A STUDY ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL SYSTEM

Introduction to Performance Appraisal Performance appraisal is a formal, structured system of measuring and evaluating an employees job, related behaviors and outcomes to discover how and why the employee is presently performing on the job and how the employee can perform more effectively in the future so that the employee, organization, and society all benefit. Performance appraisal is a process of summarizing, assessing and developing the work performance of an employee. In order to be effective and constructive, the performance manager should make every effort to obtain as much objective information about the employee's performance as possible. Performance Appraisal is a review and discussion of an employee's performance of assigned duties and responsibilities based on results obtained by the employee in their job, not on the employee's personality characteristics. Personality should be considered only when it relates to performance of assigned duties and responsibilities. It is a structured formal interaction between a subordinate and supervisor, that usually takes the form of a periodic interview (annual or semi-annual), in which the work performance of the subordinate is examined and discussed, with a view to identifying weaknesses and strengths as well as opportunities for improvement and skills development. In many organizations - but not all - appraisal results are used, either directly or indirectly, to help determine reward outcomes. That is, the appraisal results are used to identify the better performing employees who should get the majority of available merit pay increases, bonuses, and promotions.

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK Performance appraisals are a systematic way of evaluating the standard of an employees performance. Steps for developing a systematic performance appraisal 1. Identify key performance criteria Development of key performance criteria should be based on a comprehensive job description and undertaken in consultation with employees. 2. Develop appraisal measures In order to obtain accurate and valid performance appraisals, appraisal measures should be tailored to the specific job or job family (i.e., groups of similar jobs). An evaluation of factors in the work environment which help or hinder performance is also recommended. This ensures that realistic expectations are set for employees performance, and is also likely to increase the perceived fairness and acceptability of performance appraisals. 3. Collect performance information from different sources Traditionally, it has been the sole responsibility of managers / supervisors to assess performance. However, other organisational members (e.g., clients, coworkers, subordinates) can be a valuable source of information as they are likely to have exposure to different aspects of an employees performance. Collecting information from multiple sources can increase the accuracy of performance evaluation (i.e., reduce bias), and increase employees perceptions of fairness. 4. Conduct an appraisal interview The two central purposes of the appraisal interview are to: 1. Reflect on past performances to identify major achievements, areas for further improvement, and barriers / facilitators to effective performance. 2. Identify goals and strategies for future work practice. The appraisal interview should be a constructive, two-way exchange between the supervisor and employee, with preparation for the interview done by both parties beforehand.

5. Evaluate the appraisal process The performance appraisal process should undergo regular review and improvement. For example, focus groups or surveys could be conducted to gauge employees perceptions of the appraisal process. A successful performance appraisal process should demonstrate a change in both the ratings of employees performance and aspects of the work environment that impact upon work performance. Best Practice In Performance Appraisal In essence, best practice in performance appraisals involves: Integrating performance appraisal into a formal goal setting system Basing appraisals on accurate and current job descriptions Offering adequate support and assistance to employees to improve their performance (e.g., professional development opportunities). Ensuring that appraisers have adequate knowledge and direct experience of the employees performance Conducting appraisals on a regular basis.

Meaning and Definition of Performance Appraisal Performance appraisal is a formal system that evaluates the quality of a employees performance. An appraisal should not be viewed as an end in itself, but rather as an important process within a broader performance management system that links: Organizational objectives Day-to-day performance Professional development Rewards and incentives

In simple terms, appraisal may be understood as the assessment of an individuals performance in a systematic way, the performance being measured against such factors as job knowledge, quality, and quantity of output, initiative, leadership abilities, supervision, dependability, cooperation, judgment, versatility, health, and the like. Assessment should not be confined to past performance alone. Potentials of the employee for future performance must also be assessed. A formal definition of performance appraisal is: It is the systematic evaluation of the individual with respect to his or her performance on the job and his or her potential for development. A more comprehensive definition is: Performance appraisal is a formal, structured system of measuring and evaluating an employees job related behaviors and outcomes to discover how and why the employee is presently performing on the job and how the employee can perform more effectively in the future so that the employee, organization, and society all benefit. Performance appraisal is the process of obtaining, analyzing and recognition information about the relative worth of an employee. Performance appraisal is also known as performance management, performance evaluation and performance review. Traditional Performance Appraisal The history of performance appraisal is quite brief. Its roots in the early 20th century can be traced to Taylor's pioneering Time and Motion studies. But this is not very helpful, for the same may be said about almost everything in the field of modern human resources management. During the First World War, appraisals concept was adopted by US army which was in the form of merit rating. It was man-to-man rating system for evaluation of military personnel. From the army this concept entered the business field and was restricted to hourly-paid workers. During 1920s, relational wage structures for hourly- paid workers were adopted in industrial units and each worker were used to be rated in comparison to other for determining wages rates. This system was called merit rating. The process was firmly linked to material outcomes. If an employee's performance was found to be less than ideal, a cut in pay would follow. On the other hand, if their performance was better

than the supervisor expected, a pay rise was in order. Little consideration, if any, was given to the developmental possibilities of appraisal. If was felt that a cut in pay, or a rise, should provide the only required impetus for an employee to either improve or continue to perform well. Sometimes this basic system succeeded in getting the results that were intended; but more often than not, it failed. For example, early motivational researchers were aware that different people with roughly equal work abilities could be paid the same amount of money and yet have quite different levels of motivation and performance. These observations were confirmed in empirical studies. Pay rates were important, yes; but they were not the only element that had an impact on employee performance. It was found that other issues, such as morale and self-esteem, could also have a major influence. As a result, the traditional emphasis on reward outcomes was progressively rejected. In the 1950s in the United States, the potential usefulness of appraisal as tool for motivation and development was gradually recognized. The general model of performance appraisal, as it is known today, began from that time. Modern Performance Appraisal Performance appraisal may be defined as a structured formal interaction between a subordinate and supervisor, that usually takes the form of a periodic interview (annual or semi-annual), in which the work performance of the subordinate is examined and discussed, with a view to identifying weaknesses and strengths as well as opportunities for improvement and skills development. In many organizations - but not all - appraisal results are used, either directly or indirectly, to help determine reward outcomes. That is, the appraisal results are used to identify the better performing employees who should get the majority of available merit pay increases, bonuses, and promotion.

By the same token, appraisal results are used to identify the poorer performers who may require some form of counseling, or in extreme cases, demotion, dismissal or decreases in pay.

(Organizations need to be aware of laws in their country that might restrict their capacity to dismiss employees or decrease pay.)

Whether this is an appropriate use of performance appraisal - the assignment and justification of rewards and penalties - is a very uncertain and contentious matter.

A Framework of Performance Appraisal 1. Develop clear job description. 2. Select an appropriate people with an appropriate selection process. 3. Provide effective orientation, education and training. 4. Provide ongoing coaching and feedback. 5. Conduct quarterly performance development discussion. 6. Design effective compensation system. 7. Provide promotion and career development opportunities.

Objective of Performance Appraisal Salary Increase Performance appraisal plays a role in making decision about salary increase. Normally salary increase of an employee depends upon on how he is performing his job. There is continuous evaluation of his performance either formally or informally. This may disclose how well an employee is performing and how much he should be compensated by way of salary increases. Promotion Performance appraisal plays significant role where promotion is based on merit and seniority. Performance appraisal discloses how an employee is working in his present job and what are his strong and weak points. In the light of these, it can be decided whether he can be promoted to the next higher position.

Training and Development Performance appraisal tries to identify the strengths and weakness of an employee on his present job. This information can be used for devising training and development programmes appropriate for overcoming weaknesses of employees. Feedback Performance appraisal provides feedback to employees about their performance. A person works better when he knows how he is working. This works in two ways, firstly, the person gets feedback about his performance. Secondly, when the person gets feedback about his performance, he can relate his work to the organizational objectives. Pressure on Employees Performance appraisal puts a sort of pressure on employees for better performance. If the employees are conscious that they are being appraised in respect of certain factors and their future largely depends on such appraisal. Communication 1. To provide feedback to employees so that they come to know where they stand and can improve their job performance. 2. To clearly establish goals i.e. what is expected of the employee in terms of performance and future work assignments. 3. To provide coaching, counseling, career planning and motivation to employees. 4. To develop positive superior subordinate relations and thereby reduce grievance. Career development objectives 1. To assess the strong and weak points in the working of the employees and finding remedies for weak points through training. 2. To determine career potential. 3. To plan career goals.

Others 1) Identifying systemic factors that are barriers to, or facilitators of, effective performance. 2) To confirm the services of probationary employees upon their completing the Probationary period satisfactorily. 3) To improve communication. Performance appraisal provides a format for dialogue between the superior and the subordinate, and improves understanding of personal goals and concerns. This can also have the effect of increasing the trust between the rater and the ratee. 4) To determine whether HR programmes such as selection, training, and transfer have been effective or not.

How to Conduct a Performance Appraisal Process The following five-step approach to conducting a systematic performance appraisal is recommended: 1. Identify key performance criteria 2. Develop appraisal measures 3. Collect performance information from different sources 4. Conduct an appraisal interview 5. Evaluate the appraisal process.

Step 1: Identify Key Performance Criteria Perhaps one of the most challenging aspects of setting up a performance appraisal is deciding what to assess. In essence, four key dimensions of performance should be considered in a performance appraisal.

