it. 8. This sharing of the results would also give the employees an idea on who to approach in case of a certain skill, as the experts are identified as a result of this exercise. So this would improve the cross education, helping and cohesiveness among the employees. This would further help in the strengthening of the bonds between the employees, thus strengthening the manpower asset of the organization as a whole.
46
Limitations
The limitations that were felt during the course of this project are as follow: Due to lack of time, only the manager and employee self ratings could be taken. The project would have been much better in quality if the employee ratings for other employees were also considered like a 360 degree rating. It would have brought a lot more accuracy and authenticity to the ratings.
It was observed that in many teams the complete seriousness of the exercise was not understood. This was reflected in the type of ratings that were provided.
A part of the employees could not be included in the exercise as they were out of the country on on-site assignments and tours.
As the team leaders had a major say in the ratings, therefore the problem of favouritism and the bias due to that could not be accounted.
The over confidence or the under confidence of the employees in their self ratings caused some amount of in accuracy in the overall picture that emerged. But the managers rating provides a good comparing ground for the discrepancies.
The sharing of the results with the employees has not been done and so it leaves a doubt as to whether the full effect that could be achieved by the employee direct involvement is being achieved.
47
Conclusion
The skill matrix and the competency maps were successfully developed and analyzed for all the teams of Textron India Pvt. Ltd. The data provided can be used by the organization for planning its training and development programmes for the year ahead. The submitted sheets also provide a good insight into the current position of the employees as far as skills and competencies are concerned and also an idea as to how to use them for the benefit of the organization. Detailed recommendations on improving the exercise in the future and also regarding the use of the data provided are mentioned earlier in the report. The exercise carried out this time has some limitations which are also mentioned in detailed in the report. It would be advantageous if these limitations are overcome the next time. It would improve the quality of the exercise by leaps and bounds. The project was carried out in a good manner and has met the expectations of the organization and the institute satisfactorily, though it still has quite some scope for improvements which could be incorporated subsequently.
48
References
1. www.google.com 2. www.wikipedia.com 3. www.citehr.com 4. www.qualitysouthwest.co.uk 5. net.educause.edu 6. www.thefreelibrary.com 7. www.docshare.com
49
Bibliography
1. Lombardo, Michael M.; Eichinger, Robert W.; (2004) FYI: For Your Improvement, a Guide for Development and Coaching, 4th ED. 2. Tripp, Dr. Steven D.; (1992) Performance + Instruction: A skills matrix and its implications (article), Wiley Periodicals. 3. Sahu, R.K., (2009) Competency Mapping, New Delhi, Excel Books. 4. Sahu, R.K., (2005) Training for development, New Delhi, Excel Books. 5. Sanghi, Seema (2007) The Handbook Of Competency Mapping: Understanding, Designing And Implementing Competency Models In Organizations, California, Sage Publications. 6. Sharma, Radha R., (2002) 360 Degree Feedback, Competency Mapping and Assessment Centres, Tata McGraw Hill.
50
ANNEXURE 1 SOFT SKILLS MATRIX (SAMPLE SHEETS)
Dummy names have been used for Organizational privacy
51
SOFT SKILL MATRIX
TEAM-A
1 2 3 4 TEAM-A FEEDBACK
Average Above Average Good Proficient
5
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Excellent
3 3 3
bench mark
Communication
Interpersonal
Personal / Motivational
Administrative
Managerial
S.NO.
Oral
EMP.NO.
Written
Stress
Energy
Initiative
Integrity
Listening
Planning
Telephone
Follow up
Leadership
Persistence
Presentation
Team Player
Adaptability
Group Process
People Perception
Time Management
Problem Analysis
Decisiveness
Judgement
Delegation
Behaviour Flexibility
Meeting Management
Innovation / Creativity
Personal Development
Project Management
Performance Coaching
Professional Development
Negotiation/Conflict Management
Persuasiveness / Influence
TLSR
3 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 2 4 4 3 3 5 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 3 5 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 4 3 2 4 4 4 4 4 2 4 3 2 4 3 2 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 4 4 3 4 3 2 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 4 4 3 4 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 2 2 3 4 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 4 4 3 4 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 4 3 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 4 5 4 4 4 4 5 5 4 3 3 3 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 5 4 4 4 3 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 5 4 4 4 2 3 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 2 5 3 2 2 3 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 4
3 4 4 4 4 3 3 5 4 2 2 3 4 5 4 4
3 4 4 4 4 2 2 5 4 2 2 3 4 5 4 4
3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 4 3 4
3 4 4 4 4 3 3 5 4 3 3 2 3 4 4 4
3 3 3 4 4 4 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 4 3 4
3 3 3 4 4 4 3 4 4 3 3 4 3 4 3 4
Organizational Sensitivity/Perception
3 4 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 4 4 4
4 3 4 4 3
3 3 4 4 4
3 4 4 4 3
Performance Management
3 4 4 4 3
Participative Management
3 4 4 4 3
52
2 5 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 5 4 3 5 3 3 5 3 4 5 4 3 3 3 2 4 2 4 5 4 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 4 3 3 4 5 4 3 3 4 3 4 2 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 5 4 4 3 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 5 4 3 4
EMR
TLR
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 4 4 4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3 2 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 2 4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
EMR
TLR
EMR
TLR
EMR
TLR
10
EMR
11
TLR
12
EMR
13
TLR
14
EMR
15
TLR
16
EMR
17
TLR
18
EMR
19
TLR
2 4 2
4 5 4 3 4
4 5 4 3 4
4 4 4 3 4
4 4 4 3 3
3 4 3 2 4
3 3 3 2 3
3 4 3 2 3
3 5 3 2 3
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2 1 1 1 1 2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
20
EMR
21
TLR
Hugh Grenz Edwina Waybright Hugh Grenz Fernando Deno Hugh Grenz Allyson Woelfel Hugh Grenz Rae Gilcrease Hugh Grenz Brent Cell Hugh Grenz Allan Alto Hugh Grenz Karina Hinzman Hugh Grenz Jessie Stiff Hugh Grenz Cody Yorke Hugh Grenz Tanisha Wetherby Hugh Grenz
Cultural Perception
NAME
3 4
SOFT SKILL MATRIX
TEAM B
1 2 3 4 5 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Communication 3 3 3 3 3 3 Interpersonal 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Personal / Motivational 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Administrative 3 3 3 3 3 3 Managerial 3
Weak Average Good Proficient Excellent (Trainer)
TEAM-B FEEDBACK
BENCH MARK
S.NO.
Oral
EMP.NO.
Stress
Written
Energy
Listening
Initiative
Integrity
Planning
Telephone
Follow up
Leadership
Persistence
Presentation
Team Player
Adaptability
Group Process
People Perception
Time Management
Problem Analysis
Decisiveness
Judgement
Delegation
Meeting Management
Project Management
TLSR
EMR
TLR
EMR
TLR
EMR
TLR
EMR
TLR
EMR
TLR
EMR
TLR
EMR
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
TLR
Jacqueline Slavin Nathan Johnson Jacqueline Slavin Curtis Mathison Jacqueline Slavin Scott Waltman Jacqueline Slavin Henry Epley Jacqueline Slavin Marvin Bartholomew Jacqueline Slavin Christopher Sena Jacqueline Slavin Nicholas Remington Jacqueline Slavin
4 3 2 4 4 3 4 4 3 4 2 2 3 4 3
3 3 2 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 3
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 5 3 2 3 5 3
3 3 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 5 3
4 3 3 3 4 2 4 4 3 5 3 3 3 4 3
4 3 3 3 4 2 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 4 4
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 5 3 4 3 3 3 5 3
3 3 3 3 3 4 3 5 3 3 3 2 3 4 3
4 3 3 4 3 3 2 5 3 4 3 2 2 5 3
4 3 4 3 4 2 4 4 4 4 4 2 4 4 4
3 3 3 3 3 2 3 4 3 3 3 2 3 4 3
3 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 2 3 4 3
3 4 3 4 3 3 3 5 3 4 3 3 3 4 3
4 3 3 3 4 3 3 4 4 2 3 2 4 3 3
4 3 4 2 4 3 3 5 4 3 3 4 3 3 3
3 4 3 3 3 2 2 4 3 3 3 3 2 3 3
3 3 3 3 3 2 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 5 3
3 4 3 4 3 2 3 5 3 5 3 4 3 4 3
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 5 3 3 3 3 2 3 3
3 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 2 3 4 3
3 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 2 3 4 3
Training Required
4 4 4 3 4 3 3 5 4 3 3 4 3 5 3
4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 2 4 3 4
4 4 4 3 4 4 3 4 4 2 4 4 3 4 4
4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 3 4 3 3 3 4
4 4 3 3 4 2 3 4 3 5 3 2 3 3 3
3 3 3 3 3 2 3 4 3 3 3 2 3 3 3
3 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3
4 3 4 3 4 3 3 4 4 3 4 2 3 3 3
3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 2 3 3 3 3 3
3 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 2 3 3 3 4 3
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 2 3 2 3 4 3
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 2 3 3 3 4 3
Potential In-House Trainer
Cultural Perception
NAME
53
3 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 2 3 3 3 3 3
SOFT SKILL MATRIX

