Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Performance appraisal system cdac
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.


Saving this for later?

Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime - even offline.

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Performance appraisal system cdac


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide


  • 1. On “The Annual Performance Appraisal System Of CDAC, Noida” In partial fulfillment of the requirement for the MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION Submitted by: Anjalika Khurana MBA (IV Sem.) Roll No. 0507270171 Session 2005-07Under the Guidance of: Submitted to:MR. JAY P GUPTA U P TECHNICAL(HOD Management) UNIVERSITY, LUCKNOW 1
  • 3. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTI would like to express my deep and sincere gratitude to CDAC,Noida for having provided me with the opportunity to do myproject on an interesting area.Making it a success, greatly depends on the encouragement,inspiration, and help given by Mr. Samar Pal Singh (Senior HRManager) and all of the employees of CDAC, Noida. Forcompletion of this project various people have put lots of efforts.I would like to thank Mr. Jay P Gupta, the internal guide and otherfaculty members of IIMT Management College, Meerut for theirinvaluable guidance, immense support and help. Anjalika Khurana MBA 4th Sem 3
  • 4. PREFACEThis is an attempt to present a progressive detailed discussion on THE ANNUALPERFORMANCE APPRAISAL SYSTEM OF CDAC, NOIDA.Performance appraisal is a total evaluation of an employee’s performance throughout theyear undertaken by his/her superior wherefrom the junior gets to know his/her ownstanding in the organization. This system is a very important aspect, which given the truepicture of the company’s driving in a particular year. I have, over here, tried to makealmost a research work on the company’s APA system and fought out my utmost level tobring the best in my research study.The study comprises of the first textual connotation of the performance appraisal system,in general, then continued with a small paragraph explaining the APA system of CDAC.But to go into the details of this topic, I had build two sets of questionnaires foremployees working in the organization based on the four sets of the APA forms. In thesequestionnaires, I have tried to understand the general psyche of the people regarding theAPA system operating in this organization. After observing the results, I interpreted into aconclusion, which further directed me to find out the loopholes and backlogs.Accordingly, with the meager knowledge and some kind of intelligence that I carry, Ihave tried to give necessary suggestions to the corporate body as to how to overcome itsweakness in this system and build up their strengths. No matter, how ordinary they mightbe, according to me, they were the actual recommendations that I could suggest toCDAC. 4
  • 5. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1) OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY 6 3) INTROUDCTION 7 4) COMPANY PROFILE 24-31 - About the Company 25 - Human Resources Philosophy & Policy 31 5) DEPARTMENT OF CDAC, NOIDA 32-53 - Multingual Technologies 37 - Open Source 39 - System Development 41 - Education & Training 48 6) APA IN CDAC 54-65 - Annual Assessment 54 - Annual Assessment Report 56 7) RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 66 8) FINDINGS AND DATA ANALYSIS 65-78 - Analysis 67 - Findings 76 - A few lines from employees 77 9) CONCLUSIONS 7910) RECOMMENDATIONS 8011) LIMITATIONS 8112) DISCUSSIONS 82-92 - Appraisal Cops82 - PA benefits anyone ? 84 - Is PA system free from bias ? 87 - Good feedback : Way to a smart appraisal 91 13) QUESTIONNAIRE93 14) BIBLIOGRAPHY 95 5
  • 7. Performance AppraisalThe history of performance appraisal is quite brief. Its roots in the early 20th century canbe traced to Taylors pioneering Time and Motion studies. But this is not very helpful, forthe same may be said about almost everything in the field of modern human resourcesmanagement.As a distinct and formal management procedure used in the evaluation of workperformance, appraisal really dates from the time of the Second World War - not morethan 60 years ago.Yet in a broader sense, the practice of appraisal is a very ancient art. In the scale of thingshistorical, it might well lay claim to being the worlds second oldest profession!There is, says Dulewicz (1989), "... a basic human tendency to make judgements aboutthose one is working with, as well as about oneself." Appraisal, it seems, is bothinevitable and universal. In the absence of a carefully structured system of appraisal,people will tend to judge the work performance of others, including subordinates,naturally, informally and arbitrarily.The human inclination to judge can create serious motivational, ethical and legalproblems in the workplace. Without a structured appraisal system, there is little chance ofensuring that the judgements made will be lawful, fair, defensible and accurate.Performance appraisal systems began as simple methods of income justification. That is,appraisal was used to decide whether or not the salary or wage of an individual employeewas justified.The process was firmly linked to material outcomes. If an employees performance wasfound to be less than ideal, a cut in pay would follow. On the other hand, if theirperformance was better than the supervisor expected, a pay rise was in order.Little consideration, if any, was given to the developmental possibilities of appraisal. Ifwas felt that a cut in pay, or a rise, should provide the only required impetus for anemployee to either improve or continue to perform well.Sometimes this basic system succeeded in getting the results that were intended; but moreoften than not, it failed.For example, early motivational researchers were aware that different people withroughly equal work abilities could be paid the same amount of money and yet have quitedifferent 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 wasfound that other issues, such as morale and self-esteem, could also have a majorinfluence. 7
  • 8. As a result, the traditional emphasis on reward outcomes was progressively rejected. Inthe 1950s in the United States, the potential usefulness of appraisal as tool for motivationand development was gradually recognized. The general model of performance appraisal,as it is known today, began from that time.Modern appraisalPerformance appraisal may be defined as a structured formal interaction between asubordinate and supervisor, that usually takes the form of a periodic interview (annual orsemi-annual), in which the work performance of the subordinate is examined anddiscussed, with a view to identifying weaknesses and strengths as well as opportunitiesfor improvement and skills development.In many organizations - but not all - appraisal results are used, either directly orindirectly, to help determine reward outcomes. That is, the appraisal results are used toidentify the better performing employees who should get the majority of available meritpay increases, bonuses, and promotions.By the same token, appraisal results are used to identify the poorer performers who mayrequire some form of counseling, or in extreme cases, demotion, dismissal or decreases inpay. (Organizations need to be aware of laws in their country that might restrict theircapacity to dismiss employees or decrease pay.)Whether this is an appropriate use of performance appraisal - the assignment andjustification of rewards and penalties - is a very uncertain and contentious matter.Controversy, ControversyFew issues in management stir up more controversy than performance appraisal.There are many reputable sources - researchers, management commentators,psychometricians - who have expressed doubts about the validity and reliability of theperformance appraisal process. Some have even suggested that the process is soinherently flawed that it may be impossible to perfect itAt the other extreme, there are many strong advocates of performance appraisal. Someview it as potentially "... the most crucial aspect of organizational life" Between these twoextremes lie various schools of belief. While all endorse the use of performance appraisal,there are many different opinions on how and when to apply it.There are those, for instance, who believe that performance appraisal has many importantemployee development uses, but scorn any attempt to link the process to reward outcomes- such as pay rises and promotions.This group believes that the linkage to reward outcomes reduces or eliminates thedevelopmental value of appraisals. Rather than an opportunity for constructive review andencouragement, the reward-linked process is perceived as judgmental, punitive andharrowing.For example, how many people would gladly admit their work problems if, at the sametime, they knew that their next pay rise or a much-wanted promotion was riding on an 8
  • 9. appraisal result? Very likely, in that situation, many people would deny or downplay theirweaknesses.Nor is the desire to distort or deny the truth confined to the person being appraised. Manyappraisers feel uncomfortable with the combined role of judge and executioner.Such reluctance is not difficult to understand. Appraisers often know their appraiseeswell, and are typically in a direct subordinate-supervisor relationship. They work togetheron a daily basis and may, at times, mix socially. Suggesting that a subordinate needs tobrush up on certain work skills is one thing; giving an appraisal result that has the directeffect of negating a promotion is another.The result can be resentment and serious morale damage, leading to workplace disruption,soured relationships and productivity declines.On the other hand, there is a strong rival argument which claims that performanceappraisal must unequivocally be linked to reward outcomes.The advocates of this approach say that organizations must have a process by whichrewards - which are not an unlimited resource - may be openly and fairly distributed tothose most deserving on the basis of merit, effort and results.There is a critical need for remunerative justice in organizations. Performance appraisal -whatever its practical flaws - is the only process available to help achieve fair, decent andconsistent reward outcomes.It has also been claimed that appraisees themselves are inclined to believe that appraisalresults should be linked directly to reward outcomes - and are suspicious anddisappointed when told this is not the case. Rather than feeling relieved, appraisees maysuspect that they are not being told the whole truth, or that the appraisal process is a shamand waste of time.The Link to RewardsRecent research (Bannister & Balkin, 1990) has reported that appraisees seem to havegreater acceptance of the appraisal process, and feel more satisfied with it, when theprocess is directly linked to rewards. Such findings are a serious challenge to those whofeel that appraisal results and reward outcomes must be strictly isolated from each other.There is also a group who argues that the evaluation of employees for reward purposes,and frank communication with them about their performance, are part of the basicresponsibilities of management. The practice of not discussing reward issues whileappraising performance is, say critics, based on inconsistent and muddled ideas ofmotivation.In many organizations, this inconsistency is aggravated by the practice of having separatewage and salary reviews, in which merit rises and bonuses are decided arbitrarily, andoften secretly, by supervisors and managers. 9
  • 10. Performance AppraisalBasic PurposesEffective performance appraisal systems contain two basic systems operating inconjunction: an evaluation system and a feedback system.The main aim of the evaluation system is to identify the performance gap (if any). Thisgap is the shortfall that occurs when performance does not meet the standard set by theorganization as acceptable.The main aim of the feedback system is to inform the employee about the quality of his orher performance. (However, the information flow is not exclusively one way. Theappraisers also receives feedback from the employee about job problems, etc.)One of the best ways to appreciate the purposes of performance appraisal is to look at itfrom the different viewpoints of the main stakeholders: the employee and theorganization.Employee ViewpointFrom the employee viewpoint, the purpose of performance appraisal is four-fold: (1) Tell me what you want me to do (2) Tell me how well I have done it (3) Help me improve my performance (4) Reward me for doing well.Organizational ViewpointFrom the organizations viewpoint, one of the most important reasons for having a systemof performance appraisal is to establish and uphold the principle of accountability.For decades it has been known to researchers that one of the chief causes oforganizational failure is "non-alignment of responsibility and accountability." Non-alignment occurs where employees are given responsibilities and duties, but are not heldaccountable for the way in which those responsibilities and duties are performed. Whattypically happens is that several individuals or work units appear to have overlappingroles.The overlap allows - indeed actively encourages - each individual or business unit to"pass the buck" to the others. Ultimately, in the severely non-aligned system, no one isaccountable for anything. In this event, the principle of accountability breaks downcompletely. Organizational failure is the only possible outcome.In cases where the non-alignment is not so severe, the organization may continue tofunction, albeit inefficiently. Like a poorly made or badly tuned engine, the non-alignedorganization may run, but it will be sluggish, costly and unreliable. One of the principalaims of performance appraisal is to make people accountable. The objective is to align 10
  • 11. responsibility and accountability at every organizational level.Appraisal Methods1. Essay appraisalIn its simplest form, this technique asks the rater to write a paragraph or more covering anindividuals strengths, weaknesses, potential, and so on. In most selection situations,particularly those involving professional, sales, or managerial positions, essay appraisalsfrom former employers, teachers, or associates carry significant weight. The assumptionseems to be that an honest and informed statement -either by word of mouth or in writing-from someone who knows a man well, is fully as valid as moreformal and more complicated methods.The biggest drawback to essay appraisals is their variability in length and content.Moreover, since different essays touch on different aspects of a mans performance orpersonal qualifications, essay ratings are difficult to combine or compare. Forcomparability, some type of more formal method, like the graphic rating scale, isdesirable.2. Graphic rating scaleThis technique may not yield the depth of an essay appraisal, but it is more consistent andreliable. Typically, a graphic scale assesses a person on the quality and quantity of hiswork (is he outstanding, above average, average, or unsatisfactory?) and on a variety ofother factors that vary with the job but usually include personal traits like reliability andcooperation. It may also include specific performance items like oral and writtencommunication.The graphic scale has come under frequent attack, but remains the most widely usedrating method. In a classic comparison between the "old-fashioned" graphic scale and themuch more sophisticated forced-choice technique, the former proved to be fully as validas the best of the forced-choice forms, and better than most of them. It is also cheaper todevelop and more acceptable to raters than the forced-choice form. For many purposesthere is no need to use anything more complicated than a graphic scale supplemented by afew essay questions.3. Field reviewWhen there is reason to suspect rater bias, when some raters appear to be using higherstandards than others, or when comparability of ratings is essential, essay or graphicratings are often combined with a systematic review process. The field review is one ofseveral techniques for doing this. A member of the personnel or central administrativestaff meets with small groups of raters from each supervisory unit and goes over eachemployees rating with them to (a) identify areas of inter-rater disagreement, (b) help the 11
