Modeling dynamics of real time appraisal .. indian army( pinku)

MODELING DYNAMICS OF REAL TIME APPRAISAL ;
INDIAN ARMY

NAME : COL SANJEEV BHATTACHARJEE
COURSE : INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
GROUP : M3 ( M)
ROLL NO : 21

2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
1. I would like to express my sincere gratitude to all my mentors in Bharatiya Vidya
Bhawan who have provided me an opportunity to work on this project which has been
a great learning experience.

2. I would also like to thank Mr Shubhinder Singh , Managing Director Reebok ,
Mr Sajjad Shamim , Director Marketing Adidas India , Mr P Suri , Regional Manager
Marketing - Nike who spared their valuable time to discuss and guide me on my
project. I would also like to thank Ms Reeta Bhattacharjee , Director HR Reebok India
who has been an excellent guide and mentor for helping me appreciate and
understand the importance of consumer behaviour and its relevance in positioning
strategy and advertisements.

3. I would be failing in my duty , if do not mention my sincere gratitude to the
branch mangers of branded sports accessories and apparel companies in Kolkata ,
for allowing me access to their facilities and their numerous sales and outlet staff in
helping me with my survey.

3

"This world rests on the arms of heroes like a son on those of his
sire. He, therefore, that is a hero deserves respect under every
circumstance. There is nothing higher in the three worlds than
heroism. The hero protects and cherishes all, and things depend
upon the hero".

4

INDEX

SER NO CHAPTER TOPIC PAGE NO

1. CHAPTER NO 1 : INTRODUCTION 7-9

2. CHAPTER NO 2: OBJECTIVES , HYPOTHESIS & SCOPE 10 - 14

3. CHAPTER NO 3 : LIMITATIONS 15 - 24

4. CHAPTER NO 4 : THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE 25 - 48

5. CHAPTER NO 5 : METHODOLOGY & PROCEDURE
OF WORK 49 - 56

6. CHAPTER NO 6 : FINDING & INFERENCES 57 - 66

7. CHAPTER NO 7: RECOMMENDATIONS 67- 69

8. CHAPTER NO 8: CONCLUSION 70 - 81

9. CHAPTER NO 9 : SUMMARY OF THE PROJECT REPORT 82 - 86

10. ANNEXURES :

i) PROPOSAL 87 - 94

ii) REFERENCES 95 - 96

5

CHAPTER NO 1 : INTRODUCTION

1. A significant development in the field of organization, in recent times, is the increasing
importance towards management of human resources. Performance appraisal has been one of the
most debated management practices for several decades. It has generated a wide variety of
viewpoints. Much attention is being paid to the motivational aspects of human personality,
particularly the need for self-esteem, group belonging and self-actualization. This new awakening of
humanization all over the globe has, in fact, enlarged the scope of applying various principles of
human resource management in organizations. The development of human resource elements, their
competencies, and the process development of the total organization are the main concerns of human
resource management.

2. The history of appraisal is quite brief. Its roots originated the early 20th century. This can be
traced to Taylor's pioneering ‘Time and Motion’ studies. But such a reference may not be that helpful,
for the same may be said about almost everything in the field of modern human resources
management. As a distinct and formal management procedure used in the evaluation of work
performance, appraisal dates from the time of the Second World War - not more than 70 years ago.
Yet in a broader sense, the practice of appraisal is a very ancient art, which in the scale of things
might well lay claim to being the world's second oldest profession!

3. There is a basic human tendency to make judgments about those one is working with, as
well as about oneself. Appraisal, it seems, is both inevitable as well as universal. In the absence of a
carefully structured system of appraisal, raters tend to judge the work-performance of others,
including subordinates, naturally, informally and arbitrarily. The human inclination to judge does
create serious motivational, ethical and legal problems in the workplace. Without a structured
appraisal system, there is little chance of ensuring that the judgments made will be lawful, fair,
defensible and accurate.

4. Appraisal system began informally as a simple method of income justification. That is,
appraisal was used to decide whether or not the salary or wage of an individual ratee was justified.

6

The process was firmly linked to material outcomes. If a ratee’s performance was found to be less
than ideal it was then decided that a cut in pay would follow. On the other hand, if their performance
was better than what the rater expected, a pay rise was in order. Little consideration, if any, was given
to the developmental possibilities of appraisal. If was felt that a cut in pay, or a rise, should provide
the only required impetus for an ratee to either improve or continue to perform well. Sometimes this
basic system succeeded in getting the results that were intended; but more often than not, it failed.

5. Uneasiness or resistance to adopting appraisal is linked to appraisal attitudes and knowledge.
Recent research, together with considerable anecdotal evidence, suggests that many organisations and
their senior raters still regard appraisal as a mechanistic annual ritual which is a necessary evil. It is
opined that it has little relevance to their ‘bottom line’. Overall, there has been minimal recognition
and understanding of the power of appraisal practice. This phenomenon is not surprising given the
findings of earlier studies indicating that raters, generally, neither have a full appreciation of the role
of human resource management in their organisation nor do these raters see human resource
management as particularly strategic in nature. The appraisal of ratee performance, as well as the
appraisal of its collective contribution to organisational effectiveness, has often been perceived as a
combination of informal and formal techniques. Nevertheless, there is an emerging consensus that
these techniques together have the potential to motivate individual ratees, their work groups and to
evaluate the efficacy of all human resource management functions. This would provide organisations
with a strategic advantage in their ongoing pursuit of competitive goals/objectives and imperatives.

6. The functional principles of management, from the point of view of appraisal revolve around;
the nature of appraisal, managing appraisal, managing the ratee/ the rater and finally, the structure and
responsibilities of the organization. There is available today the knowledge and the experience
required for successful practice of appraisal. But, there is probably no field of human endeavour or
organizational efforts where the tremendous gap between the knowledge and performance of the rater
vis-à-vis the knowledge and performance of the ratee is widening or becoming more intractable.
There is widespread agreement that success or failure in appraisal depends on at least four criteria;
organizational philosophy, the attitudes and skills of those responsible for its implementation,
acceptance, commitment and ownership of appraisers/ appraisees and the endorsement of the notions
of ‘procedural fairness’ and ‘distributive justice’. Procedural fairness refers to the ratees’ perception

7

of the program’s overall process equity. Distributive justice is linked to perceptions of the fairness of
associated rewards and recognition out comes.

7. Advocates of real-time based appraisal systems argue that appraisal programs are the logical
and preferable means to appraise, to develop and to effectively utilise the ratees’ knowledge and
capabilities. Of course, all of these outcomes will only be possible when the end user, the rater, is
educated in the effective processes of real-time based appraisal and persuaded of the potential benefits
of getting it right. Another school of thought is less supportive as regards the perspective of the merits
of appraisal. For instance, studies suggest that appraisal and appraisal ‘nourishes short-term
performance, annihilating long-term planning, building fear, demolishing teamwork and nourishing
rivalry and politics’’. Some have critiqued the practical difficulties of appraisal systems whilst
supporting the underlying principles. Comparative analyses of both the schools of thought reveal that
there is a lack of universal agreement as regards the effectiveness of appraisal programs.

8. Despite the diversity of these views, appraisal programs, if effectively implemented, can
benefit both organisations and their ratees (this infact forms the hypothesis of the present research
problem). Arguably, the system has the potential to provide individual feedback and collated
organisational data. This can be used for the purposes of human resource management planning and
program evaluation purposes. Moreover, collated data can assist planning, human resource
development programs and remuneration schemes. Individual appraisal outputs include opportunities
for remedial skills development, retention, career development and training and up skilling programs.

8

CHAPTER NO 2 : OBJECTIVES , HYPOTHESIS AND SCOPE OF THE
STUDY

OBJECTIVES OF APPRAISAL

9. The principal objectives of carrying out an appraisal are, to bring about better operational
results, meet ratee’s developmental needs, provide information useful for (staffing) planning by
identifying ratees with potential for advancement and with abilities yet to be used,(i.e. evaluating
on-the-job relationships for future ratee’s),to provide a basis for compensation action, form a basis
for promotions, transfers, form a platform for efficient/effective human resources development,
provide an adequate feedback to each ratee on his / her performance, serve as a basis for
improving / changing behavior towards more efficient/effective working habits (to help each ratee
handle his current job better), assist the superiors in acquiring an increased understanding of their
ratee work behavior, the work itself and their ratee strength / weaknesses thereby developing a team
work among the participants in an organizational setting (enhancing ratee’s
efficiency/effectiveness), remove work alienation and help ratee’s internalize the norms, values
and ethics of the organization, exercise control , develop interpersonal relationships and develop
database about the ratee’s job / career graph.

10. What Raters Need From Appraisals? Raters need comparative performance data for
making comparative decisions that affect both the ratee’s selected and the ones not selected. With
exception of a ‘termination for cause’, it is hard to imagine a personnel decision that is not
comparative. Some examples of decisions which are comparative are; Promotions, Downsizing,
Merit Rewards, Incentive Rewards Job Assignments and Training Programs .With comparative
decisions, if one is promoted others are not; if one receives a favorable job assignment, others do
not. In the case of decisions with negative consequences, such as downsizing, some are let go,
others are retained.Whenever ratee’s believe the outcome of a decision has negatively affected their
careers, their opportunities, their chances for advancement, they claim unfair treatment. The
organization can only defend itself from such a claim if they can show that the ratee selected was
not just qualified. The individual ratee’s, however, needs information about his or her performance
that provides feedback about how his or her performance is viewed by the organization and

9

especially about areas of marginal or substandard performance. In addition to being a review of
performance, the data should also stimulate a dialogue between rater and ratee’s that anticipates
future performance, with an eye towards growth and development.

11. Career development implies continued growth-learning additional skills and overcoming
new challenges. Raters no longer need to feel they are grooming ratee’s just for promotion, either
within or outside of their departments. Instead, ratee’s may find job satisfaction by moving laterally
or by enriching their present positions with different responsibilities. Helping ratee’s develop their
skills and increase their knowledge strengthens the whole team. Ratee’s feel valued and are more
efficient when they perform more job functions. Raters who do not encourage career development
may lose productive ratee’s when positions are eliminated or ratee’s become dissatisfied. Thus, it is
crucial for raters to assume a coaching role and accept a few additional responsibilities. Because the
old career paths are gone, ratee’s need to take some more responsibility for managing their careers.
However, they need some assistance in that process. Successful organisations give them the
resources and it is up to raters to communicate that message by acting as career coaches.

12. Key objectives of appraisals include: validating selection and other management or cultural
practices, helping ratee’s understand and take responsibility for their performance and making
decisions about rewards or promotions. Important steps to obtaining useful traditional appraisals
include determining the type of data to be collected as well as who must conduct the appraisal,
establishing a rating philosophy, overcoming typical rating deficiencies, creating a rating
instrument, and engaging the ratee in making decisions on future performance changes. An effective
negotiated appraisal helps the ratee take additional ownership for both continuing effective
performance and improving weak areas. Ratee goals set through appraisals should be difficult but
achievable, as goals that are overly ambitious are doomed for failure. Some ratee’s tend to boycott
their own progress by setting impossible goals to achieve. Finally, ratee does want to know what
you think of their work. Letting ratee know that you have noticed their efforts goes a long way
towards having a more motivated workforce.

13. Appraisal is a vehicle to validate / refine organizational actions and provide feedback to
ratee’s with an eye on improving future performance. Ratee selection, training and just about any

10

cultural or management practice (such as the introduction of a new pruning method or an incentive
rewards program) may be evaluated in part by obtaining ratee’s performance data. The evaluation
may provide ideas for refining established practices or instituting new ones. Some options include,
paying more attention to interpersonal skills when selecting new raters, encouraging present raters
to attend communication / conflict and providing the rater one-on-one counselling. Data from
appraisals can also help ratee’s plan for long-term staffing and ratee’s development, give rewards
raises or other rewards, set up a ratee counselling session, institute discipline or discharge
procedures.

14. Keeping all the above on a holistic platform, the principal aim of this study is to narrow the
gap between what can be done and what is being done by the rater and the ratee in the dynamics of
appraisal. An attempt has been initiated in examining real-time based appraisal, juxtaposed with
performance management, in organizations along with identification of the concepts and issues
involved in the process. The attempt aims at setting out the framework required to ensure
accountability for performance, emphasize the need for innovative mechanisms and highlight the key
parameters for a successful performance management system. The prime purpose would be to
compare the findings of earlier studies and to ascertain whether processes have evolved to provide a
more effective strategic tool in the human resource appraisal repertoire. The study would update data
on the goals, purposes, types, measures, and communication techniques of contemporary appraisal
systems. With this as the backdrop, the objective of this study is;
1. To assess the suitability of appraisal an instrument of individual and organizational
development,
2. To examine the mechanics of modeling appraisal,
3. To apply the model in the context of Indian Army, and
4. To offer constructive criticisms and recommend a set of functional package pertaining
to the dynamics of appraisal.
HYPOTHESIS
15. Real-time based appraisal facilitates individual and organizational development.

11

SCOPE OF THE STUDY
16. The scope of the present study is to examine the various facets of real-time based appraisal and their
inter-relationships in a macro perspective. However, the scope the case study has been restricted to the
Officer’s cadre of the Indian Army. The organization harbors a vast pool of respondents who are
apprised and do the job of appraising at various levels on a different platform. This adds to the
diversifying nature of appraisal. The sole instrument for appraisal in the Army is the Annual
Confidential Report which is based on a rating scale system. There is a general resentment that the
appraisal system suffers from various lacunae and does neither meet the respondents’ needs nor the
organizational needs.

ISSUES UNDER CONSIDERATION
17. The issues under consideration are as under :
a) There is a need to review the extra-role contributions of appraisal correlates. This
would specify the appraisal referent that is tied to the extra-role contributions, a need for re-
formulation of the appraisal proposition and finally, establish the linkage between individual
and organizational development.
b) While analyzing the above issues there is a pressing need to examine the objectivity
and transparency of appraisal, the assessment of individual skills and individual
worth, the aspects of communication, motivation, performance satisfaction
,training ,superior - subordinate relationship working environment ,significance in
organizational setting and emphasis on the date-process .

JUSTIFICATIONS FOR THE STUDY
18. Appraisal is attaining an increased order of importance from the point of view of achievement
of meaningful personal and system goals. There is a need to establish a frame-work wherein, the
appraisal
can target at improving skills, productivity, organization and excellence towards individual and
organizational development.
19. Appraisal programmes has not fared well in the eyes of the critics. It is often argued that such
instruments have not contributed any new ideas. The argument put forth is that most or all of the

12

appraisals are not based on real-time dynamics. There is the inadequate status of present knowledge.
This necessitates adapting real-time based innovative mechanism with a survey of the conceptual and
empirical parameters.
20. Apparently the present arrangement in the Indian Army does not fully meet the organizational
requirements. Nor does it enjoy implicit faith of the Respondents reported upon. This needs to be
critically evaluated, examined and replaced with a more comprehensive and transparent system. This
is in order to ensure that the objectives of appraisal are recognized and respected in principle and
practice.
21. There is the need to re-examine certain select principles and practices of the appraisal
programmes. This would have to be done by establishing and interpreting human statistics. There is a
need to envision a more research focused and multi- disciplinary engagement with complex
fundamental issues that face organizations today. There are specific questions that would benefit from
deeper intellectual engagement given the array of appraisal criterion and methodologies being
adopted and followed by various organizations.
22. Appraisal criterion and methodologies are often inadequately described and not based on real-
time considerations. With some degrees of controlled exploration there is a possibility of prescribing a
standard bench-mark apparatus.

