A

PROJECT REPORT ON
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL
AT

ODISHA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LIMITED

(OPTCL)

Submitted to
DHENKANAL AUTONOMOUS COLLEGE, DHENKANAL
Affiliated to
Utkal University

By:
Sanmaya Kumar Mohapatra
ROLL NO : PG18C021
2018-20

Under the Guidance of

Mr. R.K. Khuntia

H.O.D
Department of Commerce
 GUIDE CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the Summer Internship Project report entitled

“ PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL OF ODISHA POWER TRANSMISSION
CORPORATION LIMITED(OPTCL). ” is carried out by Mr. Bibhuti
Bhusana Behera, bearing Regd No- 1806283024 under my
guidance,a student of 2nd year MBA from Rajdhani College of
Engg. and Management, Bhubaneswar,has been completed by his
and worthy of acceptance for the Degree of Master of Business
Administration.

(Singanature of internal guide) (Signature of external guide)

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I am grateful to my internal guide Mrs. Sulochana Dash, Prof. (HR) RCEM,

BBSR for her guidance and advice, supervision and encouragement in the
preparation of this project report.

I am extremely thankful to Mr. Abhishek Padhi, AM(HR), OPTCL for allowing,

conducting the study in the organization and extending co-operation to me
during my training period.

I am also thankful to the OPTCL authorities for giving me the rare opportunity
to undertake the present study and prepare a brief project report.

I shall not do justice if I forget to express my gratitude to all the faculties of

RCEM and the other teacher who have guided me in each span of my life.

Bibhuti Bhusana Behera

Regd No: 1806283024
 DECLARATION

I Mr. Bibhuti Bhusana Behera, Regd No. 1806283024, a 2nd year student of Master
of Business Administration and I do here by declare that the present study was
undertaken by me under the guidance of Mrs. Sulochana Dash, Prof. (HR of RCEM,
BBSR) and Mr. Abhishek Padhi;AM(HR), OPTCL. The project report entitle
“Performance Appraisal of ODISHA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION
LIMITED.” Is of my own and neither been submitted to any other institution
anywhere beforehand.

I have tried my level best to ensure that the contents are correct to the best of my
knowledge.

Bibhuti Bhusana Behera

Regd No: 1806283024
 PREFACE

Under the guidance of my corporate guide Mr. Abhishek Padhi, I

have prepared this Summer Internship Project “Performance
Appraisal at OPTCL.” I never claim this is completely original. But
this is not a borrowed project.

I had tried my best to analyze different schemes of Performance

Appraisal. I will be happy if my project will be accepted by others.

Bibhuti Bhusana Behera

Regd No: 1806283024
 CONTENT

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER 2: THEORITICAL FRAMEWORK
CHAPTER 3: ORGANISATIONAL PROFILE
CHAPTER 4: PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL AT OPTCL
CHAPTER 5: DATA ANALYSIS & INTREPRETATION
CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS
CHAPTER 7: ANNEXURE
 CHAPTER-1
INTRODUCTION
 INTRODUCTION OF THE TOPIC

PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL IS A FORMAL, STRUCTURED SYSTEM OF MEASURING AND

EVALUATING AN EMPLOYEES JOB, RELATED BEHAVIORS AND OUTCOMES TO DISCOVER
HOW AND WHY THE EMPLOYEE IS PRESENTLY PERFORMING ON THE JOB AND HOW THE
EMPLOYEE CAN PERFORM MORE EFFECTIVELY IN THE FUTURE SO THAT THE EMPLOYEE,
ORGANIZATION,

Performance appraisal is a process of summarizing, assessing and developing the work

performance of an employee. In order to be effective and constructive, the performance
manager should make every effort to obtain as much objective information about the
employee's performance as possible.

Performance Appraisal is a review and discussion of an employee's performance of assigned

duties and responsibilities based on results obtained by the employee in their job, not on
the employee's personality characteristics. Personality should be considered only when it
relates to performance of assigned duties and responsibilities.

It is a structured formal interaction between a subordinate and supervisor, that usually

takes the form of a periodic interview (annual or semi-annual), in which the work
performance of the subordinate is examined and discussed, with a view to identifying
weaknesses and strengths as well as opportunities for improvement and skills development.

In many organizations - but not all - appraisal results are used, either directly or indirectly, to
help determine reward outcomes. That is, the appraisal results are used to identify the
better performing employees who should get the majority of available merit pay increases,
bonuses, and promotions.

By the same token, appraisal results are used to identify poorer performers, who may
require some form of counseling, or in extreme cases, demotion, dismissal or decreases in
pay.
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
This project aims to study the performance appraisal system adopted by
OPTCL. Performance appraisal is the most significant tool for taking
administrative decision relating to payment of incentives, promotion etc. The
following objectives of the study are to be kept in view for present study.

1. To know the Performance Appraisal system appointed in OPTCL.

2. To analysis the methods of performance appraisal that has been
adopted by OPTCL.
3. To study the attitude of the employees(Executives & Non Executives)
towards the programme.
4. To evaluate the effectiveness of PA programme of OPTCL in fulfilling the
objective of reform and restructuring.
5. To examine the general aims of PA & CE what roles they play.

SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The study was undertaken in OPTCL, BBSR. The scope of the study involves the
head office of OPTCL.

NEED OF THE STUDY

The project study is necessary for integration of the review of literature and
methodology developed for the understanding and resolution of management
problem and impirical work done therein.More importantly, this study is
required for the partial fulfillment of Master of Business Administration(MBA).

The purpose of the summer project proposal is to place the proposed study
within a coherent, organized framework and to make a contribution to
knowledge. The project study is necessary to enhance our understanding,
grasp& clarity of the subject matter, the context of the managerial problem
and the research problem. This is necessary for the direction and procedure of
the study to be brought within the required scope, coverage and rigor and also
for enhancing the quality of the research effort.
LIMITATION OF THE STUDY
Basic limitation faced while preparing the study were :

 The company’s policy of not disclosing some data and information for
obvious reason, which would have been very much useful for the report.
 Some of the questionarries were incomplete.
 Few employees sometime felt disturbed as they were busy in their job.
 It is difficult to make information based a rich report in short time of
period.
 This report was prepared in short time.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Work performance appraisal systems assess the employee's effectiveness,

work habits and also the quality of the work produced. The research
methodology used to evaluate the accuracy and effectiveness of the appraisal
instrument takes different forms and depends on the type of career
professional under the microscope for evaluation, but the foundation for all
evaluations rests on several basic research techniques. The evaluation
methodology corroborates the original employee evaluations and performance
appraisals through supporting multiple research reporting measures.

Correlating Data and Appraisals

Correlating operational data on employee firing and reprimands offers one way
to assess the validity of the employee appraisal systems in place at the
workplace. Tracking the staff members with negative feedback during
evaluations and noting the types of reprimands and retraining necessary to
improve work skills or performance allows administrative officers a chance to
correlate the negative comments with the requests for improvement. Long-
term correlations allow tracking of the employees' improvement or the staff
fired after failed attempts at remediation.

Self-Assessments and Supervisor Evaluations

Other forms of evaluation for performance appraisal systems include input

from employees using self-assessment tools and also supervisor appraisals of
the system of evaluation. The employee self-reflection offers the vantage point
of examining the evaluation from the worker level. The supervisors offer the
viewpoint of a middle- to upper-level management evaluator. Both have a
unique stake in the appraisal process and also experience in dealing with a
variety of appraisal system users. Grouping both workers and supervisors into
separate and anonymous feedback groups provides candid opinions on the
perceived validity of the appraisal system. While some viewpoints offer only
biased information, common threads and repeated comments do provide
validity for some of the assessment areas.

Direct Observation

The use of multiple research measures to evaluate performance appraisal

systems includes using secondary outside assessment teams to support or
challenge the original appraisal staff findings. Hiring a professional assessment
firm to visit the workplace on a formal and informal basis provides feedback
independent from in-house evaluations by staff or workers. Meeting with the
outside assessment team prior to the visit focuses the evaluation on key issues
noted on the in-house assessment. Direct observation methods by outside
teams using video of the workplace also offer an independent research
method for correlating the employee performance with the appraisals.

Client or Customer Evaluations

Another research methodology used to evaluate the findings from employee

performance appraisal systems involves setting up an additional study
involving work customers or business clients. This secondary evaluation takes
the form of written comment forms, telephone surveys or online
questionnaires where the client answers questions developed to test the
validity of the original performance appraisal. When the original appraisal cited
staff failing to follow up on customer care, for instance, the questions
developed for a secondary evaluation probe this area in depth to validate or
disprove the original assessment.
 CHAPTER-2
THEORITICAL
FRAMEWORK
 PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL
DEFINITION:

Performance Appraisal is the systematic evaluation of the performance of

employees and to understand the abilities of a person for further growth and
development. Performance appraisal is generally done in systematic ways
which are as follows:

1. The supervisors measure the pay of employees and compare it with

targets and plans.

2. The supervisor analyses the factors behind work performances of

employees.

3. The employers are in position to guide the employees for a better

performance.

Objectives of Performance Appraisal

Performance Appraisal can be done with following objectives in mind:

1. To maintain records in order to determine compensation packages,

wage structure, salaries raises, etc.

2. To identify the strengths and weaknesses of employees to place right

men on right job.

3. To maintain and assess the potential present in a person for further

growth and development.

4. To provide a feedback to employees regarding their performance and

related status.

5. To provide a feedback to employees regarding their performance and

related status.

6. It serves as a basis for influencing working habits of the employees.

7. To review and retain the promotional and other training programmes.

Advantages of Performance Appraisal

It is said that performance appraisal is an investment for the company which

can be justified by following advantages:

1. Promotion: Performance Appraisal helps the supervisors to chalk out

the promotion programmes for efficient employees. In this regards,
inefficient workers can be dismissed or demoted in case.