  • 12. group arrive at a consensus, and (c) determine that each rater conceives the standardssimilarly.This group-judgment technique tends to be fairer and more valid than individual ratingsand permits the central staff to develop an awareness of the varying degrees of leniencyor severity -as well as bias- exhibited by raters in different departments. On the negativeside, the process is very time consuming.4. Forced-choice ratingLike the field review, this technique was developed to reduce bias and establish objectivestandards of comparison between individuals, but it does not involve the intervention of athird party. Although there are many variations of this method, the most common oneasks raters to choose from among groups of statements those which best fit the individualbeing rated and those which least fit him. The statements are then weighted or scored,very much the way a psychological test is scored. People with high scores are, bydefinition, the better employees; those with low scores are the poorer ones. Since the raterdoes not know what the scoring weights for each statement are, in theory at least, hecannot play favorites. He simply describes his people, and someone in the personneldepartment applies the scoring weights to determine who gets the best rating.The rationale behind this technique is difficult to fault. It is the same rationale used indeveloping selection test batteries. In practice, however, the forced-choice method tendsto irritate raters, who feel they are not being trusted. They want to say openly how theyrate someone and not be second-guessed or tricked into making "honest" appraisals.An additional drawback is the difficulty and cost of developing forms. Consequently, thetechnique is usually limited to middle- and lower-management levels where the jobs aresufficiently similar to make standard or common forms feasible.Finally, forced-choice forms tend to be of little value- and probably have a negativeeffect- when used in performance appraisal interviews.5. Critical incident appraisalThe discussion of ratings with employees has, in many companies, proved to be atraumatic experience for supervisors. Some have learned from bitter experience whatGeneral Electric later documented; people who receive honest but negative feedback aretypically not motivated to do better - and often do worse - after the appraisal interview.Consequently, supervisors tend to avoid such interviews, or if forced to hold them, avoidgiving negative ratings when the ratings have to be shown to the employee.One stumbling block has no doubt been the unsatisfactory rating form used. Typically,these are graphic scales that often include rather vague traits like initiative,cooperativeness, reliability, and even personality. Discussing these with an employee canbe difficult.The critical incident technique looks like a natural to some people for performance reviewinterviews, because it gives a supervisor actual, factual incidents to discuss with an 12
  • 13. employee. Supervisors are asked to keep a record, a "little black book," on each employeeand to record actual incidents of positive or negative behaviorThere are, however, several drawbacks to this approach. It requires that supervisors jotdown incidents on a daily or, at the very least, a weekly basis. This can become a chore.Furthermore, the critical incident rating technique need not, but may, cause a supervisorto delay feedback to employees. And it is hardly desirable to wait six months or a year toconfront an employee with a misdeed or mistake.Finally, the supervisor sets the standards. If they seem unfair to a subordinate, might henot be more motivated if he at least has some say in setting, or at least agreeing to, thestandards against which he is judged?6. Management by objectivesTo avoid, or to deal with, the feeling that they are being judged by unfairly highstandards, employees in some organizations are being asked to set - or help set - their ownperformance goals. Within the past five or six years, MBO has become something of afad and is familiar to most managers.It should be noted, however, that when MBO is applied at lower organizational levels,employees do not always want to be involved in their own goal setting. As Arthur N.Turner and Paul R. Lawrence discovered, many do not want self-direction or autonomy.As a result, more coercive variations of MBO are becoming increasingly common, andsome critics see MBO drifting into a kind of manipulative form of management in whichpseudo-participation substitutes for the real thing. Employees are consulted, butmanagement ends up imposing its standards and its objectives.Some organizations, therefore, are introducing a work-standards approach to goal settingin which the goals are openly set by management. In fact, there appears to be somethingof a vogue in the setting of such work standards in white-collar and service areas.7. Work-standards approachInstead of asking employees to set their own performance goals, many organizations setmeasured daily work standards. In short, the work standards technique establishes workand staffing targets aimed at improving productivity. When realistically used, it can makepossible an objective and accurate appraisal of the work of employees and supervisors.To be effective, the standards must be visible and fair. Hence a good deal of time is spentobserving employees on the job, simplifying and improving the job where possible, andattempting to arrive at realistic output standards.It is not clear, in every case, that work standards have been integrated with anorganizations performance appraisal program. However, since the work-standardsprogram provides each employee with a more or less complete set of his job duties, it 13
  • 14. would seem only natural that supervisors will eventually relate performance appraisal andinterview comments to these duties. I would expect this to happen increasingly wherework standards exist. The use of work standards should make performance interviews lessthreatening than the use of personal, more subjective standards alone.The most serious drawback appears to be the problem of comparability. If people areevaluated on different standards, how can the ratings be brought together for comparisonpurposes when decisions have to be made on promotions or on salary increases? For thesepurposes some form of ranking is necessary.8. Ranking methodsFor comparative purposes, particularly when it is necessary to compare people who workfor different supervisors, individual statements, ratings, or appraisal forms are notparticularly useful. Instead, it is necessary to recognize that comparisons involve anoverall subjective judgment to which a host of additional facts and impressions mustsomehow be added. There is no single form or way to do this.Comparing people in different units for the purpose of, say, choosing a service supervisoror determining the relative size of salary increases for different supervisors, requiressubjective judgment, not statistics. The best approach appears to be a ranking techniqueinvolving pooled judgment. The two most effective methods are alternation ranking andpaired comparison ranking.Alternation ranking: In this method, the names of employees are listed on the left-handside of a sheet of paper – preferably in random order. If the rankings are for salarypurposes, a supervisor is asked to choose the "most valuable" employee on the list, crosshis name off, and put it at the top of the column on the right-hand side of the sheet. Next,he selects the "least valuable" employee on the list, crosses his name off, and puts it at thebottom of the right-hand column. The ranker then selects the "most valuable" person fromthe remaining list, crosses his name off and enters it below the top name on the right-handlist, and so on.Paired-comparison ranking: This technique is probably just as accurate as alternationranking and might be more so. But with large numbers of employees it becomesextremely time consuming and cumbersome.Both ranking techniques, particularly when combined with multiple rankings (i.e., whentwo or more people are asked to make independent rankings of the same work group andtheir lists are averaged), are among the best available for generating valid order-of-meritrankings for salary administration purposes.9. Assessment centersSo far, we have been talking about assessing past performance. What about theassessment of future performance or potential? In any placement decision and even moreso in promotion decisions, some prediction of future performance is necessary. How canthis kind of prediction be made most validly and most fairly? 14
  • 15. One widely used rule of thumb is that "what a man has done is the best predictor of whathe will do in the future." But suppose you are picking a man to be a supervisor and thisperson has never held supervisory responsibility? Or suppose you are selecting a man fora job from among a group of candidates, none of whom has done the job or one like it? Inthese situations, many organizations use assessment centers to predict future performancemore accurately.Typically, individuals from different departments are brought together to spend two orthree days working on individual and group assignments similar to the ones they will behandling if they are promoted. The pooled judgment of observers - sometimes derived bypaired comparison or alternation ranking - leads to an order-of-merit ranking for eachparticipant. Less structured, subjective judgments are also made.There is a good deal of evidence that people chosen by assessment center methods workout better than those not chosen by these methods. The center also makes it possible forpeople who are working for departments of low status or low visibility in an organizationto become visible and, in the competitive situation of an assessment center, show howthey stack up against people from more well-known departments. This has the effect ofequalizing opportunity, improving morale, and enlarging the pool of possible promotioncandidates.Benefits of AppraisalPerhaps the most significant benefit of appraisal is that, in the rush and bustle of dailyworking life, it offers a rare chance for a supervisor and subordinate to have "time out"for a one-on-one discussion of important work issues that might not otherwise beaddressed.Almost universally, where performance appraisal is conducted properly, both supervisorsand subordinates have reported the experience as beneficial and positive.Appraisal offers a valuable opportunity to focus on work activities and goals, to identifyand correct existing problems, and to encourage better future performance. Thus theperformance of the whole organization is enhanced.For many employees, an "official" appraisal interview may be the only time they get tohave exclusive, uninterrupted access to their supervisor. Said one employee of a largeorganization after his first formal performance appraisal, "In twenty years of work, thatsthe first time anyone has ever bothered to sit down and tell me how Im doing."The value of this intense and purposeful interaction between a supervisors andsubordinate should not be underestimated. 15
  • 16. Motivation and SatisfactionPerformance appraisal can have a profound effect on levels of employee motivation andsatisfaction - for better as well as for worse.Performance appraisal provides employees with recognition for their work efforts. Thepower of social recognition as an incentive has been long noted. In fact, there is evidencethat human beings will even prefer negative recognition in preference to no recognition atall.If nothing else, the existence of an appraisal program indicates to an employee that theorganization is genuinely interested in their individual performance and development.This alone can have a positive influence on the individuals sense of worth, commitmentand belonging.The strength and prevalence of this natural human desire for individual recognitionshould not be overlooked. Absenteeism and turnover rates in some organizations might begreatly reduced if more attention were paid to it. Regular performance appraisal, at least,is a good start. Training and DevelopmentPerformance appraisal offers an excellent opportunity - perhaps the best that will everoccur - for a supervisor and subordinate to recognize and agree upon individual trainingand development needs.During the discussion of an employees work performance, the presence or absence ofwork skills can become very obvious - even to those who habitually reject the idea oftraining for them!Performance appraisal can make the need for training more pressing and relevant bylinking it clearly to performance outcomes and future career aspirations.From the point of view of the organization as a whole, consolidated appraisal data canform a picture of the overall demand for training. This data may be analyzed by variablessuch as sex, department, etc. In this respect, performance appraisal can provide a regularand efficient training needs audit for the entire organization. Recruitment and InductionAppraisal data can be used to monitor the success of the organizations recruitment andinduction practices. For example, how well are the employees performing who were hiredin the past two years?Appraisal data can also be used to monitor the effectiveness of changes in recruitmentstrategies. By following the yearly data related to new hires (and given sufficient numberson which to base the analysis) it is possible to assess whether the general quality of theworkforce is improving, staying steady, or declining. 16
  • 17. Employee EvaluationThough often understated or even denied, evaluation is a legitimate and major objectiveof performance appraisal.But the need to evaluate (i.e., to judge) is also an ongoing source of tension, sinceevaluative and developmental priorities appear to frequently clash. Yet at its most basiclevel, performance appraisal is the process of examining and evaluating the performanceof an individual.Though organizations have a clear right - some would say a duty - to conduct suchevaluations of performance, many still recoil from the idea. To them, the explicit processof judgement can be dehumanizing and demoralizing and a source of anxiety and distressto employees.It is been said by some that appraisal cannot serve the needs of evaluation anddevelopment at the same time; it must be one or the other.But there may be an acceptable middle ground, where the need to evaluate employeesobjectively, and the need to encourage and develop them, can be balanced.Conflict and ConfrontationInvariably the need arises during a performance appraisal to provide an employee withless than flattering feedback.The skill and sensitivity used to handle these often difficult sessions is critical. If theappraisee accepts the negative feedback and resolves to improve, all is well. But if theresult is an angry or hurt employee, then the process of correction has failed. Theperformance of an employee in such cases is unlikely to improve and may deteriorateeven further. Self-AuditingAccording to Krein (1990), appraisers should not confront employees directly withcriticism. Rather, they should aim to let the evidence of poor performance emerge"naturally" during the course of the appraisal interview. This is done by way of open-ended questioning techniques that encourage the employee to identify their ownperformance problems.Instead of blunt statements or accusations, the appraisers should encourage an employeeto talk freely about their own impressions of their performance. For example, consider thecase of employee who has had too many absent days. The appraiser, in accusatory mode,might say:Your attendance record is unacceptable. Youll have to improve it.A better way to handle this might be to say:Your attendance record shows that you had 7 days off work in 6 months. What can youtell me about this? 17