TEAM-C FEEDBACK
TEAM C
1 2 3 4 5
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
BENCH MARK
Communication
Interpersonal
Personal / Motivational
Administrative
Managerial
S.NO.
EMP.NO.
Oral
Written
Stress
Energy
Initiative
Integrity
Listening
Planning
Telephone
Follow up
Leadership
Persistence
Presentation
Team Player
Adaptability
Judgement
Delegation
Decisiveness
Group Process
People Perception
Time Management
Problem Analysis
Meeting Management
Project Management
TLSR
1 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3
Candice Leister 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 3
3 4 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3
3 4 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3
3 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 2
3 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3
3 4 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3
3 4 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3
3 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3
3 NA NA NA NA
N/A N/A NA 4 NA NA NA NA N/A N/A 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 NA N/A N/A NA NA NA NA NA 4 3 NA N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A NA NA NA NA NA N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A NA NA NA NA NA NA N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
EMR
Stephen Christy
TLR
Candice Leister
EMR
Willie Bayless
TLR
Candice Leister
EMR
Antonio Melson
TLR
Candice Leister
EMR
Violet Martin
TLR
Candice Leister
10
EMR
Earl Strange
TLR
11
Candice Leister
Cultural Perception
NAME
54
SOFT SKILL MATRIX

TEAM D
1 2 3 4 5 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Communication Interpersonal Personal / Motivational 3 3 3 3 3 3 Administrative 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Managerial
TEAM-D FEEDBACK
BENCH MARK
S.NO.
Oral
EMP.NO.
Stress
Written
Energy
Initiative
Integrity
Listening
Planning
Telephone
Follow up
Leadership
Persistence
Presentation
Team Player
Adaptability
Group Process
People Perception
Time Management
Problem Analysis
Decisiveness
Judgement
Delegation
Meeting Management
Project Management
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
TLSR Ralph Mackinnon EMR Steven Engel TLR Ralph Mackinnon EMR Fortenberry TLR Ralph Mackinnon EMR Eunice Pitre TLR Ralph Mackinnon
4 4 3 4 2 4 3
4 4 3 4 2 4 3
3 3 3 4 2 3 2
3 5 4 5 4 4 4
3 4 4 4 2 3 3
3 4 3 4 3 4 3
4 4 3 4 3 4 3
4 4 4 4 4 4 3
4 4 4 5 2 4 2
4 4 3 5 3 4 3
4 4 3 4 3 3 3
4 4 2 4 2 3 2
4 5 4 5 4 4 4
4 5 3 4 3 4 3
3 3 2 4 3 4 3
4 4 4 4 3 4 3
4 4 3 5 3 4 3
3 4 5 5 3 4 3
4 4 4 5 4 4 4
5 4 3 4 3 4 3
3 4 2 5 2 4 2
Training Required
4 4 4 5 2 4 3
3 5 3 5 3 4 3
5 4 5 5 3 4 3
5 3 4 5 3 4 3
5 4 3 5 3 4 3
4 4 4 4 3 4 2
3 4 3 5 3 4 3
4 4 3 4 3 4 2
3 4 3 4 3 4 3
5 4 3 4 3 3 3
5 4 3 4 3 4 3
4 4 3 4 3 4 3
4 4 3 4 3 4 3
3 4 3 4 3 4 3
Cultural Perception
NAME
55
2 4 4 4 3 3 2
SOFT SKILL MATRIX