Key Dimensions of Performance Competencies Behaviours Results / outcomes Knowledge, skills, and abilities relevant to performance Specific actions conducted and / or tasks performed Outputs, quantifiable results, measurable outcomes and

achievements, objectives attained Organisational citizenship Actions that are over and above usual job responsibilities behaviours

To ensure that the performance criteria are relevant to work practice and acceptable to appraisers and employees: i) Base the performance criteria on an up-to-date job description ii) Develop criteria in consultation with appraisers and employees.

i) Base the performance criteria on an up-to-date job description: Clear and explicit links between performance appraisal and a job description will ensure the relevance of the appraisal. If a detailed job description is not available or is out-of-date, it is strongly recommended that an accurate job description be developed prior to conducting a performance appraisal. ii) Develop criteria in consultation with appraisers and employee: Linking performance appraisals with job descriptions can help to focus the appraisal process on the key competencies, behaviours and outcomes associated with a particular role or position. It can also be useful to consult with employees to: Ensure that key aspects of a role / position are represented in the job description, for example: 1. Conduct assessments 2. Plan interventions

3. Manage cases 4. Liaise with and refer to other providers 5. Keep up-to-date service records and case notes 6. Write reports 7. Develop a clear understanding of the relative importance of various competencies, 8. Behaviours and outcomes 9. Identify how these key competencies, behaviours and outcomes can be fairly and accurately assessed.

Employees are more likely to accept and be satisfied with the appraisal system if they participate in the development of appraisal criteria and measures, and in the process of conducting appraisals. There are three important considerations in the design of appraisal measures: 1. Generic versus individually tailored measures 2. Objective versus subjective assessments 3. Assessing the impact of the work environment on performance.

1. Generic versus individually tailored measures Many workplaces use a generic rating form for all employees irrespective of their role or position within the organisation. Although this approach can save time and minimise cost, the accuracy and relevance of appraisals may be significantly diminished. The one size fits all approach of generic measures may overlook important performance criteria that are relevant to particular jobs, and may also include criteria that are irrelevant to others. Where time and other resources permit, it is more appropriate to construct appraisal formats tailored to specific jobs or families of jobs. If the development of job-specific (i.e., individually tailored) appraisal formats is beyond the resource capacity of the organisation, an alternative would be to develop two groups of criteria:

 Core competencies that have applicability to the performance appraisal of all employees within the organisation. Additional competencies applicable only to some jobs and included in the performance appraisal if relevant. 2. Objective versus subjective assessments A basic distinction between different types of appraisal measures concerns the use of objective or subjective criteria. Objective assessments of work performance: Objective measures of job performance involve counts of various work-related behaviours. Some common objective job performance measures include 1. Absenteeism (number of days absent) 2. Accidents (number of accidents) 3. Incidents at work (number of incidents / assaults / altercations) 4. Lateness (days late) 5. Meeting deadlines. Objective measures can be relatively quick and easy to obtain (given good organisational recordkeeping). However, it can be unwise to place too much emphasis on these types of objective measures. An exclusive focus on results / outcomes may mask factors that impact on employees performance that are beyond their control (e.g., client workload).

3. Subjective assessments of work performance Subjective measures rely on the judgment of an appraiser (self, coworkers, or supervisor). Subjective assessments are commonly used in performance appraisals and often involve the use of rating scales. Subjective assessments are more likely to provide accurate performance appraisals when: The behaviours and outcomes being assessed are stated in clear behavioural terms

 The employee understands the measures (e.g., rating scales) being used to evaluate their performance, and agree that the measures are fair and accurate (i.e., measures what it is supposed to) Measurement is as brief as possible whilst addressing essential behaviours and outcomes (frustration with long and unwieldy questionnaires may introduce error in responses). ii) Assessing the impact of the work environment on performance The goal of a performance appraisal is to support and improve employees performance and effectiveness. Therefore, it makes sense for an appraisal to include an assessment of factors in the work environment that help or hinder a employees capacity to perform effectively. Explicit assessment of environmental factors is also likely to increase the perceived fairness and acceptability of performance appraisals. For example, an employees capacity to provide effective treatment interventions is influenced by factors such as: Access to private, soundproofed, adequately sized rooms for counselling Availability of validated, user-friendly assessment tools Availability of reliable and approachable management / administration.

iii) Collect Performance Information from Different Sources Once the appraisal measures are developed, the next step involves collection of accurate performance information. A common trap is to begin noting observations of employees just before conducting appraisals. This is likely to give an inaccurate picture of a employees performance. Ideally, employees performance should be observed in a systematic way over time (e.g., in a diary). This method ensures the accuracy of information about their performances. Many employees in the organisation operate with a relatively high degree of autonomy. This combined with the heavy workload of most managers / supervisors, may limit opportunities to conduct regular observation of employees performance. In addition, perceptions of ongoing monitoring may foster a sense of surveillance which can damage

staff morale. A more suitable approach may be to keep critical incident reports that note specific examples of both excellent and unsatisfactory performances. Supervisors can also encourage employees to keep track of their own performance records such as emails or letters that commend them on their achievements. Traditionally, it has been the sole responsibility of managers / supervisors to assess performance. However, other organisational members can be a valuable source of information as they are likely to have exposure to different aspects of a employees performance. This approach is known as 360-degree feedback. For instance, coworkers can provide valuable information on teamwork skills, and subordinates can provide useful information on leadership style. There are many advantages to obtaining feedback on performance from sources other than supervisors or managers.

Five different sources of performance appraisal information are considered here: Manager / supervisor appraisals: Managers / supervisors play a central role in the appraisal process, and should always be included as one of the main appraisers. In essence, managers and supervisors have two roles in performance appraisal: 1.Judge: assessing performance 2.Coach: providing constructive feedback and identifying areas for improvement. Performing both roles simultaneously can be difficult. Employees may be reluctant to admit areas for improvement if performance assessment is linked with desired outcomes such as pay, promotion or opportunities to work in desired areas. One solution is to separate the judge and coach roles by conducting separate appraisal meetings. Self-appraisals: The process of evaluating ones own performance can help to increase employees commitment to the appraisal process, perceptions of appraisal fairness, and satisfaction with the appraisal process. Self-appraisal can also be useful for identifying areas for development. Not surprisingly,

self-appraisals are usually biased towards leniency. Strategies to increase the accuracy of self appraisals include: a) Using clear definitions of performance criteria linked to specific, observable behaviours b) Informing employees that their ratings will be checked and compared to other sources of appraisal (i.e., for accuracy) d) Ensuring employees receive regular feedback on their performance. It is recommended that self appraisals are used for professional development purposes, rather than for making administrative decisions (i.e., pay increases, promotion). Coworker appraisals: Coworkers can provide valuable feedback on performance, particularly where teamwork occurs. Coworkers are often aware of different aspects of a employees performance that managers /supervisors may not have the opportunity to observe. In addition, as there is usually more than one coworker who rates a workers performance, their evaluations tend to be more reliable. Coworker evaluations, however, may be biased towards those individuals most well liked in an organisation (i.e., friendship bias). Furthermore, coworker appraisals may have a negative impact on teamwork and cooperation if employees are competing with one another for organizational incentives and rewards. It is recommended that coworker appraisals are used for professional development rather than administrative decisions. Subordinate appraisals: Subordinates are a valuable source of information regarding particular aspects of a supervisor or leaders performance such as communication, team building or delegation. Subordinates can provide feedback to help managers / supervisors develop their skills in these areas. The focus should be on aspects of managerial performance that subordinates are able to comment upon. This source of appraisal may only be appropriate in larger organisations where there are sufficient subordinates to allow anonymity.

Client appraisals: Clients may also offer a different perspective on a employees performance, particularly for jobs that require a high degree of interaction with people. For example, client appraisals can be a valuable source of feedback regarding the quality of service provision (e.g., the quality of interaction, degree of empathy, level of support, degree of professionalism). Organisations often have performance contracts that specify goals and deliverables for client

outcomes. Whilst it is important that organisational goals and deliverables are reflected in the appraisal criteria for individuals and teams, it is recommended that particular care be taken if incorporating client outcomes. Relying on client outcomes as an indicator of performance can have undesirable effects due to the complex and sensitive nature of work. A range of factors may influence client outcomes, many of which are outside the control of an individual employee. It is rare for a successful (or otherwise) outcome to be the sole result of one persons efforts. This makes client outcomes a poor reflection of the quality of treatment provided by the employee. For example, good employee performance will not always bring about client improvements, and client relapses may not be due to poor employee performance. In addition to considering client outcomes, it may also be beneficial to focus on employees skills and abilities in providing services per se (i.e., independent of client outcomes).

Strategies to support appraisers and enhance appraisal accuracy Rating another persons performance is not an easy task, particularly with complex jobs or performance criteria. Strategies to support appraisers and increase the likelihood of accurate assessments include: Providing practical training in rating techniques, which includes opportunities to practice appraising performance and providing feedback Limiting the assessment to performance criteria that an appraiser has observed /experienced in regard to the employee

Providing structured assessment tools with clear explanations regarding the criteria to be assessed, and performance standard.

iv. Conduct an Appraisal Interview The next step in a performance appraisal is to conduct the appraisal interview. The two central purposes of the appraisal interview are to: Reflect on past performance to identify major achievements, areas that require further development, and barriers / facilitators to effective performance Identify goals and strategies for future work practice. As discussed below, supervisors and managers can use a range of strategies to ensure that the appraisal interview is positive, constructive and of greatest benefit for employees effectiveness. Before the interview 1. Help employees to become familiar and comfortable with talking about their performance by engaging in regular, informal communication on work progress, potential obstacles and issues, possible solutions and assistance 2. Encourage employees to prepare employees should be encouraged to review their own 3. performance before the interview 4. Do your own preparation plan ahead. Draft a list of the issues that you want to address with the employee (i.e., strengths and weaknesses of performance, strategies to improve performance). Give specific examples of the employees performances that you want to highlight. During the interview 5. Encourage employee participation start by inviting the employee to share their views about their performance 6. Begin with positive feedback to put the employee at ease 7. Make it a two-way discussion 8. Set goals mutually ensure employees participate in determining specific, challenging but attainable goals for future work performance

9. Ensure that there is a clear agreement on performance objectives and the evaluation criteria for the next year 10. Keep written records of the appraisal interview on which both parties have signed off.