ASSUMPTIONS
23. The following are the assumptions to this study:
(a) That, the decision maker (rater) determines a solution to his routine or repetitive problem
of assessing his rates,

(b) That, the decision maker (rater) has the ability to examine a situation, for the multiple
variables, from various angles and simulating it.

13

CHAPTER NO 3 : LIMITATIONS

COMPLEXITIES IN APPRAISAL
24. Recent trends and developments in the mechanism of appraisal have raised a package of
pertinent issues. The questions are; how to define a job, how to design an appraisal system ,how to
differentiate between performance and potential appraisal / development, whether appraisal should be
mixed / paired /absolute / 360-degree, how to assign weights to parameters , how to conduct a
performance audit , what are the significant errors , how to bring about statistical soundness, what
should be the nature and form of feed back, how to make the system of appraisal more pragmatic
and how to make the purpose of appraisal more development – oriented rather than punitive , to list a
few. All these require serious introspection on an inter-disciplinary basis.
25. Appraisal has many facets. It is an exercise in observation and judgment; it is a feedback
process and is an organizational intervention. It is a measurement process as well as an intensely
emotional process. Above all, it is an inexact human process. While it is fairly easy to prescribe as to
how the system should work, descriptions of how it actually works in practice are rather discouraging.
Most ratees want feedback as long as it mirrors their self-perception. When it does, they tend to like
it. When it doesn’t, they don’t.

COMMON PITFALLS

26. Obstacles to the success of formal appraisal programs are familiar to most raters, either from
painful personal experience or from the growing body of critical literature. Presented in the
successive paragraphs are the most troublesome and frequently cited drawbacks:

27. Appraisal programs demand too much from raters. Formal appraisals obviously require at
least periodic rater observation of subordinates' performance. However, the typical first-line rater
can hardly know, in a very adequate way, just what each of his subordinates are doing. Standards
and ratings tend to vary widely and, often, unfairly. Some raters are tough, others are lenient. Some
departments have highly competent ratee’s; others have less competent ratee’s. Consequently,
ratee’s subject to less competition or lenient ratings can receive higher appraisals than equally
competent or superior associates. Personal values and bias can replace organizational standards.

14

28. An appraiser may not lack standards, but the standards he uses may be sometimes the wrong
ones. For example, unfairly low ratings may be given to valued subordinates so they must not be
promoted out of the rater’s department. More often, however, outright bias dictates favored
treatment for some ratee’s. Because of lack of communication, ratee’s may not know how they are
rated. The standards by which ratee’s think they are being judged are sometimes different from
those their superiors actually use.

29. No appraisal system can be very effective for management decisions, organization
development, or any other purpose until the ratee’s being appraised know what is expected of them
and by what criteria they are being judged. Appraisal techniques tend to be used as performance
panaceas. If a ratee’s lacks the basic ability or has not been given the necessary training for his job,
it is neither reasonable to try to stimulate adequate performance through appraisals, nor fair to base
salary, dismissal, or other negative decisions on such an appraisal.

30. Poor performance represents someone else's failure. In many cases, the validity of ratings is
reduced by rater’s resistance to making the ratings. Rather than confront their less effective
subordinates with negative ratings, negative feedback in appraisal interviews, and below-average
salary increases, raters often take the more comfortable way out and give average or above-average
ratings to inferior performers. Appraisal ratings can boomerang when communicated to ratee’s.
Negative feedback (i.e., criticism) not only fails to motivate the typical ratee, but also can cause him
to perform worse .Only those ratee’s who have a high degree of self-esteem appear to be stimulated
by criticism to improve their performance. Appraisals interfere with the more constructive coaching
relationship that should exist between a superior and his subordinates. Appraisal interviews tend to
emphasize the superior position of the rater by placing him in the role of judge, thus countering his
equally important role of teacher and coach. This is particularly damaging in organizations that are
attempting to maintain a more participative organizational climate.

31. The organization must not get trapped into the various pitfalls that come along with
administration of appraisal system. The question that arises here is how to avoid these pitfalls? A
necessary condition for the effective management of appraisal system in any organization is the
need to clarify and communicate to all concerned, the objectives that the system intends to achieve.

15

Everyone in the organization especially the key decision makers should be fully aware of precisely
what objectives the system of appraisal is expected to achieve, and the priorities within these
objectives.

BARRIERS TO APPRAISAL

32. The widely recognized barriers to an efficient/effective appraisal are;

a) Faulty Assumptions (that, appraisers naturally wish to make fair and accurate
appraisal of ratee is untenable, that, appraisers take a particular appraisal system as perfect
and continue with that format for ever, that, personal opinion is better than formal appraisal
and that, ratee’s eagerness to know their position is not valid).

b) Psychological Blocks (appraisers feeling of insecurity, appraisal as an extra burden,
degree of being excessively modest or sceptical, disliking of resentment by ratee, treatment
of ratee failure as deficiency of own and disliking of communication of poor performance to
ratee).

c) Technical Pitfalls (Criterion problem which is difficult to define, ambiguous, vague
and generalization, distortions that include halo effect, central tendency, constant errors and
appraisers’ degree of liking / disliking and shifting standards that include first impression,
latest behaviour, horn effect and spill-over effect ).

33. Many researchers are skeptical about the use of self-ratings. They believe that problems
associated with informant fallibility strongly contaminate the results from questionnaires asking
ratee’s to report on themselves and their performances. It has been observed that inaccurate recall in
retrospective reporting can result from inappropriate rationalizations, oversimplifications, faulty
attributions and simple lapses of memory. Besides, ratee’s are naturally motivated to present
themselves in a favorable light; that is, self-assessment suffers from enhancement or inflation bias.
This tendency, referred as the ‘leniency-effect’, is related to notion that ratee’s are motivated by
drives of self-enhancement, which lead to the emphasizing of merits and de-emphasizing of faults.
Nevertheless, despite doubts on the validity of self-ratings and its utilization in applied research

16

settings, there is reason to believe that individual ratee’s are in a good position to make a valid
assessment of their own professional knowledge and skills. They possess the greatest familiarity
with the job and provide ratings that are reliable and have fewer errors. Who else has a better
understanding of a job and one’s functioning in it than the one who has access to wide samples of
behaviors under varying situations and periods of time.

34. Empirical studies by various agencies and authors during the last decade highlight issues like, non-
conducive work culture, lack of appreciation towards appraisal dynamics, lack of interest by top
brass for adoption, fear and apprehension about the outcome, lack of confidentiality, interference by
unions and associations, lack of proper system / procedure, lack of accountability, lack of clarity,
lack of proper skills in the rater towards performance analysis, constraint of time availability,
personal bias on the part of the rater and subjectivity, non-uniformity in the criteria of appraisal,
lack of trust and openness between ratee and rater, heterogeneous interest, low motivation, target
achievement oriented system and non-recognition of the effort in subordinate development as
certain burning issues in the dynamics of appraisal.
35. To tackle barriers, attempts must be directed at,

a) Barrier Smashing (recognize the benefit of removing barriers in the systems and
processes of the everyday work flow, identify types of flowcharts that can be used to
examine work flow, determine if critical ratee’s and core resources are performing to the
fullest extent in a scenario and identify ways to eliminate waste that occurs in the work
flow).

b) Performance Standards and Measurement ( recognize the value of utilizing
standards and measurement as a means of improving performance and removing barriers to
achievement , identify factors for consideration prior to measurement , identify the various
categories of indicators that can be used to provide measurement data and determine if a
rater appropriately develops and implements performance standards in a scenario ).

c) Tracking Improvement ( recognize the benefits of challenging the traditional
appraisal approach to ratee evaluation , identify the truths behind most appraisals ,

17

determine if a rater uses appropriate strategies for managing performance in a given scenario
and use appropriate methods for providing direction to ratee’s in a given scenario ).

d) Risk-taking and Experimentation (recognize the critical importance of taking risks
and experimenting when developing as a leader, identify reasons why risk-taking is
important and beneficial, encourage ratee’s to take risks in a given scenario and
demonstrate commitment to risk-taking in a given situation ).

36. To overcome the above barriers, the standard prescriptions towards a rational appraisal are,
go for satisfactory level of reliability only, focus on objective analysis of performance, appraisal
system be so designed to minimize undesirable effects, ratee and rater organization to monitor the
appraisal system, ratings be reviewed with the ratee, appraisal system should be backed by a
feedback mechanism and organization should have a supportive management logic.

LEGAL ASPECTS

37. Legal aspects on performance accountability can provide a framework through which ratees
and organizations are required to set strategic goals, measure performance and report periodically
on the degree to which goals are met. Such legal aspects require the development of multi-year
strategic plans focused on long-term goals and annual performance plans with specific indicators to
measure performance. The legal aspects create a process to be used by the ratees and organizations
in measuring their annual performance by identifying four key distinct performance indicators
which are, output, outcome, efficiency and effectiveness. Ultimately, such objective
measurement means that decisions are based on programme effectiveness rather than supposition.
This ultimately provides policy makers with better information for allocating resources. A rational
performance model must include features
like: performance accountability system, a comprehensive performance accountability system for all
organizations, two-fold accountability; internal accountability (accountability to internal processes)
and external accountability .

38. Organizations need to submit reports to the appropriate authority at periodical intervals.
Focus on consolidating and analysing performance of organizations and preparation of reports.

18

Reports should incorporate grading of performance according to the criteria prescribed and followed
by the organization. Periodic evaluation of performance of organizations and feedbacks on their
implementation should be assessed. Results of such evaluation should be reflected in the annual
performance report of the concerned organization.

39. SUGGESTIONS : (for Limiting Appraisals’ Unwanted Effects)

a) That, employment is understood to be at will;

b) That, the rater expressly reserves the right to discharge the ratee at any time for any
reason with or without cause and with or without notice;

c) That, nothing in the rater’s policies, practices, or procedures, including appraisals,
should be construed to confer any right upon the ratee to continued employment;

d) That, the rater expressly reserves the right to unilaterally alter the terms and
conditions of employment, including the manner in which performance is or is not
appraised;

e) That, the rater is under no obligation to appraise performance;

f) That, neither the fact that appraisals are or are not conducted, nor the manner in
which they may be conducted, should be construed to give rise to a ‘just cause’
requirement for terminating the employment relationship.

g) That, appraisals and other evaluation procedures should in no way be considered in
any other manner in determining the existence or nature of any employment relationship
that may be found to exist between the parties.

40. PROCEDURES (for Legally Sound Appraisals). Appraisal procedures:

a) Should be standardized and uniform for all ratee’s within a job group;

b) Should be formally communicated to ratee’s;

19

c) Should provide notice of performance deficiencies, and opportunities to correct them;

d) Should provide access for ratee’s to review appraisal results;

e) Should provide formal appeal mechanisms that allow for ratee input;

f) Should use multiple, diverse, and unbiased raters;

g) Should provide written instructions and training for raters;

h) Should require thorough and consistent documentation across raters that include
specific examples of performance based on personal knowledge;

i) Should establish a system to detect potentially discriminatory effects or abuses of the
system overall.

41. LEGAL GUIDELINES : Performance ratings must be job-related.

a) Ratee’s must be given a written copy of their job standards in advance of appraisals.
b) Raters who conduct the appraisal must be able to observe the behaviour they are
rating.
c) Raters must be trained to use the appraisal form correctly.
d) Appraisals should be discussed openly with ratee’s and counselling or corrective
guidance offered.
e) An appeal procedure should be established to enable ratee’s to express disagreement
with the appraisal.

ISSUES IN APPRAISAL

42. Certain issues need to be tackled while dealing with the appraisal mechanism. These are
what to asses, which rater should assess performance, which appraisal technique needs to be used,
how to communicate appraisal output and how to train appraisers for efficient/effective appraisal?

20

43. Forms of change requirements that necessitate incorporation are, need to be more realistic
about limitations of human ability, need for development of a rational and scientific foundation in
the appraisal dynamics, need to recognize vital aspects of total human existence, need to incorporate
ethical aspects, exploring whether to go in for a ‘run-of-the-mill’ system developed elsewhere in
response to certain unfortunate legal demands (given the fact that it is of little, if any, utility
value),information collected from a variety of sources should be balanced and a heterogeneous
blend of ‘excellent-good-average-poor-hopeless’, how does the rater propose to deal with it, what
quality of conclusions can an appraiser reasonably draw from such a clumsy feedback, what range
of personnel-related decisions does a rater intend to take through the instrumentality of
cumbersome, time-consuming, yet contextually useless documentation in the face of high mobility
rates (this is the result of a marked shift from the traditional long-term loyalty to job-hopping), what
developmental purpose must such a frustrating, multi-rater feedback possibly serve and finally, is
there the need of an ‘alibi’ in the shape of a stack of junk forms for applying negative sanctions
which that be necessary or even indispensable in an organisation that has been characterized by a
‘hire-and-fire-at-must’ mindset.

44. Performance - based budgeting serves as a strategic planning tool towards improving the
clarity and consistency of scheme of appraisal designs. This facilitates a common understanding and
better communication between organization and ratee’s in the desired results of scheme of
appraisals. Performance - based budgeting allows organizations to attain a unified sense of purpose
and direction. Moreover, through the measurement of performance in achieving defined results,
performance - based budgeting provides feedback to scheme of appraisals on how well they are
doing and creates a strong incentive for adopting best practices and efficiencies in use of resources.
This improves the quality of services and other outputs.

45, Performance - based budgeting has also been proposed as a means to release raters from
overly restrictive input and/or central controls and to accord them more discretion in determining
the right mix of human-technical-material - financial resources to meet expected results. In
performance - based budgeting, the increase of the accountability and responsibility of concerned
officials (a consequence of holding them responsible for achieving results) is designed to go hand in
hand with an amplified authority for managing all resources , including human resources.

21

46. To overcome the demerits and subjectively further there are laid down ethics. If followed
religiously, it would not only give a true picture of the Rates but reveal the strength of their time
tested system. One issue that merits attention here is regarding the ‘Ethical Dilemma’ in reporting.
Can, or should a rater go strictly by his convictions / ethical standards and grade an ratee low
despite being aware of the general inflationary trends in reporting in the environment, when he is
certain that the ratee is better than another ratees, who is perhaps graded better that this ratees.
There is no answer for the riddle. There as initiating raters and future reviewing raters will have to
resolve this issue by themselves. It can summed up by making a statement here that perhaps it is a
false sense of regimentation, that has been a major contributor of the present inflationary trends the
system.

ISSUES OF DIVERSITY

47. This section provides information regarding the issues of diversity in appraisal. For purpose
of this, ethnicity is considered part of the overall ‘diversity’ issue.

a) Religion: Although religion should not be considered in the appraisal process, it
would be prudent to be sure that all raters or ratee’s to cognizant of the religious customs
and practices of ratee’s they supervise. This must make sure that ratee’s are not held liable
for actions inappropriately.

b) Gender Issues: Psychoanalysts and psychoanalytically-oriented organizational
practitioners have made considerable progress over the last four decades in the exploration
and interpretation of organizational behaviour. Their efforts have resulted in an in-depth
understanding of the complexities of contemporary organizations and the complications they
can create for employees. Theory, research, and application have been quite illuminating,
particularly in the areas of management, leadership, personality characteristics, group
dynamics, stress, and executive emotional health. However, not surprisingly, most of what
has been learned about organizations has come from the study of men and their work in
male-dominated institutions. Exploration of the experience and meaning of professional

22

work for women has only received serious consideration in the past fifteen years and has
been researched largely from social and organizational psychology and management theory
perspectives.