  • 18. The technique is to calmly present the evidence (resisting the temptation to label it asgood or bad) and then invite the employee to comment. In many cases, with just a gentlenudge from the appraiser here and there, an employee with problems will admit thatweaknesses do exist.This is much more likely when an employee does not feel accused of anything, nor forcedto make admissions that they do not wish to make.If an appraiser can get an employee to the stage of voluntary admission, half the battle iswon. The technique described by Krein is a type of self-auditing, since it encourages theemployee to confront themselves with their own work and performance issues.The technique is useful because it is more likely to promote discussion and agreement onthe need for change. Confrontation techniques that rely on "charge and counter-charge"tend to promote adversarialism - and that leads to denial and resentment. Ownership of ProblemsPerhaps the most powerful aspect of the self- auditing process is that employees are morewilling generally to accept personal "ownership" of problems that have been self-identified. This sense of ownership provides an effective basis for stimulating change anddevelopment. (Some would argue that it provides the only basis.)Nevertheless there are individuals who will not admit to anything that appears to reflectpoorly on them. With ego defenses on full-alert, they will resist the process of self-auditing very strongly. In such cases, appraisers may have no choice but to confront thepoor performer directly and firmly with the evidence they have.Sometimes the shock of direct confrontation will result in the employee admitting thatthey do need to make improvements. But sometimes it will just make their denial of theproblem worse.In providing any feedback - especially negative feedback - appraisers should be willingand able to support their opinions with specific and clear examples. Vaguegeneralizations should be avoided.The focus should be on job-related behaviors and attitudes. If a specific observationcannot be supported by clear evidence, or touches on issues that are not job-related, itmay be best to exclude all mention of it.Appraisers must carefully scrutinize their own perceptions, motives and prejudices.Common MistakesWhere performance appraisal fails to work as well as it should, lack of support from thetop levels of management is often cited as a major contributing reason.Opposition may be based on political motives, or more simply, on ignorance or disbeliefin the effectiveness of the appraisal process. 18
  • 19. It is crucial that top management believe in the value of appraisal and express their visiblecommitment to it. Top managers are powerful role models for other managers andemployees.Those attempting to introduce performance appraisal, or even to reform an existingsystem, must be acutely aware of the importance of political issues and symbolism in thesuccess of such projects. Fear of FailureThere is a stubborn suspicion among many appraisers that a poor appraisal result tends toreflect badly upon them also, since they are usually the employees supervisor. Manyappraisers have a vested interest in making their subordinates "look good" on paper.When this problem exists (and it can be found in many organizations), it may point to aproblem in the organization culture. The cause may be a culture that is intolerant offailure. In other words, appraisers may fear the possibility of repercussions - both forthemselves and the appraisee.Longenecker (1989) argues that accuracy in performance appraisal is impossible toachieve, since people play social and political games, and they protect their own interests."No savvy manager...", says Longenecker, "... is going to use the appraisal process toshoot himself or herself in the foot."No matter what safeguards are in place, "... when you turn managers loose in the realworld, they consciously fudge the numbers." What Longenecker is saying is thatappraisers will, for all sorts of reasons, deliberately distort the evaluations that they giveto employees.Indeed, surveys have shown that not only do many managers admit to a little fudging,they actually defend it as a tactic necessary for effective management.The fudging motives of appraisers have, at times, certain plausibility. For instance, asupervisor who has given an overly generous appraisal to a marginal performer mightclaim that their legitimate motive was the hope of encouraging a better performance.On the other hand, fudging motives can be a lot less admirable and sometimes devious:the appraiser who fudges to avoid the possibility of an unpleasant confrontation, theappraiser who fudges to hide employee difficulties from senior managers, the appraiserwho fudges in order to punish or reward employees. Judgement AversionMany people have a natural reluctance to "play judge" and create a permanent recordwhich may affect an employees future career. This is the case especially where there maybe a need to make negative appraisal remarks.Training in the techniques of constructive evaluation (such as self-auditing) may help.Appraisers need to recognize that problems left unchecked could ultimately cause moreharm to an employees career than early detection and correction.Organizations might consider the confidential archiving of appraisal records more than,say, three years old. 19
  • 20. Feedback-SeekingLarson (1989) has described a social game played by poor performers. Many supervisorswill recognize the game at once and may have been its victims.The game is called feedback-seeking. It occurs where a poor performing employeeregularly seeks informal praise from his or her supervisor at inappropriate moments.Often the feedback-seeker will get the praise they want, since they choose the time andplace to ask for it. In effect, they "ambush" the supervisor by seeking feedback atmoments when the supervisor is unable or unprepared to give them a full and properanswer, or in settings that are inappropriate for a frank assessment.The supervisor may feel "put on the spot", but will often provide a few encouragingwords of support. The game seems innocent enough until appraisal time comes around.Then the supervisor will find that the employee recalls, with perfect clarity, every casualword of praise ever spoken!This places the supervisor in a difficult bind. Either the supervisor lied when giving thepraise, or least, misled the employee into thinking that their performance was acceptable(in fact, this is the argument that feedback-seekers will often make).The aim of the game is that the feedback- seeker wants to deflect responsibility for theirown poor performance. They also seek to bolster their appraisal rating by bringing in allthe "evidence" of casual praise. Very often the feedback seeker will succeed in makingthe supervisor feel at least partly responsible. As a result, their appraisal result may beupgraded.Was the supervisor partly responsible? Not really. The truth of the matter is that they havebeen "blackmailed" by a subtle social game. But like most social games, the play dependson the unconscious participation of both sides. Making supervisors aware of the game isusually sufficient to stop it. They must learn to say, when asked for casual praise, "I canttalk about it now... but see me in my office later."This puts the supervisor back in control of the appraisal process. Appraiser PreparationThe bane of any performance appraisal system is the appraiser who wants to "play it byear". Such attitudes should be actively discouraged by stressing the importance andtechnical challenge of good performance appraisal. Perhaps drawing their attention to thecontents of this web site, for example, may help them to see the critical issues that mustbe considered. Employee ParticipationEmployees should participate with their supervisors in the creation of their ownperformance goals and development plans. Mutual agreement is a key to success. A planwherein the employee feels some degree of ownership is more likely to be accepted thanone that is imposed. This does not mean that employees do not desire guidance from theirsupervisor; indeed they very much do. 20
  • 21. Performance ManagementOne of the most common mistakes in the practice of performance appraisal is to perceiveappraisal as an isolated event rather than an ongoing process.Employees generally require more feedback, and more frequently, than can be providedin an annual appraisal. While it may not be necessary to conduct full appraisal sessionsmore than once or twice a year, performance management should be viewed as anongoing process.Frequent mini-appraisals and feedback sessions will help ensure that employees receivethe ongoing guidance, support and encouragement they need.Of course many supervisors complain they dont have the time to provide this sort ofongoing feedback. This is hardly likely. What supervisors really mean when they say thisis that the supervision and development of subordinates is not as high a priority as certainother tasks.In this case, the organization may need to review the priorities and values that it hasinstilled in its supervisory ranks. After all, supervisors who havent got time to monitorand facilitate the performance of their subordinates are like chefs who havent got time tocook, or dentists who are too busy to look at teeth. It just doesnt make sense.If appraisal is viewed as an isolated event, it is only natural that supervisors will come toview their responsibilities in the same way. Just as worrying, employees may come to seetheir own effort and commitment levels as something that needs a bit of a polish up in themonth or two preceding appraisals.performance AppraisalBias EffectsGabris & Mitchell have reported a disruptive bias in performance appraisal known as theMatthew Effect.It is named after the Matthew of biblical fame who wrote, "To him who has shall begiven, and he shall have abundance: but from him who does not have, even that which hehas shall be taken away."In performance appraisal the Matthew Effect is said to occur where employees tend tokeep receiving the same appraisal results, year in and year out. That is, their appraisalresults tend to become self-fulfilling: if they have done well, they will continue to dowell; if they have done poorly, they will continue to do poorly.The Matthew Effect suggests that no matter how hard an employee strives, their pastappraisal records will prejudice their future attempts to improve. 21
  • 22. There is other research to support the theory that poor performers might not be given afair chance to improve. A study of supervisors in nearly 40 different organizations foundthat subordinates tend to be divided into two groups: in-groupers and out-groupers.This study, by Heneman, Greenberger & Anonyou (1989) reported that ingroupers aresubordinates who seem to be favored by their supervisors. In their relationship with theboss, they enjoy "a high degree of trust, interaction, support and rewards."On the other hand, outgroupers dont do as well. They appear to be permanently out offavor and are likely to bear the brunt of supervisory distrust and criticism. The effect istherefore similar to the horns and halo effect; supervisors tend to judge employees aseither good or bad, and then seek evidence that supports that opinion.It was found that when an ingrouper did poorly on a task, supervisors tended to overlookthe failure or attribute to causes such as bad luck or bad timing; when they did well, theirsuccess was attributed to effort and ability.But when a outgrouper performed well, it was rarely attributed to their effort or ability.And when an outgrouper performed poorly, there was little hesitation it citing the causeas laziness or incompetence.It is not clear how supervisors make the distinction between ingroupers and outgroupers.Whatever the criteria, it is clearly not objective, equitable or reliable.This bias must inevitably lead to a distortion of the appraisal process. It must also be asource of frustration for those employees who are discriminated against. FrustrationThe extent of this frustration was explored by Gabris & Mitchell. They studied anorganization with a quarterly performance appraisal system. The workforce was dividedinto two groups: those who had been given high appraisal results consistently, and thosewho had low results consistently.When the groups were asked if the appraisal system was fair and equitable, 63 per cent ofthe high performers agreed, compared to only 5 per cent of the lower performers.The groups were asked if their supervisors listened to them. Of the high performers, 69per cent said yes, while among the low performers, 95 per cent said no.Finally, when asked if their supervisors were supportive, nearly half of the highperformers agreed that they were, while none (nil, zilch, zero!) of the low performersagreed.Of course, not everyone who gets a poor appraisal result is a victim of supervisory bias.Nor are all supervisors prone to making the same degree of ingroup and outgroupdistinction. The effects discussed here are tendencies, not immutable effects. 22
  • 23. But to some extent, it appears that certain employees may be unfairly advantaged, whileothers are disadvantaged, by bias effects in the judgements of supervisors.It is a cardinal principle of performance appraisal that employees should have the chanceto improve their appraisal results - especially if their past results have not been so good. Itis a very serious flaw in the process of appraisal if this principle is denied in practice.There are reasonable steps which can be taken to limit the effects of supervisory bias. Awareness TrainingThe first line of defense lies in raising awareness of the problem. Supervisors need to beinformed of the types of subtle bias that can interfere with their performance asappraisers. They need to understand that the ingroup / outgroup bias, for instance, reducesthe morale and motivation of their subordinates. Developing Poor PerformersIncentives, financial or non-financial, may offered to encourage supervisors to makespecial efforts to help poor performers improve. Supervisory appraisals, for example,might stress the importance of working with poor performers to upgrade theirperformance. The possibilities are extensive. Counseling, Transfer, TerminationThere is always the possibility that an employee who receives poor appraisal results is infact a chronic poor performer. No employer is obliged to tolerate poor performanceforever. Consistently poor appraisal results will indicate a need for counseling, transfer ortermination. The exact remedy will depend on the circumstances. 23
  • 24. 24
  • 25. Corporate ProfileThe Centre for Development of Advanced Computing (C-DAC) is a national initiative tomot its indigenous human and technical resources in a bid to attain technologicalcompetency I evolving arena of Information Technology and proliferate its inherentbenefit toward advancement of its citizens as well society.Corporate PresentationTo integrate High-end Research and Development with education.Vision, Mission and ValuesTo emerge as a pemier R&D institution for the design, development and deployment ofclass electronic and IT solutions for economic and human advancement.Work EnvironmentC-DAC’s focus on diversity in research and work creates a competitive advantage forcustomers, our employees, and our company.Areas of Expertise • Professional Software Development • Communication Interfaces and Networking • Natural Language Processing • Corporate Consultancy • Security System • HardwareHuman Resource Philosophy and PolicyC-DAC’S HR philosophy holds the employee, its ‘Member’ (of the C-DAC family), asbeing a center stage of the organization. 25
  • 26. Corporate ProfileThe Centre for Development of Advanced Computing (C-DAC) is a national initiativemobilize its indigenous human and technical resources in a bid to attain technologycompetency in the evolving arena of Information Technology and proliferate its inherentbe towards the advancement of its citizens as well as society.Established in March 1988, as a Scientific Society of the Ministry of CommunicationsInformation Technology (formerly the Department of Electronics,), Government of India,Center for Development of Advanced Computing (C-DAC), is primarily an R&Dinstitution involve the design, development and deployment of electronics anddeployment of electronics and advanced Information Technology (IT) products andsolutions. C-DAC’S operations are mission oriented and driven by its for and targetobjectives.In a decade and a half since its inception, C-DAC has established its brand image as a preR&D institution of national and international repute working in advanced areas ofelectronic and information technology and developing and deploying IT PRODUCTS andsolutions for div sectors of economy. The technologies that C-DAC has dealt with areHigh performance computing (HPC), Natural Language Processing (NLP), ArtificialIntelligence (AI), e-Lear Multilingual-Multimedia computing, Geomatics, Cyber security,Real time systems software, Data warehousing Data mining, Digital/broadband wirelessnetworks, Scier modeling & visualization. The key sectors addressed by C-DAC areFinance, Healthcare, Po Steel, Defense, Telecom, Agriculture, Industrial Controls,Broadcasting, Education and Governance.Pioneers of the Open Frame Architecture and acknowledged globally for its PARAMseries Supercomputers, C-DAC has applied its High Performance Computing andCommunication (HPCC) expertise to the fields of Computational Atmospheric Sciences,Computational Dynamics, Computational Structural Mechanics, Seismic Data Processing,Bioinforma Quantum Chemistry, Ab-initio Molecular Dynamics, Imaging, FinancialModeling and Decide Support systems. These applications on PARAM supercomputersare powered by C-D interconnect switch PARAM Net providing high speeds and lowlatencies and its HPCC software suit, designed to provide Flexible, Parallel andDistributed Software environment for Linux Unix Clusters.C-DAC’S relentless R&D effort in the HPCC area has led to the foundation of the NatPARAM Supercomputing Facility (NPSF) at Pune, and C-DAC’s Terascalesupercomputer Facility (CTSF) at Bangalore, which houses the PARAM Padma, with apeak computing power one Teraflop, ranked in the List of Top 500 powerfulsupercomputers of the world.C-DAC’S Language Technology mission has helped to create a framework for the co-existes of all the living languages of the world, with diverse scripts, on standardcomputers. In initiative, C-DAC evolved the Graphics and Intelligence based ScriptTechnology (GIST proliferate the benefits of Information Technology to the vast anddiversified multilin population of India. 26