After the interview 1. Coach employees regularly provide frequent feedback to help employees improve their performance 2. Assess progress towards goals frequently periodic reviewing of progress towards goals helps keep behaviour on track and enhances commitment to effective performance. 3. Relate rewards to performance by linking appraisal results to employment decisions such as promotions and salaries, employees are more likely to prepare for, participate in, and be satisfied with the appraisal system.

v. Evaluate the Appraisal Process As with any organisational system, the performance appraisal process should undergo regular review and improvement. For example, the process of performance appraisal could be evaluated by conducting focus groups or surveys with employees to gauge their satisfaction with the appraisal process (and suggestions for improvements). It may also be useful to monitor the types of issues raised by supervisors and employees over time. A successful performance appraisal process should demonstrate a change in both the ratings of employees performance (i.e., ideally performance ratings should improve, or at least remain at a satisfactorily stable level over time) and the work environment (i.e., evidence that significant barriers to work practice are being addressed by the organisation).

Methods of Performance Appraisal Rating Scales: The rating scale method offers a high degree of structure for appraisals. Each employee trait or characteristic is rated on a bipolar scale that usually has several points ranging from poor to excellent (or some similar arrangement).

The traits assessed on these scales include employee attributes such as cooperation, communications ability, initiative, punctuality and technical (work skills) competence. The nature and scope of the traits selected for inclusion is limited only by the imagination of the scales designer, or by the organizations need to know. The one major provision in selecting traits is that they should be in some way relevant to the appraisees job. Advantages The greatest advantage of rating scales is that they are structured and standardised. This allows ratings to be easily compared and contrasted - even for entire workforces. Each employee is subjected to the same basic appraisal process and rating criteria, with the same range of responses. This encourages equality in treatment for all appraisees and imposes standard measures of performance across all parts of the organization. Rating scale methods are easy to use and understand. The concept of the rating scale makes obvious sense; both appraisers and appraisees have an intuitive appreciation for the simple and efficient logic of the bipolar scale. The result is widespread acceptance and popularity for this approach. Disadvantages Trait Relevance: Are the selected rating-scale traits clearly relevant to the jobs of all the appraisees? It is inevitable that with a standardised and fixed system of appraisal that certain traits will have a greater relevance in some jobs than in others. For example, the trait initiative might not be very important in a job that is tightly defined and rigidly structured. In such cases, a low appraisal rating for initiative may not mean that an employee lacks initiative. Rather, it may reflect that fact that an employee has few opportunities to use and display that particular trait. The relevance of rating scales is therefore said to be context-sensitive. Job and workplace circumstances must be taken into account. Systemic Disadvantage: Rating scales, and the traits they purport to measure, generally attempt to encapsulate all the relevant indicators of employee performance. There is an assumption that all the true and best indicators of performance are included, and all false and irrelevant indicators are excluded.

This is an assumption very difficult to prove in practice. It is possible that an employees performance may depend on factors that have not been included in the selected traits. Such employees may end up with ratings that do not truly or fairly reflect their effort or value to the organization. Employees in this class are systemically disadvantaged by the rating scale method. Perceptual Errors:This includes various well-known problems of selective perception (such as the horns and halos effect) as well as problems of perceived meaning.Selective perception is the human tendency to make private and highly subjective assessments of what a person is really like, and then seek evidence to support that view (while ignoring or downplaying evidence that might contradict it). This is a common and normal psychological phenomenon. All human beings are affected by it. In other words, we see in others what we want to see in them. An example is the supervisor who believes that an employee is inherently good (halo effect) and so ignores evidence that might suggest otherwise. Instead of correcting the slackening employee, the supervisor covers for them and may even offer excuses for their declining performance. On the other hand, a supervisor may have formed the impression that an employee is bad (horns effect). The supervisor becomes unreasonably harsh in their assessment of the employee, and always ready to criticize and undermine them. The horns and halo effect is rarely seen in its extreme and obvious forms. But in its more subtle manifestations, it can be a significant threat to the effectiveness and credibility of performance appraisal. Perceived Meaning:Problems of perceived meaning occur when appraisers do not share the same opinion about the meaning of the selected traits and the language used on the rating scales. For example, to one appraiser, an employee may demonstrate the trait of initiative by reporting work problems to a supervisor. To another appraiser, this might suggest an excessive dependence on supervisory assistance - and thus a lack of initiative.As well, the language and terms used to construct a scale - such as Performance exceeds expectations or Below average skill - may mean different things to different appraisers.

Rating Errors: The problem here is not so much errors in perception as errors in appraiser judgement and motive. Unlike perceptual errors, these errors may be (at times) deliberate. The most common rating error is central tendency. Busy appraisers, or those wary of confrontations and repercussions, may be tempted to dole out too many passive, middle-of-the-road ratings (e.g., satisfactory or adequate), regardless of the actual performance of a subordinate. Thus the spread of ratings tends to clump excessively around the middle of the scale. This problem is worsened in organizations where the appraisal process does not enjoy strong management support, or where the appraisers do not feel confident with the task of appraisal. Check-list Method: Under this method, checklist of Statements of Traits of employee in the form of Yes or No based questions is prepared. Here, the rater only does the reporting or checking and HR department does the actual evaluation. The rater concerned has to tick appropriate answers relevant to the appraisees. When the check-list is completed, it is sent to HR department for further processing. Various questions in the check list may have either equal weightage or more weightage may be given to those questions which are more important. The HR department then calculates the total scores which show the appraisal result of an employee. Advantages economy, ease of administration, limited training required, standardization. Disadvantages Raters biases, use of improper weights by HR Dept, does not allow rater to give relative ratings. Force Choice Method: A series of statements arranged in the blocks of two or more are given and the rater indicates which statement is true or false. The rater is forced to make a choice. HR department does actual assessment. Advantages Absence of personal biases because of forced choice. Disadvantages Statements may not be correctly framed. Force Distribution Method: One of the problems faced in large organizations is relative assessment tendencies of raters. Some are too lenient and others too severe. This method

overcomes that problem. It forces everyone to do a comparative rating of all the employees on a predetermined distribution pattern of good to bad. Say 10% employees in Excellent Grade, 20% in Good Grade, 40% in Average Grade, 20% in Below Average Grade and 10% in Unsatisfied grade. The real problem of this method occurs in organizations where there is a tendency to pack certain key departments with all good employees and some other departments with discards and laggards. Relatively good employees of key departments get poor rating and relatively poor employees of laggards departments get good rating. Critical Incident Method: In this method, only critical incidents and behavior associated with these incidents are taken for evaluation. This method involves three steps. A test of noteworthy on the job behavior is prepared. A group of experts then assigns scale values to them depending on the degree of desirability for the job. Finally, a checklist of incidents which define good and bad employees is prepared. Advantages ---This method is very useful for discovering potential of employees who can be useful in critical situation. Disadvantages --a) Negative incidents are, generally, more noticeable than positive ones. b) The recording of incidents is a core to the superior and may be put off forgotten. c) Overly close supervision may result. Essay Method: In the essay method approach, the appraiser prepares a written statement about the employee being appraised. The statement usually concentrates on describing specific strengths and weaknesses in job performance. It also suggests courses of action to remedy the identified problem areas. The statement may be written and edited by the appraiser alone, or it be composed in collaboration with the appraisee. and easily

Advantages The essay method is far less structured and confining than the rating scale method. It permits the appraiser to examine almost any relevant issue or attribute of performance. This contrasts sharply with methods where the appraisal criteria are rigidly defined. Appraisers may place whatever degree of emphasis on issues or attributes that they feel appropriate. Thus the process is open-ended and very flexible. The appraiser is not locked into an appraisal system the limits expression or assumes that employee traits can be neatly dissected and scaled. Disadvantages Essay methods are time-consuming and difficult to administer. Appraisers often find the essay technique more demanding than methods such as rating scales. The techniques greatest advantage - freedom of expression - is also its greatest handicap. The varying writing skills of appraisers can upset and distort the whole process. The process is subjective and, in consequence, it is difficult to compare and contrast the results of individuals or to draw any broad conclusions about organizational needs. Grading: In this method, certain categories of abilities of performance are defined well in advance and person are put in particular category depending on their traits and characteristics. Such categories may be definitional like outstanding, good, average, poor, very poor or may be in terms of letter like A, B, C, D etc with A indicating the best and D indicating the worst. This method, however, suffers from one basic limitation that the rater may rate most of the employees at higher grades. Performance Tests & Observations: This is based on the test of knowledge or skills. The tests may be written or an actual presentation of skills. Tests must be reliable and validated to be useful. Advantage Tests only measure potential and not attitude. Actual performance is more a function of attitude of person than potential. Disadvantages Sometimes costs of test development or administration are high.

Confidential Reports: Though popular with government departments, its application in industry is not ruled out. Here the report is given in the form of Annual Confidentiality Report (ACR). The system is highly secretive and confidential. Feedback to the assessee is given only in case of an adverse entry. Disadvantage is that it is highly prone to biases and recency effect and ratings can be manipulated because the evaluations are linked to future rewards like promotions, good postings, etc. Comparative Evaluation Method (Ranking & Paired Comparisons): These are collection of different methods that compare performance with that of other coworkers. The usual techniques used may be ranking methods and paired comparison method. Ranking Method: Superior ranks his worker based on merit, from best to worst. However how best and why best are not elaborated in this method. It is easy to administer. Paired Comparison Method: In this method each employee is paired with every other employee in the same cadre and then comparative rating done in pairs so formed. The number of comparisons may be calculated with the help of a formula N x (N-1) / 2. The method is too tedious for large departments and often such exact details are not available with rater.