48. Evaluate the ratee on work related elements, which have been made clear and do not
evaluate on differences in communication style. Ensure that appraisal criteria focuses on the
objective results and targets achieved. If there is a low ratio of women to men then the ladies
should not be given any undue privileges. There is a need to discourage any disparity of
functioning and appraisal.

49. When conducting appraisals, raters should clearly convey work expectations and make sure
that ratee’s understand expectations. This can be accomplished by incorporating equal performance
standards for all ratee’s. Equally important is realizing that some raters expect some ratee’s to be
superstars and from others they must expect very little. Raters should re-examine judgments to make
sure that poor performance is not overlooked due to being uncomfortable about providing feedback to
those different than self. If raters provide feedback often and equally to all members then this issue
should not prevail. Failure to give legitimate feedback because of being feared labelled as sexist,
racist or discriminatory can demean the importance of the ratee’s career goals and expectations.
An attempt has been done towards modeling appraisal on a real-time basis. From the operational
research point of view modeling may not actually represent the core ‘real universal problem’ in which
decisions are made.
50. Modeling efforts are complex and the results so obtained through real – time efforts are
difficult to be explained to the Rater. This may fail to gain their support and confidence. Raters are
required to be quite explicit about their objectives, their assumptions and their way of visualizing their
constraints. There may be problems of quantifying in real terms.

23

CHAPTER NO 4: THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE

VIEWS OF PETER DRUCKER

51. Drucker (1946) proclaimed peak performance by the ratee as a goal. This was by asserting
that appraisal should go beyond human relations and inter-ratee aspects. Insistence on high goals and
high performance requires that an individual’s ability to set high goals and attain them must be
systematically appraised. Appraisal is judgment and this always requires a definite standard that
should always be based on proven performance. To judge means to apply a set of standard values.
Value judgments without clear and sharp standard are irrational and arbitrary. An appraisal that
focuses on potential, on personality, on promise etc. on anything that is not proven is an abuse. The
greatest mistake is to build on weaknesses.
52. Any real-time based appraisal must involve and systematically evaluate comparison of
performance parameters of ratees holding similar areas of work responsibilities, their performance on
the job and their potential for development. This would thereby determine their worth for the
accomplishment of organizational goals by reducing important discrepancies between the desired /
required conditions and the present / anticipated conditions.

REAL-TIME CONCEPTUALISATION

53. Focus on real-time based performance introspection has recently emerged as a critical
instrument for improving the delivery of services and infrastructure to the ratee .To ensure
accountability for results, the organization and agencies at various levels must implement a
performance measurement and management system that would establish a link between development
goals, policies, priorities, plans, strategy, vision, mission, programmes, projects, action plans and
performance towards achieving the desired aims and objectives. Balances of quantitative and
qualitative, financial and non-financial indicators are necessary to measure the effectiveness and
efficiency of organization programmes and functions.

24

TECHNIQUES OF APPRAISAL:

54. The various techniques of appraisal usually practiced by various organisations are, written
appraisal method, field review method, critical incident method, adjective type method, forced
choice method, graphic rating scale method, ranking method, grading method, paired comparison
method, forced distribution method, check list method, essay method, results or objectives method,
behaviourally anchored rating method and appraisal technique, to list a few.

55. Essay appraisal: In its simplest form, this technique asks the rater to write a paragraph or
more covering an individual's strengths, weaknesses, potential, and so on. In most selection
situations, essay appraisals from former employers or associates carry significant weight. The
assumption seems to be that an honest and informed statement, either by word of mouth or in
writing, from someone who knows the ratee well, is fully as valid as more formal 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 man's performance or
personal qualifications, essay ratings are difficult to combine or compare. For comparability, some
type of more formal method, like the graphic rating scale, is desirable.

56. Graphic Rating Scale: This technique may not yield the depth of an essay appraisal, but it
is more consistent and reliable. Typically, a graphic scale assesses a ratee on the quality and
quantity of his work (is he outstanding, above average, average, or unsatisfactory?) and on a variety
of other factors that vary with the job but usually include personal traits like reliability and
cooperation. It may also include specific performance items like oral and written communication.
The graphic scale has come under frequent attack, but remains the most widely used rating method.
In a classic comparison between the ‘old-fashioned’ graphic scale and the much more sophisticated
forced, choice technique, the former proved to be fully as valid as the best of the forced, choice
forms, and better than most of them. It is also cheaper to develop and more acceptable to raters than
the forced, choice form. For many purposes there is no need to use anything more complicated than
a graphic scale supplemented by a few essay questions.

25

57. Field Review: When there is reason to suspect rater bias, when some raters appear to be
using higher standards than others, or when comparability of ratings is essential, essay or graphic
ratings are often combined with a systematic review process. The field review is one of several
techniques for doing this. A member of the personnel or central administrative staff meets with
small groups of raters from each ratery unit and goes over each employee's rating with them to ,
identify areas of inter, rater disagreement, help the group arrive at a consensus and determine that
each rater conceives the standards similarly. This group, judgment technique tends to be fairer and
more valid than individual ratings and permits develop an awareness of the varying degrees of
leniency or severity, as well as bias, exhibited by raters in different departments. On the negative
side, the process is very time consuming.

58. Forced Choice Rating: Like the field review, this technique was developed to reduce bias
and establish objective standards of comparison between ratee’s, but it does not involve the
intervention of a third party. Although there are many variations of this method, the most common
one asks raters to choose from among groups of statements those which best fit the individual being
rated and those which least fit him. The statements are then weighted or scored, very much the way
a psychological test is scored. Ratee’s with high scores are, by definition, the better ratee’s; those
with low scores are the poorer ones. Since the rater does not know what the scoring weights for
each statement are, in theory at least, he cannot play favorites. The rationale behind this technique is
difficult to fault. It is the same rationale used in developing selection test batteries. In practice,
however, the forced, choice method tends to irritate raters, who feel they are not being trusted. They
want to say openly how they rate someone and not be second-guessed or tricked into making
‘honest’ appraisals. An additional drawback is the difficulty and cost of developing forms.
Consequently, the technique is usually limited to middle, and lower, management levels where the
jobs are sufficiently similar to make standard or common forms feasible. Finally, forced, choice
forms tend to be of little value, and probably have a negative effect, when used in appraisal
interviews.

26

59. Critical incident appraisal: The discussion of ratings with ratee’s has, in many
organizations, proved to be a traumatic experience for raters. Some have learned from bitter
experience who receive honest but negative feedback are typically not motivated to do better , and
often do worse , after the appraisal interview. Consequently, raters tend to avoid such interviews, or
if forced to hold them, avoid giving negative ratings when the ratings have to be shown to the rater.
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 a rater can be difficult. The critical incident technique looks
like a natural to some ratee’s for performance review interviews, because it gives a ratee actual,
factual incidents to discuss with an employee. Raters are asked to keep a record, a ‘little black
book,’ on each ratee and to record actual incidents of positive or negative behavior. There are,
however, several drawbacks to this approach. It requires that raters jot down 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 rater to delay feedback to raters. And it is hardly desirable to
wait six months or a year to confront an employee with a misdeed or mistake. Finally, the rater sets
the standards. If they seem unfair to a subordinate, might he not be more motivated if he at least has
some say in setting, or at least agreeing to, the standards against which he is judged?

60. Management by objectives: To avoid, or to deal with, the feeling that they are being judged
by unfairly high standards, raters in some organizations are being asked to set, or help set, their own
performance goals. It should be noted, however, that when MBO is applied at lower organizational
levels, raters do not always want to be involved in their own goal setting. Many do not want self,
direction or autonomy. As a result, more coercive variations of MBO are becoming increasingly
common, and some critics see MBO drifting into a kind of manipulative form of management in
which pseudo, participation substitutes for the real thing. Raters are consulted, but management
ends up imposing its standards and its objectives. Some organizations are introducing a work,
standards approach to goal setting in which the goals are openly set by management. In fact, there
appears to be something of a vogue in the setting of such work standards in white-collar and service
areas.

27

61. Work-Standards approach: Instead of asking raters to set their own performance goals,
many organizations set measured daily work standards. In short, the work standards technique
establishes work and staffing targets aimed at improving productivity. When realistically used, it
can make possible an objective and accurate appraisal of the work of raters and raters. To be
effective, the standards must be visible and fair. Hence a good deal of time is spent observing raters
on the job, simplifying and improving the job where possible, and attempting to arrive at realistic
output standards. It is not clear, in every case, that work standards have been integrated with an
organization's appraisal program. However, since the work, standards program provides each
employee with a more or less complete set of his job duties; it would seem only natural that raters
will eventually relate appraisal and interview comments to these duties. The use of work standards
should make performance interviews less threatening than the use of personal, more subjective
standards alone. The most serious drawback appears to be the problem of comparability. If ratee’s
are evaluated on different standards, how can the ratings be brmustgether for comparison purposes
when decisions have to be made on promotions or on salary increases? For these purposes some
form of ranking is necessary.

62. Ranking methods: For comparative purposes, particularly when it is necessary to compare
people who work for different raters, individual statements, ratings, or appraisal forms are not
particularly useful. Instead, it is necessary to recognize that comparisons involve an overall
subjective judgment to which a host of additional facts and impressions must somehow be added.
There is no single form or way to do this. Comparing ratee’s in different units for the purpose of,
say, choosing a service rater or determining the relative size of salary increases for different raters,
requires subjective judgment, not statistics. The best approach appears to be a ranking technique
involving pooled judgment. The two most effective methods are alternation ranking and paired
comparison ranking.

63. Alternation ranking: In this method, the names of raters are listed on the left-hand side of a
sheet of paper, preferably in random order. If the rankings are for salary purposes, a rater is asked to
choose the ‘most valuable’ employee on the list, cross his 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 the bottom of the right-hand column. The ranker then selects the

28

‘most valuable’ person from the remaining list, crosses his name off and enters it below the top
name on the right-hand list, and so on.

64. Paired- comparison ranking: This technique is probably just as accurate as alternation
ranking and might be more so. But with large numbers of raters it becomes extremely time
consuming and cumbersome. Both ranking techniques, particularly when combined with multiple
rankings (i.e., when two or more ratee’s are asked to make independent rankings of the same work
group and their lists are averaged), are among the best available for generating valid order, of, merit
rankings for salary administration purposes.

29

65. Assessment centers: What about the assessment of future performance or potential? In any
placement decision and more so in promotion decisions, some prediction of future performance is
necessary. How can this kind of prediction be made most validly and most fairly? One widely used
rule of thumb is that ‘what a man has done is the best predictor of what he will do in the future.’ But
suppose you are picking a person to be a rater and this person has never held raters responsibility?
Suppose a person is selected for a job from among a group of candidates, none of whom has done
the job or one like it? In these situations, many organizations use assessment centre to predict future
performance more accurately. Typically, ratee’s from different departments are brmustgether to
spend two or three days working on individual and group assignments similar to the ones they will
be handling if they are promoted. The pooled judgment of observers, sometimes derived by paired
comparison or alternation ranking, leads to an order, of, merit ranking for each participant. Less
structured, subjective judgments are also made. There is a good deal of evidence that those ratee’s
chosen by assessment centre methods work out better than those not chosen by these methods. The
centre also makes it possible for ratee’s who are working for departments of low status or low
visibility in an organization to become visible and, in the competitive situation of an assessment
centre, show how they stack up against ratee’s from more well-known departments. This has the
effect of equalizing opportunity, improving morale, and enlarging the pool of possible promotion
candidates.

METHODOLOGY FOR RATERS

66. Strategic Plan: Each and every organizations need to submit a strategic plan for all its
activities, along with an annual performance plan, and performance budget to the appropriate
authority. The plan has to detail in specific terms the goals and objectives and how these goals and
objectives are programmed to be achieved. ‘Who We Are – Mission Statement’ are designed to
guide organizations/agencies into sharper focus, explain why and what for the organization exists,
explain what it is doing and describe how it is doing along with the constructive criticisms.
Strategic goals are an outgrowth/development/progress of clearly stated mission and aligning of
activities to support mission-related goals and making linkages between levels of funding and their
anticipated results are a welcome sign in the dynamics of real-time appraisal.

30

67. Annual Performance Plans: Each organization/agency must submit a well-designed, a
well- defined and a concrete annual performance plan. Direct linkage to be programmed between
the strategic goals outlined in the strategic plan and what the organization appraisers and ratee’s are
actually doing. Annual performance goals need to be identified so as to gauge the progress toward
accomplishing strategic goals and identifying performance measures. Ratings provided in
‘administrative purpose with severe consequences’ condition must be more lenient than those
provided in ‘training purpose’ (and administrative purpose with less severe consequences’)
condition. Decisions in ‘administrative purpose with severe consequences’ condition must be more
lenient than decisions in ‘training purpose’ (and ‘administrative purpose with less severe
consequences’) condition. Purpose and self-monitoring must interact to affect leniency. Ratings
provided by high self-monitors be most lenient in the’ administrative purpose with severe
consequences’ condition.

68. Performance Management Indicators: Performance management system has to be
introduced in all organizations. This is by taking into account the availability of resources and the
inherent constraints. Promotion of culture with respect to performance management and focus on
results among its political structures, political office bearers and in its administration has to be
ensured.

69. Appropriate performance indicators needs to be introduced in each organization as a
yardstick for measuring performance. Measurable performance targets must be introduced. Monitor
measure and review performance against the performance indicators and targets set in. Initiate steps
to improve performance with regard to those development priorities and objectives where
performance targets are not met. Establish a process for regular reporting of performance-related
information to the appropriate authority.

70. Be honest and fair in evaluating all ratee’s. Be certain that the rater has reviewed all
ratee’s in an objective and consistent manner as ratee’s and relative to other ratee’s in the group.
The purpose of performance evaluations is to take a realistic snapshot of the ratee's performance. Do
not endorse that the ratee is improving if (s) he is not performing well.

31

71. Be consistent in approach. Do not subscribe to a situation where it appears that the rater
can create excuses for one ratee while holding another ratee accountable. Define your criteria for
each level of ranking and use the same criteria for every ratee. Don't set separate criteria for certain
ratee’s.

72. Give comments. A ranking or number used to rank a ratee's performance is useless without
a written comment. Comments are required for any ranking that is less than 4 or meets expectations
and also for the highest ranking of 9 or exceed expectations. Comments may confirm achievements
or be constructive depending on the nature of the ranking. Make the comments consistent with
rankings. Don't give ratee’s a ‘meets expectations’ ranking if comment describes a substandard
performance. There is a need to be realistic. Don't inflate ratings. Inflation of ratings only inflates a
ratee's expectations.

73. Rate the ratee's performance, not the ratee's ‘attitude.’ Keep comments job related and
based on the ratee's ability to perform his job. Avoid phrases like ‘bad attitude,’ ‘he's not a team
player,’ and other subjective type comments. Explain the behavior that is a result of the ‘attitude.’

74. Set goals with the ratee. Don't just criticize a deficient performer; set goals for follow up
and for improvement or development. Work together to create a plan of action to help the ratee in
deficient areas and to establish goals for the coming year. Set a follow up period and be sure to
reevaluate the ratee at the appropriate time.

