Cms college Coimbatore A STUDY ON ASSESSING SUPERVISORS PERFORMANCE THROUGH 360 DEGREE FEEDBACK AT TECMO INDDUSTRY, COIMBATORE By S.SARATH Reg.No: 11MCM015 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER NUMBER TITLE PAGE NO LIST OF TABLES 21 LIST OF CHARTS 21 COMPANY PROFILE 1 CHAPTER I 1.1 -BRIEF HISTROY OF THE COMPANY 1.2 -INTRODUCTION 1.3 – BRANCHES & UNITS 1.4 –ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION 1.4.1 – GENERAL MEETING 1.4.2 - QUALITY OBJECTIVE 1.4.3 - QUALITY POLICY 1.4.4 BOARD OF MEMBERS 1 1 2 3 3 3 3 3 1
110
Embed
A STUDY ON ASSESSING SUPERVISORS PERFORMANCE THROUGH 360 DEGREE FEEDBACK AT TECMO INDDUSTRY, COIMBATORE By S.SARATH Reg.No: 11MCM015.doc
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Cms college Coimbatore A STUDY ON ASSESSING SUPERVISORS PERFORMANCE THROUGH
360 DEGREE FEEDBACK AT TECMO INDDUSTRY, COIMBATOREBy
S.SARATHReg.No: 11MCM015
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER NUMBERTITLE
PAGE NO
LIST OF TABLES 21
LIST OF CHARTS 21
COMPANY PROFILE 1
CHAPTER I
1.1 -BRIEF HISTROY OF THE COMPANY
1.2 -INTRODUCTION
1.3 – BRANCHES & UNITS
1.4 –ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION
1.4.1 – GENERAL MEETING
1.4.2 - QUALITY OBJECTIVE
1.4.3 - QUALITY POLICY
1.4.4 BOARD OF MEMBERS
1.5- ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE
1.5.1.- ORGANISATON CHART
1.5.2 – PRODUTS
1.5.3 – FUNCTIONS OF DEPARTMENT
1
1
2
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
5
1
1.5.4 – COMPETITORS.11
CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE 12
CHAPTER IIIRESEARCH METHODOLOGY
15
3..1 – RESEARCH DESIGN
3.2 – OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY
3.3 – SCOPE OF THE STUDY
3.4 –LIMITATION OF THE STUDY
15
17
17
17
CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS & INTERPERTATION 18
CHAPTER V FINDINGS , SUGGESTIONS & CONCULSIONS 58
BIBLIOGRAPHY 62LIST OF TABLES
TABLE NO.
TITLE PAGE NO.
4.1 Organization provides an opportunity for each appraisee 21
4.2 Appraisee and appraiser to have a clear joint understanding 22
4.3 Opportunity for each appraisee to communicate the support needed 23
4.4 Provides an opportunity for self review and reflection. 24
4.5 Opportunity for a discussion between the appraiser and the appraisee 25
4.6 Encourages open communication between each appraiser –appraisee 26
4.22 Test Statistics - Strengthening appraiser –appraisee relationships. 42
4.23 Kruskal-Wallis Test – Ranks -Conduct of Periodic orientation programs. 43
4.24 Test Statistics- Conduct of Periodic orientation programs. 44
4.25 Kruskal-Wallis Test –Ranks - Line managers generally spend time with their subordinate.
45
4.26 Test Statistics-Line managers generally spend time with their subordinate. 46
4.27 Kruskal-Wallis Test –Ranks- Facilitate growth and learning of both appraisees and appraisers in the organization.
47
4.28 Test Statistics- Facilitate growth and learning of both appraisees and appraisers in the organization.
48
4.29 Friedman Test 49
4.30 Kendall’s tau – b Test- Cross tabulation of Strengthening appraiser -appraisee * start working from.
52
4.31 Ordinal by Ordinal Kendall's tau-b - Strengthening -appraiser and appraisee * start working from.
52
4.32 Kendall’s tau – b Test- Cross tabulation of Conduct of Periodic orientation programs * start working from.
53
4.33 Ordinal by Ordinal Kendall's tau-b - Conduct of Periodic orientation programs * start working from.
54
3
4.34 Kendall’s tau – b Test- Cross tabulation of Line managers generally spend time with their subordinate * Start working from.