2. Compensation: Performance Appraisal helps in chalking out

compensation packages for employees. Merit rating is possible through
performance appraisal. Performance Appraisal tries to give worth to a
performance. Compensation packages which includes bonus, high salary
rates, extra benefits, allowances and pre-requisites are dependent on
performance appraisal. The criteria should be merit rather than
seniority.

3. Employees Development: The systematic procedure of performance

appraisal helps the supervisors to frame training policies and
programmes. It helps to analyse strengths and weaknesses of employees
so that new jobs can be designed for efficient employees. It also helps in
framing future development programmes.

4. Selection Validation: Performance Appraisal helps the supervisors to

understand the validity and importance of the selection procedure. The
supervisors come to know the validity and thereby the strengths and
weaknesses of selection procedure. Future changes in selection methods
can be made in this regard.

5. Communication: For an organization, effective communication between

employees and employers is very important. Through performance
appraisal, communication can be sought for in the following ways:

a. Through performance appraisal, the employers can understand

and accept skills of subordinates.

b. The subordinates can also understand and create a trust and

confidence in superiors.

c. It also helps in maintaining cordial and congenial labour

management relationship.
 d. It develops the spirit of work and boosts the morale of employees.

All the above factors ensure effective communication.

6. Motivation: Performance appraisal serves as a motivation tool. Through

evaluating performance of employees, a person’s efficiency can be
determined if the targets are achieved. This very well motivates a person
for better job and helps him to improve his performance in the future .

CHARACTERISTICS:

 Objectives should be clear: The objectives of appraisal should be clear

and specific. An effective performance system will always have specific
appraisal attributes to match the employee’s job description.

 Data should be valid and reliable: An effective performance appraisal

system provides data that is consistent, reliable and valid. It supplies
data according the objective that serves the purpose of performance
appraisal and succession planning.

 Performance criteria should be well defined: Effective performance

appraisal has standard appraisal forms, rules and appraisal procedures.
It will have well defined performance criteria and standards.

 Economical and less time consuming: Effective performance appraisal

systems are designed to be economical and less time consuming to bring
maximum benefits.

 Should initiate follow up: A post appraisal talk should be arranged for
employees to get feedback from their managers. It also helps the
organization to learn about the problems and difficulties the employees
might be facing and discover suitable training.

Performance appraisal is one thing that not done properly can harm the
organization and the employees by creating conflicts. Organization that has
conflicting teams at work can never prosper. Therefore, choosing an effective
performance appraisal system is a wise thing to do, and it is now easy with
Synergita Software that brings performance management closure to people
and business.

TECHNIQUES / METHODS OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL:

Performance Appraisal Methods: Traditional and Modern Methods!

Each method of performance appraisal has its strengths and weaknesses may
be suitable for one organisation and non-suitable for another one. As such,
there is no single appraisal method accepted and used by all organisations to
measure their employees’ performance.

All the methods of appraisal devised so far have been classified differently by
different authors. While DeCenzo and Robbins’^ have classified appraisal
methods into three categories: absolute methods, relative methods and
objective methods; Aswathappa has classified these into two categories past-
oriented and future-oriented.

Michael R Carrell et. al. have classified all appraisal methods into as many as six
categories: rating scales, comparative methods, critical incidents, 6ssay, MBO
and combination methods. Rock and Levis” have classified the methods into
two broad categories: narrow interpretation and broad interpretation. Beatty
and Schneier have categorised various methods of appraisal into four groups:
comparative methods, absolute methods, goal setting, and direct indices.

A more widely used classification of appraisal methods into two categories,

viz., traditional methods and modem methods, is given by Strauss and Sayles”.
While traditional methods lay emphasis on the rating of the individual’s
personality traits, such as initiative, dependability, drive creativity, integrity,
intelligence, leadership potential, etc.; the modem methods, on the other
hand, place more emphasis on the evaluation of work results, i.e., job
achievements than the personal traits! Modem methods tend to be more
objective and worthwhile. The various methods included in each of the two
categories are listed in Table 28.4.
In the discussion that follows, each method under both categories will be
described briefly.

Traditional Methods:

Ranking Method:

It is the oldest and simplest formal systematic method of performance

appraisal in which employee is compared with all others for the purpose of
placing order of worth. The employees are ranked from the highest to the
lowest or from the best to the worst.

Paired Comparison:

In this method, each employee is compared with other employees on one- on

one basis, usually based on one trait only. The rater is provided with a bunch of
slips each coining pair of names, the rater puts a tick mark against the
employee whom he insiders the better of the two. The number of times this
employee is compared as better with others determines his or her final
ranking.

Grading Method:

In this method, certain categories of worth are established in advance and

carefully defined. There can be three categories established for employees:
outstanding, satisfactory and unsatisfactory. There can be more than three
grades. Employee performance is compared with grade definitions. The
employee is, then, allocated to the grade that best describes his or her perfor-
mance.
Such type of grading is done is Semester pattern of examinations and in the
selection of a candidate in the public service sector. One of the major
drawbacks of this method is that the rater may rate most of the employees on
the higher side of their performance.