TEAM-E FEEDBACK
1 2
Weak Average
TEAM E
Good
4 5 3 3 3 3 3 3 Interpersonal 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Personal / Motivational 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Administrative 3 3 3 3 3 3 Managerial
Proficient Excellent (Trainer) 3
Benchmark
3 3 3 3 3 Communication
S.NO.
EMP.NO.
Oral
Written
Energy
Initiative
Integrity
Listening
Planning
Telephone
Follow up
Leadership
Persistence
Presentation
Stress Mgmt.
Adaptability
Group Process
People Perception
Time Management
Problem Analysis
Decisiveness
Judgement
Delegation
Negotiation/Conflict Management Team Player
Meeting Management
Project Management
TLSR Jessica Feeley
EMR Stanley Engelhardt
TLR Jessica Feeley
56
TLSR-- TEAM LEADER SELF RATING TLR -- TEAM LEADER RATING EMR-- EMPLOYEE RATING Training Required Potential In-House Trainer
EMR Elizabeth Mobley
TLR Jessica Feeley
EMR Natasha Parenteau
TLR Jessica Feeley
EMR Keith Bigham
TLR Jessica Feeley
10
EMR Nicholas Kling
11
TLR Jessica Feeley
12
EMR Mark Mcginley
13
TLR Jessica Feeley
14
EMR Juan Marcotte
15
TLR Jessica Feeley
16
EMR Richard Baier
17
TLR Jessica Feeley
20
EMR Cindy Yanez
21
TLR Jessica Feeley
22
EMR Sheryl Grimm
23
TLR Jessica Feeley
24
EMR Sean Spinks
25
TLR Jessica Feeley
3 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 3
3 3 3 4 3 4 2 3 2 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3
3 2 3 4 3 4 3 2 2 2 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3
3 3 3 4 3 4 2 3 2 3 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 3
3 3 3 4 3 4 2 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3
3 3 2 4 3 4 3 3 2 3 3 4 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3
3 3 2 4 3 4 3 3 2 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3
3 4 3 3 3 4 2 3 2 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
3 2 2 5 3 4 2 3 2 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 4 3
3 4 3 5 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
4 4 3 5 3 4 2 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 3
3 2 3 3 3 4 2 2 3 2 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3
4 4 3 5 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3
3 4 3 5 3 4 2 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
3 4 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3
3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 2 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3
3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 3
3 2 3 5 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 3
3 3 3 5 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 5 3 3 3 3 3 4 3
3 3 2 5 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 3
3 3 2 5 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 3
3 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 5 3 3 3 2 3 4 4 3 3 2 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 2 2 3 3 4 4 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 2 3 4 4 3 3 2 3 4 4 3 3 2 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 3 3 2 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Cultural Perception
NAME
SOFT SKILL MATRIX

TEAM-F FEEDBACK
TEAM F
1 2 3 4 5 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Interpersonal 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Personal / Motivational 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Administrative 3 3 3 3 3 3 Managerial 3
Weak Average Good Proficient Excellent( Trainer) Bench mark
3 3 3 3 3 Communication
S.NO.
EMP.NO.
Oral
Written
Energy
Listening
Initiative
Integrity
Planning
Telephone
Follow up
Leadership
Persistence
Presentation
Team Player
Stress Mgmt.
Adaptability
Group Process
People Perception
Time Management
Problem Analysis
Decisiveness
Judgement
Delegation
Meeting Management
Project Management
TLSR
Vincent Burd
EMR
Katie Sanborn
4 4 3 3 4 4 3 2 3 2
3 4 4 3 4 4 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 3 3 1 3 3 2 4 2 2 2 4 3 3 2 2 4 4 4 4 2 3 2 2 2 3 4 4 2 4 4 3 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 5 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 4 4 3 4 3 4 4 3 2 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 4 3 3 4 4 4 3 3
4 2 4 3
3 3 3 4
3 3 3 3
4 3 3 3
4 3 4 3
TLR
Vincent Burd
4 3 2 3 2
EMR
Allen Fair
4 3 4 4 4
TLR
Vincent Burd
4 4 2 3 4
2 4 4 3 3 4 3 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 5 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2 3 3 2 1 1 2 3 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 4 2 4 2 3 1 2 1 1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2 4 4 1 2 3 2 4 2 3 3 4 4 4 3 4 4 5 4 3 4 2 2 3 4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 4 4 2 3 4 3 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 5 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
EMR
Eileen Hammock
4 3 2 3 2
TLR
Vincent Burd
7 8
EMR
Jose Steffens TLR Vincent Burd
3 2 2 3 2 3 3 3 3 3
4 3 3 3 3
Cultural Perception
NAME
57
4 2 4 3
SOFT SKILL MATRIX