55
4.35 Ordinal by Ordinal Kendall's tau-b - Line managers generally spend time
with their subordinate * start working from.
55
4.36 Kendall’s tau – b Test- Cross tabulation of Facilitate growth and learning of both appraisees and appraisers in the organization * start working from.
56
4.37 Ordinal by Ordinal Kendall's tau-b - Facilitate growth and learning of
both appraisees and appraisers in the organization * start working from.
57
LIST OF CHARTS
TABLE NO.
TITLE PAGE NO.
4.1 Organization provides an opportunity for each appraisee 21
4.2 Appraisee and appraiser have a clear joint understanding 22
4.3 Opportunity for each appraisee to communicate the support needed 23
4.4 Provides an opportunity for self review and reflection. 24
4.5 Opportunity for a discussion between the appraiser and the appraisee 25
4.6 Encourages open communication between each appraiser –appraisee 26
There is a significant growth and learning of both appraisees and appraisers in the
organization by facilitating the appraisal system. Out of 90 respondent 43 of them agree
with the statement.
Kurskal – Wallis H TestHypothesis:
H0: There is no significant difference between the total score on employee’s opinion towards the appraisal system providing an opportunity to have a clear understanding of what is expected.
H1: There is a significant difference between the total score on employee’s opinion towards the appraisal system providing an opportunity to have a clear understanding of what is expected.
Level of Significance: The Level of Significance is 0.5%. So it comes 95% Confidence Limit.
Test Sample:
53
Kurskal – Wallis H Test
Test Statistics:
Chi-Square.
Table: 1 Kruskal-Wallis Test
Ranks
Opinion Department N Mean RankThe appraisal system aims at strengthening appraiser– appraisee relationships through mutuality and trust.
Service Department 14 47.36Assembly Department 14 53.96Dispatch Department 5 44.10Testing Department 12 43.38Stores Department 12 49.00MachineShop Department 13 37.62EDP Department 6 26.58QC Department 9 40.67Subcontract department 5 66.60
Total90
Table: 4.21
Table: 2 Test Statistics
Test Statistics (a, b)
Test
The appraisal system aims at strengthening appraiser –appraisee relationships through mutuality and trust.
Chi-Square 11.583
df 8
Asymp. Sig. .171Table: 4.22
54
a Kruskal Wallis Testb Grouping Variable: department
INFERENCE:
The Table 2 Shows that, maximum 5 departments has shown no differences
among 9 departments. So it is clear that there is no difference in opinion among 9
departments with one another.
The Table 3 shows that the Asymptotic Significance is less than 5%. So we
conclude that there is no significant difference in opinion among the departments.
Hypothesis:
H0: There is no significant difference between the employee’s opinion towards the periodic orientation program which conducted by the organization.
H1: There is a significant difference between the employee’s opinion towards the periodic orientation program which conducted by the organization.
Level of Significance: The Level of Significance is 0.5%. So it comes 95% Confidence Limit.
Test Sample:
Kurskal – Wallis H Test
Test Statistics:
55
Chi-Square.
Table: 1 Kruskal-Wallis Test
Ranks
Opinion Department N Mean Rank
Periodic orientation programs are conducted to explain the objectives and other details of the appraisal system.
Service Department 14 49.00Assembly Department 14 52.61Dispatch Department 5 61.80Testing Department 12 44.63Stores Department 12 37.50Machine Shop Department 13 43.19EDP Department 6 25.42QC Department 9 40.67Subcontract department 5 59.60
Total90
Table: 4.23
Table: 2 Test Statistics
Test Statistics (a, b)
TestPeriodic orientation programs are conducted to explain the objectives and other details of the appraisal system.
Chi-Square 10.646
df 8
Asymp. Sig. .223
56
Table: 4.24
a Kruskal Wallis Testb Grouping Variable: department
INFERENCE:
The Table 2 Shows that, maximum 5 departments has shown no big differences
among 9 departments. So it is clear that there is a no big difference in opinion among 9
departments with one another.
The Table 3 shows that the Asymptotic Significance is less than 5%. So we
conclude that there is a no significant difference in opinion among the departments.