FUTURE-ORIENTED METHODS MBO (management by objective) : The use of management objectives was first widely advocated in the 1950s by the noted management theorist Peter Drucker. MBO (management by objectives) methods of performance appraisal are results-oriented. That is, they seek to measure employee performance by examining the extent to which predetermined work objectives have been met. Usually the objectives are established jointly by the supervisor and subordinate.

Once an objective is agreed, the employee is usually expected to self-audit; that is, to identify the skills needed to achieve the objective. Typically they do not rely on others to locate and specify their strengths and weaknesses. They are expected to monitor their own development and progress. Advantages The MBO approach overcomes some of the problems that arise as a result of assuming that the employee traits needed for job success can be reliably identified and measured. Instead of assuming traits, the MBO method concentrates on actual outcomes. If the employee meets or exceeds the set objectives, then he or she has demonstrated an acceptable level of job performance. Employees are judged according to real outcomes, and not on their potential for success, or on someones subjective opinion of their abilities. The guiding principle of the MBO approach is that direct results can be observed, whereas the traits and attributes of employees (which may or may not contribute to performance) must be guessed at or inferred. The MBO method recognizes the fact that it is difficult to neatly dissect all the complex and varied elements that go to make up employee performance. MBO advocates claim that the performance of employees cannot be broken up into so many constituent parts - as one might take apart an engine to study it. But put all the parts together and the performance may be directly observed and measured. Disadvantages MBO methods of performance appraisal can give employees a satisfying sense of autonomy and achievement. But on the downside, they can lead to unrealistic expectations about what can and cannot be reasonably accomplished. Supervisors and subordinates must have very good reality checking skills to use MBO appraisal methods. They will need these skills during the initial stage of objective setting, and for the purposes of self-auditing and self-monitoring. Unfortunately, research studies have shown repeatedly that human beings tend to lack the skills needed to do their own reality checking. Nor are these skills easily conveyed by training. Reality itself is an intensely personal experience, prone to all forms of perceptual bias. One of the strengths of the MBO method is the clarity of purpose that flows from a set of wellarticulated objectives. But this can be a source of weakness also. It has become very apparent

that the modern organization must be flexible to survive. Objectives, by their very nature, tend to impose a certain rigidity. Of course, the obvious answer is to make the objectives more fluid and yielding. But the penalty for fluidity is loss of clarity. Variable objectives may cause employee confusion. It is also possible that fluid objectives may be distorted to disguise or justify failures in performance. Assessment Center Method: This technique was first developed in USA and UK in 1943. An assessment centre is a central location where managers may come together to have their participation in job related exercises evaluated by trained observers. It is more focused on observation of behaviours across a series of select exercises or work samples. Assesses are requested to participate in in-basket exercises, work groups, computer simulations, role playing and other similar activities which require same attributes for successful performance in actual job. Advantages Well-conducted assessment centre can achieve better forecasts of future performance and progress than other methods of appraisals. Also reliability, content validity and predictive ability are said to be high in Assessment Centres. The tests also make sure that the wrong people are not hired or promoted. Finally, it clearly defines the criteria for selection and promotion. Disadvantages Concentrates on future performance potential. No assessment of past performance. Costs of employees travelling and lodging, psychologists. Ratings strongly influenced by assessees inter-personal skills. Solid performers may feel suffocated in simulated situations. 360o Appraisal: It is a technique in which performance data/feedback/rating is collected from all sections of people employee interacts in the course of his job like immediate supervisors, team members, customers, peers, subordinates and self with different weightage to each group of raters. This technique has been found to be extremely useful and effective. It is especially useful to measure inter-personal skills, customer satisfaction and team building skills.

One of the biggest advantages of this system is that assesssees cannot afford to neglect any constituency and has to show all-round performance. However, on the negative side, receiving feedback from multiple sources can be intimidating, threatening, expensive and time consuming. Psychological Appraisals: These appraisals are more directed to assess employees potential for future performance rather than the past one. It is done in the form of in-depth interviews, psychological tests, and discussion with supervisors and review of other evaluations. It is more focused on employees emotional, intellectual, and motivational and other personal characteristics affecting his performance. This approach is slow and costly and may be useful for bright young members who may have considerable potential. However quality of these appraisals largely depends upon the skills of psychologists who perform the evaluation.

COMPANY PROFILE SEW Infrastructures In the year 1959,Sri. Vallurupalli Nageswara Rao, founded 'Southern Engineering Works' (SEW) in Vijaywada, A.P. India, with late Sri. Y. Purnachandra Rao and Sri. Y.M.G. Nageswara Rao as co-founders to pursue civil engineering construction activities. The first project SEW worked on, was the prestigious Nagarjuna Sagar Dam in Andhra Pradesh. During the period of expansion, other partners joined the company and contributed to the growth of the organization to its present status In the year 1967, the seventh year since founding, SEW was awarded a Gold Medal by the then Honble Prime Minister of India Shrimati Indira Gandhi for the record progress of stone masonry in a single day at Nagarjuna Sagar Dam. With the experience gained at the Nagarjuna Sagar Dam, the company participated in the building of other major dams of Tawa, Bargi, Bansagar, Hasdeo Bango, in Madhya Pradesh & Srisailam and Priyadarshini Jurala in Andhra pradesh. SEW attained specialization in the construction of high dams due to the experience gained in the opportunities available in the beginning years of its founding. In the year 1983, the company was converted to a Private Limited Company with the name SEW Constructions Ltd. Over the years, SEW Constructions Ltd., has diversified into construction of

Lined Irrigation Canals Hydel, Thermal and Gas based Power Industrial, Commercial and Residential Buildings Dams & Barrages Lift Irrigation Schemes Canal Structures Roads and Bridges

Fabrication and Erection of Gates Water Supply Projects Transmission Lines

In the year 2008, the company was renamed as SEW Infrastructure Ltd. to highlight our commitment to infrastructure project works. We derive our strength from the shareholders and employees and the company accords top most priority for their growth. Our company is backed by a large team of talented, committed and loyal employees, sub- contractors and suppliers. We continue to aim towards being a leader in the construction industry with strong client relationships, dedicated and satisfied workforce with an impeccable reputation to be the top quality provider without cost and time overruns. Vision "To be a leader in the construction industry setting standards in technology, quality & deliverables while ensuring growth of employees and creating value to share holders.

Core Values We actively demonstrate our Core Values at all times because we are a customer and employee oriented organization delivering maximum value to our stakeholders.

We always Do what we say We do our BEST to EXCEL in everything We RESPECT and COLLABORATE with each other to succeed We continually CHANGE and INNOVATE to IMPROVE We strive to ENRICH our STAKEHOLDERS and COMMUNITY

Strength Dependability is a cherished quality amidst uncertainties. SEW Infrastructure Ltd., earned several accolades for competence, dedication and quality. Having gained experience of handling men and machinery, a fast pace for an impressive growth is now set.

Specialising in the development of sustainable infrastructure, SEW diversified into allied strategic business areas, which are wide ranging and impressive by any standards. A total commitment to quality and time has earned SEW the reputation of a highly dependable company.

Strong Technical and Management team to identify, develop and execute all types of infrastructure projects.

Experienced and well equipped state of the art in house Design facility to execute EPC projects.

Meeting and exceeding customer expectations of project completion dates and quality Proven qualification credentials to take up big size projects Capability in bringing together Joint Venture Partners to take up mega projects of high value.

Clients

AD Hydro Power Limited, Bhilwara Group Aditya Hospitals (P) Ltd Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation BSES-Andhra Power Ltd Bharat Energy Ventures Limited Bharat Heavy Electrical Limited Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd Bharat Oman Refinery Ltd Chattisgarh State Electricity Board DANS Energy Private Ltd

Domus Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd GATI Infrastructure Ltd GMR Jadcherla Expressways Private Ltd GMR Projects Private Ltd GMR hyderabad international airport Ltd Ginni Global Ltd Guntur Vikas (P) Ltd HEG Ltd.(Manideep) Harayana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Ltd Indore Municipal Corporation Institute of Management Technology Irrigation & CAD Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh Irrigation Deparment, Govt of Chhattisgarh Irrigation Department,Govt of Madhya Pradesh JSW Energy (Ratnagiri) Ltd Karnataka Neeravari Nigam Ltd Kelo Project Survey Division Krishna Valley Development Corporation, Govt. of Maharashtra Larsen & Toubro, ECC Division Madhya Pradesh Power Transmission Company Ltd Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board Maharashtra State Power Generation Co Ltd Malana Power Company Ltd Meghalaya State Electricity Board

Minor Irrigation Divison Mumbai Metro One Private Ltd Nagpur Municipal Corporation Narmada Valley Development Corporation, Govt. of Madhya Pradesh National Buildings Construction Corporation Ltd National Highways Authority of India North Eastern Electric Power Corporation Power Grid Corporation Of India Limited (PGCIL) Prasad & Company (Project works) Ltd Public Health Engineering Department, Govt. of Madhya Pradesh Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Ltd (Visakhapatnam Steel Plant) Reliance Innoventures Private Limited Shree Maheshwar Hydel Power Corporation Ltd Shree Ram Urban Infrastructure Ltd South Eastern Coal Fields Ltd Southwest Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd State Electricity Board, Government of Meghalaya Tapi Irrigation Development Corporation, Govt. of Maharashtra Teesta Urja Ltd Utility Energytech Engineers Private Ltd Uttar Pradesh Power Transmission Corporation Limited (UPPTCL) VA Tech Escher Wyss Flovel Ltd