TEAM-G FEEDBACK
1 2
Weak Average
TEAM G
Good
4 5
Proficient Excellent (Trainer) Skills concerned to job profile 3 3 3 3 3 3 Communication 3 3 3 3 3 3 Interpersonal 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Personal / Motivational 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Administrative 3 3 3 3 Managerial 3 3
Benchmark
S.NO.
Oral
EMP.NO.
Written
Listening
Telephone
Stress
Leadership
Persistence
Presentation
People Perception
Group Process
Team Player
Adaptability Energy Initiative
Delegation
Meeting Management
Time Management Integrity Planning Follow up Problem Analysis Project Management Decisiveness Judgement
TLSR
EMR
TLR
58
EMR
TLR
EMR
TLR
EMR
TLR
EMR
TLR
EMR
TLR
EMR
TLR
EMR
TLR
EMR
TLR
EMR
TLR
EMR
TLR
EMR
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
TLR
Kenneth Zucker Albert Reed Kenneth Zucker Christine Barefoot Kenneth Zucker Matthew Chalmers Kenneth Zucker Howard Wimer Kenneth Zucker Bryan Ontiveros Kenneth Zucker Jesse Dorr Kenneth Zucker Holly Fontes Kenneth Zucker Yolanda Cole Kenneth Zucker Roger Emmons Kenneth Zucker Cantrell Kenneth Zucker Bobby Rutter Kenneth Zucker Harold Digiovanni Kenneth Zucker
3 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 2 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 4 3 2 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 2 3
3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 1 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 2 3
3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 2 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 2 3
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 4 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 1 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 2 3
3 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 3 3 1 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 2 3
3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 4 3 2 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 2 3
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3
2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 1 4 2 2 2 4 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 2 2
4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 3 4 2 4
2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 4 2 3 2 4 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 2 2
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 2 3
3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 1 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 2 3 2 3
3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 2 3
4 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 4 4 2 4 4 2 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 2 3
4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 4 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 3
4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 4 1 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 3
2 3 2 3 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 4 2 3 2 4 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2
3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 1 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3
2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 4 2 4 2 3 2 4 2 3 2 4 2 3 2 3 2
2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 4 1 4 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 4 2 3 2 3 2
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 4 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 2
3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 2
3 4 3 3 2 3 2 3 2 4 1 4 3 3 3 3 2 3 2 4 3 2 2 3 2
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 4 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 2
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 2
2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 4 1 4 2 3 2 4 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 2 2
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 1 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
3 3 3 NA NA NA 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 3 1 1 1 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Cultural Perception
NAME
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 3
SOFT SKILL MATRIX
TEAM H
Weak
2 3 4 5 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Interpersonal 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Personal / Motivational 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Administrative 3 3 3 3 3 Managerial 3 3
Average Good Proficient Excellent( Trainer) BENCH MARK
TEAM-H FEEDBACK
3 3 3 3 Communication
S.NO.
Written
Oral
Energy
EMP.NO.
Initiative
Integrity
Listening
Planning
Telephone
Follow up
Leadership
Persistence
Presentation
Team Player
Stress Mgmt.
Adaptability
Group Process
People Perception
Time Management
Problem Analysis
Decisiveness
Judgement
Delegation
Meeting Management
Project Management
3 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 3 3 4 5 3 4 4
3 4
3 4
3 4
3 3
3 3
3 3
TLSR Harold Gregoire EMR Celia Whetstone
4 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 3 2 4
TLR
Harold Gregoire EMR Marvin Estabrook TLR Harold Gregoire
EMR Ronald Fong TLR Harold Gregoire
4 4 4 4 4 3 3
3 4 4 4 3
2 4 3 3 2
4 3 4 4 4
3 4 4 4 3
2 4 2 4 2
2 3 3 4 3
3 3 3 4 3
N/A 3 N/A 3 N/A
3 3 3 3 3
4 4 4 3 4
3 4 3 4 3
3 4 3 5 3
4 4 4 4 4
2 3 2 3 2
3 4 3 3 3
2 3 3 4 3
4 4 4 4 4
4 2 4 4 4
4 3 4 5 4
3 3 3 5 3
3 3 3 5 3
4 4 4 5 4
3 3 3 5 3
4 3 4 5 4
4 4 4 5 4
3 2 3 3 3
3 4 3 4 3
3 4 3 3 3
3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 4 3 4 4 4 4 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3 4 3 4 3 3
N/A 2 N/A 3 N/A 4
EMR
April Mcafee
4 4 3 4 4 4 3 3 4 3 3
4 4 4 3 4 4 5 3 3 4 4 4 5 4 4 3 3 3 4 2 3 3 4 4 4 3 3 4 3 4 4 3 3 3
Training Required
TLR
Harold Gregoire
4 3 3 4 4 3 2 3 3 3 4
3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Cultural Perception
NAME
59
3 3
ANNEXURE 2 TECHNICAL SKILLS MATRIX (SAMPLE SHEETS)
60
TECHNICAL SKILL MATRIX

TEAM-A FEEDBACK
TEAM A
0 1 2 3 4
No Competency Just Aware/Novice Cabable With Assistance Fully Competent Expert
NA
Not Applicable
bench mark
KNOWLEDGE
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
3
Softwares
3
OS
S.NO.
EMP.NO.
Java
Catia V4
MS Excel
MS Word
LS Dyna
Catia V5
VB .Net
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Surface Modelling
Machining analysis
Product Knowledge
Sheetmetal analysis
Composite Analysis
Engineering Materials
Mechanical Engineering Fundamentals
TLSR N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Aerodynamics & Aerospace fundamentals
Tool Design
Hypermesh
N/A
Solid Modelling
N/A
EMR
TLR
EMR
61
TLR
EMR
TLR
EMR
TLR
10
EMR
11
TLR
12
EMR
13
TLR
14
EMR
15
TLR
16
EMR
17
TLR
18
EMR
1 1 0 0 2 N/A N/A N/A 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
19
TLR
20
EMR
21
TLR
Hugh Grenz Edwina Waybright Hugh Grenz Fernando Deno Hugh Grenz Allyson Woelfel Hugh Grenz Rae Gilcrease Hugh Grenz Brent Cell Hugh Grenz Allan Alto Hugh Grenz Karina Hinzman Hugh Grenz Jessie Stiff Hugh Grenz Cody Yorke Hugh Grenz Tanisha Wetherby Hugh Grenz
3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 1 3
Training Required
3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 2 3
2 2 2 2 3 2 3 2 2 2 3 2 4 3 4 2 3 2 2 2
1 N/A 1 N/A 4 N/A 1 N/A 1 N/A 1 N/A 3 N/A 3 N/A 3 N/A 1 N/A
2 4 2 3 4 4 4 4 2 2 3 1 N/A 1 3 1 1 3 1 3 3 3 3 3 N/A N/A 2 2 N/A N/A 2 1 N/A N/A 3 1 0 0 3 2
2 1 2 2 3 4 4 4 1 1 2 1 N/A 1 N/A 1 4 3 0 1
2 1 2 1 2 1 N/A 1 1 1 2 1 N/A 1 N/A 1 N/A 1 2 3
3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3
4 4 4 4 1 1 N/A 1 3 3 2 2 N/A 1 N/A 1 N/A 1 1 2
3 0 3 2 3 0 3 2 3 0 4 4 3 0 4 4 2 2 2 2 1 3 3 3 N/A N/A 3 2 1 3 3 3 3 0 2 2 3 0 2 2 2 0 3 3 2 0 3 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1 1 2 2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1 1 2 2 N/A 3 4 4 1 3 3 2 0 1 1 0 1 2 2 2
2 2 4 4 3 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 N/A 1 N/A 1 4 1 0 1
1 1 2 2 3 3 N/A 1 0 0 1 1 N/A 1 N/A 2 N/A 1 0 0 N/A 1
Windows
NAME
3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 0 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 2 3