Forced Distribution Method:

This method was evolved by Tiffen to eliminate the central tendency of rating
most of the employees at a higher end of the scale. The method assumes that
employees’ performance level confirms to a normal statistical distribution i.e.,
10,20,40,20 and 10 per cent. This is useful for rating a large number of
employees’ job performance and promo ability. It tends to eliminate or reduce
bias.

It is also highly simple to understand and easy to apply in appraising the

performance of employees in organisations. It suffer from the drawback that
improve similarly, no single grade would rise in a ratings.

Forced-Choice Method:

The forced-choice method is developed by J. P. Guilford. It contains a series of

groups of statements, and rater rates how effectively a statement describes
each individual being evaluated. Common method of forced-choice method
contains two statements, both positive and negative.

Check-List Method:

The basic purpose of utilizing check-list method is to ease the evaluation

burden upon the rater. In this method, a series of statements, i.e., questions
with their answers in ‘yes’ or ‘no’ are prepared by the HR department (see
Figure 28-2). The check-list is, then, presented to the rater to tick appropriate
answers relevant to the appraisee. Each question carries a weight-age in
relationship to their importance.
Critical Incidents Method:

In this method, the rater focuses his or her attention on those key or critical
behaviours that make the difference between performing a job in a
noteworthy manner (effectively or ineffectively). There are three steps
involved in appraising employees using this method.

First, a list of noteworthy (good or bad) on-the-job behaviour of specific

incidents is prepared. Second, a group of experts then assigns weightage or
score to these incidents, depending upon their degree of desirability to
perform a job. Third, finally a check-list indicating incidents that describe
workers as “good” or “bad” is constructed. Then, the check-list is given to the
rater for evaluating the workers.

The basic idea behind this rating is to apprise the workers who can perform
their jobs effectively in critical situations. This is so because most people work
alike in normal situation. The strength of critical incident method is that it
focuses on behaviours and, thus, judge’s performance rather than
personalities.

Its drawbacks are to regularly write down the critical incidents which become
time-consuming and burdensome for evaluators, i.e., managers. Generally,
negative incidents are positive ones. It is rater’s inference that determines
which incidents are critical to job performance. Hence, the method is subject
to all the limitations relating to subjective judgments.

Graphic Rating Scale Method:

The graphic rating scale is one of the most popular and simplest techniques for
appraising performance. It is also known as linear rating scale. In this method,
the printed appraisal form is used to appraise each employee.

The form lists traits (such as quality and reliability) and a range of job
performance characteristics (from unsatisfactory to outstanding) for each trait.
The rating is done on the basis of points on the continuum. The common
practice is to follow five points scale.

The rater rates each appraisee by checking the score that best describes his or
her performance for each trait all assigned values for the traits are then
totaled. Figure 28-3 shows a typical graphic rating scale.
Modern Methods:

Management by Objectives (MBO):

Most of the traditional methods of performance appraisal are subject to the

antagonistic judgments of the raters. It was to overcome this problem; Peter F.
Drucker propounded a new concept, namely, management by objectives
(MBO) way back in 1954 in his book.

The Practice of management. The concept of MBO as was conceived by

Drucker, can be described as a “process whereby the superior and subordinate
managers of an organization jointly identify its common goals, define each
individual’s major areas of responsibility in terms of results expected of him
and use these measures as guides for operating the unit and assessing the
contribution of each its members”.

In other words, stripped to its essentials, MBO requires the manager to goals
with each employee and then periodically discuss his or her progress toward
these goals.

In fact, MBO is not only a method of performance evaluation. It is viewed by

the Practicing managers and pedagogues as a philosophy of managerial
practice because .t .s a method by wh.ch managers and subordinates plan,
organise, communicate, control and debate.

An MBO programme consists of four main steps: goal setting, performance

standard, comparison, and periodic review. In goal-setting, goals are set which
each individual, s to attain. The superior and subordinate jointly establish these
goals. The goals refer to the desired outcome to be achieved by each individual
employee.

In performance standards, the standards are set for the employees as per the
previously arranged time period. When the employees start performing their
jobs, they come to know what is to be done, what has been done, and what
remains to be done.

In the third step the actual level of goals attained are compared with the goals
agreed upon. This enables the evaluator to find out the reasons variation
between the actual and standard performance of the employees. Such a
comparison helps devise training needs for increasing employees’ performance
it can also explore the conditions having their bearings on employees’
performance but over which the employees have no control.

Limitation of MBO:

MBO is not a panacea, cure for all organisational problems.

As with other methods, it also suffers from some limitations as catalogued

below:

(i) Setting Un-measurable Objectives:

One of the problems MBO suffers from is unclear and un-measurable
objectives set for attainment. An objective such as “will do a better job of
training” is useless as it is un-measurable. Instead, “well have four
subordinates promoted during the year” is a clear and measurable objective.