75. Performance evaluation should motivate a ratee to improve. The ratee should feel
excited about the challenges and his ability to meet them. If ratee’s hear only about their failures
and weaknesses, they'll start to believe they can't succeed. If ratee’s get support and encouragement
from their rater, they'll gain the desire and confidence to keep trying. When the rater’s suggestions
for improvement bring results - and recognition - ratee’s are even more likely to listen to future
suggestions.

76. No surprises. The evaluation should be a review of the past year's performance. Through
previous counseling and other communications, the ratee should be aware of any concerns you

32

might have about their job performance. The annual evaluation should not be the first time the ratee
learns of your concerns.

77. One tool that may be used is to ask the ratee to review his or her own performance and
expectations for the future by preparing a self-appraisal. They can complete the evaluation form that
the rater uses, draft a memo or list reviewing performance strengths, weaknesses and future goals.
Having the ratee undergo the same exercise may make it easier for him / her to understand the value
of evaluation. The limited usefulness of self-appraisals as an evaluation tool has elicited doubts
about the use of self-ratings in the appraisal process.

JOB PERFORMANCE SUMMARY

78. An essential part of the Appraisal Program is the Job Performance Summary, which is
completed by the rater for each ratee at the end of the work planning/appraisal cycle. This summary
includes the following, overall rating and summary statement, comments by rater and ratee and next
level rater review.

a) Overall Performance Rating :The overall rating for each ratee is determined at the end
of the work cycle. The rater reviews performance information (examples: notes, records and
reports) collected during the work cycle against the expectations for each key responsibility/
result and dimension. These are then rated expectations in order to record the actual
performance on the work plan form. The rater combines actual performance of the
individual key responsibilities/results and dimensions into a single overall rating and records
it on the overall summary page of the work plan form. If 50 percent or more of the
individual performance ratings are at the same level of performance, the overall rating is
most likely to be at that level of performance. In determining the overall rating consideration
must be given to, the priority order of the key responsibilities/results and dimensions, the
impact of not performing the primary job factors and relationship of the key responsibilities/
results plus dimensions to accomplishment of the entire job. The statement supporting the
overall rating must be entered in the raters comments section of the work plan form. The
rater signs the job performance summary page and obtains the signatures of the ratee and the
next level rater.

33

b) Summary Statement and Comments :The summary statement explaining the raters
Overall Performance Rating should indicate how the actual performance was compared to
the performance expectations described. In the comments section, ratee’s and raters may
make statements regarding the appraisal and the appraisal process.

c) Next Level Rater Review : The next level rater is required to review and sign the
performance rating completed by subordinate raters for ratee’s in their areas of responsibility
before the performance rating is discussed with the ratee. Comments are optional.

COMPETENCY OF APPRAISER

79. Performance rater uses a specific set of competencies to help ratee’s identify and resolve
human performance problems. These competencies are embedded in the human performance
technology process and include the skills of problem analysis, solution design, development, change
management, impact evaluation and remediation. Analysis skills are fundamental, covering both
organizational and cause analysis, and are supported by strong relationship-building ability. Design
skills demand strength in intervention selection, solution development and coordination.
Implementation skills are rooted in organizational management and change resistance abilities.
Evaluation skills are rooted in reliable measurement of intermediate plus final results across the
entire performance analysis and improvement process. Acquiring core competencies of the
performance professional is a question of formal and informal skill acquisition. Observation and
practice in real-time performance improvement scenarios and close attention to and improvement of
one’s emotional skill set is of prime importance. If such a factor is necessary for an appraiser to
develop credible assignment results, the appraiser is responsible for having the appraisal to address
that factor or for following the steps outlined above to satisfy this appraisal rule.

80. The background and experience of appraisers varies wide. Lack of knowledge or experience
can lead to inaccurate or inappropriate appraisal practice. The appraisal rule requires an appraiser to
have both the knowledge and the experience required to perform a specific appraisal service
competently. Trying to find real quantitative data to appraise your knowledge ratee and avoid
subjective ratings? If quantitative data about performance is available that are neither trivial nor

34

contaminated, it makes perfect sense to use them for evaluating performance. But our most
important and valuable ratee — our executives, raters, and knowledge ratee — generally perform
jobs that require subjective skills such as analysis, problem solving, creativity, and judgment. Even
when there appear to be ‘bottom line’ results such as profits or sales, the performance picture will
always be incomplete without subjective evaluations.

81. If an appraiser is offered the opportunity to perform an appraisal, but lacks the necessary
knowledge or experience to complete it competently, the appraiser must disclose his or her lack of
knowledge or experience to the ratee before accepting the assignment. Then necessary or
appropriate steps to complete the appraisal service competently can be undertaken. This may be
accomplished in various ways, including but not limited to, personal study by the appraiser,
association with an appraiser reasonably believed to have the necessary knowledge or experience, or
retention of others who possess the required knowledge or experience. In an assignment where
appraisal is necessary, an appraiser preparing an appraisal in an unfamiliar setting must spend
sufficient time to understand the nuances involved. Such understanding should not be imparted
solely from a consideration of specific data. Although this requires an appraiser to identify the
problem and disclose deficiency in competence prior to accepting an assignment, facts or conditions
uncovered during the course could cause an appraiser to discover that he or she lacks the required
knowledge or experience to complete the assignment competently.

82. Applying templates from the performance criterion literature, there is a need to implement a
construct-based approach to the investigation of errors in appraisal ratings. Context effects in
appraisals have been operationalized at a personal level phenomenon. The need is to investigate
context effects at the instrument level by examining: the influence of rating contextual items on
subsequent ratings of task items and influence of rating task items on subsequent ratings of
contextual items.

83. ‘Item response’ theoretical methods of differential item functioning detection can be applied
to investigate the influence of context on item ratings of task and contextual performance. The
order in which task and contextual items can be presented would to some extent influence rating
responses. Specifically, when task items are preceded by contextual items, the relatedness between

35

task items and their underlying construct can be reduced. These observed slope effects, as
conceptualized within the item response theory framework, does demonstrate an advantage of item
response theory methods over traditional approaches for detecting the influence of context on
responses to appraisal questions.

84. The rater personality study needs to examine the relationship between levels of rater agreeableness,
conscientiousness and ratings of task and contextual performance. Use of a more precise
operationalization of performance would be capable of detecting complex relationships between
personality and ratings on task and contextual performance. While rater agreeableness and
conscientiousness are both related to task performance ratings, conscientiousness does moderate the
relationship between rater agreeableness and contextual performance ratings. Overall, high
agreeable raters tend to give higher ratings than low agreeable raters. However, these difference a
researched to be greatest among low conscientious raters but minimized among high conscientious
raters.

RATING SCALE

85. Outstanding Performance: Performance is far above the defined job expectations. The ratee
consistently performs outstanding work, regularly above and beyond what is expected of ratee’s in
this job. Performance that exceeds expectations is due to the effort and skills of the ratee. Any
performance not consistently exceeding expectations is minor or due to events not under the control
of the ratee.

a) Very Good Performance: Performance meets the defined job expectations and in
many instances, exceeds job expectations. The ratee generally is doing a very good job.
Performance that exceeds expectations is due to the effort and skills of the ratee.

b) Good Performance (Meets Expectations) : Performance meets the defined job
expectations. The ratee is performing the job at the level expected for ratee’s in this position.
The good performance is due to the ratee’s own effort and skills.

36

c) Below Good Performance: Performance may meet some of the job expectations but
does not fully meet the remainder. The ratee generally is performing the job at a minimal
level, and improvement is needed to fully meet expectations. Performance is less than good.
Lapses in performance are due to the ratee’s lack of effort or skills. Requires guidance and
supervision.

d) Unsatisfactory Performance: Performance generally fails to meet the defined
performance expectations or requires frequent, close supervision and/or the redoing of work.
The ratee is not performing the job at the level expected for ratee’s in this position.
Unsuccessful job performance is due to the ratee’s own lack of effort or skills.

CONSTRUCTING AN APPRAISAL MODEL

86. The appraisal summary rating for each ratee is used to support other personnel decisions such as
promotions, demotions, disciplinary actions, reductions-in-force, etc. Each ratee must have a current
appraisal on file and the appraisal must be consistent with the action to be taken. There is a need to
monitor recommended actions and require justification by raters for any actions requested which are
inconsistent with the rating. This may be accomplished through meetings and/or written information
87. Studies on designing configurations for appraisal reflect upon the following key parameters for a
successful appraisal;

a) Leadership is critical in designing and deploying efficient/effective performance
measurement and management systems. Clear, consistent, and visible involvement by senior
organization officials and appraisers is a necessary part of the successful performance
measurement and management systems. Senior leadership should be actively involved in
both the creation and implementation of the organizational systems.

b) A conceptual framework is needed for the performance measurement and
management system. Every organization/agency needs a clear and cohesive performance
measurement framework that is understood by all levels of the organization. This framework
should support its objectives and reflection of results.

37

c) Efficient/effective internal and external communications are the keys to successful
performance measurement. Such communication with ratee’s, appraisers, process owners
and participants is vital to the successful development / deployment of performance
measurement and management systems. It is the ratee’s and appraisers who ultimately judge
how well it has achieved its goals and objectives. Those within the organization entrusted
with / expected to achieve performance goals and targets should be clear as to how success
is defined. They must be aware as to what their role in achieving that success is. Both
outsiders and insiders need to be part of the development / deployment of performance
measurement systems.

d) Accountability for results must be clearly assigned and well-understood. High-
performance organizations clearly identify on what it takes to determine success. It must
make sure that all appraisers and ratee’s understand what they were responsible for in
achieving organizational goals. Accountability is typically a key success factor, but one with
multiple dimensions and multiple applications.

e) Compensation rewards and recognition should be linked to performance
measurements. Linking performance evaluations and rewards to specific measures of
success and tying incentives directly to performance, sends a clear and unambiguous
message to the organization as to what is important, relevant and significant.

f) Performance measurement systems should be positive and not punitive. Most
successful performance measurement systems are not punitive systems but learning systems.
This helps organizations identify as to what works and what does not so as to continue with
and improve those. Performance measurement is a tool that lets the organization track its
progress and direction towards the strategic goals and objectives. It should not lead to
perverse incentives with a clandestine view to fudge figures or manipulate performance
achievements. Results and progress toward programme commitments should be openly
shared with ratee’s. While sensitive information generally must be protected, performance
measurement system information should be openly and widely shared.

38

g) A progressive transformation from good performance monitoring and measurement
system towards good appraisal is called for. Performance management is a tool as well as a
means for real-time appraisal. The biggest challenge of an organization is to create a system
of good, equitable, rational, just optimal appraisal which promotes supports and sustains
human development. Good appraisal is among other things participatory, transparent,
accountable, efficient/effective and equitable. It promotes the role of human resource
development (management) and ensures that political, social-economic and cultural
priorities are based on a broad consensus. There is a requirement to design an optimal and
comprehensive agenda, keeping in view the individual and organisational objectives in
which appraisal architecture/monitoring/regulation/ administration form key components.

88. While building the above architecture, the following aspects need to be looked into:
indicator-wise base data (to learn about recent levels and patterns of performance in order to gauge
subsequent policy/programme/scheme of appraisal impact), clarity (as to data sources: primary and
secondary, data collection method :review, interview, field visit, survey, census, field
experiment),how and who must collect data(frequency and cost of data collection), practical
difficulties (in collecting data, setting indicator targets, clear understanding of baseline starting
point, funding and level of personnel resources expected throughout the target period), quantum of
outside resources (expected to supplement efforts) and only one target (for each indicator).

DIFFICULTIES WITH TRADITIONAL APPRAISAL SYSTEMS

89. For many, the term 'appraisal system' embodies the major difficulties with these traditional
approaches. The appraisal itself suggests assessment of the past rather than improvement in the
future. An appraisal system suggests a tightly controlled, formal, procedure which limits the scope
of the discussion and activities of the rater and ratee. Consequently both parties tended to view the
appraisal interview with apprehension (at best) or at worst judge the process a waste of valuable
time.

90. A focus on the past: Most appraisal systems are based upon assessment of the past. Whilst
it is much easier to assess the past than the future, viewing the appraisal as a control and
maintenance system does little to realise future performance improvement. A consideration of
future potential, opportunities and development needs is an essential aid for both organisations and

39

ratees. Future performance improvement needs organisational investment in development but this,
together with succession planning, is often very poorly managed if at all. Learning objectives,
learning potential, opportunity to apply learning and the means by which learning can be acquired
all need identification, and all need close support of line raters. Hence, the evolvement of
performance review and development systems.

91. Use of quantifiable measures: Rating scales and quantifiable measures do not always
reflect the true value of a ratee. Depending on the role, non-quantifiable behaviours (such as
motivation, ability to learn and quality of work) should represent important factors within the
appraisal process. Once a list of quantifiable factors becomes established, ratee’s must often modify
their behaviour to maximise their performance in those areas.

92. Traits are inputs to work, not outputs: Traits describe a person's characteristics and
approaches to work. They represent what somebody puts into the job. They do not necessarily
predict or reflect the outcome or results of a person's work. The problem is similar to the difference
between effort and achievement. Organisations which put a premium on effort in the appraisal may
not necessarily yield high performance improvement. Those which put all appraisal emphasis on
results may appear to be insensitive towards ratee’s' personal contributions. But where appraisal
systems value achievement, the degree of change, self determination and then the consequential
developmental cultural must produce high value results for both the individual and organisation.
Trait based measurements are inherently subjective and require judgment on the part of appraiser.
The difficulty here is that any appraisal system utilising judgment criteria must generate markedly
different results between different appraisers. The outcome of an appraisal may therefore depend
more upon who is the appraiser than upon actual performance. A particular problem identified in
this area is the 'Halo' and 'Horns' effects.

93. Conservative use of scales : It has been researched that with all appraisal rating scales there
is a very high tendency to only give middle range scores .The consequence is that both high and low
performers are not recognised and managed (rewarded or punished) accordingly and therefore the
appraisal system is ineffective. Appraisees have an awareness of how well they are performing
compared with their colleagues, they do talk to each other about their appraisal results and unless
the appraisal process fairly utilises the full rating range the appraisal system itself must rapidly

40

become discredited. Performance review and development systems focus on self realisation of
individual potential and not some arbitrary comparison with colleagues that often results in conflict.

94. Rewards/ awards 'unrelated' to appraisal : In systems where there is a time lapse between
the appraisal interview and the rewards award itself, there can grow a concern either that
performance has not been fully recognised or that the calculation is somehow fudged. In addition,
ratee’s still know that the appraisal does have a bearing on the rewards award, however hidden.
Many organisations today prefer a more open and honest approach.

95. Emphasizes formal procedures: For the rater to take full responsibility, they have to
continually monitor, review, feedback, discuss performance improvement during frequent and
informal meetings with each ratee. A formal annual appraisal can falsely suggest that this effective
informal process can be replaced by the formal annual meeting. Documentation supporting the
appraisal interview often reinforced this by describing the formal procedure in great detail, with
only a passing reference to informal meetings and continuous development.

96. The limits of only two appraisal views: Where the appraisal only required input from the
appraiser and the appraisee then the appraisal process must potentially miss the rich sources of
feedback that can be offered by peers and subordinates, hence 360 degree appraisal. This
information can often reveal problems in perceptions of roles and the quality of working
relationships, including that between the appraiser and appraisee and the need for the appraiser to
accept criticism. In organisations where team working and open management are encouraged, the
appraisal process must recognise the value of the information gained from these sources.