Hypothesis:
H0: There is no significant difference between the total score on employee’s opinion towards the line manager spending time with their subordinates.
H1: There is a significant difference between the total score on employee’s opinion towards the line manager spending time with their subordinates.
Level of Significance: The Level of Significance is 0.5%. So it comes 95% Confidence Limit.
Test Sample:
57
Kurskal – Wallis H Test
Test Statistics:
Chi-Square
Table: 1 Kruskal-Wallis Test
Ranks
Opininon department N Mean Rank
Line managers generally spend time with their subordinate and discuss their performance.
Service Department 14 51.43Assembly Department 14 51.43Dispatch Department 5 50.30Testing Department 12 52.63Stores Department 12 35.17Machine Shop Department 13 45.62EDP Department 6 19.00QC Department 9 36.89Subcontract department 5 62.20
Total 90
Table: 4.25
Table: 2 Test Statistics
Test Statistics (a, b)
Test
Line managers generally spend time with their subordinate and discuss their performance.
Chi-Square 14.565
df 8
58
Asymp. Sig. .068
Table: 4.26
a Kruskal Wallis Testb Grouping Variable: department
INFERENCE:
The Table 2 Shows that, maximum 5 departments has shown huge differences
among 9 departments. So it is clear that there is a huge difference in opinion among 9
departments with one another.
The Table 3 shows that the Asymptotic Significance is less than 5%. So we
conclude that there is a huge significant difference in opinion among the departments.
Hypothesis:
H0: There is no significant different between the total score on employee’s opinion towards the appraisal system facilitate growth and learning of both appraises & appraiser in the organization.
H1: There is a significant different between the total score on employee’s opinion towards the appraisal system facilitate growth and learning of both appraises & appraiser in the organization.
Level of Significance: The Level of Significance is 0.5%. So it comes 95% Confidence Limit.
Test Sample:
59
Kurskal – Wallis H Test
Test Statistics:
Chi-Square
Table:1 Kruskal-Wallis Test
Ranks
Opininon department N Mean Rank
The appraisals facilitate growth and learning of both appraisees and appraisers in the organization.
Service Department 14 49.64Assembly Department 14 47.29Dispatch Department 5 67.60Testing Department 12 44.21Stores Department 12 31.83Machine Shop Department 13 36.85EDP Department 6 50.42QC Department 9 48.67Subcontract department 5 53.60
Total 90
Table: 4.27
Table: 2 Test Statistics
Test Statistics (a, b)
TestThe appraisals facilitate growth and learning of both appraisees and appraisers in the organization.
Chi-Square 11.261
df 8
Asymp. Sig. .187
60
Table: 4.28
a Kruskal Wallis Testb Grouping Variable: department
INFERENCE:
The Table 2 Shows that, maximum 5 departments has shown no differences
among 9 departments. So it is clear that there is no difference in opinion among 9
departments with one another.
The Table 3 shows that the Asymptotic Significance is less than 5%. So we
conclude that there is no significant difference in opinion among the departments.
Friedman TestHypothesis:
H0: There is no significant different opinion among all departments.
H1: There is a significant different opinion among all departments.
Level of Significance: The Level of Significance is 0.5%. So it comes 95% Confidence Limit.
Test Sample:
Friedman Test
61
Test Statistics:
Chi-Square
Table: 1 Friedman Test
Ranks
Opinion Mean Rank
The appraisal system aims at strengthening appraiser –appraisee relationships through mutuality and trust.
2.83
Periodic orientation programs are conducted to explain the objectives and other details of the appraisal system. 1.88
Line managers generally spend time with their subordinate and discuss their performance. 1.85
The appraisals facilitate growth and learning of both appraisees and appraisers in the organization. 3.43
Table: 4.29
Table: 2 Test Statistics
Test Statistics (a)
N 90
Chi-Square 122.185
df 3
Asymp. Sig. .000
Table: 4.30
a Friedman Test
62
INFERENCE:
The above table describes the opinions of appraisees and the appraisers on various
parameters. The above test statistics value of asymptotic significance is 0. Hence there is no
significant difference of opinion among all the departments.