(ii) Time-consuming:

The activities involved in an MBO programme such as setting goals, measuring

progress, and providing feedback can take a great deal of time.

(iii) Tug of War:

Setting objectives with the subordinates sometimes turns into a tug of war in
the sense that the manager pushes for higher quotas and the subordinates
push for lower ones. As such, goals so set are likely to be unrealistic.

(iv) Lack of Trust:

MBO is likely to be ineffective in an environment where management has little

trust in its employees. Or say, management makes decisions autocratically and
relies heavily on external controls.

Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS):

The problem of judgmental performance evaluation inherent in the traditional

methods of performance evaluation led to some organisations to go for
objective evaluation by developing a technique known as “Behaviourally
Anchored Rating Scales (BARS)” around 1960s. BARS are descriptions of various
degrees of behaviour with regard to a specific performance dimension.

It combines the benefits of narratives, critical incidents, and quantified ratings

by anchoring a quantified scale with specific behavioural examples of good or
poor performance. The proponents of BARS claim that it offers better and
more equitable appraisals than do the other techniques of performance
appraisal we discussed so far.

Developing BARS typically involves five steps:

1. Generating Critical Incidents:

Critical incidents (or say, behaviours) are those which are essential for the
performance of the job effectively Persons who are knowledgeable of the job
in question (jobholders and/or supervisors) are asked to describe specific
critical incidents of effective and ineffective performance. These critical
incidents may be described in a few short sentences or phrases using the
terminology.

2. Developing Performance Dimensions:

The critical incidents are then clustered into a smaller set of performance
dimensions, usually five to ten. Each cluster, or say, dimension is then defined.

3. Reallocating Incidents:

Various critical incidents are reallocated dimensions by another group of

people who also know the job in question. Various critical incidents so
reallocated to original dimensions are clustered into various categories, with
each cluster showing similar critical incidents. Those critical incidents are
retained which meet 50 to 80% of agreement with the cluster as classified in
step 2.

4. Scaling Incidents:

The same second group as in step 3 rates the behaviour described in each
incident in terms of effectiveness or ineffectiveness on the appropriate
dimension by using seven to nine points scale. Then, average effectiveness
ratings for each incident are determined to decide which incidents will be
included in the final anchored scales.

5. Developing Final BARS Instrument:

A subset of the incidents (usually six or seven per cluster) is used as a

behavioural anchor for the final performance dimensions. Finally, a BARS
instrument with vertical scales is drawn to be used for performance appraisal,
as in Figure 27-5.

How BARS is developed can be exemplified with an example of grocery

checkout clerks working in a large grocery chain.

A number of critical incidents involved in checking out of grocery can be

clustered into seven performance dimensions:
1. Knowledge and Judgment

2. Conscientiousness

3. Skill in Human Relations

4. Skill in Operation of Register

5. Skill in Bagging

6. Organisational Ability of Check stand Work

7. Skill in Monetary Transactions

8. Observational Ability

Now, a BARS for one of these performance dimensions, namely, “knowledge

and judgment” can be developed, as in Figure 28-5. Notice how the typical
BARS is behaviourally anchored with specific critical incidents.

Assessment Centres:

The introduction of the concept of assessment centres as a method of

performance method is traced back in 1930s in the Germany used to appraise
its army officers. The concept gradually spread to the US and the UK in 1940s
and to the Britain in 1960s.

The concept, then, traversed from the army to business arena during 1960s.
The concept of assessment centre is, of course, of a recent origin in India. In
India, Crompton Greaves, Eicher, Hindustan Lever and Modi Xerox have
adopted this technique of performance evaluation.

In business field, assessment centres are mainly used for evaluating executive
or supervisory potential. By definition, an assessment centre is a central
location where managers come together to participate in well-designed
simulated exercises. They are assessed by senior managers supplemented by
the psychologists and the HR specialists for 2-3 days.

Assessee is asked to participate in in-basket exercises, work groups,

simulations, and role playing which are essential for successful performance of
actual job. Having recorded the assessee’s behaviour the raters meet to
discuss their pooled information and observations and, based on it, they give
their assessment about the assesee. At the end of the process, feedback in
terms of strengths and weaknesses is also provided to the assesees.

The distinct advantages the assessment centres provide include more accurate
evaluation, minimum biasedness, right selection and promotion of executives,
and so on. Nonetheless, the technique of assessment centres is also plagued
by certain limitations and problems. The technique is relatively costly and time
consuming, causes suffocation to the solid performers, discourages to the poor
performers (rejected), breeds unhealthy competition among the assessees,
and bears adverse effects on those not selected for assessment.

360 – Degree Appraisal:

Yet another method used to appraise the employee’s performance is 360 –

degree appraisal. This method was first developed and formally used by
General Electric Company of USA in 1992. Then, it travelled to other countries
including India. In India, companies like Reliance Industries, Wipro Corporation,
Infosys Technologies, Thermax, Thomas Cook etc., have been using this
method for appraising the performance of their employees. This feedback
based method is generally used for ascertaining training and development
requirements, rather than for pay increases.