97. May impede wider discussion: Completing a appraisal form can easily become the task
object, rather than a performance improvement review. In addition, appraisals forms are often
generated by personnel departments and do not always cover the real performance improvement
issues between a rater and ratee. The one appraisal form cannot deal effectively with organisational
diversity.

98. Not always measurable: Much criticism has been made, by ratee’s, of the use of appraisal
objectives. Raters who cannot set SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and time-
based) objectives are accused of changing the goal-posts, creating confusion and increasing the
appraisal standard without performance related rewards recognition or increase in grade. This is

41

often because appraisal objectives are not related to the goals and direction of the business or the
department. Hence, the movement towards performance review and development systems.

99. Different schemes for different ratee’s: Diverse appraisal systems are often introduced
because of the need to measure different factors and reward in different ways. However, different
appraisal systems risk being divisive and causing resentment. If the use of different appraisal
systems generate 'us and them' attitudes they must be divisive, in which event it is unlikely that the
appraisal process must be much more than a meaningless paper exercise. Better to differentiate
between roles, and attendant competence definitions, using the 'level of work' principle, than having
separate appraisal systems.

100. A common practice is to set goals that must force the organization to ‘stretch’ in order to
exceed its past performance. By benchmarking such measures, an organization can validate the fact
that the designed goals are still attainable. It is also important to provide information on
performance goals / results to ratee’s and appraisers. This increases their understanding of the
organization’s mission / goals and unifies the workforce behind them. It also helps emphasise team
logic rather than fostering individual competition.

101. The key objectives of a performance monitoring and evaluation system is to provide real-
time based crucial information about performance to the ratees, provide a view over time on the
status of a scheme of appraisal/programme /policy, promote credibility and ratee’s confidence by
reporting on the results, help formulate and justify requests, plan interventions, identify potentially
promising programmes/practices and help building a performing organization.A sound performance
monitoring system needs to be guided by the following principles; ownership/management need to
realize that movement of performance information be both horizontal and vertical, identify demand
for performance information, clarify responsibilities at each level to each ratee and rater ,data
collection/collation/analysis/measurement /reporting, should not be limited or under a set of
constraints but cater to the requirement ( precise, reliable, consistent, valid, and timely).

102. A well-designed performance monitoring system tracks implementation (input/output and
activities), results (outcomes and impacts) and monitors whether a scheme of appraisal, programme
or policy is cruising along the desired path towards achieving the desired goals or results.

42

Implementation monitoring involves tracking the means and strategies used to achieve goal ably
supported by the use of management tools. Developing the system requires, conduct ‘readiness
assessment’, agree on performance outcomes, select key performance indicators to monitor
outcomes, gather baseline data, plan for improvement in setting targets, build a monitoring system,
analyse and publish findings, undertake evaluation, use findings to institutionalize monitoring and
evaluation. While designing a appraisal instrument, the focus should be towards goals and
results(objective), be conducted under the surveillance of a responsible rater, appraisal be
consistently pursued, should include the interaction of personal and situational variables, be
regularly reviewed and modified when required, appraisals to reinforce commitment with
satisfaction among organizational membership/employment and it should for provide a continuity
of relationships from one appraisal stage to the next.

PRACTICAL APPROACHES

103 Trying to find real quantitative data to appraise your knowledge ratee and avoid subjective
ratings? If you've got quantitative data about performance that are neither trivial nor contaminated,
it makes perfect sense to use them for evaluating performance. But our most important and
valuable ratee — our executives, raters, and knowledge ratee — generally perform jobs that require
subjective skills such as analysis, problem solving, creativity, and judgment. Even when there
appear to be ‘bottom line’ results such as profits or sales, the performance picture will always be
incomplete without subjective evaluations.

104. Appraisal is not about a single event, such as completing a standard review form, but rather
a process that is ongoing. Appraisal activities, as an ongoing process, should connect the process to
organizational functioning and focus on ratee and rater improvement, not simply wage adjustment
and/or disciplinary action.

105. An approach is the Conventional Rating Scale. These scales use words or phrases to
describe the degree to which certain behaviours or characteristics are displayed. Categories for
behaviourally anchored scales can be created from job descriptions. If there are no appropriate
behaviours or characteristics within job descriptions, raters should work with ratee and rater to
determine what behaviours and characteristics would be most useful in an appraisal setting.

43

106. Another approach is the Behaviourally Anchored Scale. In this approach, broad categories
of practice are identified, ideally through collaborations between raters and staff. Specific job
behaviours are then linked to the categories. Measures of ratee behaviour are rated on a scale in
relation to specific behaviour items, such as ‘understands department functions.’ Job-dimensions
usually yield similar broad categories, such as planning, setting priorities, and responsiveness to
supervision. Categories such as these may be useful in framing evaluation criteria in this approach
to appraisal.

107. Another means of approaching behaviour-based appraisal is the Behavioural Frequency
Scale. Here, desired behaviours are described and the ratee is evaluated on how often those
behaviours occur.

108. The Weighted Checklist is another appreciable way of approaching behaviour-based
appraisal. This method provides a list of performance related statements that are weighted. Ratee’s
are judged on a scale indicating the degree to which the statement accurately describes performance.

109. A final approach to behaviour-based appraisal is the forced-choice method. Here, a list of
performance related statements about job performance are evaluated on how well they discriminate
among ratee and rater and how important they are to unit or institutional performance.
Discrimination and desirability statements are placed on a grid in clusters that differ on
discrimination but are closely related in desirability. Discrimination and desirability are multiplied
to yield a total scale score.

110. There are both advantages and disadvantages to the above approaches. On the positive side,
they produce short and long-term results in the context of original performance and organizational
objectives, are generally perceived as fair, tend to generate high levels of commitment to the
organization, and they encourage a high level of participation and are thus defensible. On the
negative side, they can be overly results oriented and they may be inflexible.

111. What raters need from appraisals ?Raters need (and the law encourages) comparative
performance data for making comparative decisions — decisions that affect both the person selected
and the ones not selected. With the exception of a ‘termination for cause’, it is hard to imagine a

44

personnel decision that is not comparative. With comparative decisions, if one ratee is promoted,
others are not; if one receives a favorable job assignment, others do not. In the case of decisions
with negative consequences, such as downsizing, some are let go, others are retained.

112. Whenever ratee’s believe the outcome of a decision has negatively affected their careers, or
their opportunities, or their chances for advancement, they can claim unfair treatment. The
organization can only defend itself from such a claim if they can show that the person selected was
not just qualified, but better qualified than the others not selected.

113. If raters determine that the advantages outweigh disadvantages, it can then be recommended
that the results-focused approaches be incorporated. There are two general techniques of enacting
results-focused approaches: Management by Objectives (MBO) and Accountabilities with
Measures. To avoid, or to deal with, the feeling that they are being judged by unfairly high
standards, ratee’s in some organizations are being asked to set (or help set) their own performance
goals.

114. Accountabilities and Measures approaches involve the rater and ratee agreeing on
accountability and performance factors and including them in the job description. Performance is
then forecast for each factor to enable quantifiable measures for each factor. An Accountabilities
and Measures form can be created, with performance factor categories.

INTEGRATING THE STAFFING MODEL

115. Staffing should be viewed as a process and not creation of ubiquitous standards. The
overriding purpose is to help ratee’s and raters to improve and, thus improve organizational
effectiveness. Appraisal therefore addresses institutional needs as well as ratee needs, abilities,
motivation, and expectancies. Staffing is obviously closely associated with organization structure
and climate, as well as ratee-systems like career development, succession planning, self-help and
coaching, training, compensation and other functions. These provide the convergent influences that
lead to the retention of ratees by their employer-organization.

45

116. The key to successful staffing is to ensure that these two elements (the personal and the
corporate) are orchestrated to be as convergent as possible, thus creating an optimal use of
organizational resources. The integrated staffing model suggests two integrated functions toward
this purpose: the evaluation of ratee and rater relative to job requirements and the development of
ratee and rater for improved performance. Thus, appraisal and ratee and rater development are
closely related and should operate in concert with one another. The integrated staffing model also
suggests that staffing practices occur within a larger context of institutional culture. Thus,
judgments about appraisal, as well as the design and implementation of appraisal systems, should be
considered contextually. Effective appraisal systems should address clarity, openness, fairness;
recognize productivity through rewards and be cognizant of appraiser leadership qualities.

117. ‘The Dynamics of Successful Staffing’ suggests a sequential flow which includes the
following.
a) The organization structure and design is the product of an evolution that can be
charted; over the same time frame the organization can chart changes in organizational
climate; and the individuals who go to make up the human resources of the organization
have each their life and career histories that bring them to where they are now.

b) Successful staffing can only take place as part of the dynamic interaction of several
organizational systems. It must be planned and systematically orchestrated over time. The
payoff of successful staffing is keeping the right people for the right reasons, and losing the
ones we lose for the right reason too: how many organizations seem to land up with the
wrong people for the wrong reasons? And getting it right adds greatly to an organization's
effectiveness (optimizing what it can achieve with the resources it has) and will considerably
reduce overhead costs over time.

APPRAISAL SYSTEM ATTRIBUTES:

46

118. The appraisal system must possess the attributes of clarity, openness, and fairness. These
attributes are related to the historic values of the profession. While specific implementation of these
attributes may vary, the following should be represented in effective appraisal:

a) Ongoing Review: Effective appraisal systems conduct ongoing evaluations of both
the position and the ratee occupying it. With ongoing position analysis and appraisal, there
are few surprises, and changes in the environment are quickly incorporated into the official
appraisal system.

b) Job Descriptions: Job descriptions should be reliable, valid, understandable and
specific enough to provide direction for ratee / rater behaviour. Job descriptions should focus
on what the ratee does and what outcomes are expected. These outcomes should be clearly
linked to organizational / institutional objectives and needs. Job descriptions should use
action words such ‘plans’ or ‘supervises’ rather than ‘demonstrates initiative’ or ‘is likable.’
Job descriptions need to provide guidelines for ratee and rater so they know the specific
behaviours expected to perform. The responsibilities of the ratee should be listed in order of
importance and weighted relative to importance, if possible.

c) Participatory and Interactive: Appraisal system processes should be designed in
concert with all participants and open to constant interaction with them. Plans made jointly
by ratee and rater must have a better chance of working than plans made independently by
either party.

d) Workable Formats (Avoid Systemic Bias): Effective appraisal systems must
include workable formats that avoid systematic biases. Checklists of performance criteria
completed at the same time every year should be avoided. This type of approach simply fails
to produce any useful information for individual or organizational improvement. Other
biases include giving preferential treatment to some but not all ratee’s, rating all ratee and
rater the same, being overly lenient or overly harsh toward some or all staff, and practicing
conscious or unconscious racial or gender prejudice. Adopting a format that includes the
standards of clarity, openness, and fairness and that involves more than one appraiser may
help to control some of these biases.

47

119. Armstrong(1991) observes that design configurations be based on an integrated and
continuous approach, a shared vision, a set of inter-related activities, to include; strategies and
objectives, performance agreement and plans, continuous management, formal performance
reviews, development / training, rating and performance-related rewards.

120. Pattanayak (2004) advocates for developing an overall approach to include, what are the
objectives, what benefits would accrue, what are the main features, where and how should appraisal
be introduced, decide who is to be covered, decide whether the same approach is to be adopted at
each level, set up appraisal scheme of appraisal team, define role of human resource organization,
decide whether to use external consultants, define performance management process and
documentation, fine tuning the system based on pilot test and plan the implementation programme.

CHAPTER NO 5 : METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURE OF WORK

48

METHODOLOGY IN INDIAN ARMY APPRAISAL SYSTEM :

121. The appraisal system in any organisation has a bearing on its ethos and motivation. The

prime objective of any reporting system is to serve the interest of service by ensuring that the

personnel branch of that organisation knows their Officers and makes optimum use of their

capabilities. This implies that Officer’s showing potential and promise are spotted and assigned

commensurate appointments. This is done so that the organisation optimizes from its members.

This is in the form of a `flow chart’, which reflects job satisfaction and ensures that Officer’s are

appraised without equivocation.

122. The system of reporting in the Army evolved over a long period of time. If one goes into its

evolution, it will be seen that it has alternated / oscillated between the open and closed systems.

Figurative assessments and box grading was started in 1969.It became a closed system in 1975,

reverted to an open system in 1979, closed system in 1985 and open system again in 1990.The aim

of the appraisal in the Indian Army is to have an objective assessment of an Officer’s professional

and personal qualities, his competence and employment potential desiring the period cored by the

report.

123. The reporting system has a very important bearing on the efficiency of the Indian Army as

an organisation and on the well being of the Officer’s cadre in particular. The reporting system

currently in vogue in the Indian Army is claimed to be modern in outlook, scientific in concept and

gives a very high assurance level on objective in reporting and fairness in management decisions.

124. It is well known that level of any personality trait is influenced as much by the personality

traits of the reporting Officer’s himself, as by the personality of the Officer’s reported upon.

49

Human judgment is often subject to influence of bias, prejudice and other subjective and extraneous

factors. To device a reporting system that can be free from these influences is an impossible task.

An awareness of these short comings help the reporting Officer’s in achieving the minimum desired

level of objective, fairness and uniformity of reporting standards.

125. The importance of appraisal systems is universally appreciated in Indian Army. It is

supposedly a barometer of an Officer’s individually as well as professional competence. Appraisal

systems form basis for career management of Officer’s cadre. Appraisals are designed with a view

to providing an input for a basis to take decisions with regard to Officer’s suitability for promotion ,

certain type of appointments, a means of telling an Officer’s how he is doing and suggesting

changes in behaviour , altitudes and skills.

126. The Reporting System : Indian Army follows the ‘Grand Father’ System of reporting. The

system places complete trust in the reporting Officer’s. To reduce subjectivity, Reporting Officer’s

and Senior Reporting Officer’s play the role of moderator and balancer. The revised formats have

been designed with a view to assist reporting Officer’s while initiating/endorsing the reports without

committing technical/assessment errors.

127. The Military Secretary (MS) Branch is the repository of all appraisals. This is the MS

Automation, Edit and Appraisal Group. This is essentially the data bank of the MS Branch. This

group maintains record of appraisal in a folder called the appraisal, one for each Officer, and

handles all matters related to the appraisal. There are three sub groups:-

(a) MS Automation and Edit Sub Group carries out computerizations of MS functions

and makes computer outputs against specific requirements of other sections.

50

(b) Appraisal Library and Policy Sub Group is responsible for internal assessments and

maintenance of appraisals of Officer’s of the rank of Colonels and below.

c) Appraisal Library and Channels Sub Group, in addition to the responsibility of

maintenance appraisal and carrying out internal assessment of Officer’s, this sub-group is

responsible to lay down channels of reporting for all serving Army Officer’s. There are

variations in the quality and extent of appraisal depending on the rank of the ratee. A

detailed look at the format of appraisal adopted in the Indian Army, i.e., IAFI-1123-BI . It

consists of four parts:

i) Part I is Validation and Authentication data while Part II is Basic Assessment,

which is endorsed by the IO/RO/SRO chain. A total of ten personal qualities (PQs)

are assessed separately by the Initiating Officer (IO) the reviewing Officer (RO). In

order to simplify the appraisal, four PQs were reduced in the latest revision. While

Adaptability and Stamina were removed altogether, Decisiveness was merged with

Drive and Determination, and Verbal Expression and Written Expression were

merged into Communications Skills. These are a total of seven Demonstrated

Performance Variables (DPV). These are rated separately by the IO and the RO. The

box grading and the pen picture are assessed by the IO, RO and SRO. The pen

picture is meant to give a soul to the skeleton of figurative assessment. Elaboration

of PQs and DPVs, comments on qualities , strong and weak points and achievements

of the ratee are included here. The MS Branch observed that the pen picture is

generally neglected, being appraisal and non-committal.