Kendall’s tau – b Test
Hypothesis:
H0: There is no associate difference between the higher experience and the higher satisfaction.
H1: There is an associate difference between the higher experience and the higher satisfaction.
Level of Significance: The Level of Significance is 0.5%. So it comes 95% Confidence Limit.
63
Test Sample: Kendall’s tau – b Test
Test Statistics:
Ordinal by Ordinal Kendall's tau-b
Strengthening relationship between appraiser and appraisee * start working fromCross tabulation
The appraisal system aims at strengthening appraiser –appraisee relationships through mutuality and trust.
start working from
Total0 - 1 yrs
2- 5 yrs
5- 10 yrs
10 - 15 yrs
15- 20 yrs
strongly disagree
disagree
Count 0 0 2 1 0 3% within strengthening relationship betwe appraiser n appraisee
.0% .0%66.7%
33.3% .0%100.0%
Count 3 0 1 1 0 5% within strengthening relationship betwe appraiser n appraisee
60.0%
.0%20.0%
20.0% .0%100.0%
Count 16 8 6 1 0 31
64
neatural
agree
strongly agree
% within strengthening relationship betwe appraiser n appraisee
51.6%
25.8%
19.4%
3.2% .0%100.0%
Count 20 12 8 4 0 44% within strengthening relationship betwe appraiser n appraisee
45.5%
27.3%
18.2%
9.1% .0%100.0%
Count 1 1 2 2 1 7% within strengthening relationship betwe appraiser n appraisee
14.3%
14.3%
28.6%
28.6% 14.3%100.0%
Total
Count 40 21 19 9 1 90% within strengthening relationship betwe appraiser n appraisee
44.4%
23.3%
21.1%
10.0% 1.1%100.0%
Table: 4.31
Test Statistics: Ordinal by Ordinal Kendall's tau-b
Systematic Measure Value
Asymp. Std. Error(a)
Approx. T(b)
Approx. Sig.
Ordinal by Ordinal Kendall's tau-b.089 .104 .851 .395
N of Valid Cases90
Table: 4.32
a Not assuming the null hypothesis.b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.
Periodic orientation program are conducted to explain the object n other details of the app sys * start working from
Cross tabulation
65
Table: 4.33
Test Statistics: Ordinal by Ordinal Kendall's tau-b
66
Periodic orientation programs are conducted to explain the objectives and other details of the appraisal system.
start working from
Total
0 - 1 yrs
2- 5 yrs
5- 10 yrs
10 - 15 yrs
15- 20 yrs
strongly disagree
disagree
neatural
agree
strongly agree
Total
Count 7 1 1 2 0 11% within periodic orientation program are conducted to explain the object n other details of the app sys
63.6%
9.1% 9.1%18.2%
.0%100.0%
Count 13 11 7 2 0 33% within periodic orientation program are conducted to explain the object n other details of the app sys
39.4%
33.3%
21.2%
6.1% .0%100.0%
Count 10 3 7 3 1 24% within periodic orientation program are conducted to explain the object n other details of the app sys
41.7%
12.5%
29.2%
12.5%
4.2%100.0%
Count 9 5 4 2 0 20% within periodic orientation program are conducted to explain the object n other details of the app sys
45.0%
25.0%
20.0%
10.0%
.0%100.0%
Count 1 1 0 0 0 2% within periodic orientation program are conducted to explain the object n other details of the app sys
50.0%
50.0%
.0% .0% .0%100.0%
Count 40 21 19 9 1 90% within periodic orientation program are conducted to explain the object n other details of the app sys
44.4%
23.3%
21.1%
10.0%
1.1%100.0%
Symmetric Measures ValueAsymp. Std. Error(a)
Approx. T(b)
Approx. Sig.
Ordinal by Ordinal Kendall's tau-b.040 .090 .448 .654
N of Valid Cases90
Table: 4.34
a Not assuming the null hypothesis.b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.