  • 27. C-DAC’s has continuously developed and provided a number of advanced products forthe us computers in Indian languages as well as foreign languages like Tibetian,Bhutanese, Perso-Arabic and so on for hundreds of thousands of users. The ISCIIstandard for multilin initied and adopted by C-DAC though a proactive support by theMinistry of Information Technology, Government of India.As the era of a digital economy evolves, the concept of eGovernance assumes grewsignificance. Recognizing the importance of eGovernance and capitalizing on its skillstechnologies developed over the years, C-DAC has taken major initiatives by developsystems for Land Management and GIS based Planning, Telephone Revenue billcomputerization of Municipal Corporations, Election Commission, Stamps and RegistrarPWD, Seed Corporation, State Legislative Assembly, Hospital Information Systems,Electo Commerce and other similar systems to address specific needs of governmentdepartment and organisations.C-DAC established the Advanced Computing Training school (ACTS) in order to buildmobilize high quality and skilled manpower in the extremely fast moving sector of ICT.There the ACTS, C-DAC offers a variety of specializes courses covering crucial domainsof IT industries. There include VLSI, Embedded System Design, Enterprise SystemManagement Bioinformatics, Geomatics, Digital Multimedia, Business Computing andComputer Software Development, Specific Masters training courses in ComputerScience, Information Technology Electronic Product Design are also offered by C-DAC.C-DAC, as an institute of fundamental R&D, in its new unified framework seeks tostrength its brand equity and crate a higher value for its activities in contributing to theeconomy the society at large. The key focus areas of High Performance ComputingBioinforma Networking, Internet Computing, Cyber Security, Real-Time Systems andsoftware, Geoma Multinugual and Multimedia Computing, Digital/Broadband WirelessNetworks, Open so software and ICT for Healthcare, Agriculture and Education.It is C-DAC reborn and strengthened that will define the terms of success both for itselfthe nation. The opportunities have been identified, and C-DAC stands poised to deliver asR&D institute dealing with ‘Tomorrows’ Computing Technologies’ today. 27
  • 28. Vision, Mission and ValuesVision of C-DAC • To emerge as a pemier R&D institution for the design, development and deploymer world class electronic and IT solutions for economic and human advancement.Mission Statement • To carve out a niche in a global arena of advanced information technology and enha our brand image. • To continue to crate and deploy the finest talent in our quest for further expanse the frontiers of High Performance Computing and Communication technologies and applications. • To achieve rapid and effective spread of knowledge by overcoming language barr using natural language oriented computing and multimedia technologies. • To share our vast reservoir of experience for education and knwoeldgge enrichment the field of Information Technology. • To utilize the intellectual property thus generated, bring benefits of Information Technology to society, by converting it into an exciting business opportunity establishing a self-sustaining and wealth creating operation.Our Core ValuesThe essence of C-DAC’s philosophy and the bed rock of our corporate culture • Innovation and pursuit of excellence in ‘Applications’, ‘Research and Technology’ • Integrity, transparency and openness in all our action. • Working with and through the Teams in our way of life. • Distributed Leadership across the organization at various levels. • Strive to continuously improve our processes and quality. • Address needs of the society through user centre initiatives. 28
  • 29. Work EnvironmentC-DAC’s focus on diversity in research and work crates a competitive advantage forcustomers, our employees, and our company.Every day’ at all levels of C-DAC’S business, we strive to crate an environment of trustrespect, where each individual is included and valued. This environment enables all Cmembers to develop and contribute to their full potential.The Human Resource group in C-DAC is continuously involved in effectivelyimplementer philosophy of employee centric policies, a great learning platform freedomto think, evolved implement and an informal work culture that is second to none. Thuscreating a conducive environment to facilitate the C-DAC employees to develop andcontribute in keeping with stated vision & mission objectives of C-DAC.C-DAC designs and offers a number of solutions to markets that include defense, linguistriving to make ourselves self-reliant by marketing our products and solutions nationallyinternationally. Thus we offer an environment to our employees to make their crateeconomically viable and profitable to the organization.C-DAC is committed to conducting its business in an ethical, socially responsibleenvironmentally sustainable manner. This commitment is consistent with our corporateobject and is essential to continued business success. 29
  • 30. Area of ExpertiseProfessional Software Development Communication Interfaces and Networking • ERP Solutions • Professional Audio Broadcasting • GIS Applications • Professional Graphic Broadcasting • Decision Support Systems • Newsroom Automation • Certificate Authentication Servers • Digital Storage and Retrieval • Property Management Systems • Examination Systems • WAP based Systems • Internet via cable Natural Language Processing • VISHWAKOSH • Machine-Aided Translation Corporate Consultancy • Bilingual Dictionaries • IT- Strategy Planning • IT Terminology • Requirement Analysis and Study • LEKHIKA • Networking (LAN, WAN, Intranet • Language Conversion Tools etc.) • CHITRAKSHARIKA • System Implementation and • Parallel CORPORA Supervision Security System • Quality Assurance and Certification • Access Control Systems • Integrated Perimetry Protection Systems Hardware • Digital Set Top Box • Attendance Recording System • Neuron –Thin Client • Wireless Access Control System • Solar based SMPS • UPS / Inverters / Converters • Embedded Systems • Special Applications • Cable Modem 30
  • 31. Human Resource Philosophy and PolicyC-DAC’s HR philosophy holds the employee, its Member (of the C-DAC family), asbeing at center stage of the organization.C-DAC’s achievements are clearly attributed to the 575 strong human resource spreadover six different locations across the country, and manifest itself in employee centricpolicies great learning platform freedom to think, innovate, challenging areas to work andan inform work culture that is second to none.C-DAC greatly values the contribution of its employees and keeps its human resource isunder constant review, drawing inputs in this regard both through internal climate surveysthe external environmental considerations.The management at C-DAC is confident that wit a sound combination of a goodhierarchal functionally flat structure, an effective inter personal communication systemalready in pl newer HR thrust areas currently on steam, the employee centric HRphilosophy will further boost and reinforce a belief in the minds of IT professionals thatC-DAC is truly a place to be in . 31
  • 32. DEPARTMENT OF CDAC, NOIDA• Embedded System• Multilingual Technologies• Open Source Technologies• Health care e-Sushrut Hospital Management Information System• Education & Training• Events and Conferences 32
  • 33. Embedded SystemDesign and Development of Digital Set Top BoxSet Top Box is a device that can be connected to a TV for watching digital channels. Itsupports all cable, terrestrial and satellite transmission system and has followingfeatures – • Support for DBC-S, DVB-T, and DBV-C through different NIM modules. • Transport Input from front ends (Satellite, terrestrial, Cable). • A category-based user friendly multilingual OSC (in Engli9sh & one other regional languages) will be provided. • Support PAL/NTSC picture formats. • Cable Modem integrated. • Euro DOSCSIS Compliant. • Email on T.V. • Web-browsing on T.V. • Conditional Access. • Smart and Integration – 2. • I.R. ACTIVATED Remote, Keyboard and mouse.The specifications of the product have been frozen and schematic design prepared. Thepro is in development stage.Design & Development of Standard Indigenous Call Centre Equipment ApplicationSoftware with Multilingual Capacities.In the current scenario establishing a Call Centre involves procurement of expensiveSwitch servers and Application Software etc. at exorbitant cost. This project aims atproviding a cost solution for the entire application needs of a Call Centre.The Solution being developed is soft switch based, which eliminates the need of buyingswitches. The objective of the project is to provide and integrated solution for Call Centrelike features for incoming and outgoing calls, Web Integration with e-mail client and 33
  • 34. program, chat program, Web Callback etc. A part from this, a small CRM application isintegrated, which can be modified as per the customer needs. Automatic Call Distributorsfeatures are also included.The development of the project is under going.Hardware/Embedded Systems ProjectsIn line with its mandate to be an R&D organization, the Unit has augmented its R&Dbase in terms of availability of qualified manpower and latest systems/tools like sun workstatic cadence design software, ARM Development Tools and RTOS Tolls software. Anumber projects, sponsored and in-house, were taken up during the year. The majorprojects in taken and products developed are :-Thin Client (Neuron)Neuron has been designed to be a complete solution for network clients. Each Neuron hasown embedded memory, processor, Ethernet, graphics, sound and most other capabilitiesa modern PC has. At its heart is a versatile STPC-Atlas x 86 based processor integratedmodern capabilities like 2D graphics acceleration, multimedia processing capabilities,SDI controller and several other features. The main board has a sound card; an EthernetCard SD Ram. The storage memory Device is a Disk on Chil (DOC). This DOC worksexactly lit normal Hard Disk. It is loaded with one or more OS and a combination ofutilities, architecture gives Neuron fast and powerful processing capabilities. A smallexternal m adapter supplies the power to neuron, thus preventing the server from gettingoverburden The Neuron runs on a Linux platform but can work with most windowsprograms as well, t the software costs for Neuron is very less and software are requiredonly at the server.A Thin Client terminal only processes keyboard and mouse input and screen output,leavin application processing and storage to the server.Unlike a traditional PC with high-speed processors and data storage, these terminalsoptimized to act solely as windows to the server where users applications and data resInstead of applications running on individual PCs, all applications are run from a singleser greatly simplifying the administration and support needed to run a network.The note worthy features of the Neuron are:- • Very economical setup of networks • Only server up-gradation required to upgrade the network • Stable, robust and secure networks • Compatible with windows as well as UNIX platforms 34
  • 35. • Integrated on board Ethernet, display, sound and serial port • 2D graphics acceleration • Provision for USB, hard disk CD, floppy drives and modem • No threat of viruses • No danger of data loss due to improper shutdownThe transfer of technology of the product is being explored.External (serial) and Internal (pci) ModemThe unit has developed a modem based on a single chipset from Conexant Inc. USA. Thedesign is aimed at highest functionality at lowest cost, to meet the current 56Kbpsstandard The technology has been transferred to BPL & Wipro.Home Inventory Management SystemThe project, which was taken up in-house was aimed at designing and developing asystem monitoring of home inventories like soaps, toothpaste and other household itemsof day-to-use. The system is capable of connecting to the racks in which each drawer ismarked I wise. The system will keep track of all the drawers and once a particular itemgoes belc predefined limit, the system will send email to the vendor and the order is picautomatically.The project has been successfully completed.Solar Power Grain Moisture Measurement SystemThe moisture content plays a vital role in determining the period of grain storage in thedowns. Higher moisture content attract various fungi and bacteria thereby causingdamage the grain whereas very low moisture content affect the nutrient content of thegrain.Solar Power Grain Moisture Measurement Unit (SPGMMU) measures the moisturecenter grain/seeds. In addition, the system will be utilized to know the optimum stage ofharvest storage for extended period and for research work in the laboratory. The systemhas applications in pre-dominantly agricultural communities/regions.Photovoltaic Main Electronic Interface UnitThe conventional sources of energy are depleting rather fast. Keeping in view technodevelopment on PV utility taking place elsewhere and as an import substitution effort, aprc was undertaken to design, develop and fabricate a 2 KVA PV utility interface. Thesys consisting of the following 6 modules has been successfully developed:- 35
  • 36. • DC to DC Converter • DC to AC converter • SMPS Power Supply for Control Card, drive Circuits and Fan • Power flow and Synchronization Control • Supervisory Control and Metering and Load Management • CP Control CardThis system is ideal for rural areas where the electricity supply from the grid isinfrequent, surplus power generated can also be fed into the grid.Solar Powered Uninterruptible Switch Mode Power Supply for PCSystemSolar powered uninterruptible switch mode power supply is used to generate various volllevels (regulated) required to run a PC. The system consists of an uninterrupted powersurf an AC to DC converter and a DC to AC converter. The system takes solar energy asprim source of power. It switches to AC line, when solar power is not available andswitched Battery bank when both solar and AC Power are not available. Softwaremonitoring facility also provided to monitor the power status of the system.This technology/product has immense for use in the rural/remote areas where the electricsupply is scarce or unstable.Development of Technology for Tele TV Conferencing usingConventional Telephone LinesThe project aims at developing technology for transmission of audio and videoconventional telephone lines. The main features include, the compression of audio and vdata and data transmission over line. The compression used for the video is as per H,standard, for audio is as per G.723.1. The video for transmission is PAL based, the videow be transmitted QCIF resolution. The audio would be compressed to as low as 5.3 kbp:against the standard 64 kbps.The project is in development stage.Solar Home LanternThis system is designed to work as a night lamp in homes, particularly in the remote areas: 36
  • 37. 37
  • 38. • Lekhika - Platform Independent Word Processor• Translation Support System• Bilingual Electronic Dictionaries• On-Line Hindi Vishwakosh• Address Management System• e-Content Creation• Unicode Interface System for Applications• Multilingual Corpora• Hindi OCR• Text to Speech (TTS) 38
  • 39. 39