51

ii) The basic purpose of the ‘Guidance for Improvement’ is to ensure that the

weaknesses (if any) reflected in the pen-picture are brought to the notice of the ratee

during the reporting period itself and that he is not exposed to these only at the time

of initiation of appraisal.

iii) The RO/Senior reviewing Officer (SRO) is required to endorse reporting as

Liberal/Justified/Strict. It needs to be elaborated here that this by itself is not

sufficient to explain wide variations in figurative assessment, which has to be

separately justified in the pen picture. The ‘Recommendation for Expunction’ has

been designed to ensure that the senior reporting Officer’s in the chain of command

render positive comments in case they feels that the assessment of subordinate

reporting Officer’s is NOT objective.

iv) Part III of the appraisal pertains to Technical and Special to Corps

Assessment, and follows along similar lines as for Basic Assessment, except that the

qualities looked at are different. A total of eight qualities are assessed here.

v) Part IV, the Potential for promotion, is the only closed portion of the report at

the initiation stage. It has been introduced only in the latest revision, and consists of

assessment of five qualities as listed. Assessment of these is expected to be de-linked

from current performance as reflected in the Basic Assessment. The format for

recommendations for promotion/employment/courses has also been considerably

simplified recently.

52

d) For initiation of an appraisal there are some mandatory provisions to be met: 90 days

physical service, following the channel of reporting and ratee should be posted to the

appointment for which the appraisal is initiated. The appraisal is normally initiated by the

ratee’s immediate superior at least one rank senior, although under special circumstances

this principle can be deviated from. Similarly, an officiating incumbent can initiate, though

only under very special circumstances and with requisites permission.

e) On the same appraisal format, five different types of appraisal can be initiated under

different circumstances. The Annual Confidential Report, or the appraisal (Early and

Delayed appraisal’s are variations of the appraisal), the Interim, the Special, the Adverse and

the Review appraisals. There is also the Non-Initiation Report.

f) Early and Delayed appraisals are applicable only around the due date, when either

the ratee or the IO or the formation moves out. Early appraisal can be initiated up to 90 days

earlier, while delayed appraisal up to 60 days late. A number of conditions have to be met

for their initiation. Special appraisals are normally asked for at the time of promotion boards,

while the provision for adverse appraisals exists to record cases where the ratee’s service is

considered unsatisfactory. Initiation of a review appraisal is very rare, and is designed to

further assess an Officer’s competences or traits under special circumstances.

128. The rationale for the interim appraisal is somewhat different. It is this appraisal which

ensures that no portion of the reporting period of the ratee greater than 90 days goes by without

being assessed whenever a rater is available. An NIR is initiated to ensure that the reporting period

is covered wherever gaps in appraisal exist.

53

SYSTEM OF APPRAISAL

129. To highlight the essence of objective we dwell upon the subject as, Yardstick, Overall

average performance, Merits and demerits of the system and Ethics of appraisal. About the division

of appraisal from, it may be observed that except the pen picture, all other parts viz, PQ, DPV and

QAP have been codified and are objective in nature. The subjective part of pen picture has also been

reduced as the same has been semi formatted.

YARDSTICKS

130. An appraisal system can command the confidence of the Officer’s cadre only if it possesses

the minimum desired level of objectivity. The system places the reporting Officer’s in the role of

both a judge and a psychologist. Therefore, three is a need to reduce subjectively. To do so

objective yardsticks have been laid from 1 to 9, varying the assessment from below average to

outstanding. The gradations so made by the IO, RO and SRO has inbuilt checks and balances at

both staff level of reporting Officer’s before it reaches the MS Branch where final checks are

carried .Here checks generally involve, inflation/deflation, bias and technical errors.

OVERALL AVERAGE PROFILE (OAP)

131. Once the appraisals are received in MS Branch, detailed checks carried out, overall average

of performance is prepared. The OAP is calculated by first taking the average of Reporting

Officer’s in the three parts of appraisal, viz. personal qualities say X-1, demonstrated performance

say x-2 and qualities to assess potential say x-3. These averages are added to the overall box

grading of IO, RO and SRO, say X-4, X-5 and X-6 and then an average of X-1 to X-6 TS obtained

which is the OAP in respect of the Officer’s. The OP so calculated is used as a basic data for all

54

types of posting and placements of an Officer’s by condensing the overall objective into inter-se

merit of Officer’s of a batch.

MERITS AND DEMERITS

132. Appraisal systems in Indian Army have its own merits and demerits and for better or worse,

the Indian Army has chosen the semi open system has retained the closed system. The appraisal

system in the Army has undergone an evolutionary process over a member of decades and

reformed. The merits of the system are, basic fundamentals have been established. System

incorporates inbuilt checks and balances; by and large the system has withstood the test of time for

various organizational and managerial functions. Fully automated for requisite management

functions and it has designed acceptability and appraisal credibility with most the Officer’s cadre

strength, to list a few.

133. The system suffers from certain demerits like ,there is a lack of common denominator for the

various reporting Officer’s to appraise, designed interaction between ratee and rater is lacking at

times, there is a lack of accountability for inaccurate and delayed reporting by Initiating Officer’s,

Reviewing Officer’s and Senior Reviewing Officer’s, the environment does not have the requisite

awareness of the appraisal system, there is a lack of independent report, the potential of a ratee to

hold higher rank is often not judged and it has inflationary trends.

134. The written appraisal is an opportunity for the rater and ratee to review whether

previously discussed performance expectations and objectives have been met, to discuss

professional development opportunities, and to identify options for acquisition of additional

skills and knowledge to foster career growth. The performance assessment shall be written and

shall include: information on the ratee's job duties and key areas of responsibility, comments and

55

ratings on specific areas of responsibility and overall performance in relation to previously

established outcomes and objectives, feedback on any areas of concern outlining where performance

improvement is needed, assessment of the ratee's good faith efforts in situations where an ratee has

responsibility for meeting established objectives in equal employment opportunity and affirmative

action, future plans and objectives and finally, signatures of the ratee and the rater.

135. Raters should be encouraged to address pertinent issues in written appraisal. This can

comprise of: identify opportunities for professional development and options for acquiring

additional knowledge and skills to support career growth, outline future steps necessary to meet

professional development and job-related goals, the ratee shall be given a copy of the final

assessment, and be allowed time to reflect on the document and respond orally or in writing. The

ratee should be asked to sign the assessment, being advised that a signature acknowledges

discussion of the contents of the form, not necessarily agreement with it. A copy of the final

assessment document shall be placed in the personnel file.

CHAPTER NO 6 : FINDINGS AND INFERENCES

56

136. Organisations seem to be rearranging itself once again into what is commonly referred to as: the

post-capitalist organisation -- one in which the means of production and human progress is being

radically transformed. As the next millennium fast approaches, this rearranging of organisation is creating

a "performance appraisal wave". The idea of performance appraisal as opposed to information or hard

assets will be examined as the prime driver of organizational performance in the ensuing future. The

theme of this chapter will be to provide a structure that can be superimposed on top of any organization

by which leadership and management will be able to plan, develop and maintain performance results in a

performance appraisal driven organisation. If we look at any form of organization in either the pre- or

post-capitalist societies that have any degree of coherence and stability, we will find they are

hierarchically structured. The universal characteristic of hierarchies is the paradox of the terms "part" and

"whole". But, wholes and parts in an absolute sense just plainly do not exist, neither in living organisms

nor in social organizations. What actually exist are sub-wholes which simultaneously display

characteristics of both wholes and parts. Managing performance in the performance appraisal driven

organization will require the understanding of "holarchy”. A holonic performance feedback system,

combined with the cybernetic principles surrounding the viable system model will be an archetype, which

takes on a very basic and simplistic balancing loop structure.

137. The question is does research in performance appraisal influence the practice of performance

appraisal? Thousands of studies of performance appraisal exist in both the academic and practitioner

literatures. The intended purpose of many of these works is to somehow rink performance appraisal to

performance appraisal performance; i.e., to utilize the process as a performance-enhancing instrument.

Ratee perceptions of are performance appraisal vital to the acceptance of validity, and must be examined

prior to any further extension of the process; yet few studies have shown credence to this premise. This

57

study examines ratee perceptions and their implicit consequences, following such aspects of as perceived

accuracy, feedback, participation, rarer training, rewards, and others. The utilization of many proven

performance appraisal components is dismal; it is discuss rater training and diary-keeping as two

plausible factors for improving performance appraisal accuracy, fairness, and the perceptions of same.

Further, it is suggested that practitioners must fully sponsor the results of the vast performance appraisal

research efforts to improve the process as a prerequisite to improving performance.

138. The paths of performance appraisal are it isll-traveled in the behavioral literature. Over the past

fifty years literally hundreds of academicians have published thousands of works in search of the perfect

appraisal. Yet practitioners still experience a great deal of dissatisfaction with the process. Ratees distrust

many, if not all, aspects, aspirations, and purposes of performance appraisal.

139. Effectiveness of the Indian Army depends upon a host of factors; organizational structure, clear-

cut policies, appropriate guidance of the Government and the authorities at the highest echelons,

availability and serviceability of precision weapons and equipment, well trained manpower with the

highest degree of motivation and last, but not the least, a competent corps of Officers.

140. Officers do play a key role in enhancing the quality of the armed forces. Qualities required by the

Officers to function effectively (efficiently) in such a scenario will be needed to be identified, developed

and honed. This is where real-time based performance appraisal system, as a tool of human resource

development/human resource management, plays a crucial role towards the growth and optimum

utilization of the Officers towards attainment of individual and organizational

growth/progress/development. The appraisal system in vogue in the Indian army, at present, was

reviewed comprehensively under arrangements of the Defence Institute of Psychological Research, New

Delhi (India) in the year 1983.

58

APPRAISAL IN INDIAN ARMY: LACUNAE AND DISCUSSION

141. The current objectives of the annual confidential report system, as spelt out in the relevant

rules/guidelines applicable to different organizations studied by the study, vary considerably in wording

but not too much in essence. For example, the objectives of performance appraisal in respect of the

Indian Army have been spelt out as follows:

a) “To provide basic and vital input for assessing the performance of an officer and for

his/her advancement in his/her career”

b) “To be used as a tool for human resource development so that an officer realizes his/her

time potential”

c) “To have an objective assessment of an officer’s competence, employability and potential,

primarily for organizational requirements”.

c) “To assess the performance of the subordinate and provide guidance and counseling to him

to improve his performance”

d) “To assess potential and to prepare an employee through appropriate feedback and

guidance for higher responsibilities”

e) “To be a tool for human resource development”

f) “To evaluate the standard of accomplishment of work, including character, ability and

suitability connected to their work”

g) “To decide on promotion, transfer, change, special raise in salary”

h) “To help give recognition to good performers and to counsel under performers”

142. Given the rapidly evolving challenges of performance appraisal, it is felt that the present

objectives of performance appraisal, especially for the Indian Army, need to be widened and deepened to

59

respond to the emerging needs of governance. In this context, performance appraisal cannot serve only to

assess suitability for vertical movement, but should be primarily used for the overall development of an

officer, and for his placement in an area where the most advantage can be taken of his abilities and

potential. This study is of the view that performance appraisal should be constructive and advisory in

nature, to be used as a tool for the development and career planning of the officer, as opposed to a simple

judgmental exercise, which is largely the case at present. There is, thus, a need for a paradigm shift in the

philosophy of appraisal.

143. After detailed analysis this study of the view that the objectives of performance appraisal of

Indian army should be the following:

a) To make an assessment of the officer’s professional capabilities, with a view to
determining capacity building needs and suitability for particular areas of
responsibility/assignments. (Training and Placement Function)
b) To counsel the officer on directions for improving performance, professional
capabilities, and conduct with peers, juniors, elected representatives, and the general public
(Feedback and Counseling function)
c) To be a tool for developing a work plan for the year (Planning of work function)
d) To make an objective assessment of the officer’s performance in the current
assignment, including performance in training, study courses and deputation outside the
government, based on monitorable inputs, relative to his/her peers, with a view to
determining suitability for higher responsibilities and special assignments. (Promotion
Function)
f) To identify genuinely exceptional work accomplished, including innovations, with a
view to giving due recognition (Recognition function)
g) To enable officers to identify systemic shortcomings in the organization with a view
to improving governance standards (Strengthening Governance Function).

60

144. The ways in which the performance appraisal system can perform each of the above functions,

except the promotion and placement functions, have been highlighted along with the ways in which it

may be used for the promotion and placement functions .

145. The following matrix maps the problems encountered in the present system of annual confidential

reports with the proposed objectives:

146. Mapping Weaknesses of the ANNUAL CONFIDENTIAL REPORT System to Objectives of

the PAR System

Objective Perceived Weaknesses related to realization of the objective
Planning work and • The present system of appraisal is not based on monitor able inputs

setting work expectations (relationship to accomplishment of an agreed work plan).
Feedback and • The present system of appraisal is not based on monitor able inputs

Counselling (relationship to accomplishment of an agreed work plan).

• Adverse remarks are rarely given due to the hassles of having to

defend such remarks subsequently. Even advisory remarks are not

recorded for fear that they would be construed as adverse remarks

and will need to be subsequently defended.

• There is considerable delay in the writing of annual confidential

reports, even though there are instructions regarding cut off dates for

this purpose. In many cases, annual confidential reports of

several years are written together. As a result, objectivity of the

61

assessment is suspect and promotions often get delayed. Besides,

the remarks of reviewing and accepting authorities are often

not available on account of their having demitted office. This is largely

due to a weak monitoring mechanism.

• There is insufficient variance in the structure of annual confidential

reports differing types of jobs, (for example, field versus secretariat

assignments, program implementation vs. policy formulation assignments,

etc.)
Training and Placement
Annual confidential reports of officers who are on deputation outside the

government system are generally not available for the period of such

deputation. Besides, performance in training/study courses is not taken into

account.In the Indian Army the annual confidential report is rarely used,

as an officer is better known through his general reputation. There is

insufficient variance in the structure of annual confidential reports annual

confidential reportoss differing types of jobs, (for example,

field vs. secretariat assignments, program implementation vs.

policy formulation assignments, etc.).There is considerable delay

in the writing of ANNUAL CONFIDENTIAL REPORTs, even though

there are instructions regarding cut-off dates for this purpose. In many cases,

annual confidential reports of several years are written together. As a result,

objectivity of the assessment is suspect and promotions often get delayed.