Line managers generally spend time with subordinates * start working from
Cross tabulation
67
Line managers generally spend time with their subordinate and discuss their performance.
start working from
Total0 - 1 yrs
2- 5 yrs
5- 10 yrs
10 - 15 yrs
15- 20 yrs
strongly disagree disagree neatural agree
strongly agree
Total
Count 10 2 1 2 0 15% within line managers generally spend time with subordiantes
66.7%
13.3%
6.7% 13.3% .0%100.0%
Count 14 6 6 3 0 29% within line managers generally spend time with subordiantes
48.3%
20.7%
20.7% 10.3% .0%100.0%
Count 8 6 7 2 1 24% within line managers generally spend time with subordiantes
33.3%
25.0%
29.2% 8.3% 4.2%100.0%
Count 7 6 5 2 0 20% within line managers generally spend time with subordiantes
35.0%
30.0%
25.0% 10.0% .0%100.0%
Count 1 1 0 0 0 2% within line managers generally spend time with subordiantes
50.0%
50.0%
.0% .0% .0%100.0%
Count 40 21 19 9 1 90% within line managers generally spend time with subordiantes
44.4%
23.3%
21.1% 10.0% 1.1%100.0%
Table: 4.35
Test Statistics: Ordinal by Ordinal Kendall's tau-b
Symmetric Measures Value
Asymp. Std. Error(a)
Approx. T(b)
Approx. Sig.
Ordinal by Ordinal Kendall's tau-b.127 .088 1.453 .146
N of Valid Cases90
Table: 4.36a Not assuming the null hypothesis.b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.
Appraisals facilitate growth n learning of both appraisees and appraisers in the organization * start working from
Cross tabulation
68
The appraisals facilitate growth and learning of both appraisees and appraisers in the organisation.
start working from
Total0 - 1 yrs
2- 5 yrs
5- 10 yrs
10 - 15 yrs
15- 20 yrs
strongly disagree
disagree
neatural
agree
strongly agree
Total
Count 1 0 0 1 0 2% within appraisals facilitate growth n learining of both appraisees n appraisers in the orgn
50.0%
.0% .0% 50.0% .0%100.0%
Count 0 0 2 3 0 5% within appraisals facilitate growth n learining of both appraisees n appraisers in the orgn
.0% .0% 40.0% 60.0% .0%100.0%
Count 7 2 0 0 0 9% within appraisals facilitate growth n learining of both appraisees n appraisers in the orgn
77.8%
22.2%
.0% .0% .0%100.0%
Count 19 15 8 1 0 43% within appraisals facilitate growth n learining of both appraisees n appraisers in the orgn
44.2%
34.9%
18.6% 2.3% .0%100.0%
Count 13 4 9 4 1 31% within appraisals facilitate growth n learining of both appraisees n appraisers in the orgn
41.9%
12.9%
29.0% 12.9% 3.2%100.0%
Count 40 21 19 9 1 90% within appraisals facilitate growth n learining of both appraisees n appraisers in the orgn
44.4%
23.3%
21.1% 10.0% 1.1%100.0%
Table: 4.37
Test Statistics: Ordinal by Ordinal Kendall's tau-b
69
Symmetric Measures ValueAsymp. Std. Error(a)
Approx. T(b)
Approx. Sig.
Ordinal by Ordinal Kendall's tau-b.055 .108 .504 .614
N of Valid Cases90
Table: 4.38
a Not assuming the null hypothesis.b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.
INFERENCE:
The cross tabulation between the years of experience and the relationship between the
appriasee and the appraiser is no way related. Since there is no associate difference between the
years of experience and the satisfaction of appraisee, null hypothesis is rejected.
The cross tabulation between the periodic orientation and the years of experience shows
that there is significant association between years of experience and periodic orientation. Since
the value observed from the Kendall’s tau-b test is 0.654 which is greater than the level of
significance, null hypothesis is accepted.
The third table depicting the cross tabulation between the years of experience and the
time spent by the line managers with the subordinates throws the value of 0.164 which is less
than the level of significance. Hence the null hypothesis is rejected.
The last table showing the cross tabulation between the years of experience and the
facilitation of growth and learning gives the value of 0.614 which is greater than the level of
significance. Hence the null hypothesis is accepted.
70
CHAPTER V
71
CHAPTER V
FINDINGS, SUGGESTION
&
CONCULSION
FINDINGS & SUGGESTION
FOR 360 DEGREE APPRASIAL SYSTEMS:
72
FINDINGS:
Demographic findings:
1. Majority of the employees of Tecmo Industries are male (70%).
2. Majority of the age group of employees/appraisees (50%) were between 26-35 years of
age.