Under 360 – degree appraisal, performance information such as employee’s

skills, abilities and behaviours, is collected “all around” an employee, i.e., from
his/her supervisors, subordinates, peers and even customers and clients.

In other worlds, in 360-degree feedback appraisal system, an employee is

appraised by his supervisor, subordinates, peers, and customers with whom he
interacts in the course of his job performance. All these appraisers provide
information or feedback on an employee by completing survey questionnaires
designed for this purpose.

All information so gathered is then compiled through the computerized system

to prepare individualized reports. These reports are presented to me
employees being rated. They then meet me appraiser—be it one’s superior,
subordinates or peers—and share the information they feel as pertinent and
useful for developing a self-improvement plan.

In 360 – degree feedback, performance appraisal being based on feedback “all

around”, an employee is likely to be more correct and realistic. Nonetheless,
like other traditional methods, this method is also subject to suffer from the
subjectivity on the part of the appraiser. For example, while supervisor may
penalise the employee by providing negative feedback, a peer, being
influenced by ‘give and take feeling’ may give a rave review on his/her
colleague.

Cost Accounting Method:

This method evaluates an employee’s performance from the monetary

benefits the employee yields to his/her organisation. This is ascertained by
establishing a relationship between the costs involved in retaining the
employee, and the benefits an organisation derives from Him/her.

While evaluating an employee’s performance under this method, the

following factors are also taken into consideration:

1. Unit wise average value of production or service.

2. Quality of product produced or service rendered.

3. Overhead cost incurred.

4. Accidents, damages, errors, spoilage, wastage caused through unusual wear

and tear.

5. Human relationship with others.

6. Cost of the time supervisor spent in appraising the employee.

PROCESS OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL:

ERRORS IN PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL:

Central Tendency Error

 Some supervisors tend to rank all employees at about average,

regardless of an employee’s performance. A supervisor who believes in
never rating an employee as excellent is demonstrating central tendency
error.

Contrast Error

 Supervisors who rate subordinates as they compare against each other

rather than how they compare against the performance standards
commit contrast error. This error can cause an employee who is
performing average against performance standards to rate high because
his peers are under performing.

False Attribution

 False attribution is the tendency to attribute bad performance to

internal causes and good performance to external causes. In other
words, if an employee performs well, it’s because the employee had
help, such as a good leader; and if the employee performs badly, it’s
because the employee did something wrong, such as procrastinate.

Halo Effect

 The halo effect is when a supervisor forms a positive impression of an

employee's skill in one area and then gives her high ratings across all
rating criteria. Humans tend to view some traits as more important than
other traits. When a supervisor rates employees with the traits that he
deems more important higher in all rating areas than employees who do
 not possess those traits, the supervisor is committing the halo effect
error.

Leniency Error

 Leniency error is the tendency of a supervisor to rate an employee

higher than what his performance warrants. Reasons that a supervisor
might do this could include avoiding confrontations, or feeling that by
giving the employee a high rating, he will work harder to live up to the
rating.

Perceived Meaning

 Perceived meaning becomes an issue when appraisers do not agree on

the meaning of the rating criteria. For example, one supervisor may
perceive an employee’s constant reporting of problems as initiative,
while another supervisor may feel this behavior demonstrates
dependence on supervisory assistance instead of initiative.

Recency Error

 Recency error happens when a supervisor uses recent events to rate the
employee. This usually occurs due to a lack of documentation of the
employee’s performance over the course of the entire performance
appraisal period. An employee who performed highly over the course of
the appraisal period may be rated low if the most recent events where
negative.

Severity Error

 Severity error is the opposite of leniency error. In severity error, a

supervisor tends to rate an employee lower than what her performance
warrants. A potential cause of the error could be the use of unrealistic
standards of comparison, such as the supervisor rating a new employee
against himself. In this scenario, the supervisor forgets that it took time
to reach the level of performance he operates at, and a new employee
would not have had enough time to develop to that level.

Stereotyping

 Stereotyping is the tendency to apply the same generalizations to all

members of specific social groups. One of the more common types of
 stereotyping that occur in the workplace is gender stereotyping.
Research conducted by Madeline Heilman, a professor of psychology at
NYU, suggests that women are often evaluated more negatively than
men, even when both are trained to do a job the same way.

MEASURING PERFORMANCE:

Goal-setting, or management by objectives (MBO)

In a typical MBO scenario, an employee and manager sit down together at the
start of an appraisal period and formulate a set of statements that represent
specific job goals, targets, or deliverables.

This list of targets becomes the basis for an action plan that spells out what
steps need to be taken to achieve each goal. At a later date  —six months or a
year later — the employee and the manager sit down again and measure
employee performance on the basis of how many of those goals were met.

Essay appraisals

Though less popular than it was a few years ago, the essay approach still has
merit. It can be quite useful for a supervisor to periodically compose
statements that describe an employee’s performance during the appraisal
period. The statements are usually written on standard forms, and they can be
as general or as specific as you want.