62

Besides, the remarks of reviewing and accepting authorities are often not

available on account of their having demitted office. This is largely due

to a weak monitoring mechanism. There is no provision for feedback from

juniors and peers on leadership, teamwork skills, behavioural and reputation

aspects.
Promotion • The present system of appraisal is not based on monitorable inputs

(relationship to accomplishment of an agreed work plan). And without

moderation for differing standards of assessment of different assessors

(personal likes and dislikes intervene). Adverse remarks are rarely given

due to the hassles of having to defend such remarks subsequently. In many

cases the rating of officers is below the benchmark for promotion but since

it was not adverse it was not communicated to the officer. Such cases

have been challenged in the courts of law, who have held that such recording,

in effect, worked adversely to an officer and should have been conveyed

like an adverse entry. There is no clear linkage between evaluation for

individual parameters and overall grading (implicit weights for different

attributes are subjective and variable). There is insufficient variance in the

structure of ANNUAL CONFIDENTIAL REPORTs annual confidential

reportoss differing types of jobs, (for example, field versus secretariat

assignments, program implementation versus policy formulation assignments,

etc.).In the Indian Army the ANNUAL CONFIDENTIAL REPORT is rarely

63

used, as an officer is better known through his general reputation.There is no

system for a trend (individual level) or manual confidential report

(cadre level) analysis. There is an acute problem of a very large proportion

of the officers being graded as very good or outstanding. This makes it very

difficult to identify the really outstanding officers.ANNUAL

CONFIDENTIAL REPORTs of officers who are on deputation

outside the governmental system are generally not available for the

period of such deputation. Besides, performance in training/study courses is not

taken into account.There is considerable delay in the writing of

ANNUAL CONFIDENTIAL REPORTs, even though there are instructions

regarding cut off dates for this purpose. In many cases, ANNUAL

CONFIDENTIAL REPORTs of several years are written together. As a

result, objectivity of the assessment is suspect and promotions often get

delayed. Besides, the remarks of reviewing and accepting authorities are

often not available on account of their having demitted office. This is largely

due to a weak monitoring mechanism.
Recognition • There is an acute problem of a very large proportion of the officers being

gradefd as very good or outstanding. This makes it very difficult to

identify the really outstanding officers.There is no focus on exceptional

work accomplished or manifestly revealed incompetence (e.g. in crisis

situations). There is also no provision for recognition of innovation and

64

creativity.
Strengthening Governance• Although there are enabling powers for screening non-performers at the age

of 50 (or after 20 years of service), the lack of clear norms for such

screening seems to constrain this activity. Core professional competency

is not evaluated adequately. There is no system for a trend (individual

level) or manual confidential report (cadre level) analysis. There is no

provision for feedback from juniors and peers on leadership, teamwork

skills, behavioural and reputation aspects. There is no focus on exceptional

work accomplished or manifestly revealed incompetence (e.g. in crisis

situations). There is also no provision for recognition of innovation and

creativity.

65

CHAPTER NO 7 : RECOMMENDATIONS

147. The thesis has identified a set of actions which are necessary to build consensus more

effectively within the realm of Defence modelling and simulation community on the need for and

direction of human performance representation within military simulations. The focus is on near-term

actions the model can undertake to influence and shape modelling priorities within the services. These

actions are in four areas: collaboration, conferences, inter-service communication, and

education/training.

148. Collaboration : The study believes it is important in the near term to encourage collaboration

among modellers, content experts, and behavioural and social scientists, with emphasis on

unit/organizational modeling, learning, and decision making. It is recommended that specific

workshops be organized.

149. Conferences : The study recommends an increase in the number of conferences focused on

the need for and issues associated with human behaviour representation in military models and

66

simulations. The study believes the previous biennial conferences on computer-generated forces and

behavioural representation have been valuable, but could be made more useful through changes in

organization and structure.

150. Expanded Interservice Communication : There is a need to actively promote

communication across the services, model developers, and the researchers. The model can lead the

way in this regard by developing a clearinghouse for human behaviour representation, perhaps with a

base ,with a focus on information exchange. This clearing house might include references and

pointers to the following:

a) Definitions

b) Military task descriptions

c) Data on military system performance

d) Live exercise data for use in validation studies

e) Specific models

f) Resource and platform descriptions

g) Model contractors and current projects

h) Contractor thesis

i) Military technical thesis

151. Education and Training : The study believes opportunities for education and training in the

professional competencies required for human behaviour representation at a national level are lacking.

The modelling of cognition and action by individuals and groups is quite possibly the most difficult

task humans have yet undertaken. Developments in this area are still in their infancy. Yet important

67

progress has been and will continue to be made. Human behaviour representation is critical for the

military services as they expand their reliance on the outputs from models and simulations for their

activities in management, decision making, and training. In this thesis, the study has outlined as to

how modelling can proceed in the short, medium, and long terms so that the model and the military

services can reap the greatest benefit from their allocation of resources in this critical area.

152. Research: Research must look at performance appraisal measurement theory and practice in

the Indian Army. Issues should include:

a) The design, implementation and use of performance appraisal systems,

b) Performance appraisal measurement context, process and content,

c) Performance appraisal measurement frameworks,

d) The development of performance appraisal measurement systems ,

e) Updating and refreshing performance appraisal measurement systems ,

f) Measurement system review practices and audit techniques ,

g) The impact of performance appraisal measurement on intermediate factors and on

overall organizational performance appraisal ,

h) Theoretical developments in performance appraisal measurement ,

i) Critical appraisal of measurement frameworks ,

j) Dysfunctional aspects of performance appraisal measurement ,

68

k) The use of performance appraisal measurement in the organization ,

l) The link between performance appraisal measurement and strategy ,

m) The link between performance appraisal measurement and the planning and

budgeting processes ,

n) The link between performance appraisal measurement and compensation ,

o) The measurement of intangible assets, forward looking measures and predicting

performance appraisal

CHAPTER NO 8 : CONCLUSIONS

153. Sooner or later the question arises whether ratee should be rated on the basis of their job

performance. Usually, supervisors and administrative officials are continually rating their

subordinates. No supervisor, for example, directs the work of subordinates without frequently

making judgments as to their cooperation, the quality and quantity of their work, their dependability,

and so forth. Such judgments are information ratings. When the question is viewed in this light, the

problem is not whether to rate ratee, but how shall ratee be rated, and how should ratings/evaluations

be used?

154. In recent years there has been a shift away from the traditional employee rating system --

which places emphasis on the use of such ratings for administrative actions -- to service ratings,

which serve as a basis for counseling ratee regarding the improvement of their performance on the

job. For example, many personnel authorities believe that disciplinary matters should be treated in

terms of the specific causes rather than in terms of a general service rating program. The “new look”

69

in employee ratings emphasizes the use of performance evaluation as an opportunity for the

supervisor to give the employee a better understanding of the job and what is expected of the

employee. The “new look” likewise provides an opportunity for the employee to give input into the

scope and sequence of the tasks performed. While this new type of performance review is simple in

concept, it is still necessary to use a prescribed procedure not only to formalize the periodic review

but also to provide a record of the employee’s performance review.

155. The prime purposes of the study were to compare the findings of earlier studies, and to

ascertain whether performance appraisal processes have evolved to provide a more effective strategic

tool in the human resource appraisal repertoire. The findings suggest, as in earlier studies, that the use

of performance appraisal systems remains problematic, although for the first time there are some

positive indications of a more strategic approach to performance appraisal as espoused by HRM

theorists. The study was undertaken in order to: update data on the goals, purposes, types, measures,

and communication techniques of contemporary performance appraisal systems, compare these

findings with those obtained in earlier Australian studies, and ascertain whether these systems reflect

a more strategic HRM perspective.

156. The evaluation of individual work performance has long posed a perplexing dilemma to

researchers and practitioners alike. There is little debate that more often than not, the most complete,

readily available, and efficient measure of an individual's performance involves ratings of that

performance by another individual. The thrust of the dilemma, then, is how to reduce the subjectivity

inherent in performance ratings. Due in large part to a strong psychometric emphasis, the

development of "better" rating scale formats has received a great deal of attention as an approach to

resolving this dilemma.

70

157. A multi-dimensional approach of the concept of professional expertise is useful for at least

three reasons. Firstly, it permits the measurement and comparison of performance levels attained in

different job domains. Secondly, a multi-dimensional operationalisation is useful in identifying those

components most in need of being updated: throughout his or her career, an employee may remain

competent in some dimensions but less competent in others. Thirdly, a multi-dimensional approach is

useful in examining how specific factors in the individual or in the working environment support or

limit performance in particular expertise elements. Until now little research has been done aimed at

examining the intended relationships between specific influential factors and particular dimensions of

professional expertise.

158. Ratee need to be evaluated by their seniors, peers, and subordinates. While the leader's seniors

determine if goals and objectives were met, only the leader's subordinates can determine if their

senior is a leader. Determining if a person has skills is based upon the willingness of ratees to follow

that ratee. Before anyone is allowed to rate someone, they must first understand what performance

based appraisals are, and the common rater errors to avoid when doing appraisals. The potential of the

ratee is the key ingredient in a performance appraisal. Goal setting should be done by the persons

being rated (not the rater) as they need to feel a sense of ownership. Keep the goals focused on

improving needed competencies. Development goals, such as for advancing in the organization,

should be performed in other setting, and preferably with a career counselor. Performance appraisals

and career or developmental planning are two separate subjects...do not tie them together.

159. Performance is a dynamic process. Just as ratees should be given feedback throughout the

rating period, and not just on an annual or semi-annual basis, goals should also be discussed and

reevaluated frequently. Evaluating a leader's team accomplishments is more important than evaluating

71

individual accomplishments. Some of the best ratee are almost invisible because of the work they

have performed in guiding their team on to excellence. There is a tendency to judge more favorably

those we perceive as similar to ourselves (Just-Like-Me Effect). The more closely a person resembles

our attitudes or background, the stronger our tendency to judge that individual favorably. Yet,

diversity offers the most benefits. There is also a tendency to evaluate a person relative to other

individuals rather than on the behavioral standards (Contrast Effect). A common belief is people of

the same rank should be compared to one another. Each appraisal should be a reflection on how well a

person met each criterion. Again, the key word is diversity. Performance should be based on the entire

evaluation period, rather than on the most recent performance. It helps to keep a daily log to jog your

memory. There is sometimes a tendency to rate a person as good or bad on all characteristics, based

upon the inappropriate emphasis on a single characteristic (the Halo or Horns effect).Do not rate a

person on or close to the midpoint of a scale when performance clearly warrants higher or lower

marks. Rating in the middle of the scale is often used to avoid uncomfortable discussions for poor

performance. While the failure to give high ratings is often the inability to compliment people for

great performance or not wanting to give someone a higher rating than they, themselves, has received.

Balance the ability to get things done (tasks) with keeping the team together (people). Seniors often

give higher marks for task accomplishments while subordinates tend to give higher marks for good

people skills. Tasks are important for the day-to-day survival of the organization, while developing

people and teams are important for the long-range performance of the organization. Great ratees are

both task and people orientated, while poor ratees become fixated on one or the other. Remember the

term SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Timely) when performing appraisals

and creating goals.

72

160. Base ratings on explicit performance and targeted to the area you are measuring. For example,

if you measure a leader's ability to perform customer service, a good metric would be direct feedback

from customers on how they feel about the ratee. A poorer metric would be the number of returned

products. When creating goals, ensure both you and the rater understand what the goal is. When the

performance or goal is charted over the rated time period, which direction is good and which direction

is bad must clearly be distinguishable so that action can be taken to reverse, maintain, or grow the

rating. If prior goals were failed, were they achievable? Great companies treat failure as a learning

opportunity. In the early 80's, when the manager of the failed IBM PC Jr. project was called onto the

carpet, the first thing he asked was if he should clean out his desk. His senior replied that they had just

spent several million dollars training him and that they wanted him learn from this experience. When

setting performance goals, they must be easy to understand and can be accomplished by the majority

of individuals if given the proper resources. Do not measure things that are not important. A common

downfall is to try measure everything, this in turn produces many meaningless results and becomes

very time consuming. The individual knows the time period for which he or she is accountable for

and when goals must be completed.

161. Despite the diversity of these views, effectively implemented performance appraisal programs

can benefit both organisations and their employees. Arguably, the systems have the potential to

provide individual feedback and collated organisational data, which can be used for the purposes of

HRM planning and program evaluation purposes. Moreover, collated data can assist managerial

planning, human resource development programs, and remuneration schemes. Individual performance

appraisal outputs include opportunities for remedial skills development, retention, career

development, training, and up- skilling programs.

73

162. The increasing complexity and intensity of business competition has elevated the importance

of HRM objectives, policies, and strategies. Rapid and discontinuous change within organisations,

flatter organisational structures, broader spans of control, and self-managing work groups, combined

with network structures and looser business relationships have emphasised the importance of

performance appraisal as a crucial link between HRM functions and organisational competitiveness.

In particular, there appears to be evidence of a move towards a more strategic approach to

performance appraisal with the use of techniques such as the Balanced Scorecard. However, whilst

many researchers have argued the merits of the more contemporary approaches, others warn that more

research will be required to ensure their efficiency .

NEW MODEL: FOCUS ON SKILL DEVELOPMENT AND CREATING NEW VALUE

163. By contrast, the new model breaks the link between compensation and performance by

severing the association between the two. In other words, ratees must make clear performance

reviews are not the same as salary reviews. An effective way to do this is to have management give

performance reviews at a different time of the year from when compensation is considered. In this

way, the performance review takes on a new function: Its purpose is to have supervisor and ratee

come face-to-face as a team for a productive and honest discussion of what is required of both parties

to ensure the competitive edge of both the organization and its ratees.

164. Now instead of being seen as a passive or subservient player in the review process, the new

structure enables ratees to take the lead in developing their own performance criteria based on their

own queries such as: What can I do better? How can I increase my value to the company? What skills

do I need to develop to become more competitive, productive, strategic, and innovative? Likewise,

raters are expected to raise questions that will support the ratee's criteria of how he or she is to be

74

evaluated. For example, they might ask: What can I do to help my ratees achieve their goals? What

kind of assistance or training does my ratee need to develop new skills to improve their performance

and productivity?

165. In essence, the re-purposed performance appraisal model transforms what might have been

traditionally viewed as a punitive or adversarial relationship to one that is dynamic and forward

thinking. Seen as such, the performance appraisal becomes a means to an end — the creation of a

collaborative and highly skilled workforce whose primary goal is to help both the organization and its

individual ratees compete.

FRAMEWORK OF DEVELOPMENT OF MODELS OF HUMAN BEHAVIOUR

166. There is not a magical formula that will produce the best performance appraisal system.

Organizations with successful systems have taken a hard look at the needs of their organization.

Organizations that have effective performance management systems provide their ratees the necessary

tools to measure their success and promote open communication among the ratees. Performance

management-defined as the cyclical, year-round process in which managers and employees work

together on setting expectations, coaching and feedback, reviewing results and rewarding

performance-has a significant impact on organizational success. Organizations with effective

performance management processes outperformed other organizations in every measure of

productivity and financial achievement. The study identified areas that can lead to successful

performance management programs: Senior management involvement in design and implementation,

75

Employee involvement in the process, common performance measures and an emphasis on coaching

and feedback.

167. Variability in employee performance over time, as evidenced by dynamic criteria, has been a

source of concern. Early research suggested the existence of dynamic criteria which sparked a debate

about the theoretical and practical significance of such a phenomenon. Recent evidence indicates that

the relative (rank-ordered) performance of individuals changes systematically over time. The above-

mentioned research, together with evidence of changes in ability-performance relationships over time

suggests the need for further research on dynamic criteria and intra-individual performance changes

over time This type of research should increase our understanding of what causes dynamic criteria

(systematic versus random within-person performance change) and what causes inter-individual

differences in performance changes (e.g., individual difference variables). The purposes of this

research will be to: (a) examine possible determinants of dynamic criteria; (b) describe an analytic

technique that is appropriate for investigating determinants of dynamic criteria; and (c) present

evidence pertaining to determinants of dynamic criteria.