3. The majority of the employees/appraisees (48 %) have experience less than 5 years.
4. The majority of the employees/appraisees (36 %) belong to different department.
Dimensions Findings:
1. There is no relationship between the gender and ability to resolve conflicts tactfully.
2. The opinion by self and manger differs while ranking for individual performance.
3. The opinion by self and colleague does not differ while ranking for individual
performance.
4. It is found that the employees having high organizational commitment have highest
flexibility but have least co-operation in team work in their organizational
environment.
5. The priority order factors with respect to their importance in the organization were
analyzed. They are 1.flexibility, 2.organizational commitment, functional skill,
4.coaching and 5.team work.
6. Every supervisor is using their time efficiently and also consistently producing high
quality work.
FOR EXISTING PERFORMANCE APPRASIAL SYSTEM:
1. There is no such provision for periodic orientation program in the organization.
73
2. The line managers do not spend time with the sub-ordinates, since they spend
more time on production.
3. Only intra-departmental relationship exists and no inter-departmental relationship
exists in the organization.
4. No opportunity has been provided for the appraisee to communicate the support
required.
5. The appraisees do not know about their strengths and weaknesses and insight
about themselves.
6. The employees are not aware about the existing appraisal system and the methods
followed by the organization.
SUGGESTIONS:
FOR 360 DEGREE APPRASIAL SYSTEMS:
74
There should be a good understanding between the employees and with their colleagues. Hence it can be used in a positive way to improve their team spirit and work environment.
Flexibility is very high but team spirit is very low. Because of this there is lack of co-ordination from peers. So the Manager needs to motivate the supervisors.
There is a lack of co-operation between team members. So every supervisor should encourage the exchange of ideas and bring out colleagues’ strengths.
FOR EXISTING PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL SYSTEM:
The company should conduct periodic review programs, so that job efficiency and employees contribution will increase.
The Appraisal system should be open and should be communicated to all levels of employees.
The line managers should spend time with their employees for getting insight about them.
The employees of this organization should be provided with periodic orientation program to improve their operational efficiency.
CONCLUSION:
75
In this project, a performance appraisal system utilizing the performance appraisal criteria
has been analyzed from a company manufacturing pumps based in coimbatore. This system uses
multiforce evaluation model in assisting the supervisory level, to appraise their employees.
Utilizing the concept of using multiforce evaluation model in the performance appraisal system
could ease the changes need to be made in this system whenever it is necessary. This model
follows a systematic step in determining a staff’s performance, and therefore, it creates a system
of appraisal which is able to consistently produce reliable and valid results for the appraisal
process.
The performance appraisal system followed by the organization says that organization
has to improve their relationship between the supervisors and their subordinates. This appraisal
system also helped the organization to identify the communication gap between the employees,
supervisors and the management. The organization should emphasize on periodic orientation
program in order to enhance the employees understanding.
Bibliography:
76
Books:1) Performance Management – 2nd edition- By Herman Aguinis.
1. For each item, circle the number that best matches your assessment of the individual’s current level of expertise or performance.
2. If you have no basis for judgment, circle “?”. This response will not be averaged in with other ratings.
3. Try to use a range of ratings in your assessment. Your feedback will be most helpful if it differentiates the individual’s true strengths from areas needing improvement.
4. Finally, fill in the open-ended question at the end of the questionnaire. Your constructive suggestion is particularly important for the organizations development and growth.
All information will remain confidential. Rater responses will be shared in aggregate form.
Multi-rater Feedback Questionnaire
78
Name : _______________ Name of the person being rated:_______________
Designation: ___________ Department: ____________
Indicate your role with regard to the person being rated:
__ I am this person’s direct line/dotted line manager__ I report to this person__ I am a colleague or customer of this person
Instructions:
1. For each item, circle the number that best matches your assessment of the individual’s current level of expertise or performance.
2. If you have no basis for judgment, circle “?”. This response will not be averaged in with other ratings.
3. Try to use a range of ratings in your assessment. Your feedback will be most helpful if it differentiates the individual’s true strengths from areas needing improvement.