These written statements can either be forwarded to the HR department or

can be used as one element in an appraisal session. Any written evaluation also
needs to include more measurable evaluation tools, such as rating scales
applied to specific objectives, tasks, and goals.

Critical incidents reporting

The critical incidents method of performance appraisal is built around a list of

specific behaviors, generally known as critical behaviors, which are deemed
necessary to perform a particular job competently. Managers, the HR
department, or outside consultants can draw up the list.
Performance evaluators use a critical incident report to record actual incidents
of behavior that illustrate when employees either carried out or didn’t carry
out these behaviors. You can use these logs to document a wide variety of job
behaviors, such as interpersonal skills, initiative, and leadership ability.

Job rating checklist

The job rating checklist method of performance appraisal is the simplest

method to use and lends itself to a variety of approaches. To implement this
approach, you supply each evaluator with a prepared list of statements or
questions that relate to specific aspects of job performance.

The questions typically require the evaluator to write a simple “yes” or “no”
answer or to record a number (or some other notation) that indicates which
statement applies to a particular employee’s performance. More often than
not, the responsibility for developing the list lies with the HR department.

Behaviorally anchored rating scale (BARS)

Behaviorally anchored rating scale (BARS) systems are designed to emphasize

the behavior, traits, and skills needed to successfully perform a job. A typical
BARS form has two columns. The left column has a rating scale, usually in
stages from Very Poor to Excellent. The right column contains behavioral
anchors that are the reflections of those ratings.

If the scale were being used, for example, to evaluate a telephone order taker,
the statement in one column may read “1-Very Poor,” and the statement in
the right column may read, “Occasionally rude or abrupt to customer” or
“Makes frequent mistakes on order form.”

Forced choice

Forced-choice methods generally come in two forms: paired statements and

forced ranking. In the paired statements method, evaluators are presented
with two statements and must check the one that best describes the
employee; it’s either one or the other. In the forced ranking method, a number
of options are listed, allowing the evaluator to select a description that may fall
somewhere in between the two extremes.
Ranking methods

Ranking methods compare employees in a group to one another. All involve an

evaluator who asks managers to rank employees from the “best” to the
“worst” with respect to specific job performance criteria. The three most
common variations of this method are as follows:

 Straight ranking: Employees are simply listed in order of ranking.

 Forced comparison: Every employee is paired with every other

employee in the group, and in each case, the manager identifies the
better of the two employees in any pairing. The employees are ranked
by the number of times they’re identified as the best.

 Forced distribution: The employees are ranked along a standard

statistical distribution, the so-called bell curve.

Multi-rater assessments

Multi-rater assessments are also called 360-degree assessments. The

employee’s supervisors, co-workers, subordinates, and, in some cases,
customers are asked to complete detailed questionnaires on the employee.
The employee completes the same questionnaire. The results are tabulated,
and the employee then compares her assessment with the other results.

ADVANTAGES OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL:

1. Performance improvement:

Appraisal systems always aim at improving the performance of employees. It

helps to analyse and evaluate opportunity factors such as technology and
social process.

2. Development of employees:

Appraisal systems determine which employee needs more training and

becomes primary source of information regarding the strengths and
potentialities of the employees.

3. Corrective actions:
Any deficiency of employees can be detected and corrective steps can be taken
through appraisal system.

4. Career planning:

Performance appraisal serves as a valuable tool in the case of career planning

to the employees, since it helps in preparing SWOT analysis of every employee.

5. Promotions:

Performance appraisal also helps the management in deciding about the

promotions, transfers and rewards of the employee.

6. Motivation:

It is a tool for motivating employees towards higher performance.

7. Other benefits:

a. Performance appraisal plans help the management provide systematic

judgments to back up salary increases, transfers, promotions, and demotions
regarding the employees.

b. Superiors can guide the subordinates by making them aware of ‘where they
stand’.

Disadvantages of Performance Appraisal:

1. The Halo effect:

Halo effect is defined as the ‘influence of a rater’s general impression on

ratings of specific rate qualities’. It tends to occur when an evaluation rates an
employee high on all jobs criteria, even if he has performed well only in one
area.

2. Contrast error:

The rating is always based on performance standards. The contrast error

occurs when employee is rated without taking into account the performance
standard. This can also occur if a rater compares an employee’s present
performance with their past performance.
3. Rater bias:

The rater’s prejudices and biasness can also influence rating. For example, a
supervisor can underrate an employee based on race, sex, religion, appearance
and favouritism.

4. Central tendency error:

When the supervisor rates all the employees within a narrow range, thinking
all employees are of average level, this type of error occurs.

5. Leniency or severity:

Performance appraisal demands that the rater should objectively draw a

conclusion about employee’s performance.

6. Sampling error:

If the rater uses a very small sample of the employee’s work, it may be subject
to sampling error.