TEAM-B FEEDBACK
TEAM B
NA
No Knowledge Just Aware/Novice Cabable With Assistance Fully Competent Expert Not Applicable
BENCHMARK
S.NO.
SAP JBA
EMP.NO.
Stellent
Ariba
Dynamic Connect
Lawson
Knowledge on process
TLSR Jacqueline Slavin EMR Nathan Johnson
TLR Jacqueline Slavin EMR Curtis Mathison
TLR Jacqueline Slavin EMR Scott Waltman
TLR Jacqueline Slavin EMR Henry Epley
TLR Jacqueline Slavin EMR Marvin Bartholomew
TLR Jacqueline Slavin EMR Christopher Sena
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
TLR Jacqueline Slavin
EMR Nicholas Remington TLR Jacqueline Slavin
4 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4
3 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 NA 3 3
NA 1 NA 2 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 NA NA
4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 NA 0 NA NA NA NA NA
3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 1 3 4 3 3 3 1 2 3 3 3 3 NA 3 4 2 3 3 2 2 0 2 NA 3 NA 2 2 NA 3 3 NA NA NA NA NA 3
NA 1 NA 4 3 0 NA NA NA 0 NA NA NA 4 3
Scotia Bank JP Morgan Chase
NAME
62
NA 1 NA 4 3 0 NA NA NA 0 NA NA NA 4 3
No Knowledge
TEAM C
1 2 3 4 NA
Just Aware/Novice Capable With Assistance Fully Competent Expert Not Applicable
TEAM-C FEEDBACK
BENCH MARK
S.NO.
EMP.NO.
Loads
Design
Weights
FEMAP
Catia V4
MS Excel
MS Word
Catia V5
NASTRAN
Aerodynamics & Aerospace fundamentals
FAA Regulations
Product Knowledge
Strength Of Materials
Engineering Materials
1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 2 NA 3 2 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 NA 3 3 3
TLSR
Candice Leister 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 3
Engineering Mechanics
Airframe stress analysis
3 3 3 3 3
3 3 3 3 3
3 3 3 3 3
2 NA NA 2 2
2 2 2 2 2
2 3 2 2 2
Fatigue & Damage Tolerance
2 2 2 2 2
Solid Modelling
2 NA 2 2 2
EMR
Stephen Christy
Candice Leister EMR Willie Bayless
TLR
4 5
TLR
Candice Leister
EMR
TLR
EMR
TLR
EMR
6 7 8 9 10 11
TLR
Antonio Melson Candice Leister Violet Martin Candice Leister Earl Strange Candice Leister
3 3 3 3 3 2
3 3 3 3 3 1
3 3 3 3 3 1
3 3 2 3 3 1
3 2 3 2 3 2
1 2 2 2 1 2
1 2 2 2 1 2
3 3 3 3 2 1
3 2 2 2 2 2
4 3 3 3 3 3
4 3 3 3 3 3
1 3 2 3 2 2
2 3 3 3 2 2
0 2 2 2 1 2
3 2 3 2 2 2
2 2 2 2 3 2
1 2 2 2 1 2
NA 2 2 2 2 2
NA 3 3 3 3 3
Windows
NAME
63
3 4 3 3 3
TEAM D
No Knowledge Just Aware/Novice 2 Cabable With Assistance 3 Fully Competent 4 Expert NA Not Applicable
TEAM-D FEEDBACK
BENCHMARK
S.NO.
EMP.NO.
Adobe Illustrator
MS Office (MS Word)
Aircraft Familiarization
Engineering Drawing
MS Office (MS Excel)
MS Office (MS Power Point)
MS Office (MS Access)
MS Office (MS Visio)
Adobe Professional
Adobe photo Shop Catia V5
1 2 2 3 3 4 4
TLSR Ralph Mackinnon EMR Steven Engel TLR Ralph Mackinnon EMR Fortenberry TLR Ralph Mackinnon EMR Eunice Pitre TLR Ralph Mackinnon
3 3 3 4 3 3 3
4 4 4 4 4 4 4
3 3 3 4 3 NA NA
Technical Writing (ArborText)
3 3 3 4 3 3 3
3 3 3 4 3 3 3
3 3 3 4 3 3 3
3 2 3 4 3 3 3
1 1 1 4 1 3 1
1 2 2 3 NA NA 1 0 NA 3 N/A N/A 1 0 NA 3 4 4 1 2 2
2 3 NA 2 NA 4 2
NA NA NA 3 NA NA NA
Catia Cadam Drafting (CCD)
NAME
64
TECHNICAL SKILL MATRIX TEAM-E FEEDBACK
0 1
No Competency Just Aware/Novice
TEAM E
Cabable With Assistance
Fully Competent
4 3 Softwares 3 3 3 Design KNOWLEDGE 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Expert 3 3
NA
Not Applicable Benchmark
FAR
C#
2 3 2 3 4 3 4 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A NA N/A 1 N/A NA N/A N/A 3 N/A N/A N/A NA N/A N/A N/A NA N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A NA N/A N/A N/A NA N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A NA N/A N/A N/A NA N/A
PIOS
VHDL
S.NO.
GD&T
Drafting
Product
Catia V4
EMP.NO.
Catia V5
MS Excel
MS Word
Altium
Weibull++
Import Compliance
Solid Modelling
CESSNA Std.
PCB DESIGN
CIRCUIT DESIGN
Reliability Tools
TLSR Jessica Feeley
N/A N/A N/A 2 2 1 N/A N/A N/A N/A NA NA NA 3 3 N/A N/A N/A 3 N/A N/A 4 3 4 N/A 1 2 3 3 2 N/A N/A N/A 2 4 2 1 N/A N/A 3 3
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3 2
EMR
Stanley Engelhardt
TLR
Jessica Feeley
3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1 N/A 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
EMR
Elizabeth Mobley
Jessica Feeley EMR Natasha Parenteau
TLR
NA 4 4 NA NA NA NA NA NA 3 NA NA NA 3 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
TLR
N/A NA NA N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3 N/A N/A 2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A NA 3 2 NA 1 1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3 N/A N/A 2 N/A N/A 3 3 3 3 1
1 3 0
NA NA N/A N/A N/A N/A
1 2 0
NA NA N/A N/A N/A N/A
3 3 3
3 NA NA NA NA 3 3 1 NA NA NA NA 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 3 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3 3 2 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Jessica Feeley EMR Keith Bigham TLR Jessica Feeley
10
EMR
Nicholas Kling
11
TLR
Jessica Feeley
12
EMR