168. Human Resource Practice has identified six top-rated approaches to performance management

that are currently being used by successful organizations. Change from complex to simple (Several

organizations have stopped the practice of listing and cataloguing all duties, tasks, competencies and

skills that are necessary to perform a job. Instead they have opted for a few key skills and

commitments.), Obtaining more data without drowning in it (The multi-source feedback allows the

manager to obtain information from key stakeholders.),Providing practical models for effective

coaching(Performance management processes encourage on-going coaching; however, few

organizations provide training or recognize that the coach can be someone other than the employee's

76

supervisor.),Cutting the length of the review periods (How realistic is it for someone to set targets one

year in advance. Sometimes it is necessary to review the targets as you progress through the year. An

alternative to the "annual ceremony" is dividing the year into two or more consecutive performance

periods.), Separating performance discussions from pay increases (Some organizations inform the

employee about their pay increase two days before the meeting. Other organizations have established

teams to review performance ratings and determine the increases.), Measuring progress and making

changes (Employees and managers receive ongoing guidance regarding the performance management

process. The performance process needs to align with the organization’s goals and directions;

otherwise, the project becomes the "performance process du jour").

169. The study has formulated a general framework that can guide the development of models of

human behaviour for use in military simulations. This framework reflects the study's recognition that

given the current state of model development and computer technology, it is not possible to create a

single integrative model or architecture that can meet all the potential simulation needs of the

services. The framework incorporates the elements of a plan for the performance appraisal modelling

to apply in pursuing the development of models of human behaviour to meet short, intermediate, and

long-term goals. For the short term, the study believes it is important to collect real-world and

organisational data in support of the development of new models and the development and application

of human model accreditation procedures. For the intermediate term, the model should extend the

scope of useful task analysis and encourage sustained model development in focused areas. And for

the long term, the model should advocate theory development and behavioural thesis that can lead to

future generations of models of human and organizational behaviour. Work on achieving this short ,

intermediate , and long-term goals should begin concurrently. It is recommend that these efforts be

77

focused on four themes, in the following order of priority: collect and disseminate human

performance data, develop accreditation procedures for models of human behaviour, support

sustained model development in focused areas, and support theory development and basic thesis in

relevant areas.

Collect and Disseminate Human Performance Data

170. The study has concluded that all levels of model development depend on the sustained

collection and dissemination of human behaviour data. Data needs extend from the kind of real-world

military data that reflect, in context, the way military forces actually behave, are coordinated, and

communicate, to organisational studies of basic human capacities. Between these extremes are data

derived from high-fidelity simulations and from organisational analogy to military tasks. These data

are needed for a variety of purposes: to support the development of measures of accreditation, to

provide benchmark performance for comparison with model outputs in validation studies, to help set

the parameters of the actual models of real-world tasks and test and evaluate the efficacy of those

models, and to challenge existing theory and lead to new conceptions that will provide the grist for

future models. In addition to the collection of appropriate data, there must be procedures to ensure

that the data are codified and made available in a form that can be utilized by all the relevant

communities(from military staffs who need to have confidence in the models to those in the academic

sphere who will develop the next generation of models).It is important to note that clear measures of

performance for military tasks are needed. Currently, these measures are poorly defined or lacking

altogether.

Create Accreditation Procedures for Models of Human Behaviour

78

171. The study has observed very little quality control among the models that are used in military

simulations today. Models should establish a formal procedure for accrediting models to be used for

human behaviour representation. One component needed to support robust accreditation procedures is

quantitative measures of human performance. In addition to supporting accreditation, such measures

would facilitate evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of alternative models so that resource allocation

judgments could be made on the basis of data rather than opinion. The study does not believe that the

people working in the field are able to make such judgments now, but the model should promote the

development of simulation performance metrics that could be applied equivalently to live exercises

and simulations. The goal would be to create state-of-health statistics that would provide quantitative

evidence of the payoff for investments in human behaviour representation.

172. There are special considerations involved in human behaviour representation that warrant

having accreditation procedures specific to this class of behavioural models. The components of

accreditation should include those described below.

Demonstration/Verification

173. Provide proof that the model actually runs and meets the design specifications. This level of

accreditation is similar to that for any other model, except that verification must be accomplished with

human models in the loop, and to the extent that such models are stochastic, will require repeated runs

with similar but not identical initial conditions to verify that the behaviour is as advertised.

Validation

79

174. Show that the model accurately represents behaviour in the real world under at least some

conditions. Validation with full generality is not possible for models of this complexity; rather, the

scope and level of the required validation should be very focused and matched closely to the intended

uses of each model. One approach to validation is to compare model outputs with data collected

during prior live simulations conducted at various military training sites. Another approach is to

compare model outputs with data derived from organisational experiments or various archival

sources. The study suggests that to bring objectivity and specialized knowledge to the validation

process, the validation team should include specialists in modelling and validation who have not

participated in the actual model development. For those areas in which the knowledge base is

insufficient and the costs of data collection are too high, it is suggested that the developers rely on

expert judgment. However, because of the subjectiveness of such views, it is believed that judgment

should be the alternative of last resort.

Analysis

175. Describe the range of predictions that can be generated by the model. This information is

necessary to define the scope of the model; it can also be used to link this model with others. Analysis

is hampered by the complexity of these models, which makes it difficult to extract the full range of

behaviour covered. Thus investment in analysis tools is needed to assist in this task.

Documentation Requirements

176. The accreditation procedures should include standards for the documentation that explains

how to run and modify the model and a plan for maintaining and upgrading the model. Models will be

used only if they are easy to run and modify to meet the changing needs of the user organization.

Evaluation of the documentation should include exercising specific scenarios to ensure that the

80

documentation facilitates the performance of the specified modelling tasks.

CHAPTER 9 : SUMMARY

177. As a high priority, the study recommends that the above accreditation procedures be applied to

military models of human behaviour that are either currently in use or being prepared for use, most of

which have not had the benefit of rigorous quantitative validation, and that the results of these

analyses be used to identify high-payoff areas for improvement. Significant improvements may

thereby be achievable relatively quickly for a small investment.

Provide Support for Sustained Model Development in Focused Areas

178. Several specific activities are associated with model development. They include the following:

a) Develop task analysis and structure. Researchers and model users must continue and

expand the development of detailed descriptions of military contexts—the tasks,

81

procedures, and structures that provide the foundation for modeling of human behavior

at the individual, unit, and command levels.

b) Establish model purposes. The modeller must establish explicitly the purpose(s) for

which a model is being developed and apply discipline to enhance model fidelity only to

support those purposes Research on appraisal purpose has generated contradictory results

such that the relationship between appraisal purpose and leniency/severity as well as

accuracy of ratings is clear. As a boundary variable, appraisal purpose has the potential to

limit the external validity of performance appraisal research as performance ratings

obtained for research purposes may be more lenient or severe than those obtained for

administrative purposes. Consequently, suggestions based on ratings obtained for research

purposes are likely to be of little value to practitioners who typically obtain them for

making several important administrative and personnel decisions. Thus, this inconsistency

has theoretical importance as well as practical relevance; and therefore, needs to be

addressed.

b) Support focused modeling efforts. Once high-priority modeling requirements have

been established, it is recommend sustained support in focused areas for human

behavior model development that is responsive to the methodological approach.

c) Employ interdisciplinary teams. It is important that model development involve

interdisciplinary teams composed of military specialists and researchers/modelers with

expertise in cognitive psychology, social psychology, sociology, organizational

behavior, computer science, and simulation technology.

82

d) Benchmark. Periodic modeling exercises should be conducted throughout model

development to benchmark the progress being made and to enable a focus on the most

important shortfalls of the prototype models. These exercises should be scheduled so

as not to interfere with further development advances.

e) Promote interoperability. In concert with model development, modeling should evolve

policy to promote interoperability among models representing human behavior.

Although needs for human behavior representation are common across the services, it

is simplistic to contemplate a single model of human behavior that could be used for

all military simulation purposes, given the extent to which human behavior depends on

both task and environment.

f) Employ substantial resources. Improving the state of human behavior representation

will require substantial resources. Even when properly focused, this work is at least as

resource demanding as environmental representation. Further, generally useful unit-

level models are unlikely to emerge simply through minor adjustments in integrative

individual architectures.

179. In the course of this study, the study examined the current state of integrated computational

models of human behaviour and human cognitive processes that might lead to improved models of the

future. However, the current state of the art offers no single representation architecture that is suited

to all individual human or organizational modelling needs. Each integrated model reviewed implied

its own architecture, and the contents of this thesis on particular cognitive content areas each suggest

specific alternative modelling methodologies. It is not likely, even in the future, that any single

architecture will address all modelling requirements. On the other hand, recognize the value of having

83

a unitary architecture. Each new architecture requires an investment in infrastructure beyond the

investment in specific models to be built using that architecture. Having an architecture that

constrains development can promote interoperability of component modelling modules. As

applications are built with a particular architecture, the infrastructure can become more robust, and

some applications can begin to stand on the shoulders of others. Development can become synergistic

and therefore more efficient. This study was conducted to ascertain whether there have been any

significant changes in the design, implementation, and effectiveness of Indian army performance

appraisal systems. The detection of such changes might reflect and reinforce contemporary strategic

HRM theory. There was some expectation that the pressures of globalisation, increased regional

competition, industry rationalisation, and a significantly more cooperative industrial relations

environment, would have encouraged raters to redesign their performance appraisal systems in order

to reflect their competitive imperatives, and to enable closer links between individual, group, and

organisational objectives and outcomes.

180. Overall, the findings of the study can best be described as mixed. The evidence confirms with

that substantial changes have been made with respect to the use, purposes, and nature of performance

appraisal systems, and hopefully, that more customised and integrated systems are proposed for the

future. There are signs that some organisations, especially those utilising the Balanced Scorecard, as

the bridge between organisational and individual employee goals, are serious attempts to implement

the strategic HRM agenda in their organisations through performance appraisal, and it appears likely

that these imperatives are likely to grow in the future.

181. At this point in the maturity of the field, it would be a mistake for the military services to

make a choice of one or architecture to the exclusion of others. Therefore, it is recommended that the

84

architectures pursued within the military focus initially on the promising approaches identified in

Chapter 3 of this thesis. This recommendation is especially important because the time scale for

architecture development and employment is quite long, and prior investment in particular

architectures can continue to produce useful payoffs for a long time after newer and possibly more

promising architectures have appeared and started to undergo development. On the other hand, this

recommendation is in no way meant to preclude exploration of alternative architectures. Indeed,

resources need to be devoted to the exploration of alternative architectures, and in the medium and

especially long terms, such thesis will be critical to continued progress.

Support Theory Development and Basic Thesis in Relevant Areas

182. There is a need for continued long-term support of theory development and basic thesis in
areas

such as decision making, situation awareness, learning, and organizational modelling. It would be
short-

sighted to focus only on the immediate payoffs of modelling; support for future generations of models

needs to be sustained as well. However, the kinds of theories needed to support human behaviour

representation for military situations are not the typical focus of these agencies. The thesis tends to

emphasize toy problems and predictive modelling in restricted experimental paradigms for which data

collection is relatively easy. To be useful for the representation of military human behaviour, the
thesis

needs to be focused on the goal of integration into larger military simulation contexts and on specific

military modelling needs.

85

Annexure ‘A’

REFERENCES

1. ASC Centre and College (2001), Management, Army Service Corps Centre and
College, Bangalore, India

2. Basu, M.K. (1988). Managerial Performance Analysis in India, Vision Books Ltd.,
New Delhi, India.

3. Beach, D.S. (1980).Management of People at Work, Macmillan Publishers, New
York, USA.

4. Beatty, R.W. (1991).Re-Energizing the Mature Organization, Journal of
Organizational Dynamics, Vol.25 (4), Pp: 16-30, Washington, USA.

5. Becker, L.J. (1978). ‘Effect of Goal Setting on Performance, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol.63, Pp: 428-433, USA.

6. Bell, J.E. (1948). Projective Techniques, Longman Green Inc., New York, USA.

86

7. Brigadier Jaidka, P. (1993).’Reality of Real-Time’, Journal of Combat, Vol.20,
Number. I, April, Pp: 44-52, Mhow, India.

8. Brigadier Kuthiala, S.C. (1992).’Confidential Reporting System: An Appraisal’,
Journal of Combat, Vol.10, Number. I, April, Pp: 21-24, Mhow, India.

9. Brigadier Sharma, R.M. (1997). Human Resource Development: Concept and
Practice, Combat Journal, Vol.24 (I), Pp: 3-10, April, Mhow, India.

10.‘Review of Appraisal System’, Journal of Combat, 1993 ,Vol.20, Number. I, April,
Pp: 66-75, Mhow, India.

11. Brown, M. (2003).Rated to Exhaustion? Reactions to Performance
Appraisal processes, Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol.34 (I), Pp: 67-81, USA.

12. Budhwar, P (2000). ‘Determinants of HRM Policies and Practices in India: An
Empirical Study’’ Global Business Review, Vol. 1 (2), Pp: 231-47, India.
13. Chandrasekhar, R. (1996). ‘Evaluation Enigma’, Business Today,
March 22 – April 06, India.

14.Chatman, J.A. (1989). ‘A Model of Organizational-Person Fit’,
Academy of Management Review, Vol.1 (4), Pp: 666-681, Boston, USA.

15.Church, A.H. and Bracken, D.W. (1997) ‘Advancing the State of the Art of
360°Feedback: Guest Editors’ Comments’, Group and Organisation
Management, Report No. 22, 149-161, World Bank, Washington, USA.

16.Cleveland, J. N., Murphy, K. R., and Williams, R. E. (1989). Multiple uses of
Performance Appraisal: Prevalence and correlates. Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 74, Pp: 130-135, USA.

17.Cleveland, N Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, (1996).
Understanding Performance Appraisal: Social, Organizational and Goal-Based
Perspectives, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, USA.

18. College of Defence Management (1990).Forecasting (Hand book),
Bolarum, Secunderabad, India (1990).Interpersonal and Organizational
Communication, (Hand book), Bolarum, Secunderabad, India (1990).Effective
Decision Making (Hand book), Bolarum, Secunderabad, India (1990).Quantitative
Aids to Decision Making (Hand book), Bolarum, Secunderabad, India.

19.Infantry Colonel Singh.Y. (2003). ‘Performance Appraisal’, Journal of the,
December, Infantry Department, Pp: 15-20, Mhow, India.

87

20.Colonel Sreeramulu, S. (1997). Motivation as a Function of Human Resource
Development, Combat Journal, Vol.24 (I), Pp: 21-28, April, Mhow, India.

21. Cooper, W. (1981). ‘Ubiquitous Halo’, Journal of Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 90,
Pp: 218-244, USA.

22.Mishra, M.N. (1998). ‘Homeostasis of Human Resource Management’, Quarterly
Journal of Institute of Applied Manpower Research, Vol.34 (2), June-September,
Note No.1, New Delhi, India.

23. Wright, P.M. et al. (2001). ‘Comparing Line and HR Executives Perception of HR
Effectiveness’, Journal of Human Resource Management, summer, Vol. 40(2),
USA.

.

Modeling dynamics of real time appraisal .. indian army( pinku)

More Related Content

What's hot

Similar to Modeling dynamics of real time appraisal .. indian army( pinku)

Recently uploaded

Modeling dynamics of real time appraisal .. indian army( pinku)