Vallurupalli Rattayya & Seethamma Charitable Trust Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation Water Resources Department, Govt. of Chhattisgarh Water Resources Department, Govt. of Madhya Pradesh

Commitment Environment Responsibility SEW is committed to safeguarding the environment. All our projects, whether it is a hydro electric project, a dam, a new road, or a new airport facility, has the potential to affect people, flora and fauna and the surrounding land. Whether it is cement in the form of concrete for the structure or fossil fuel in the form of electricity to provide energy, environmental aspects play an important part in throughout the life cycle of a project. Our goal always is to protect the environment during a project, and to build in safeguards that will keep protecting it long after the project is complete. Operating ecologically and using limited resources sparingly is a matter of course for SEW. It is our objective to identify the environmental impact of all projects and activities early on and to keep this to a minimum. We make sure that every project we undertake meets or exceeds the national and local governmental regulations for air, water and sound quality. We also take steps to mitigate potential impact on nature at and near project sites. That includes creating new habitats for animals and birds by planting trees to replace any that must be removed. Our environment protection policies are certified to ISO 14001 on all projects across SEW. These are integrated into the core business processes from site planning to waste disposal. Using the ISO 14001 as a guideline we have put in place a series of practices and procedures to manage our commitment towards prevention of pollution and minimization of other negative impacts on the environment. Quality Commitment

Quality objectives are established for all processes of the organization in line with Quality Policy. Management Review meetings are conducted periodically at various levels to ensure the effectiveness and adequacy of the Quality Management System. Learning out of corrective & preventive actions provides opportunity for improvement. CLIENT FOCUS Processes are established for client communication on suggestions for improvements, information on status and meetings. Client feedback is obtained once in three months by the project in-charge. Areas of dissatisfaction / improvements, if any, are discussed in the site management review meetings and corrective actions taken based on those inputs. During the project execution, the client interaction is maintained on a continuous basis and the requirements are met on a regular basis as per the documented Project Quality Plan. QUALITY POLICY Our Quality Policy, is consistent with the SEW Vision & Core Values:

Shows commitment to comply with the requirements and continually improve the effectiveness of the Quality Management System.

Provides a frame work for establishing and reviewing quality objectives. Communicated and understood within the organization. The policy is communicated to all by displaying at strategic locations and through Quality manual, which is being distributed to all sections and intend being circulated to all employees of SEW.

Reviewed for continuing suitability, once in two years.

QUALITY OBJECTIVES

To incorporate state of the art technology in the areas of design, construction, materials, processes and machinery.

Progressive wastage elimination. Continuous training of all employees towards empowerment saving decision making time.

To reduce impact on environment at the project site and to progressively achieve pollution certification.

QUALITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

SEWs Quality Management System (QMS) is taking appropriate steps to improve its effectiveness in accordance with the requirements of ISO 9001 requirements & guidelines.

Procedures are established to specify the methods and criteria for effective operation, control and necessary resources and information to support the operation and monitoring of these processes.
o

1. Procedure for monitoring, measuring and analyzing of these processes and to take necessary actions to achieve planned results and continual improvement of these processes. It has also maintained relevant procedures to identify and exercise required control over outsourced processes, if any

2. The responsibilities and authorities for each function are defined. These include planning, operations, control, review and monitoring and corrective / preventive action as appropriate for respective functions. Effectiveness of the Quality Management System is evaluated through review meetings at various levels and course correction made accordingly. The monthly meetings have pre defined agenda. The information flow is affected through the minutes of meetings to ensure that both operation and control of these processes are effective and transparent.

3. Minute planning is done for each project site for the efficient management of Human Resource, Plant & Machinery and other requirements. Well-established systems exist for acquisition, monitoring & control of effective utilization of the resources against annual targets set.

4. MIS is the tool used in organization for systematic data collection and reporting. This data is used to analyze, reviewed and monitor region / sites at different levels and collated by Management committees. Action plans are

developed and communicated to concerned persons for implementation and improvement.

o

5. Persons responsible for implementation do so as per plan; results are measured against targets set. Performance measurement aims at continual improvement; inability to do so calls for review of processes to improve effectiveness.

Wherever the processes are outsourced for some specific products (projects/contracts), these are controlled in accordance with the documented Quality Management System. QUALITY MANUAL A PROJECT QUALITY PLAN is maintained for all project sites in SEW, that includes the quality manual, work procedures and work instructions.

Employee Safety At SEW Safety is of paramount importance to us, a value that is fundamental to our culture. SEW has pursued zero incident programs on it's nationwide projects to heighten the sense of safety consciousness in every job we do. We strictly enforce the use of all safety equipment available to every worker on our sites. We have an extensive deployment of impact, electrical and fire protection systems available to ALL workers on EVERY project. We believe that every accident, every injury, no matter how small, is preventable, and we embed that philosophy into every SEW project through a combination of technical field procedures and ongoing training programs. Our dedication to safety helps keep workers safe, and it also pays off for our stakeholders. Our operating costs go down and productivity goes up because less time is lost to accidents and results in savings on insurance premiums. The OHSAS 18001 standard for Occupational Health and Safety is used as a guideline to develop our health and safety management systems. SEW implemented a variety of programs and processes, to address the issues around ergonomics, machine guarding and the use of personal protective equipment to achieve greater

protection and to prevent occupational injury and illness of employees, contractors and visitors. All employees are committed to identifying and reporting safety concerns and are involved in implementing solutions for any potential hazard. We have developed formal safety management systems which are being implemented across all projects. A task group to look at independent auditing performs periodic safety inspections to ensure the internal standards on workplace safety are being followed. Safety audit is a key element of safety management. We subject our safety management systems to extensive internal audit scrutiny to ensure adherence to our best practices and standards. All projects maintain programmes for internal audit and inspection, to monitor implementation of operational controls. The Project Safety Task Force, chaired by the Managing Director is established to develop a company policy, review performance, launch new initiatives, and ensure good practices are shared across all projects nationwide. SEW has a setup a nationwide helpline in place for reporting of accidents and incidents of all types (safety, health, environment, quality, security, complaints etc). This also helps perform a common underlying case analysis and a powerful facility to track actions from investigations, audit and risk assessment. We also ask our subcontractors and partners to adopt our commitment to safety and health for exceptional safety performance, even in hazardous work environments, severe weather, and remote locations. SEW provides a blanket insurance cover to all its employees employed on project sites to cover the risk of personal accidents and emergency medical attention etc. SAFETY PROGRAMS SEW strives to be a leader in employee safety. We have extensively deployed safety equipment and programs available ALL our workers on project sites. These include:

Light weight hard hats, eye and face protection, and improved tools and equipment. Full-body harness to fall protection of employees working at heights. Injury prevention program of stretching exercises and training in lifting techniques.

A worker-based safety program that puts the responsibility for changing and eliminating unsafe practices in their hands with support from project management. An program to protect workers who work in underground tunneling areas.

Supplier Engagement Our suppliers and subcontractors are extremely valued members of SEWs contracting and procurement functions supporting the companys strategy and varied service offerings of irrigation, power, transportation and buildings. SEW counts on the quality, consistency and integrity of all services and products delivered by it's suppliers. Jointly we share the common objectives of enhancing our stakeholder value and advancement of our strategic business objectives while conforming to the strict moral code of dignity of labour, equal opportunity, fair competition and respecting mutual business interests. We continually encourage our suppliers to excel in the mutual goals of on-budget performance, on-time quality delivery, enforcement of safe work environment, fairness in labour compensation and transparency of business practices. SEW's PROCUREMENT ORGANIZATION Our procurement is conducted from the SEW head office as well as the project sites. Our staff is segmented into experienced specialists for contracting, procuring and materials management. Most are people dedicated to direct support of our projects while others play a more indirect role by providing functional services to our projects. Each project has its own commercial team responsible for obtaining the correct materials and services, validating capabilities of our prospective vendors, managing the bid cycle, ensuring a fair evaluation of each responsive bidder is conducted prior to award, and monitoring quality and schedule. This team consists of several specific disciplines which include Finance, Contracts, Procurement, Inventory Management, Quality Enforcement and Project Management. Purchase order requirements and specifications adherence will be checked by the Quality Assurance / Inventory Management team. Equipment and Materials receipt will be provided on the spot when such deliveries are made. Industry codes and standards will be applied nonconforming quality and manufacturing issues will be identified before such issues impact quality of project works.

PRINCIPLES OF SUPPLIER AND SUBCONTRACTOR ENGAGEMENT

SEW maintains the highest standards of integrity in its dealings with suppliers and subcontractors

SEW follows rigorous and transparent procedures to select it's suppliers and subcontractors

Every qualified supplier will be provided equal opportunity and afforded fair treatment Our expectations will be clearly set and documented We will be available for a review of our relationship to address performance improvement opportunities

We aim to fully meet our contractual obligations to ensure and protect our joint interests We will protect the confidentiality of quotations and other 3rd party information entrusted to us

We always will strive to avoid placing our employees in positions of potential conflict of interest

We will always strive to promote fair competition among our suppliers in the interests of SEW, acting in accordance with the law

ETHICS AND SAFETY We are committed to the highest safety and ethical standards in the industry and expect the same from our suppliers and subcontractors. We seek suppliers and subcontractors who understand SEW's obligations to it's clients and other stakeholders. SEW seeks to apply high standards of ethics and professional practices in it's supply chain operations. Our practices are governed by the following core principles: Adherence to the law of the land

All applicable legal obligations must be observed based on the area of operations

Bribery and corruption will be strongly dealt with Employee rights & safe working environment

All Human Rights and labour laws should be observed Equal opportunities of employment should be provided regardless of caste, color, gender and religious preferences.