Mark Mcginley
13
TLR
Jessica Feeley
14
EMR
15
TLR
16
EMR
17
TLR
20
EMR
21
TLR
22
EMR
23
TLR
24
EMR
25
TLR
Juan Marcotte Jessica Feeley Richard Baier Jessica Feeley Cindy Yanez Jessica Feeley Sheryl Grimm Jessica Feeley Sean Spinks Jessica Feeley
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3 N/A 4 N/A 1 N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2 N/A
N/A 3 N/A N/A 3 N/A N/A 3 3 3 3 2 N/A NA N/A 3 NA 2 N/A NA 3 3 3 3 N/A 3 N/A N/A 3 N/A N/A 3 3 3 3 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3 3 3 3 4 N/A 3 N/A N/A 3 N/A N/A 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 NA 3 NA 3 2 3 NA NA NA N/A 2 N/A N/A 2 N/A 3 3 3 N/A N/A N/A 3 4 3 N/A 3 2 3 2 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 2 N/A N/A 2 N/A 3 3 3 N/A N/A N/A NA 3 3 3 4 NA NA 3 3 2 2 2 N/A 3 N/A N/A 3 N/A N/A 3 3 2 2 2
3 2 3 3 3 NA N/A N/A N/A 2 2
N/A 3 N/A N/A N/A NA N/A N/A N/A NA N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A NA N/A N/A N/A NA N/A
HTS United States
SQL-Server
N/A N/A N/A 3 3 NA N/A N/A N/A NA N/A
VBA
NAME
65
TEAM F
TECHNICAL SKILL MATRIX TEAM-F FEEDBACK
0 1 2 3 4 NA 3 3 3 3 KNOWLEDGE 3 3 3 3 3 Modelling Analysis 3 3 3 3 3 3 Softwares 3 3 3
No Knowledge Just Aware/Novice Cabable With Assistance Fully Competent Expert Not Applicable
Bench mark
2D
S.NO.
3D
Static
Crash
EMP.NO.
Matlab
PA TRAN
LS-Dyna
Fortran
CATIA V4
Dynamics
Theory of Elasticity
NASTRAN
1 2 3 NA 1 NA 1 NA NA 4 4
TLSR
Vincent Burd EMR Katie Sanborn
Finite Element Method
Hypermesh
CATIA V5
2 3
Vincent Burd EMR Allen Fair
TLR
3 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 4 3 1 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 4
1 NA 2 NA
TLR
EMR
TLR
EMR
4 5 6 7 8 9
TLR
Vincent Burd Eileen Hammock Vincent Burd Jose Steffens Vincent Burd
4 3 2 2 2 4
3 3 2 4 3 3 3 2 3 3 NA NA NA 4 3 2 2 NA 4 3 2 NA 4 NA NA 3 4 3 2 2
4 4 NA NA NA 2
2 2 NA NA NA 3
2 NA NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA NA 2
NA 2 1 3 NA 1 NA 3 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 4 2 2 NA 4
2 2 NA NA 3 4
NA NA 3 3 NA NA
2 NA 2 1 NA NA
4 3 NA NA NA NA
ANSYS
NAME
66
T ECHNICAL SKILL M AT RIX T EAM G FEEDBACK
0 1
No Know le dge Just Aw a re /Novice
Ca ba ble W ith Assista nce
TEAM G
Fully Compe te nt
4 3 KNOW LEDGE 3 3 3 3 3 3 De sign 3 3 3 3
Ex pe rt 3
NA
Not Applica ble Be nch Ma rk
Softw a re s
FAR
S.NO.
GD&T
Drafting
Product
PIOS
Catia V4
EMP.NO.
Catia V5
MS Excel
MS Word
3 4 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 2 4 3 4 4 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3
TLSR
Solid Modelling
CESSNA Std.
3
NA
EMR
TLR
EMR
TLR
EMR
TLR
67
4 4 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 1 2 3 2 1 1 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
EMR
TLR
EMR
TLR
EMR
TLR
EMR
1 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 3 0 2 0 1
N/A N/A
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 3
TLR
3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 2 4 3 4 3
3 4 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 2 4 3 4 3
2 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 0 3 2 2 2
2 4 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 0 4 2 3 2
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 4 3 4 3
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 4 3 3 3
3 1 3 0 3 3 3 3 0 4 4 1 2 1 2
N/A
16
EMR
Kenneth Zucker Albert Reed Kenneth Zucker Christine Barefoot Kenneth Zucker Matthew Chalmers Kenneth Zucker Howard Wimer Kenneth Zucker Bryan Ontiveros Kenneth Zucker Jesse Dorr Kenneth Zucker Holly Fontes Kenneth Zucker Yolanda Cole
TLR
EMR
TLR
EMR
TLR
EMR
TLR
EMR
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
TLR
Kenneth Zucker Roger Emmons Kenneth Zucker Cantrell Kenneth Zucker Bobby Rutter Kenneth Zucker Harold Digiovanni Kenneth Zucker
0 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 0
3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3
2 2 2 1 2 0 2
TLSR-- TEAM LEADER SELF RATING TLR -- TEAM LEADER RATING EMR-- EMPLOYEE RATING Tra ining Re quire d Pote ntia l In-House Tra ine r
Power point
3 2 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3
NAME
TEAM H
0 1
No Know ledge Just Aw are/Novice
Cabable With Assistance
3 4 NA 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Fully Competent Expert Not Applicable
T EAM-H FEEDBACK
BENCH MARK
S.NO.
.NET
C++
EMP.NO.
Fat Wire
SunPortal
68
TLSR
EMR
TLR
EMR
TLR
EMR
TLR
EMR
TLR
Harold Gregoire Celia Whetstone Harold Gregoire Marvin Estabrook Harold Gregoire Ronald Fong Harold Gregoire April Mcafee Harold Gregoire
1 1 NA NA 1 1 1 4 1 4 4 1 4 2 4 3 4 2
SharePoint
1 4 4 1 1 0 1 1 1
2 4 4 0 1 0 1 0 1
4 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 1
VC++
4 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1
Java
1 1 1 3 3 4 4 3 3
NAM E
ANNEXURE 3- COMPETENCY MAPPING (SAMPLE SHEETS)
69
TECHNICAL / PERSONAL REQUIREMENTS T E C H N I C A L E D U C A T I O N