  • 40. Open Source Technologies- CDAC, Noida InitiativesOpen Source Technologies like linux are being widely implemented globally on the serdesktop PCs and Laptops or even embedded devices like Mobile Phones, PDAs, Honorindustrial appliances etc. The Linux Clusters rank highly among the top 500 supercompworldwide. Many mission critical applications of NASA and US military are simulatedimplemented on Linux.Indian market is also opening up to new opportunities being offered at very low costs bySource Technologies. CDAC, Noida has taken various initiatives by providing products,soli and consultancy support services for adopting open source technologies. Someinitiative CDAC, Noida are: • Machine Aided Translation- English to Hindi translation system • Lekhika- A platform independent word processor with addon utilities like Hindi : checker, transliteration, dictionaries etc. • Neuron Thin Client- Thin client provides desktop environment at very low cost com|: to PCs over a network. It can work in both windows as well as Linux environment. • Open Source Set-Top-Box- with embedded Conax CAS. The implementation is will open source web browser to provide internet on TV. • Hospital Information System- Total HIS package implementation • ISP Setup with Mail server, Web server, DNS, RADIUS, Proxy server all configure Linux • Data centre with 2 clusters - one application cluster and the other one as data ck The data cluster is configured with Oracle 9i RAC and the data applications are host* the application servers cluster. • Q-mail implementation at NTPC, Noida - providing consultancy and handheld suppc big corporate like NTPC in enabling them to adopt Open source technologies. • Migration of existing legacy applications and databases to Linux • Advanced Linux Training programs for departments like Cabinet Secretariat, Minis Home, Rajasthan Electricity Board etc. • Organising and actively sponsoring seminar/workshops like Linux Asia. 40
  • 41. 41
  • 42. Dimensione-Sushrut C-DACs Hospital Management Information System is a major step towardsada technology to improve healthcare.e-Sushrut incorporates an integrated computerized clinical information system for imphospital administration and patient health care. It also provides an accurate, electronicallymedical record of the patient. A data warehouse of such records can be utilized for staticrequirements and for research.The real time e-Sushrut streamlines the treatment flow of patients and simulateempowering workforce to perform to their peak ability, in an optimized and efficientmanner modeled on the unique combination of a patient centric and medical staff centricparadigm, providing benefits to both the recipients and the providers of healthcare. Itensures improvement in performance along with reducing the costs.e-Sushrut can be customized for a variety of hospitals such as medium sized clinics, largehospital which could be Government hospitals, Super specialty hospital or PurelyPr hospitals. Advantages • Connects people, processes and data in real time across all the hospital on a s platform. • Workflow routes documents and Information electronically. • & Flexibility and Integration abilities manage change. • Customized Clinical data according to each Department, Laboratory etc • Access to Financial information and Performance indicators help in managing resource costs and margins. • Fast and reliable information storage, querying and retrieval. Retrieval could be eighth< generation of reports based on demographics, gender, and age or for research & Ml classification.Technical Specs • Based on C-DAC’s n-tier Internet Architecture. • Takes Full adv • Advantage of extensive markup Language (XML). • Provides Bar coding Interface for areas such as patient Registration, Stores, Sample collection etc. 42
  • 43. • Provision for Machine Interface • Integration with Code sets like ICD (International Classification of Diseases), SNOMED • Based on RDBMS for easy retrieval and better performance • Portable across a variety of platforms • Easy GUI interface • Director, 3 D Studio, • AutoCAD Map, PC Arc • Info Solaris & JAVA • Sun Solaris & JAVA Toolssalient features of Diet Kitchen are Meal Scheduling, Meal Cancellation and PrescribedTherapeutic DietPatient Medical RecordsThe Patient Record Management Module is crucial in the overall integrated hospitalmanage system. The rationale behind computerization of PMR is to maximize the usageof the patient medical information.Blood BankThe Blood Bank is one of the major components of a hospital, concerned with various reactivities including donor registration, physical examination, blood grouping, blood infecttests, component separation, blood requisition and cross match.Central StoresThis module deals with Hospital Equipment/Material/Inventory Purchase and Supply todiffer Departments. Requisitions for different items/equipment are sent to this store fromdifferent departments and accordingly the CSD issues items/equipment to variousdepartments. The also maintains records of purchases, stock, and supplier list,item/equipment/material m tables, and also takes care of the inspection details.Bio-Medical Engineering DepartmentThe Bio-Medical Engineering Department (BMED) module keeps track of the details ofthe medical equipment of the hospital. The details include equipment code, category,depart name, location, and vendors name and purchase details. This module also handlescomply and service details of different equipment. 43
  • 44. EnquiryThis module provides information related to enquires regarding the hospital or the patadmitted or registered in the hospital.Master ManagementThe functioning of the Hospital Information System depends on a large set of data thatrun static for a long period of time.The Master module is used to enter, modify and validate the Master data that is used by aother modules. It is the responsibility of the System Administrator to maintain theintegrate this data.User ManagementUser Management is Instrumental in assigning Privileges to users according to their RolesWork Area. The Privileges are of two kinds Application Level and Data Level.Personnel Information SystemThe PIS Module deals with the maintenance of employee records in the hospital. Thefunction this module includes Employee Personnel Information, Employee ServiceDetails, L Management, Disciplinary Action, Recruitment Process, Manpower Planning,and Manage Module, which specifically looks after Vehicle Management &Accommodation Manager Training Management. The PIS Module is integrated withPayroll System.Finance Management SystemThe FMS module consists of Payroll System, which deals with generation of salary ofemplaced with dues, deduction and income tax processing. Bill Processing System, whichgene various types of bills (both employee specific and office related). The AssetManagement M< which deals with purchase, allotment, location tracking, maintenance,contract details of a and generation of Fixed Asset register. The Account Modulemaintains accounts, generating Accounts Book such as Bank Book, Journal Book, andCash Book etc. It also includes Void generation, Ledger, Trial Balance, Sub-TrialBalance, Balance Sheet, and Profit-Loss account the accounts section.Stores Management SystemThe Stores Management System keeps the inventory of various items such as stationfurniture etc. It also keep record of items in the inventory, reorder level of items, items allto various department, no of items that can be allotted to the department, vendor detail*details of the items, item requisition, request approval and generating various reports. 44
  • 45. Library Management SystemThe Library Information System comprises of the following sub modules; Books acquitscataloguing, circulation serialization, OPAC (Online Public Access Catalogue), Fundsaccounts and Printing Desired Reports.Experience in health care • SGPGI Lucknow – Since 1998 • GTBH Delhi – Since 2000 • Central Hospital, Northern Railway, New Delhi – Since 2002 • GB Pant, Port Blair – Since July 2004 • General Hospital, Chandigarh, Implementation in progress • MGIMS, Sevagram (Nagpur), Customization in Progress Registration Emergency Out Patient Transport In – Patient Enquiry Labs Service Appointment O.T. Services Diet & Kitchen Blood Bank C.S.S.D. PMIS Pharmacy Linen & Laundry FMS Patient Med. Record Bio-Med Waste MNS Patient Billing Maintenance LIS Core Services Support Service Back Office Administration Advanced Hospital Information System • Based on Windows - 95/98/2000 and NT front end with NT/Unix/Solaris as backend • Audit logging of transactions • Comprehensive User Management & Security. 45
  • 46. • Integration with PACS and Telemedicine. FeaturesRegistrationEvery patient who approaches a hospital has to get registered prior to getting anyconsultant treatment, and investigations done from the hospital. Registration of patientsinvolves certain general and demographic information about the patient and assigning aunique re-registration number (CR No) to the Patient.Out Patient ManagementThe outpatient module deals with the entire gamut of activities pertaining to the manageme out-patients. It consists of the creating Patient Visit and storing details likecomplaints, his clinical summary, provisional diagnosis, drugs etc corresponding to eachvisit.Pharmacy ManagementThe Pharmacy Module deals with the maintenance of drugs and consumables in thehospital functions of this module include, online drug prescription, inventorymanagement of d consumables and sutures.BillingThe Billing module deals with collection of money for services availed by a patient.InvestigationIn the routine functioning of a hospital, various types of investigations are carried out.The module handles the processes right from raising investigations to making the resultsavailableIn Patient ManagementThe In-patient module commences when the patient is being allotted a bed in the wardand after preparing the final discharge for a patient. In Patient Management deals with thecomp treatment administered during the patient stay in the hospital. 46
  • 47. Operation TheatreThe Operation Theatre module contains information about the availability of all theEquipment/Tools etc. Scheduling of operations is the main function of this module. Proprovision for raising and validating an operation. Automatic preparation of Operation dcEntering and validating the detailed Operation and Anesthesia record along with theprovisic maintaining Post-op progress.AppointmentThis module deals in allotting appointments to patients for a visit to the hospital. It keepsof available slots in various categories of appointments. This module also deals withcancel of existing appointments.The module deals with two types of appointments • Consultant Appointment • Equipment Appointment.Central Sterile ServicesThe Central Sterile Services Departments (CSSD) main function is to provide sterileitems, I equipment to wards and OTs. This could be reusable equipment, linen fromvarious wards OTs for sterilization or it could be fresh sterilized items, which is issued towards/OTs as per requisition received from their side.Diet KitchenThe functionality of the kitchen module is to manage the patients meal services. This medepends on the In-patient module. The diet can be prescribed only to the In-patients. 47
  • 48. 48
  • 49. Setting Up of "Centre of Excellence" for R&D and EducationA Unit has initiated steps for setting up of a Centre of Excellence for Research &Education the areas of Information Technology, Communications and Bio-informaticswith IT Indu participation. A five acres land has been acquired in Noida, adjacent to C-DAC, NOIDA O for the proposed Centre.The Centre of Excellence would offer various knowledge and skill based graduate,postgradi and Ph.D. programmes integrating R&D and Education in the areas ofInformation Technol" Communications and Bio-informatics.The proposal has already been approved by the Governing Council and Secretary,Ministry Communications and IT and is under process for SFC approval.C-DAC, Education & Certification ServicesWith a view to integrate high-end education and research in the field ofInforms Technology, the Education & Certification Services include: • BOSP : Business - Oriented Specialized Programme • CDP : Career Development Programme • SUP : Skill Up gradation ProgrammeStructured training methodology and advanced learning techniques are deployed to progoal-based learning.Education & Certification Services aim at updating the technical knowledge and manage^performance with: • Education/Training in Information Technology, in alliance with World Leaders • Practice - Oriented Training Programmes to build knowledge based skills • Effective Training Methodologies for enhancing the quality • Instructor Facilitation - encouraging deployment of experts from academia and industries • Comprehensive curriculumThe programmes offered includeMaster Degree programmes • M. Tech(IT) (jointly with University of Roorkee) • MCA (In affiliation with IP University) • M. Tech.(Computer Science & Engineering) in affiliation with IP Univ. 49
  • 50. • M. Tech.(Information Technology) in affiliation with IP Univ. M. Tech.(VLSI Design) in affiliation with IP Univ.PG Diploma ProgrammesPG Diploma in Advanced Software Design & Development (Based on IIT, DelhiCurricula).PG Diploma in Embedded System in VLSI Design ^ PGDiploma in System and Database Administration Diplomain Geographic Information SystemSpecialized Programmes • Application Developer • Oracle 9i SQL • Oracle 95 PLSQL • Internet Form Application-I • Internet Form Application-II • Building Internet • Oracle 9i DBA Track • SQL • Oracle 9i DBA Fundamental-I • Oracle9i DBA Fundamental-II • Oracle 9i DBA Performance & Tuning • ERP • People SoftTECHNICAL MANPOWERC-DAC, NOIDA, employs about 300 professionals. 50
  • 51. INFRASTRUCTUREC-DAC, NOIDA, has full-fledged sate-of-the-art infrastructure and facilitated labs. Thefacil include: Software Hardware Networking • IBM S-390 • SAP R/3 4.OB • 3-Com Switched • IBM AS/400 • SIEBEL/CINCOM Network • Compaq non – stop • SCO Unix/Linux • Routers Servers • Windows NT Novell • Compaq • 8 MB Fibre Optical Ltd Net Clients/workstation • Oracle 8i, Sybase II • Nortel Switch for Call • IBM Work Stations • Developer 2000, Centres • Digital Work Station Power builder 5.0, 6.0 • Network on 10 Mbps • 240 KW UPS • COBOL II, MVS, JCL, CICS, Ethernet Cat 5 cabling • SUN Work Stations VSAM etc. on IBM S-390 • Printers & Plotters • Siemens System for • ILE COBOL, OS-400, • Scanners RPG-400, CL-400 etc. on • Network Management AS/400 • Projection Systems Centre • Domino Lotus Notes • Generator • SNPS • VCU Visual Studio • 2 MB leased line for Internet • IPLC to USA/UK 51
  • 52. e-GovernanceBuddham Dhamara 52
  • 53. Business – Oriented Specialized Programme (BOSP)Sr. Long/Short No. of Products Programmes DurationNo. Term Seats per year Professional Courses Design Building & Deploy1. Internet Applications with Oracle Short Term 10 Days 10 4 Developer 6i2. Java with Oracle9i Long Term 45 Days 30 43. ERP Long Term 6 Weeks 15 64. CRM Long Term 1 Months 10 85. Oracle 8 DBA Short Term 10 Days 10 46. Enterprise Network Management Short Term 5 Days 15 127. Unix & Networking Short Term 5 Days 24 88. Oracle 9 (i) Short Term 5 Days 12 89. Oracle 8 (i) for Developer Short Term 8 Days 15 410. Oracle Developer 6 (i) Short Term 13 Days 15 411. Red Hat Linux Essentials Short Term 5 Days 24 412. Linux System Administration Short Term 5 Days 24 413. Administering Oracle 9i AS Short Term 5 Days 16 4 53
  • 54. ANNUAL ASSESSMENTObjectives:The Annual assessment System for executive and non-executive Categories seeks to meetthe following objectives: PROMOTION: To form an important basis for promotion along with seniority. TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT: To understand the gaps in knowledge and skillwith reference to the present assignment of an employee and with reference to his futuredevelopment; and fill the same by planned guidance and trainingCoverage:There will be different formats for assessment as per the following broad categories: (a) Executive – technical (b) Executive – non-technical (c) Non – executive – technical (d) Non- executive – non – technical Assessment: - The assessment will be annual and cover performance during the financial year. - The annual assessment form provides for evaluation on certain attributes and abilities on a 3-point scale ‘Outstanding’, ‘satisfactory’, and ‘unsatisfactory’. Periodic performance records and critical incidents maintained by persons reporting, with respect to each employee, will form the basis, which will aid in filling the annual assessment. This, it is hoped, will contribute towards making the appraisal objectives. - The assessment form also provides for an overall evaluation on a 5-point scale. Keeping in view the relative priorities/ratings on each attribute on the 3-point scale, the overall assessment may be arrived upon. - In addition to the above, the annual assessment form provides for identification of training needs and rotational assignment to fill the gaps in knowledge and skills. Who Appraises - The annual assessment for each non-executive will be done by the person to whom he reports. However, the minimum level of the reporting person will not be less than a head of the department, of a employee . 54