Respect personal dignity of all individuals employed Deal with a sense of fairness and provide access to the judicial system Provide all safety equipment and training facilities to employees

Prohibition of child labour Indian Child Labour (Prohibition & Regulation) Act, 1986 and subsequent rules should be strictly adhered to Environment sensitivity We require our subcontractors and suppliers to promote environment sensitivity, be aware of the risks involved and have sound mitigation practices Social Responsibility The main charitable activities of SEW are handled through SEW Charitable Trust with our founder Sri. Vallurupalli Nageswara Rao and Sri. Vallurupalli Raja Rama Mohan Rao as the trustees. The trust is fully funded and supported by SEW Infrastructure Ltd. Core Principles of the Trust

To provide education, establish maintain, run, develop, improve and extend Educational institutions

To provide boarding and lodging facilities to students and working youth and to render help financially to deserving students

To establish maintain, run, develop, improve and otherwise assist in setting up of Libraries, Reading Rooms and other facilities including publication of books, journals, pamphlets etc.

To establish, maintain, run, develop, improve and otherwise assist in setting up of vocational training centers and similar other institutions

To conduct and carry on classes for propagation of adult education, to take over any existing educational institutions or vocational training centers and to conduct, maintain, run, develop and improve the same subject to the regulations of the Government in this behalf

To establish Hospitals, Nursing Home. Clinics, Health units, Homes for the aged etc., and provide medical facilities to the public

AREAS OF IMPACT EDUCATION Supporting education for the needy children Supported institutions such as Anadha Vidyarthi Griha, Vaidehi Seva Samithi, Bhoja Krishna Narayana Desha Seva Trust to contribute to their social service activities in providing education for the poor and the underprivileged children. School Adoption and Mid-Day Meal Programs SEW supports the cause of education based empowerment to uplift the socially and economically disadvantaged sections of the society by adopting Government Schools lacking in standard infrastructure facilities. This includes:

Student sponsorship Capacity building Mid-day meals Drinking water and sanitation Building school infrastructure

Maintenance of playgrounds Upgrading libraries, laboratories, and computer labs Extra-curricular activities such as science exhibitions, health camps etc.

As part of our Empower with Education programs we have also supported special needs children that are mentally handicapped, deaf and dumb. Vocational Training Established a vocational training institute at Bachupally, Hyderabad, with facilities to provide employment-oriented training to poor people. During the Financial year 2008-09, about 400 unemployed youth, belonging to the various parts of the country, have been trained in activities such as plumbing, electrical, farm work carpentry, masonry with free boarding and lodging facilities on campus. Higher Education Supporting Vignana Jyothi an organization promoting the VNR College of Engineering & Technology (named after our founder Sri. Vallurupalli Nageswara Rao) among numerous other schools and colleges. MEDICAL CAMPS AND RED CROSS In addition to supporting the Red Cross Society of India, the SEW Charitable Trust as conducted free medical camps in associations with hospitals such as the Asian Institute of GastroEntrology, Hyderabad. CULTURAL Supports the development and sustenance of Indian classical music, dance and other cultural activities via South India Cultural Association (SICA). SPORTS Promotes activities to identify talent and generate opportunities for the underprivileged children in sports such as gymnastics and cricket by supporting the Sports Coaching Foundation. Infrastructure Industry

Infrastructure Industry in India have been experiencing a rapid growth in its different sectors with the development of urbanization and increasing involvement of foreign investments in this field. The Indian government has taken initiatives to develop the infrastructure sector, with major emphasis on construction, engineering, IT, entertainment, textiles, food, and utility to name some.

Reports of different segments in Infrastructure Industry: The section of the construction industry of Infrastructure Industry in India reported an estimated growth of 6.78% year-on-year in 2006. The industry in India is highly fragmented and has about 300,000 construction companies operating nationwide. The government has allowed 100% foreign equity in the construction industry. Among the major infrastructure projects are the US$7-8bn India-Iran gas pipeline, the US$2.8bn construction of two power plants, and the US$2.3bn power project in Tamil Nadu. Heavy Engineering Industry is one of the largest segments of Infrastructure Industry in India. It includes a whole range of industries such as Heavy Electricity Machinery, Turbines, Generators, Transformers, Switchgears, Textile Machinery etc. all of which are essential infrastructure for the development of industrial sector in India. For proper industrial development the utility commodities like the switchgear and control gear, MCBs, air circuit breakers, switches, rewireable fuses and HRC fuses with their respective fuse bases, holders and starters are produced. Construction machinery, equipment for irrigation projects, diesel engines, tractors, and transport vehicles, cotton textile and sugar mill machinery are other manufactured objects of great demand of the Infrastructure Industry. Some major areas where these are in use are the multi-crore projections for power generation like nuclear power stations, petrochemical complexes, and chemical plants integrated steel plants, non-ferrous metal units etc. In India BHEL is the largest engineering and manufacturing enterprise in the energy related infrastructure sector, manufacturing over 180 products under 30major product groups and catering the core sectors of the Indian Economy.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Scope of the study: The aim of the study is to find out the level of awareness among the employees about the performance appraisal system adopted in the organization and the steps involved in the appraisal system. The study focuses on how effective is the performance appraisal system by taking into account various factors that affect the effectiveness. Objectives: 1. To effect promotions based on competence and performance. 2. To confirm the services of probationary employees upon their completing the probationary period satisfactorily. 3. To assess the training and development needs of employees. 4. To decide upon a pay raise where (as in the unorganized sector) regular pay scales have not been fixed. 5. To let the employees know where they stand insofar as their performance is concerned and to assist them with constructive criticism and guidance for the purpose of their development. 6. To improve communication. Performance appraisal provides a format for

dialogue between the superior and the subordinate, and improves understanding of personal goals and concerns. This can also have the effect of increasing the trust between the rater and the rate. Sampling: Population: Population is defined as the consumers of cell phones. Sampling method: Non-probability sampling (convenience sampling) Sample size: 100 Data and Sources of data: The study is based mainly on primary data. Primary data will be collected through the issue of questionnaire to the customers of mobile services who had switched their service

provider at least once during the past one year. Care has to be taken to see that the sample represented all socio-economic and demographic users of mobile customers. Secondary Sources: The secondary sources of data include data from magazines, Internet, Books, and various marketing journals. Limitations: 1. The study is done in only one organization hence it cannot be generalized to the whole industry. 2. Another major constraint was the time. The study is undertaken for a period of 60 days only.

DATA INTERPRETATION 1. How long have you working in the present organization? Less than 1yr 1-2yrs 2-5yrs 5-10yrs Above 10yrs

INTERPRETATION: Most of the employees in the Organization are relatively old because a minority of them (i.e. 14%) has between one and two years of experience in the Organization. 28 respondents have 2 5 years of experience, 23 respondents have 5 10 years of experience, 20 respondents have above 10 years of experience, 15 respondents have 1 2 years of experience the remaining 14 respondents are associated less than one year.

2. Are you aware of Performance Appraisal System in the Organization? Yes No

Interpretation: Due to the fact that most of the employees (66%) are experienced in this sector before, they are aware of the Performance Appraisal model used in the Organization. According to the graph, 66% of the respondents are aware of performance appraisal system in the organization while 34% of the respondents are not aware of performance appraisal system.

3. Were you informed about the Performance Appraisal model, used in the Organization, during your induction? Yes No

Interpretation: In the pie graph, it is observed 58% of the respondents are informed about the performance appraisal model during the induction and 42% of the respondents are not informed about performance appraisal model during the induction.

4. The performance appraisal system is sufficient in assessing goals and objectives of the Organization. Do you agree with this statement? Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree

Interpretation: According to the chart, it is mentioned that 36 respondents agree and 23 respondents strongly agree that the performance appraisal system is sufficient in assessing goals and objectives of the organization. 12 respondents disagree and 7 respondents strongly disagree that the performance

appraisal system is insufficient in assessing goals and objectives of the organization. The remaining 22 respondents are given neutral response about the performance appraisal system.

5. How important is the Performance Appraisal to improve your Performance, according to you? Most important Important Not important Not at all important

Interpretation: According to graph, 34 respondents believe it is important, 26 respondents believe it is most important that the performance appraisal will encourage and improve performance. 26

respondents believe that it is not so important and 14 respondents believe that it is not all important to improve the performance appraisal to improve performance.

6. In your opinion, does the Performance Appraisal System give a proper assessment of your contribution to the organization? Yes To some extent No

Interpretation: About 42% of the respondents say that the Performance Appraisal System does give a true and fair view of their contribution to the Organization. This does include employees who think that their rating does not always turn up to be correct as per their opinion. The group of respondents who have replied in the negative(24%), also include candidates who say that the appraisal does not turn out to be right most of the times but do show a fair view sometimes.

7. Are you able to achieve your target set by the Performance Appraisal System? Yes To some extent No

Interpretation: This does show that the satisfaction level of the employees (53%) in this system is quite high and that there is a general feeling of likeability among the respondents.

8. Which kind of reward did you get from the superior for your performance? Salary increment Appreciation Promotion Bonus payment Others

Interpretation: According to the graph, 40 respondents are reward with salary increment, 24 respondents with appreciation, 15 respondents with promotion, 13 respondents with bonus payment and the remaining 8 respondents with other types of rewards.

9. What is your satisfaction level with your superiors efforts to identify your strengths and weaknesses? Highly satisfied Satisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Not satisfied Highly dissatisfied

Interpretation: From the above graph, it was observed that 61 respondents had overcome with the superiors effort to identify the strength and weakness of each and every individual. For 16 respondents the superiors efforts did not help to identify the strength and weakness of the employees.