WORK HISTORY
Does Not Meet Meets Exceeds Requirements Requirements Requirements
COMMUNICATION SKILLS WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
TEAM A
Sr No
NAME
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 DEALING WITH AMBIGUITY WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT WEAK BUSINESS ACUMEN AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT WEAK CONFLICT MANAGEMENT
Hugh Grenz Edwina Waybright Fernando Deno Allyson Woelfel Rae Gilcrease Brent Cell Allan Alto Karina Hinzman Jessie Stiff Cody Yorke Tanisha Wetherby
70
ACTION ORIENTED
Sr No
NAME
WEAK
AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

CUSTOMER FOCUS WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT FUNCTIONAL / TECHNICAL SKILLS WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT INTEGRITY / TRUST WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
Sr No
NAME
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
71

PEER RELATIONSHIPS WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
Sr No
NAME
OR GAN IZAT ION AL AGIL IT Y WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
PERSONAL LEARNING WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
PLANNING WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
TEAM B

WORK HISTORY
Sr No
NAME
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 DEALING WITH AMBIGUITY WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT BUSINESS ACUMEN WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
Jacqueline Slavin Nathan Johnson Curtis Mathison Scott Waltman Henry Epley Marvin Bartholomew Christopher Sena Nicholas Remington CONFLICT MANAGEMENT WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
72
ACTION ORIENTED
Sr No
NAME
WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Jacqueline Slavin Nathan Johnson Curtis Mathison Scott Waltman Henry Epley Marvin Bartholomew Christopher Sena Nicholas Remington

CUSTOMER FOCUS WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT FUNCTIONAL / TECHNICAL SKILLS WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
Sr No
NAME
INTEGRITY / TRUST WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
73

Sr No
NAME
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
TEAM C

WORK HISTORY
Sr No
NAME
1 2 3 4 5 6 DEALING WITH AMBIGUITY WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT BUSINESS ACUMEN WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
Candice Leister Stephen Christy Wil ie Bayless Antonio Melson Violet Martin Earl Strange CONFLICT MANAGEMENT WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
74
ACTION ORIENTED
Sr No
NAME
1 2 3 4 5 6
Candice Leister Stephen Christy Wil ie Bayless Antonio Melson Violet Martin Earl Strange

Sr No
NAME
1 2 3 4 5 6
75

Sr No
NAME
1 2 3 4 5 6
TEAM D

WORK HISTORY
Sr No
NAME
1 2 3 4 DEALING WITH AMBIGUITY WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT BUSINESS ACUMEN WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
Ralph Mackinnon Steven Engel Fortenberry Eunice Pitre CONFLICT MANAGEMENT WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
76
ACTION ORIENTED
Sr No
NAME
1 2 3 4
Ralph Mackinnon Steven Engel Fortenberry Eunice Pitre

Sr No
NAME
1 2 3 4
77

Sr No
NAME
1 2 3 4
TEAM E

WORK HISTORY
Sr No
NAME
78
DEALING WITH AMBIGUITY WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT WEAK AVERAGE BUSINESS ACUMEN
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Jessica Feeley Stanley Engelhardt Elizabeth Mobley Natasha Parenteau Keith Bigham Nicholas Kling Mark Mcginley Juan Marcotte Richard Baier Cindy Yanez Sheryl Grimm Sean Spinks CONFLICT MANAGEMENT GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
ACTION ORIENTED
Sr No
NAME
WEAK
AVERAGE
GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Jessica Feeley Stanley Engelhardt Elizabeth Mobley Natasha Parenteau Keith Bigham Nicholas Kling Mark Mcginley Juan Marcotte Richard Baier Cindy Yanez Sheryl Grimm Sean Spinks

WEAK CUSTOMER FOCUS AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT WEAK FUNCTIONAL / TECHNICAL SKILLS WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT INTEGRITY / TRUST AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
Sr No
NAME
WEAK
CREATIVITY AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
79