  • 55. - The annual report will further be reviewed by the officer to whom the reporting person in turn reports. The minimum level of reviewing authority both in case of technical & non-technical will be that of an executive.- The report will further be seen & signed by the sectional head in case he us not the reviewing officer, and countersigned by the HOD may enter remarks if any.- In the event of the overall assessment being rated ‘Unsatisfactory’ a written communication will be issued to the concerned employee by the HOD. The communication will be accompanied with specific facts and figures substantiating the adverse remarks. In case of representation by the concerned employee the same will be examined by the HOD who will record his final decision along with reasons. The final decision will be communicated to the employee with regard to: The earlier assessment being retained. After due consideration the earlier remarks are expunged and the same being noted in the annual assessment form.- If an employee has worked with more than one reporting person for three months or more, he will be assessed by all the concerned reporting persons.- As in case of executive, an important outcome of the follow up of annual assessment will be counseling, counseling in case of ‘unsatisfactory performers’ will be done by the HOD. 55
  • 56. ANNUAL ASSESSMENT REPORT: EXECUTIVE – TECHNICALYEAR:_____________FROM:_____________TO:________________NAME: EMPLOYEE NO:GRADE: SECTION:TRADE: DEPARTMENT:DT OF ENTRY IN THE PRESENTGRADE: OUTSTANDING SATISFACTORY UNSATISFACTORYTechnical ExpertiseTechnicalCompetenceTechnicalAcquaintanceLearningAreasFollow up of workat appropriatecheckpoints andtaking timely action/decision whererequiredAbility to direct andget work doneJob knowledge,adequacy of hisknowledge andskills andapplication for thesame.Cost consciousnessResponsibilitytowards workAbility to maintainproper recordsHandling ofconfidentialdocumentProficiency withregard to writtencommunication/skillin draftingRegularity and 56
  • 57. punctualityAbility to guide &train subordinatesAmenability todisciplineKnowledge andobservance ofcompany rules &instructions andprocedures relatedto his jobAbility tocoordinate withother departmentsRelationship withsuperiors andcolleaguesIntegrityAbility to assumehigherresponsibilitiesCite any incident of breach of company rules and feature of misconduct if any. Incase ofany disciplinary action, give details and nature of charge.Training & Career Development (To be filled by the Reporting Person)a. Keeping in mind his i) present assignment ii) future development, do you feel that theemployee should be given a rotational assignment within or outside thesection/department or an additional skill?b. If yes give details of the rotational assignment/additional skill. -With reference to his present assignment: - With reference to his future development:c. Approximate month when these recommendations should take effect:OVERALL ASSESSMENT (To be filled by the Reporting person) [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]Outstanding V.Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory(Consistently (Exceedingly (Performance (Perf. As per (Performanceexceptional high level of higher than job below average)performance) performance) average) requirement)Name:………………………………………signature:…………………………………….Designation:…………………………………date:………………………………………... 57
  • 58. OVERALL ASSESSMENT (To be filled by the reviewing officer) [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]Outstanding V.Good Good Satisfactory UnsatisfactoryName:………………………………………signature:…………………………………….Designation:…………………………………date:………………………………………...Signature of the Sectional HeadName:………………………………………signature:…………………………………….Designation:…………………………………date:………………………………………...Comments of the HOD Name……………………………………….. Signature…………………………………… Date………………………………………… ANNUAL ASSESSMENT REPORT: EXECUTIVE NON- TECHNICALYEAR:_____________FROM:_____________TO:________________NAME: EMPLOYEE NO:GRADE: SECTION:TRADE: DEPARTMENT:DT OF ENTRY IN THE PRESENTGRADE:HEADS OUTSTANDING SATISFACTORY UNSATISFACTORY1. Results achievedwith respect toassigned work, interms ofthoroughness andquality.2. Timelycompletion of work3. Follow up ofwork at appropriatecheckpoints andtaking timelyaction/decisionwhere required4. Ability to direct 58
  • 59. and get work done5. Job knowledge,adequacy of hisknowledge andskills, andapplication of thesame.6. Costconsciousness7. Responsibilitytowards work8. Handling ofconfidentialdocuments9. Proficiency withregard to writtencommunication/skill in drafting10. Regularity andpunctuality11. Ability to guide& trainsubordinates12. Amenability todiscipline13. Knowledge andobservance ofcompany rules &instructions andprocedures relatedto his job14. Ability tocoordinate withother departments15. Relationshipwith superiors andcolleagues16. Integrity17. Ability toassume higherresponsibilities18. Cite any incidents of breach of company rules and feature of misconduct if any. In case of any disciplinary action, give details and nature of charge.19. Details of commendations and awards and special remarks if any. 59
  • 60. 20. Training & Career Development (To be filled by the Reporting Person)a. Keeping in mind his i) present assignment ii) future development, do you feel that theemployee should be given a rotational assignment within or outside thesection/department or an additional skill?b. If yes give details of the rotational assignment/additional skill. -With reference to his present assignment: - With reference to his future development:c. Approximate month when these recommendations should take effect:OVERALL ASSESSMENT (To be filled by the Reporting person) [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]Outstanding V.Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory(Consistently (Exceedingly (Performance (Perf. As per (Performanceexceptional high level of higher than job below average)performance) performance) average) requirement)Name:………………………………………signature:…………………………………….Designation:…………………………………date:………………………………………...OVERALL ASSESSMENT (To be filled by the reviewing officer) [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]Outstanding V.Good Good Satisfactory UnsatisfactoryName:………………………………………signature:…………………………………….Designation:…………………………………date:………………………………………...Signature of the Sectional HeadName:………………………………………signature:…………………………………….Designation:…………………………………date:………………………………………...Comments of the HOD Name……………………………………….. Signature…………………………………… Date………………………………………… ANNUAL ASSESSMENT REPORT: NON-EXECUTIVE TECHNICALYEAR:_____________FROM:_____________TO:________________ 60
  • 61. NAME: EMPLOYEE NO:GRADE: SECTION:TRADE: DEPARTMENT:DT OF ENTRY IN THE PRESENTGRADE: Outstanding Satisfactory UnsatisfactoryWORK OUTPUT:Results produced inrelation to assignedtasks.1.Quantity of work(Extent to whichresults have beenachieved)2. Quantity of work(implies accuracythoroughness andquantity)3. Timelycompletion of workJOB ABILITYKnowledge of skillsrequired and it’s aapplications in thepositions held4. Adequacy of hisknowledge oftechniques/skills forthe present position5. Utilization of jobknowledge andskills(Effectivenesswith whichknowledge andskills are applied tocarry out his work)RESPONSIBILITYANDDEPENDABILITY6. Responsibilitytowards work7. Responsibilitytowards tools andmachinesOTHER ASPECTS:8. Regularity and 61
  • 62. punctuality inattendance9. Amenability todiscipline10. Knowledge ofcompany rules andinstructions &procedures relatedto his job11. Technicalexpertise12. TechnicalAwareness13. Relationshipwith superiors andcolleagues14. Ability toassume higherresponsibilities15. Integrity16 Does he absent himself frequently from his place of work.17. Details in cases of unauthorized absenteeism.18. Cite any incidents of breach of company rules and feature of misconduct if any. In case of any disciplinary action, give details and nature of charge. Details of commendations and awards and special remarks if any._____________________________________________________________________Training & Career Development (To be filled by the Reporting Person)a. Keeping in mind his i) present assignment ii) future development, do you feel that theemployee should be given a rotational assignment within or outside thesection/department or an additional skill?b. If yes give details of the rotational assignment/additional skill. -With reference to his present assignment: - With reference to his future development:c. Approximate month when these recommendations should take effect:OVERALL ASSESSMENT (To be filled by the Reporting person) [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]Outstanding V.Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory(Consistently (Exceedingly (Performance (Perf. As per (Performanceexceptional high level of higher than job below average) 62
  • 63. performance) performance) average) requirement)Name:………………………………………signature:…………………………………….Designation:…………………………………date:………………………………………...OVERALL ASSESSMENT (To be filled by the reviewing officer) [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]Outstanding V.Good Good Satisfactory UnsatisfactoryName:………………………………………signature:…………………………………….Designation:…………………………………date:………………………………………...Signature of the Sectional HeadName:………………………………………signature:…………………………………….Designation:…………………………………date:………………………………………...Comments of the HOD Name……………………………………….. Signature…………………………………… Date…………………………………………ANNUAL ASSESSMENT REPORT: NON-EXECUTIVE-NON-TECHNICALYEAR:_____________FROM:_____________TO:________________NAME: EMPLOYEE NO:GRADE: SECTION:TRADE: DEPARTMENT:DT OF ENTRY IN THE PRESENT DIVISION: NCPPGRADE: Outstanding Satisfactory Unsatisfactory1. Job abilities: Job knowledgeand its utilization,relating to theposition held 63
  • 64. 2. Timelycompletion of tasksassigned/promptness3. Maintenance ofrecords and files andefficiency inretrieval of papers.4. Follow up ofmatters relating towork5. Dependabilityand responsibilitytowards work.6. Accuracy andthoroughness.7. Knowledge ofcompany rules andprocedures relatedto job8. Handling ofconfidentialdocuments9. Proficiency withregard to writtencommunication skillin drafting10. Amenability todiscipline11. Relationshipwith supervisors andfellow employees,12. Punctuality andregularity inattendance.13. Tact in handlingtelephone calls anddealing with visitors14. Cite any incidents of breach of company rules and feature of misconduct if any. In case of any disciplinary action, give details and nature of charge.Details of commendations and awards and special remarks if any.Training & Career Development (To be filled by the Reporting Person)a. Keeping in mind his i) present assignment ii) future development, do you feel that theemployee should be given a rotational assignment within or outside thesection/department or an additional skill? 64
  • 65. b. If yes give details of the rotational assignment/additional skill. -With reference to his present assignment: - With reference to his future development:c. Approximate month when these recommendations should take effect:OVERALL ASSESSMENT (To be filled by the Reporting person) [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]Outstanding V.Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory(Consistently (Exceedingly (Performance (Perf. As per (Performanceexceptional high level of higher than job below average)performance) performance) average) requirement)Name:………………………………………signature:…………………………………….Designation:…………………………………date:………………………………………...OVERALL ASSESSMENT (To be filled by the reviewing officer) [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]Outstanding V.Good Good Satisfactory UnsatisfactoryName:………………………………………signature:…………………………………….Designation:…………………………………date:………………………………………...Signature of the Sectional HeadName:………………………………………signature:…………………………………….Designation:…………………………………date:………………………………………...Comments of the HOD Name……………………………………….. Signature…………………………………… Date………………………………………… 65
  • 66. 66
  • 67. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AT CDAC, NOIDASAMPLE SIZE FOR NON-EXECUTIVE EMPLOYEES: 90 FOR EXECUTIVE EMPLOYEES : 90ACTUAL NUMBER OF POPULATION COVERED: FOR NON-EXECUTIVE EMPLOYEES: 79 FOR EXECUTIVE EMPLOYEES : 70Due to unavoidable circumstances and irrevocable constraints, the actual number ofpopulation covered is less than the sample size targeted.SAMPLING METHOD:-Random sampling- as I hardly know anybody from the organization. But at times, thesample was also collected as per the choices and targets of my knowledgeable corporateseniors. Hence, here it can be said that it was judgmental samplingSOURCES OF DATA COLLECTIONThe data used in the project is collected both by primary sources and secondary sources.The following are the sources of collection of data: Primary sources of data collection: The primary sources of data collection for the project are questionnaire andinterviews. Secondary sources of data collection: ~ Company profile ~ Books ~ WebsitesEVALUATION PROCESS After the study of company’s profile and its performance appraisal procedure,questionnaire for employees is prepared and is given to them. Interview method is alsoemployed and the views of the company’s personnel are taken. Questionnaire for the employee is objective in nature. Employees are required to selectthe answer for the given questions.ANALYSIS PROCESSQuestionnaire for the employees are analyzed graphically and are evaluated in terms ofpercentage. 67
  • 68. ANALYSIS FOR NON-EXECUTIVE EMPLOYEES1) Whether you are aware about the exiting performance appraisal system. 19% Yes Partly 19% No 62%2) Whether the current system fulfills your expectation? 25% 37% Yes Partly No 38% 68
  • 69. 3) Whether there is a transparency while evaluating your performance? 25% 38% Yes Partly No 37%4) Whether you are satisfied with the current evaluating system. 25% 38% Yes Partly No 37% 69
  • 70. 5) Do you receive feedback in any form about your level of performance from your superiors? 38% Yes Partly No 62% 0%6) Do you think that there is need to change/replace the existing performance evaluation system? 19% Yes Partly 13% No 68% 70
  • 71. 7) Whether there is any linkage with your career growth with the existing performance evaluation system? 13% Yes Partly 49% 38% No8) Whether the current system in any way contributes to job rotation, skill up gradation related programmes/issues? 38% Yes Partly 56% No 6%9) Whether the current system motivates for higher performance at the work place and help in increase the productivity? 25% 31% Yes Partly No 44% 71
  • 72. FOR EXECUTIVE EMPLOYEES1) Whether you are aware about the existing performance appraisal system ? 10% 0% Yes Partly No 90%2) Whether the current system fulfill your expectation ? 20% 30% Yes Partly No 50% 72
  • 73. 3) Do you think that in the existing system there is a transparency in evaluating the performance of the employees ? 30% 40% Yes Partly No 30%4) Whether you are satisfied with the current evaluating system? 20% 30% Yes Partly No 50% 73
  • 74. 5) Whether the parameters on which an employee is assessed in the existing system are sufficient to evaluate his performance? 40% 40% Yes Partly No 20%6) Do you think that there is a need to change/replace the existing performance evaluating system? 10% Yes Partly 50% No 40% 74
  • 75. 7) Whether there is a need to add some more ingredients in the performance evaluating form for the executive category to make it more result oriented? 0% 10% Yes Partly No 90%8) Whether the current system satisfied the expectation of the employees and link to their career growth? 20% 40% Yes Partly No 40% 75
  • 76. 9) Whether the current system in any way contributes to job rotation, skill up gradation related programmes/issues of the employees in executive category? 10% 20% Yes Partly No 70%10) Whether the current system motivates the employees for higher performance at the work place and help in increase the productivity? 10% 30% Yes Partly No 60% 76