10. In which stage do you think that appraisal should communicate with employees with regard to Performance Appraisal System? Goal-setting stage Data-gathering stage Mid-term reviews Annual reviews

Interpretation: According to the graph, 31 respondents prefer at data gathering stage, 25 respondents prefer at goal setting stage, 24 respondents prefer at midterm reviews and the remaining 20 respondents prefer at annual reviews.

11. According to you, how often does performance appraisal match to your expectation? Every time Often Sometimes Rarely Never

Interpretation: According to the graph, 29 respondents reach frequently, 23 respondents occasionally, 20 respondents sometimes, 16 respondents every time and 12 respondents never received the performance appraisal.

12. To what extent, supervisor gives feedback to the employees regarding performance appraisal? To a very great extent To a considerable extent To some extent To a very little extent None of the above

Interpretation: Any company should give feedback to the employees periodically. They can also extend proper diagnostic tips/ counseling methods at the required level. According to the graph, 31 respondents feel to some extent, 21 respondents to a considerable extent, 21 respondents to a great extent. 16

respondents feel to a very little extent. While the remaining 11 respondents say that the supervisor will never give the feedback to the employees regarding performance appraisal.

13. Do you agree that superior allows employees to view their performance evaluation? Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree

Interpretation: Half of the respondents (53) say the superior allows employee to view their performance evaluation. 16 respondents are having neutral opinion on the same. While 24 respondents disagree and 7 strongly disagree that the superior does not allow employees to view their performance evaluation.

14. What are the areas that should be improved upon? Standards Frequency of appraisal Appraiser

Interpretation: From the above Pie graph, 47% of the respondents say that there should be a change in the standards of the company, 31% of the respondents believe in the frequency of appraisal and 22% of the respondents believe to change the evaluator.

15. Do you agree that organization is documenting individual performance to support compensation and career planning decisions? Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree

Interpretation: According to the graph, 25 respondents agree and 17 respondents strongly agree that the individual performance will play a important role to support compensation and career planning decisions. While 18 disagree and 9 strongly disagree that the individual performance will not support compensation and career planning decisions. The remaining other 31 respondents neither agree nor disagree with the above statement.

16. To what extent, the organization motivate employees after appraisal to develop and improve performance? To a very great extent To a considerable extent To some extent To a very little extent None of the above

Interpretation: According to the graph, 20 respondents agree to a very great extent and 19 to a considerable extent that the organization motivates employees after appraisal. 37 respondents feel that the organization motivates to some extent while 16 respondents to a very little extent. 8 respondents feel that none of the above factors motivates the employees appraisal in the organization.

17. Is your performance is only measured with the review of past performance? Yes No

Interpretation: 87% of the respondents believe that performance is measured on the previous past performance while 13% of the respondents did not agree with the above statement.

18. Evaluating performance and delivering incentives are carried out in a fair and consistent manner. Do you agree with this statement? Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree

Interpretation: From the above chart, 29 respondents believe and 22 respondents strongly believe that the evaluation of performance and delivering the incentives are carried out in a fair and consistent manner. 15 respondents disagree and 11 strongly disagree that the evaluation of performance and

delivering incentives are not carried out in a fair and consistent manner. While 23 respondents neither agree nor disagree with the above statement.

19. Is the performance rating done periodically? Yes No

Interpretation: According to the pie graph, 91% of the respondents agreed that the performance rating is done periodically.

20. Do you agree that Performance-based pay motivates employee to improve/sustain performance? Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree

Interpretation: In the graph, it is clear that 65 of the respondents believe that the performance based pay motivates the employees to improve their performance while 14 respondents did not believe that the performance based pay will not motivate to improve the performance of the employee. The remaining 21 respondents are showing neutral response regarding the performance based pay.

21. To what extent, the managers and subordinates have shared perception of purpose and function of appraisal process? To a very great extent To a considerable extent To some extent To a very little extent None of the above

Interpretation: Among the 100 respondents, 15 respondents to a great extent, 19 respondents to a considerable extent, 35 respondents to some extent, 18 respondents to a very little extent agree that the managers and subordinates have shared perception of purpose and function of appraisal process. The remaining 13 respondents did not agree with the above statement.

22. The performance appraisal process results in better communication between me and my supervisor. Do you agree with this statement? Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree

Interpretation: According to the graph, 25 respondents agree and 17 respondents strongly agree that the performance appraisal process will help in better communication with the supervisor and his subordinates. 31 of the respondents neither agree nor disagree with the same. The remaining 27

respondents agree that the performance appraisal will not help to better communicate between the supervisor and his subordinates.

23 . To what extent the appraisals are actually effective and accomplish goals? To a very great extent

To a considerable extent To some extent To a very little extent None of the above

Interpretation: According to the graph, 31 respondents believe that appraisals are effective and accomplish goals to some extent. 25 respondents believe to a very little extent, 16 respondents to a considerable extent and 12 respondents to a very great extent. 16 respondents believe that the appraisals will not be effective and accomplish goals.

24. Performance appraisal system helps to identify the strength and weakness of the employee. Do you agree with this statement? Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree

Interpretation: Among the 100 respondents, majority of the respondents (70) feel that the appraisal system has helped to identify the strength and weakness of the employee. 8 respondents believe that the performance appraisal system did not help them to identify the strength and weakness of the employees. While 22 respondents has shown neutral response on this.

25. Does the employee is rewarded for good performance? Yes No

Interpretation: Majority of the respondents (77) feel that the employee is rewarded for good performance while 23% of them disagreed with the above statement.

26. In what way does your organization improve your performance? Counseling Training Development programs

Interpretation: According to the pie chart, the first method will be training as 45% of the respondents believe that the training program will be helpful to improve their performance. Second method is Development programs with 34% of the respondents and the third method is counseling with 21% to improve performance.

27. Performance appraisal is helpful in reducing the grievance among the employees? Do you agree with this statement? Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree

Interpretation: In the above graph, it is observed that 26 respondents strongly agree and 21 respondents agree that the performance appraisal will help in reducing the criticism among the employees. While 15 respondents disagree and 8 respondents strongly disagree that the performance appraisal will not help in reducing the criticism among the employees. 30 respondents neither agreed nor disagreed regarding the same.

28. Mark the following needs which derived from system? Training needs Motivation Counseling Stress Management Developments Coaching Leadership quality

Interpretation: According to the graph, 22 respondents require motivation, 21 respondents require training needs, 17 respondents require development, 12 respondents require counseling, 10 respondents require stress management, 9 respondents require coaching and the remaining 9 respondents require leadership quality to develop the appraisal system.

29. To what extent, the performance of an individual has been increased after appraisal? To a very great extent To a considerable extent To some extent To a very little extent None of the above

Interpretation: Among the 100 respondents, 34 respondents feel to some extent, 26 respondents to a considerable extent, 17 respondents to a very great extent, 14 respondents to a very little extent has increased the performance after appraisal. For the remaining 9 respondents none of the above has influenced to increase the performance after appraisal.

30. How do you rate the performance appraisal system in your organization? Excellent Good Satisfactory Neither Good nor Bad Poor

Interpretation: By conducting the performance appraisal system in the current organization most of the employees are benefitted and improved their performance. Among the 100 respondents 29

respondents feel that the appraisal system in the current organization is excellent, 35 respondents feel good, 21 respondents feel satisfactory. 11 respondents neither feel good nor bad regarding the performance appraisal system. Only 4 respondents feel it as poor among the remaining respondents. DATA ANALYSIS:

Sufficient in assessing goals * Overall agreement Chi-Square Tests Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 425.809a 51.966 43.700 105 df 64 64 1 Asymp. Sig. (2sided) .015 .860 .641

a. 74 cells (91.4%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .01.

View their Performance evaluation * Overall agreement Chi-Square Tests Asymp. Sig. (2sided) .024 .860 .347

Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio 425.809a 51.966

df 64 64 1

Linear-by-Linear Association 43.700 N of Valid Cases 105

Chi-Square Tests Asymp. Sig. (2sided) .024 .860 .347

Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio 425.809a 51.966

df 64 64 1

Linear-by-Linear Association 43.700 N of Valid Cases 105

a. 74 cells (91.4%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .01.

Documenting individual performance * Overall agreement Chi-Square Tests Asymp. Sig. (2sided) .641 .780 .854

Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 328.000a 55.052 83.690

df 64 64 1

105

a. 73 cells (90.1%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .01.

Incentives are fair and consistent * Overall agreement Chi-Square Tests Asymp. Sig. (2sided) .000 .552 .000

Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 326.469a 53.980 86.332

df 56 56 1

105

a. 63 cells (87.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .01.

Performance based pay motivation * Overall agreement Chi-Square Tests Asymp. Sig. (2sided) .047 .380 .368

Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 387.444a 66.836 43.887

df 64 64 1

105

a. 73 cells (90.1%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .01.

Shared perception of Purpose and function * Overall agreement

Chi-Square Tests Asymp. Sig. (2sided) .544 .747 .615

Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 431.138a 56.145 81.048

df 64 64 1

105

a. 73 cells (90.1%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .01.

Better communication * Overall agreement Chi-Square Tests Asymp. Sig. (2sided) .658 .797 .841

Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 428.123a 54.449 71.998

df 64 64 1

105

a. 72 cells (88.9%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .01.

Identify strength and weakness * Overall agreement Chi-Square Tests Asymp. Sig. (2sided) .000 .667 .514

Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 440.140a 66.304 83.313

df 72 72 1

105

a. 82 cells (91.1%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .01.

Grievance reduction * Overall agreement Chi-Square Tests Asymp. Sig. (2sided) .032 .075 .647

Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 604.689a 231.531 87.308

df 56 56 1

105

a. 61 cells (84.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .01.