4. Finally, fill in the open-ended question at the end of the questionnaire. Your constructive suggestion is particularly important for the organizations development and growth.
All information will remain confidential. Rater responses will be shared in aggregate form.
Multi-rater Feedback Questionnaire
79
For each item, circle the number that best matches your assessment of the individual's
2. Adapts willingly to the changing responsibilities
1 2 3 4 5 ?
3. Acts in a manner that engages and motivates 1 2 3 4 5 ?
4. Builds positive & effective relationships with colleagues at all levels of organization
1 2 3 4 5 ?
Functional Skills
1. Knowledge of job 1 2 3 4 5 ?
2. Organizes and prioritizes work well 1 2 3 4 5 ?
3. Uses time efficiently 1 2 3 4 5 ?
4. Consistently produces high quality work 1 2 3 4 5 ?
5. Has shown improvement in required skills over the last year’s skill level
1 2 3 4 5 ?
Flexibility
1. Values and respects diverse opinions, experiences, background, cultures, and work styles
1 2 3 4 5 ?
2. Resolves conflicts tactfully 1 2 3 4 5 ?
3. Accepts change gracefully 1 2 3 4 5 ?
Teamwork
1. Demonstrates consideration, cooperation, and generosity within the team
1 2 3 4 5 ?
2. Actively seeks feedback on how interaction or process worked
1 2 3 4 5 ?
3. Ability to handle the task independently 1 2 3 4 5 ?
4. Ensures that actions are followed through to completion
1 2 3 4 5 ?
80
Coaching
1. Communicates expectations, Clarify queries and gives solution to others in a way that is clearly understood.
1 2 3 4 5 ?
2. Uses positive recognition to motivate or appreciate
1 2 3 4 5 ?
3. Encourages the exchange of ideas and brings out colleagues’ strengths
1 2 3 4 5 ?
4. If applicable, identifies areas for improvement for each person and sets related goals
1 2 3 4 5 ?
1) Give suggestions for organizational development and growth overall?
Comments
If there are any comments that you would like to share or issues that you would like to rise, please do so here:
Thank You!!!
QUESTIONARIES: 2
81
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL EFFECTIVENESS
Employee name: Position: Department: Start working from:
S.NO.
OPINION
STRONGLY DISAGREE
DISAGREE NEATURAL AGREE
STRONGLY AGREE
1 The executive appraisal system in this organisation provides an opportunity for each appraisee to have a clear understanding of what is expected by his reporting officer during the performance year.
2 The appraisal system helps each appraisee and appraiser to have a clear joint understanding of each apraisee’s job.
3 The appraisal system provides an opportunity for each appraisee to communicate the support he needs from his superiors to perform his job well.
4The appraisal system provides an opportunity for self review and reflection.
5 The appraisal system provides an opportunity for a discussion between the appraiser and the appraisee on the expectations, achievements, failures, constraints and improvements required.
6 The appraisal system encourages open communication between each appraiser –appraisee pair through performance review discussions.
82
7
The appraisal system aims at strengthening appraiser –appraisee relationships through mutuality and trust.
8 The appraisal system helps interested appraisees to gain more insights into their strengths and weaknesses.
9 The appraisal system has scope for communicating the plans of the top management and the business goals to the staff.
10 The objectives of the appraisal system are clear to all employees.
11 Periodic orientation programmes are conducted to explain the objectives and other details of the appraisal system.
12 Line managers generally spend time with their subordinate and discuss their performance.
13 Reporting officers help their apparaisees to plan their performance in the beginning of the year.
14 Performance review discussions are of high quality and are conducted with care.
15 The HRD department follows up the training needs identified during the appraisal seriously.
16 The appraisal data are used by the HRD department for other developmental decisions like job rotation, job enrichment and the like.
17 The reviewing officers take the appraisals seriously and educate their subordinates to overcome their personal biases and favouritism.
83
18 The HRD department actively reviews each appraisal and discusses them with the line managers.
19 The HRD department provides adequate feedback to the line managers on their rating behaviour and the decisions taken on their ratings.
20 The appraisals facilitate growth and learning of both appraisees and appraisers in the organisation.