  • 77. FINDINGS1) From the data, it is clear that irrespective of confidential report writing majority of non-executive employees are aware of attributes on which they are evaluated.2) 65% of non-executive employees feel that existing performance evaluation system fully/partly fulfills their expectation.3) Irrespective of awareness and fulfillment of expectation, majority of non- executive employees feel that there is lack of transparency in the system.4) 65% non-executive employees not/partly satisfied with the existing performance evaluation system.5) 63% of non-executive employees do not receive any feedback from their superiors.6) Majority of non-executive employees want that present system need to be replaced/changed.7) 70% of non-executive employees think that the current system do not contribute in any way to job rotation, skill up gradation etc.8) 60% of non-executive employee’s feels that the current system is partly motivate the employees for higher performance at the work place.9) Nearly all executive employees are aware of existing performance appraisal system.10) Though 30% of executive employees feel that transparency in the existing system is not up to mark while 40% think that there is lack of transparency.11) Half of executive employees are partly satisfied with the current evaluation system while 30% are satisfied and 20% are not satisfied.12) In the case of parameters on which a non-executive employee is assessed, executive employees provide ambiguous view. 40% feels that parameters are sufficient while another 40% feels that parameters are not sufficient.13) Majority of executive employees want that present system should be changed.14) Almost nearly all executive employees want more ingredients in the performance evaluating form for the non-executive category to make it more result oriented.15) 40% of executive employees are not satisfied with the existing system while 40% are partly satisfied.16) Majority nearly 70% of executive employees feels that current system does not contribute to job rotation, skill up gradation etc. 77
  • 78. A FEW LINES ABOUT THE PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL SYSTEM FROM EMPLOYEES1) The system is an okay kind partially reflecting self-efficiency and self- management in the eyes of the management and if taken seriously there is a scope of improvement.2) Old system- needs a radical change.3) Both the parties should be allowed to evaluate each other’s performance so as to reduce autocracy.4) Negative- complete farce.5) The period of appraisal should be reduced to six-months/monthly appraisal system.6) More of objectivity should be brought in while appraising an employee-remove bias.7) Communication system should be changed for better performance of the employees.8) System is totally dysfunctional.9) Good for developing the performance of the employees.10) System is not result oriented, no rewards, only punishment.11) Identifies performers & non-performers and thus development towards improvement/better performance thereby creating a culture of continuous growth and development of employees as well as the organization.12) A structured system is required with more formal rating practice.13) Arbitrary and done for the sake of formality. 78
  • 79. SUGGESTIONS FROM EMPLOYEES1) Self- appraisal2) Appraiser should be friendlier with the appraisee.3) Actual numerical evaluation required.4) Previous years’ rating should be mentioned in order to compare improvement/degradation.5) Grouping of similar parameters need to be done.6) A person known for his/her integrity, sincerity, familiarity, and professional competence should be given the job of appraisal and not by any tom-dick-harry.7) The appraisal should take more interest.8) Appraiser/reporting officer should be more than one in order to avoid bias in favor of an employee.9) The concerned employee should be allowed to record his comments on the evaluation done.10) A detailed discussion is required to obtain a good interpersonal relationship, job motivation and sound-working atmosphere.11) There should be more bearing, more responsibility and it should be result oriented.12) The communication system needs to be improved. There is a communication gap between the reporting and the reviewing officer. The actual fact is presented, most of the times, in colored form, which thereby leads to incorrect evaluation.13) The rating should be officially communicated.14) Appraisee’s strengths and weakness should be communicated and then help him/her to build up. 79
  • 80. CONCLUSIONPerformance appraisal system, have tended to incorporate an uneasy mix of objectivesetting and rating processes. They have often been the property of the personneldepartment which has imposed them as a bureaucratic system on the executives whocarry out appraisals under duress and therefore badly. They have also been operated inmany instances, as a top down approach incorporating an annual appraisal meeting, whichdwelt on the past and used mainly to determine ‘merit’ pay awards which gradually,became known as performance related pay.The very word ‘appraisal’ implies that this is a top down process in which manager telltheir subordinates what they think about them. And one of the reasons for the failure ofmany appraisal systems is that managers did not like doing that at all- they objected, inDouglas Mc Gregor’s(1957) phrase, to ‘playing at being God’. This is one of the reasonswhy multi-source assessments processes- ‘360 degree feedback’- by peers andsubordinates as well as managers are being developed in some organizations.However, coming to the aspect of the problem in the performance appraisal system ofCDAC, I have arrived at a general observation that in most of the cases, the non-executive employees are of the view, that these things are reviewed only for the sake offormality and not for any constructive or concrete purpose. Hence, a discussion or ageneral meeting can be held in order to brush off their apprehensions and wrongjudgements about this system. It is known, that any good thing done for welfare ofpeople, if not communicated properly, can be misunderstood and misinterpreted. Hence,their thinking process needs to be modified now, in the first case. Secondly, drastic stepsshould be taken where the communication process is smoothen and streamlined, such thatall sorts of misunderstanding, misjudgments, misbehavior is removed out in order to giveway to healthy relationships and strong bondage. Faith and confidence needs to be incitedinto the people by means of proper discussions, honest work and trustworthyperformance. There should be no demarcation of understanding or rather ofcommunication between the level of management and the employees. Such healthyenvironment should be created where the management works for the employees, and theemployees for the organization. Only a strong conglomerated unit can work towards abetter future; hence, suitable plans and programmes should be adopted so that the wholeorganization works as one single unit towards one ultimate goal- TO BE ONE OF THEWORLD’S LARGEST RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT INSITUTITION. 80
  • 81. RECOMMENDATIONS1) From what I observed and interviewed, I got to know that the current system is not liked by many. Hence, I have come up with an idea of a panel of counselors to discuss the APA form with the concerned appraisee so as to.2) (1) give importance to this system, (2) create a pressure on him, (3) make an impression of a professional approach towards the evaluation of his/her performance. Maybe this might help, I feel. However, though thismight be time consuming but as we know, you might have to part with something in order to gain well for long-term gains.3) While studying the APA forms, I have found out that some of the parameters mentioned for evaluating an individual’s performance are similar in nature. These like factors can be grouped such that while rating, the appraiser does not come up with dubious results.4) Undertake the responsibility professionally and not just casually.5) Keep the whole period under review.6) Analyze performance in relation to agreed objectives.7) Adopt a joint problem solving approach.8) Let the appraisee do most of the talking, while discussing.9) Encourage self-appraisal.10) Provide feedback: a. Build feedback into the job b. On actual events/actual results or observed behavior- not based on supposition. c. Describe the incidents, don’t judge. d. Ask questions rather than make statements e. Select key issues. f. Positive feedback-on areas of improvement.11) The supervisor should try to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of an employee and advice him on correcting the weaknesses; also recognize his achievements in order to provide encouragement.12) The result of the appraisal, particularly when they are negative, should be immediately communicated to the employees, so that they try to improve their performance. 81
  • 82. LIMITATIONSCONSTRAINTS FACED WHILE UNDERGOING MY PROJECT1) Location hazard- Institute far off from work place. Certain critical, important but lengthy problems could not be discussed with my internal guide properly.2) While distributing the questionnaire, people were not ready to accept one more extra burden of work, which was not a part of their office job.3) Everybody was not willing to give time and they were also reluctant to discuss certain internal matters to an outsider.4) Reluctance on the part of the employees to disclose their identity on the questionnaire.5) Honest answers have not come out in the questionnaire, which I got to know after talking to them.6) Insecurity of disclosure of the right thoughts and feeling creped into them, which they said was against their commitment towards working in a Govt. organization.7) Catching hold of the technicians in organization and getting the questionnaire filled by them was the greatest problem I had to face. 82
  • 83. APPRAISAL COPS Seven steps for HR professionals to help improve the process of performance appraisal.Perhaps performance appraisal is the most misunderstood management tool in anorganisation though HR officials think performance appraisal is an important one.The performance appraisals often do not get done in time, and managers andsupervisors hesitate to review performance. While HR professionals spend a lot oftime urging managers to do the appraisals, the appraisers look for a variety ofreasons to delay the process.It is uncomfortable to do performance appraisals because appraisers undertakethem for the wrong reasons and wrong perspective. Managers and employeesoften can end up on opposite "sides". Appraisals are generally used fordetermining pay increases and promotions and also focus on what went wrong.The most important objective of the appraisal is to improve futureperformance...and not just for the employee. Managers can get valuableinformation from employees to make jobs more productive. They can also identifyand solve problems that interfere with everyones work.When managers adopt a cooperative, dialogue approach, the whole appraisalprocess becomes comfortable and effective. Manager and employee feel that theyare on the same side, and work towards the same goals.HR professionals and managers can, therefore, adopt seven steps to improve theprocess of appraising employees.Step 1: There should be less focus and stress on paperwork. When the emphasison paperwork overshadows the real purpose of doing appraisals, then hugeamounts of resources are wasted. Avoid it.Step 2: HR professionals should stop believing that a ratings based form ofappraisal will serve as protection against lawsuits by employees. The desire forfalse security is one-reason HR departments feel they need to pressure managersto get the forms rated. At least until their first law suit.Step 3: Using an automated system for performance appraisal is a waste of moneyand time, because doing an appraisal is an interpersonal communication process.Even between two people, its often not done well. HR professionals who preferthat route are doing charitable work for the vendors of the software.Step 4: Managers may not understand the purpose of the printed appraisals formssupplied to them by the HR departments. This could be the reason for the delay 83
  • 84. for filling up of the forms. To avoid any confusion, HR departments should ensurethat managers are given extensive training, not only about the nuts and bolts of theappraisal process, but about the whys and interpersonal parts of it.Step 5: Similarly, employees should also be trained about their role in theappraisal process, because performance appraisals work only when employee andmanager work together. Very few organisations offer anything but a superficialorientation to the appraisal process. That should be avoided.Step 6: To make reluctant managers to do the appraisal, HR departments shouldmake them feel useful.Step 7: HR departments get stuck with the responsibility of getting appraisalsdone by managers. Though it is not their fault, it is a strong indicator that thesystem being used is or has failed. If a manager is not carrying out theresponsibility, it is his boss that should be evaluating the manager. No appraisalsystem is going to work until each managers boss makes it clear that getting itdone is going to be a factor in the managers own appraisal.HR departments shouldnt be appraisal cops if anyone is to do that, it should bethe managers boss. Anything less is going to be a waste of time and effort. 84
  • 85. Performance appraisal benefits anyone?The answer to the question whether the performance appraisal system benefits anyone is—“it depends”. A good performance appraisal process is an integral part of theperformance management system and it works seamlessly with the other components.This article takes a holistic approach to performance management and gives an overviewof the components.A performance management system has the following components and interfaces: goal-setting, regular reviews, annual appraisal, development process and linkages to othersystems.Goal-settingThis process is the foundation for a good performance management system. It brings inthe clarity required to deliver the required results. The organizations expectations are setin the form of “key result areas” (KRAs), along with strong indicators of the requiredstandards (also termed “measures of performance”). The benefits of giving cleardirections are many. It helps increase productivity by enabling people to focus on therequirement, it minimizes frustration and enables employee satisfaction.Regular reviewsReviews are a critical component of the system. Reviews give timely feedback to theindividual. It is important to schedule formal reviews during the course of the year. Thesecan be half-yearly or quarterly depending on the need. Structured mid-term reviewsenable the organisation to take stock of the performance during the given period. It givesthe individual an opportunity to discuss his/her achievements during the given period andto look at areas of improvement. In a dynamic environment, it is important to keepabreast of market situations. Reviews can be utilized to make midcourse correction in theKRAs.It is possible that the macro environment has changed and that some of the objectiveshave to be reviewed. For example, certain sectors in the economy may be doingextremely well and the organisation may see a need to review sales numbers based onthese indicators. Reviews need to be structured on a regular basis to ensure that there areno surprises in the annual appraisal. Regular and structured reviews are a criticalcomponent of the performance management system and this is essential to ensure that theperformance management system is not the same as the annual performance appraisal. Asa part of this sub-system, we have processes such as coaching, mentoring, performanceimprovement plans, etc.Annual appraisalA typical appraisal system could be designed on one of the following • Confidential report: The report is written by the supervisor and is, typically, not shown to the individual. Decisions, such as promotions and changes in compensation are made, based on this report. 85
  • 86. • Report by supervisor that is shown/given to the individual and discussed. • Self-appraisal by the individual, value-added comments by the supervisor and a discussion: In this system, the individual writes a self-appraisal vis-à-vis KRAs set at the start of the year. The manager adds his or her comments. Organisations follow one of the following methods of ratings—(a) rating given by the manager or (b) the individual and the manager give ratings and the organisation has a mechanism to deal with differences between the two. There is an opportunity for the individual and the manager to discuss the contents of the appraisalPeople working in the software industry or in a project environment may raise a questionabout the relevance of the annual appraisal. Then there are also professionals who workwith different project teams during the course of the year. In this case we could havereviews signed-off at the end of each project. These could be collated at the end of theyear to look at overall performance and linkages to other systems.Development planThis pertains to the training and development sub-system. A part of the development planstems out of the annual appraisal. This is the result of the areas of improvement thatemerge from the appraisal and competencies required for new roles, if relevant. A goodtraining and development process will also take the necessary inputs from theorganizations business plan. This is required if the organisation is investing into newbusiness or entering new markets.Linkage to rewards systemLinkages to processes such as compensation, rewards, progression and successionplanning—the performance appraisal system, in many organisations, has a link to therewards system. Individuals judge the performance management system and the culture ofthe organisation based on the message sent by the rewards system. If the rewards systemrecognizes individual contribution and ignores contributions made to team objectives, thepeople in the organisation start focusing on individual tasks.Therefore, linkage too many of these systems need to be contemplated upon, articulatedto the people and implemented with consistency.Dr Douglas Mc Mgregor in the HBR Classic, An uneasy look at Performance Appraisal,wrote: “Managers are uncomfortable when they are put in the position of playing God”.They do not want to pass judgment on personal worth of their team members. This articlewas written years ago and it is still relevant in the current context. An effective systemfocuses on results on the behaviours that facilitate or constrain the achievement of results.The organisation and the individuals benefit when there is a balance in the “Evaluation”and “Development” content of the appraisal process. It is unlikely that organisations willdo away with the evaluation component; however, it is important to realise that peopleperceive real value when the system gives them adequate opportunity to develop. 86