From the above chi-square analysis, it is found that the factors like Sufficient in assessing goals, View their Performance evaluation, Incentives are fair and consistent, Performance based pay motivation, Identify strength and weakness and Grievance reduction are showing significance value less than 0.05. That means these factors do not have significant association with the overall agreement of performance appraisal. Other factors like documenting individual performance, Shared perception of Purpose and function and better communication do not have significance value greater than 0.05. That means these factors do not have significance association with the overall agreement on performance appraisal. Hence alternative hypothesis is accepted. Therefore performance appraisal system is effective in an organization.

FINDINGS 1. Majority of the employees are associated with the organization above 2 years. 2. It has been found that 66 of the respondents are aware of the concept of Performance Appraisal System 3. It is observed that (58%) of the respondents were informed about the Performance Appraisal System during induction. 4. Among the respondents majority of them (59) agree that the performance appraisal system is sufficient and also important in assessing goals and objectives in the organization. 5. Above 40% of respondents feel that the performance appraisal system gives a proper assessment of each employee and also sets to achieve the target given by the organization. 6. Among the respondents, 40 respondents are awarded with the salary increment, 24 respondents of them with appreciation, 15 respondents with promotion and remaining with others. 7. Above half of the superiors put efforts to identify strengths and weaknesses of their subordinates. 8. Among the respondents 31 respondents feel that the communication of appraisal should communicate at data gathering stage, 25 respondents feel to have at goal setting stage, 24 respondents feel to have at midterm reviews and 20 respondents feel to have at annual reviews. 9. For 29 respondents performance appraisal matches the expectation frequently, 23 respondents receive rarely, 20 respondents receive occasionally, 16 respondents reaches every time and the remaining 12 respondents never reaches the target. 10. Above 40% of the Supervisor's give feedback to the employees regarding performance appraisal and also allows them to view their performance evaluation 11. Among the respondents, 47 respondents feel that the standards should be changed, 31% of the respondents feel that there should be change in the frequency of appraisal and 22% of the respondents feel in the appraiser

12. Above 50% of the respondents feel that the organization is documenting individual performance to support compensation and career planning decisions and to some extent motivating employees after appraisal to develop and improve performance. 13. Except for 13% of the respondents performance is measured only with the review of past performance. 14. Half of the respondents feel that the evaluation of performance and delivering incentives are carried out in a fair and consistent manner. 15. 91% of the respondents feel that the rating on performance is done at regular intervals. 16. Among the 100 respondents 65 respondents agree that the performance based pay motivates employee to improve/sustain performance. 17. 35 employees feel that to some extent the managers and subordinates have shared perception of purpose and function of appraisal process. 18. 42 respondents have agreed that performance appraisal process results better communication with the supervisor. 19. Among the 100 respondents, 16 respondents have no impact on appraisals to achieve goals. 20. Only 8 respondents feel that performance appraisal system does not help to identify the strength and weakness of the employee. 21. 77% of the employees are rewarded for the good performance. 22. For most of the organizations the first preference will be training, second will be counseling and the third preference will be Development programs to improve performance of the employees. 23. 23 respondents disagree that the performance appraisal will not be helpful for reducing the grievance among the employees. 24. From the study it is found that the employees require training needs, motivation and developments. 25. Most of the respondents has improved their performance and found satisfactory with the performance appraisal system in the organization.

SUGGESTIONS 1. Few employees in the organization are not aware of performance appraisal system in the organization and they are not informed regarding the same at the time of induction also. The organization should take necessary action to inform the same. 2. Half of the respondents did not know the importance of the performance appraisal system. The organization should inform the importance and effectiveness of the same by conducting training session or meetings. 3. Further, some of the employees feel that proper assessment was not done in the performance appraisal system when compared to the work they had contributed to the organization. The organization should consider this factor seriously and had to increase the performance appraisals. By doing this they are able to achieve the target set by the organization. 4. The management should observe the superiors attitude to find out whether they are able to help to overcome the weaknesses, as few of the employees pointed that their superiors are unable to identify the strengths and weakness in them. 5. Half of the employees feel that the organizations are not calculating the individual performance to support compensation and career planning decisions. The organization should focus on this to achieve better performance from the employees. 6. Employees feel that the organization is not motivating them after appraisal in order to develop and improve performance. performance after appraisal also. The organization should check the employee

CONCLUSION The study on effectiveness of appraisal system was undertaken to get knowledge of the appraisal system of the organization. It was also done to find out the level of awareness among the employees about the performance appraisal system adopted in the organization and the steps involved in the appraisal system. It was done to throw light on the employee perception of the existing appraisal system. The study is done at Hyderabad in a single organization with the employees as the respondents of the study. The sampling technique used was convenience sampling. The entire study is based on the hypothesis that there is no significant relationship between the performance appraisal and improvement in the performance of the employee. The study also had limitations like time which were taken care of. The data collected from the primary source and the secondary sources was analyzed using appropriate statistical tools like chi-square test, graphs, tables etc. From the study, it was found that the existing appraisal system in the organization is effective and it helps in improving the employee performances. It was also found that considerable number of employees opines that their appraisal system does not proper assess an employee. The organization should therefore properly assess the employee regularly. Based on this, they should be trained and encouraged to perform well. Further, the improvement should be properly rewarded. A part from this, the employees should be given clear information of the companys appraisal system and the methods and policies followed in the organization.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Pawan S Budhwar, Arup Varma, Angelo S DeNisi, Performance Management Systems, Published by Taylor & Francis in 2008. Kevin R. Murphy, Jeanette Cleveland, Understanding Performance Appraisal, Published by SAGE in 1995. John M Ivancevich, Human Resource Management 10E, published by Tata McGraw-Hill Education in 2008.

Websites: www.wikipedia.org www.performance-appraisal.com www.performance.gov.in www.appraisals.naukrihub.com www.humanresources.about.com

ANNEXURE-1 QUESTIONNAIRE Demographics: i) Age:____________ a. 15-25yrs b. 25-35yrs c. 35-45yrs d. Above 45yrs

ii) Gender____________________ a. Male b. Female

iii) Residence___________________ iv) Qualification__________ a. Undergraduate v) Designation____________ vi) Experience in the current organization: a. Less than 1yr b. 1-2yrs c. 2-5yrs d. 5-10yrs e.Above 10yrs b. Graduate c. Post Graduate d. Others

vii) Annual income (in lakhs)______________ a. Below 1 d. 3-5 b. 1-2 e. 5-8 c. 2-3 f. Above 8

1. How long have you working in the present organization? Less than 1yr 1-2yrs 2-5yrs 5-10yrs

 Above 10yrs

2. Are you aware of Performance Appraisal System in the Organization? Yes No

3. Were you informed about the Performance Appraisal model, used in the Organization, during your induction? Yes No

4. The performance appraisal system is sufficient in assessing goals and objectives of the Organization. Do you agree with this statement? Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree

5. How important is the Performance Appraisal to improve your Performance, according to you? Most important Important Not important Not at all important

6. In your opinion, does the Performance Appraisal System give a proper assessment of your contribution to the organization?

 Yes To some extent No 7. Are you able to achieve your target set by the Performance Appraisal System? Yes To some extent No 8. Which kind of reward did you get from the superior for your performance? Salary increment Appreciation Promotion Bonus payment Others 9. What is your satisfaction level with your superiors efforts to identify your strengths and weaknesses? Highly satisfied Satisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Not satisfied Highly dissatisfied

10. In which stage do you think that appraisal should communicate with employees with regard to Performance Appraisal System? Goal-setting stage Data-gathering stage Mid-term reviews Annual reviews

11. According to you, how often does performance appraisal match to your expectation? Every time Often Sometimes Rarely Never

12. To what extent, supervisor gives feedback to the employees regarding performance appraisal? To a very great extent

To a considerable extent To some extent To a very little extent None of the above

13. Do you agree that the superior allow employees to view their performance evaluation? Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree

14. What are the areas that should be improved upon? Standards Frequency of appraisal Appraiser

15. Do you agree that organization is documenting individual performance to support compensation and career planning decisions? Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree

16. To what extent, the organization motivate employees after appraisal to develop and improve performance? To a very great extent To a considerable extent To some extent To a very little extent None of the above

17. Is your performance is only measured with the review of past performance? Yes No

18. Evaluating performance and delivering incentives are carried out in a fair and consistent manner. Do you agree with this statement? Strongly agree Agree Neutral

 Disagree Strongly disagree

19. Does the performance rating was done periodically? Yes No

20. Do you agree that Performance-based pay motivates employee to improve/sustain performance? Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree

21. To what extent, the managers and subordinates have shared perception of purpose and function of appraisal process? To a very great extent To a considerable extent To some extent To a very little extent None of the above

22. The performance appraisal process results in better communication between me and my supervisor. Do you agree with this statement?

 Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree

23 . To what extent the appraisals are actually effective and accomplish goals? To a very great extent

To a considerable extent To some extent To a very little extent None of the above

24. Performance appraisal system helps to identify the strength and weakness of the employee? Do you agree with this statement? Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree

25. Does the employee is rewarded for good performance? Yes No

26. In what way does your organization improve your performance? Counseling

 Training Development programs

27. Performance appraisal is helpful in reducing the grievance among the employees? Do you agree with this statement? Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree

28. Mark the following needs which derived from system? Training needs Motivation Counseling Stress Management Developments Coaching Leadership quality

29. To what extent, the performance of an individual has been increased after appraisal? To a very great extent To a considerable extent To some extent To a very little extent None of the above

30. How do you rate the performance appraisal system in your organization? Excellent Good Satisfactory Neither Good nor Bad Poor Any suggestions ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________