WEAK PEER RELATIONSHIPS AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
Sr No
NAME
WEAK
PERSONAL LEARNING AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
WEAK
PLANNING AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
TEAM F

WORK HISTORY
Sr No
NAME
1 2 3 4 5
Vincent Burd Katie Sanborn Allen Fair Eileen Hammock Jose Stef ens
80

ACTION ORIENTED
Sr No
NAME
1 2 3 4 5

Sr No
NAME
1 2 3 4 5
81

Sr No
NAME
1 2 3 4 5

WORK HISTORY
TEAM G
Sr No
NAME
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 DEALING WITH AMBIGUITY WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT WEAK AVERAGE BUSINESS ACUMEN GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT WEAK CONFLICT MANAGEMENT AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
Kenneth Zucker Albert Reed Christine Barefoot Matthew Chalmers Howard Wimer Bryan Ontiveros Jesse Dorr Holly Fontes Yolanda Cole Roger Emmons Cantrell Bobby Rutter Harold Digiovanni
82
ACTION ORIENTED
Sr No
NAME
WEAK
AVERAGE
GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

WEAK CUSTOMER FOCUS AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT WEAK FUNCTIONAL / TECHNICAL SKILLS WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT INTEGRITY / TRUST AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
Sr No
NAME
WEAK
CREATIVITY AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
83
WEAK PEER RELATIONSHIPS AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT WEAK
Sr No
NAME
WEAK
OR GAN IZAT ION AL AGIL IT Y AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
PERSONAL LEARNING AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
WEAK
AVERAGE
PLANNING GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
TEAM H

WORK HISTORY
Sr No
NAME
1 2 3 4 5
Harold Gregoire Celia Whetstone Marvin Estabrook Ronald Fong April Mcafee
84

ACTION ORIENTED
Sr No
NAME
1 2 3 4 5

Sr No
NAME
1 2 3 4 5
85

Sr No
NAME
1 2 3 4 5

Skill Matrix and Competency Mapping Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Skill Matrix and Competency Mapping Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PROJECT REPORT ON

SKILL MATRIX AND COMPETENCY MAPPING

Textron India Pvt. Ltd.

BY JOJAN V. JOSE 09DM050 2010

JOJAN V. JOSE 09DM050

Dr. MANOSI CHAUDHURI (Project Mentor)

BIRLA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGY, GREATER NOIDA 2009-2011

Figure showing the various BUs of Textron:

Textron India GTC

Marine & Land Systems

Theory and Terminology

Performance Coaching Performance Management Participative Management

SOFT SKILL MATRIX (SAMPLE)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 EMPLOYEE 1 EMPLOYEE 2 EMPLOYEE 3 EMPLOYEE 4 EMPLOYEE 5 EMPLOYEE 6 EMPLOYEE 7 EMPLOYEE 8 EMPLOYEE 9

Communication Interpersonal Personal / Motivational Administrative

SOFT SKILL NAMES

BENCHMARK RATINGS FOR EACH SKILL

EMPLOYEE NAMES (SPECIFIC TEAMS)

SPACE FOR PROVIDING RATINGS

SPACE FOR PROVIDING RATINGS

TECHNICAL (HARD) SKILL MATRIX- (SAMPLE)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 EMPLOYEE 1 EMPLOYEE 2 EMPLOYEE 3 EMPLOYEE 4 EMPLOYEE 5 EMPLOYEE 6 EMPLOYEE 7 EMPLOYEE 8 EMPLOYEE 9

TECH SKILL MATRIX

Capable With Assistance

TECHNICAL SKILL NAMES

EMPLOYEE NAMES (SPECIFIC TEAMS)

BENCHMARK RATINGS FOR EACH SKILL

Communication Interpersonal Personal/Motivational Administrative Managerial

RATING SCHEME USED

The legend used for mapping the competencies is given below:

1 TECHNICAL / PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION

10 FUNCTIONAL / TECHNICAL SKILLS

2 WORK HISTORY / REQUIREMENTS

5 DEALING WITH AMBIGUITY

Other Designs for Skill Matrix

Emp A Emp B Emp C Emp D Emp E Emp F Emp G Emp H Emp I

Skill comparison matrix for teams using similar kinds of skills

SKILL COMPARISON FOR TEAMS USING SIMILAR SKILLS

TEAM A TEAM B TEAM C TEAM D TEAM E TEAM F TEAM G TEAM H TEAM I

SKILL COMPARISON FOR THE SAME EMPLOYEE AT DIFFERENT TIME INTERVALS

360 DEGREE RATINGS FOR MORE ACCURATE SKILL MATRIX

360 DEGREE RATINGS FOR MORE ACCURATE SKILL MATRIX

360 DEGREE RATINGS FOR MORE ACCURATE SKILL MATRIX

Skill comparisons for employees based on achievements

SKILL COMPARISON FOR EMPLOYEES USING ACHIEVEMENTS

Data Collection Techniques

SAMPLE SKILL MATRIX

EMPLOYEE 1 EMPLOYEE 2 EMPLOYEE 3 EMPLOYEE 4 EMPLOYEE 5

SAMPLE SKILL MATRIX

EMPLOYEE 1 EMPLOYEE 2 EMPLOYEE 3 EMPLOYEE 4 EMPLOYEE 5

SAMPLE SKILL MATRIX

EMPLOYEE 1 EMPLOYEE 2 EMPLOYEE 3 EMPLOYEE 4 EMPLOYEE 5

A sample of the analyzed and colour coded sheet is shown below:

SAMPLE SKILL MATRIX

TLSR EMPLOYEE 1 EMR

Training Required Potential In-House Trainer

Sample pieces of the competency maps are shown below:

CORE COMPETENCY REQUIREMENTS

ACTION ORIENTED WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT

DEALING WITH AMBIGUITY WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT

BUSINESS ACUMEN WEAK AVERAGE GOOD PROFICIENT EXPERT

EMPLOYEE 1 EMPLOYEE 2 EMPLOYEE 3 EMPLOYEE 4 EMPLOYEE 5