  • 87. Dr Deming in his book, Out of the Crisis mentions the importance of taking systemvariables into account while dealing with performance. There are times when organisationprocesses hinder the performance of individuals. The system needs to continuouslyreview the operational processes in the organisation to ensure that they facilitate andenable performance. There is no point in rating the individual’s performance as “not asper expectation” if the root cause lies in the system and not with the individual’scompetency or inclination.Therefore, the performance appraisal process is an integral part of the performancemanagement system. The benefit to the organisation and the individual will accrue if wetake a holistic and balanced approach. 87
  • 88. Is performance appraisal system free from bias?The performance appraisal system forms an integral part of the employee developmentprocess in any organisation. It reflects the ability of an organisation to define goals andexpectations from employees. A fair and ethical performance appraisal process isessential for the company’s well-being and it plays a significant role in bringing out thebest in workers. Salary revision following a performance appraisal is a great motivatingfactor and a fair performance appraisal process goes a long way toward reducing attritionrates.Six-monthly appraisalsMost organisations go in for a bi-annual performance review, helping to ensure thatemployees are on the right track. Steps are taken to bring them onto the track if theydeviate from their goals. However, most organisations believe in giving their employees asalary hike only once a year based on their annual performance. PrabhakarChandrashekhar, manager HR, Apara Enterprise Solutions says, “Employees love to getfeedback twice a year and it works in two ways. One, it helps them correct any mistakesthey might have committed during the first half of the year; and two, they can set thingsright to achieve their goals by the end of the year.”Fair appraisalsAn organisation needs to have an appraisal system that is free from bias. Being fair andobjective is of utmost importance for the integrity of the performance review process.Unfortunately, personal biases, prejudices and idiosyncrasies, occurring at thesubconscious level can have a negative effect on an employee’s evaluation. It has beenobserved that most organisations have more than two appraisers to maintain objectivity inthe performance appraisal process.Madan Mohan Nagaldinne, vice president of human resources, Tavant Technologies says,“We have two rounds of appraisals, whereby the performance appraisal given by the teamleader is again reviewed at the company level to ensure that it is not biased. This ensuresthat the employee gets due recognition of the work which he or she has put in for thetasks assigned to them.” It has been observed that if an employee gets severely negativefeedback he can have a deflated picture of his performance and development needs andmight feel angry, alienated, de-motivated, and demoralized ending up suffering from aloss of confidence.On the other hand, when an employee receives overtly positive feedback, there might beill feelings from other employees who perceive that one employee enjoys preferred status.There are also chances of clouding an employee understands of what is actually expectedfrom him.Multiple rounds of appraisalsIn order to avoid biased assessments some organisations have multiple rounds ofappraisals, which helps maintain the objectivity and transparency of the exercise. Most 88
  • 89. organisations vouch that biases and difference of opinion between the appraiser and theappraisee are very uncommon and on an average happen maybe once in a hundredoccasions. For instance, SAP Labs India has an online performance management systemand the managers (who on an average head 16 employees each) keep defining objectivesfor them from time to time, depending upon changes in project objectives. It helpsemployees update themselves and change their approach, depending upon projectrequirements.Satish Venkatchaliah, head of HR with SAP Labs India adds, “Regular sharing ofinformation through the online performance management system helps ensure thatcommunication channels between a manager and an employee are open throughout theyear. This helps avoid any difference of opinion in performance reviews. In case there isany difference, it is sorted out with mutual discussion. When a discussion does not help insorting out the problem, the HR department mediates and things are put on track.” InMindTree Consulting, there is a panel which overlooks the assessment which has beendone by the appraiser. Puneet Jetli, general manager—people function, MindTreeConsulting explains, “It is ensured that consistency in rating employees based upon theirperformance is maintained. This ensures that an employee gets his due in context of theperformance which he put in for achieving set goals.”Training the appraisersAlmost all organisations train their appraisers to ensure that they give proper feedback tothe appraisee and maintain transparency in the performance appraisal system. Traininghelps an appraiser in setting directions and establishing clear performance expectationsfrom employees. It helps them give performance feedback on a regular basis, ensuringthat goals set up by the appraiser get completed on time, within budget, and according torequired specifications.SAP Labs India conducts performance training for its managers, which helps in settingproper objectives for their direct reports. Similarly, Tavant Technologies also has a set oftraining programmes for its managers that help them assess performance better.Nagaldinne says, “Proper training of appraisers helps ensure that they have a fair idea ofthe types of biases and the harmful effect any bias might have on an employee. Trainingof appraisers also ensures that they give their feedback in a diplomatic way which helpsthem maintain objectivity and does not hurt the sentiments of the employee.”Effective communicationAn open communication channel between an appraiser and an appraisee is the backboneof any successful appraisal system. Regular discussion between the two is necessary as ithelps develop a positive relationship. Positive achievements of the appraisee should behighlighted and problem areas dealt with before they spin out of control. Addressingproblems immediately ensures the reinforcement of good performance as it motivates 89
  • 90. employees to excel in their work. Regular discussions with employees help raisemotivation levels and reinforce their belief in the organisation. It ultimately leads tohigher productivity, quality work and effectiveness of employees as a group. Guidelines for avoiding biased performance reviews • Become aware of your own prejudices and challenge them. • Focus on observable behaviours related to expectations.  Ask yourself if you are viewing the employee’s behaviour in an objective manner. • Consider factors that may have affected an employee’s performance or behaviour, such as circumstances beyond the employee’s control. • Keep things in perspective in terms of frequency, significance in the overall picture, and representation of the employee’s overall performance. • Ask yourself if you have overemphasized aspects of the employee’s performance you find particularly admirable or irritating. • Check your perceptions for accuracy, fairness, balance, reasonableness, and consistency. • Give written feedback that is specific, constructive, and action-oriented. 90
  • 91. Tips for giving performance feedback • Address performance problems as an opportunity for professional development. • Listen actively to the employee’s concerns. • Remember and acknowledge that negative feedback is both hard to give and to receive. • Identify and ask for specific behaviour or training needed to correct performance problems. • Work together on one performance concern at a time. • If there are multiple concerns, schedule additional meetings. • Solve problems and identify solutions together that are acceptable to both parties and then decide when you will meet again to evaluate the outcomes of these solutions. • Don’t discount emotional responses that are bound to occur. • Take a break to relieve tensions if emotions become extreme and reschedule the meeting if necessary. • Work to communicate assertively rather than aggressively or submissively. 91
  • 92. 92
  • 93. Good feedback: Way to a smart appraisal Good feedback is the key to improve employee performance.Performance reviews are still considered a painful ritual in organisations. Probablybecause human nature hasn’t changed – few of us enjoy hearing about our shortcomings,and few of our bosses, and colleagues look forward to expose them.Besides, the approach to work has changed – it’s more team oriented and lessindividualistic. It has become increasingly difficult to evaluate individual performance.To top it all, review process has not changed much. Most organisations treat feedback asa once-a-year event, rather than an ongoing discipline.Chris Oster, director of organizational development at General Motors (GM), says,“There were so many problems – for managers and for employees being appraised. Wehad ‘rater error’. We had the ‘contrast effect’. We had the ‘halo effect’. The biggestproblem, however, was that feedback wasn’t leading to change in behaviour”.There is no right or wrong way to provide or receive feedback. However, few tips tohandle this tricky situation to elicit optimal performance:Feedback is not just paper work. Organisations that equate delivering feedback, withfilling out forms, lose the battle for smart appraisal even before it has begun.Dorothy Gill, vice-president of human resources at Parkview Medical Centre, Colorado,and her team came up with an idea called Annual Piece of Paper (APOP). The mostvaluable kinds of feedback, they concluded, are the daily interactions between managersand their employees - interactions that cannot be captured on paper.The APOPs only role is to confirm that the conversations took place. There are no scoresor written goals for the next year. Its just a piece of paper, signed by the employee andthe director, which records the date, place and agenda of the meeting.Feedback delayed is feedback denied. The traditional model of performance appraisalsystem does not suit organisations with project-driven and result-oriented workforce.Bruce Tulgan, author of Fast Feedback, says managers can build feedback into routinemeetings and memos. They can deliver feedback through email, voicemail or use shortpersonal notes.Feedback is where you find it. Feedback is no different from any other business process- you get out of it only what you put into it. GM has a new approach to feedback called‘Individual Growth Strategy’, based on simple principles:• Employees want to do their best. • Employees who improve are those who have better control over their development.So its up to employees - not managers - to decide what kind of feedback is most useful,and from whom it should come. 93
  • 94. Raise in pay and feedback are not related. Feedback reflects success of employees andcustomers. Pay reflects marketplace economics and skills. Kelly Allan Associates ltd.,Ohio, research the market rates for talent in their peer group, based on skills andexperience. Employees who want a raise can present evidence that they have acquired anew skill or experience that the market would reward with a salary increase.Associates meet weekly with a colleague to discuss their current project, apart from theformal sessions held monthly, quarterly or half yearly. Kelly, a senior associate, says,"We have conversations, not appraisals, and these conversations never includediscussions on pay.”Feedback on your feedback. Managers need to conduct a reality check, to avoidperceptual differences about the feedback between the giver (manager) and the receiver(employee).Managers need to recall three recent times where in they offered feedback to employees.In this regard, few questions that need to be answered: I What prompted him to give feedback on that matter at that time? W Did he check the facts first? What was the substance of the feedback? D Was there any concrete action as a result?Organisations should keep track of what’s changing and what’s the same, what’s workingand what’s not, and communicate the same to their employees. Employees won’t getgreat at their jobs unless the management does a great job of providing the rightfeedback. 94
  • 95. A SURVEY ON PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL SYSTEM (NON-EXECUTIVE EMPLOYEES)NAME:___________________________DESINATION:______________________DEPARTMENT:_____________________S.NO PARAMETERS YES PARTLY NO01 Whether you are aware about the exiting performance appraisal system.02 Whether the current system fulfills your expectation?03 Whether there is a transparency while evaluating your performance?04 Whether you are satisfied with the current evaluating system?05 Do you receive feedback in any form about your level of performance from your superiors?06 Do you think that there is need to change/replace the existing performance evaluation system?07 Whether there is any linkage with your career growth with the existing performance evaluation system?08 Whether the current system in any way contributes to job rotation, skill up gradation related programmes/issues?09 Whether the current system motivates for higher performance at the work place and help in increase the productivity?Suggestions (If any) ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 95
  • 96. A SURVEY ON PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL SYSTEM (EXECUTIVE EMPLOYEES)NAME:___________________________DESINATION:______________________DEPARTMENT:_____________________S.NO PARAMETERS YES PARTLY NO01 Whether you are aware about the existing performance appraisal system ?02 Whether the current system fulfill your expectation ?03 Do you think that in the existing system there is a transparency in evaluating the performance of the employees in executive category?04 Whether you are satisfied with the current evaluating system?05 Whether the parameters on which a executive is assessed in the existing system are sufficient to evaluate his performance?06 Do you think that there is a need to change/replace the existing performance evaluating system?07 Whether there is a need to add some more ingredients in the performance evaluating form for the executive category to make it more result oriented?08 Whether the current system satisfied the expectation of the employees and link to their career growth?09 Whether the current system in any way contribute to job rotation, skill up gradation related programmes/issues of the employees in executive category?10 Whether the current system motivates the employees for higher performance at the work place and help in increase the productivity?Suggestions (If any) ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 96
  • 97. BIBLIOGRAPHY1) www.cdacnoida.in2) www.performance-appraisal.com3) www.expresscomputeronline.com4) www.hoganassessments.com5) Ratnam, C.S.V. & Srivastava, B.K. Human Resources. New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill, 1992.7) Sarathi, P. Human Resource Development. New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill, 1998. 97