CHAPTER-3
 ORGANISATIONAL
PROFILE

OPTCL PROFILE

ODISHA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LIMITED (OPTCL), one of the

largest Transmission Utility in the country was incorporated in March 2004
under the Companies Act, 1956 as a company wholly owned by the
Government of Odisha to undertake the business of transmission and wheeling
of electricity in the State. The registered office of the Company is situated at
Bhubaneswar, the capital of the State of Odisha. Its projects and field units are
spread all over the State.
OPTCL became fully opeartional with effect from 9th June 2005 consequent
upon issue of Odisha Electricity Reform (Transfer of Transmission and Related
Activities) Scheme, 2005 under the provisions of Electricity Act, 2003 and the
Odisha Reforms Act, 1995 by the State Government for transfer and vesting of
transmission related activities of GRIDCO with OPTCL. The Company has been
designated as the State Transmission Utility in terms of Section 39 of the
Electricity Act, 2003.

Presently the Company is carrying on intra state transmission and wheeling of

electricity under a license issued by the Odisha Electricity Regulatory
Commission. The Company is also discharging the functions of State Load
Despatch Centre. The Company owns Extra High Voltage Transmission system
and operates about 13,076.997 ckt kms of transmission lines at 400 kV, 220
kV, 132 kV levels and 133 nos. of substations with transformation capacity of
16,514.50 MVA having 340 nos of transformers.

The day-to-day affairs of the Company are managed by the Managing Director
assisted by whole-time Functional Directors as per the advice of the Board of
Directors constituted. They are in turn assisted by a team of dedicated and
experienced professionals in the various fields.

FORMATION OF ODISHA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

In purpose of provision for the Indian electricity(supply) Act,1998 the state

Government constituted the Odisha State Electricity Board a statutory
authority, which came into force in March 1961. OSEB has the responsibility of
a majority within a state.Gue to the heavy commercial losses, the board didn’d
give due attention to the quality & reliability of our supplys to it’s consumers.

Therefore the organization has been reformed from “ODISHA STATE

ELECTRICITY BOARD” to “GRID CORPORATION ODISHA LIMITED” AFTER
REFORM Act, 1986. OPTCL has been bifurcated into two components via GRID
CORPORATION OF ODISHA LIMITED and POWER TRANSMISSION
CORPORATION LIMITED (OPTCL) wed 09-06-2005 by Govt. of Odisha of
notification dated 09-06-2005.

It is estimated that 15% of board’s loes are attributable to this factor of

overstaffing. It is few tile to go into the cause of overstaffing but it is apparent
from various studies that the overstaffing is mustly in non productive
employment. There are many skilled and highly technical areas where chronic
shortage of manpower skill continues.The distribution system of OSBC suffered
from a lack of capital investment and expenditure on repairs and
maintainance, where resulted in a high level of system losses due to technical,
factor (technical losses). Therefore Government of Odisha decided to inform
the power sector and above the issues Government decided to dissolve OSEB
were generation, distribution was decided to be suggested and only the
transmission part was to be retained this or to give fuel to the reform process
in 1995. One Act was passed known as Odisha Electricity reformed Act.

THE ODISHA ELECTRICITY REFORM ACT

The Grid Corporation of Orissa Limited incorporated under the provisions of

the Companies Act, 1956 with effect from the Pith day of April, 1995 with the
main objects of engaging in the business of procurement, transmission and
bulk supply of electric energy, shall subject to the powers of the State
Government under section 12, be the principal company to undertake planning
and coordination in regard to transmission and to determine the electricity
requirements in the State in coordination with the Generating Companies,
State Government, contiguous States, the Commission, the Regional Electricity
Board and the Central Electricity Authority.

(2) Gridco shall own the extra high voltage transmission system, shall be
responsible for transmission system operations and shall operate the power
system in an efficient manner.
(3) Gridco shall undertake the functions specified in this section and such other
functions as may be required under the licence to be granted to it by the
Commission under this Act.

(4) Upon the grant of licence to Gridco under section 15, Gridco shall discharge
such powers, duties and functions of the Board including those under the
Indian Electricity Act, 1910 and the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 or the rules
framed thereunder as the Commission may specify in the licence and it shall
undertake and duly discharge the powers, duties and functions so assigned.

5) Subject to sub-section (1) and the overall supervision and control of Gridco,
subsidiary or associated grid companies may be established in the State and
the Commission may grant licences under the terms of this Act to such grid
companies, in consultation with Gridco.

ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE
OBJECTIVES OF OPTCL

1. To integrate the vision, mission and strategic objectives of OPTCL.

aligning/ linking individual, departmental and organizational objectives.
2. To cascade corporation’s strategic goals to departmental and individual
level.
3. To facilitate role clarity, setting expectations and goal setting, thereby
strengthen
appraiser-appraisee relationship in an atmosphere of openness, mutual trust
and two
way communications.
4. To assess and map competencies at executive level.
5. To track, identify and assess potential of the executive to assume higher
responsibilities and leadership position.
6. To identify future roles and chalk out individual development plans
7. To introduce Bell curves, moderate the ratings for classification of executives
into
Outstanding, Very Good, Moderate& Low performer.
8. Strengthen linkages with other HRD sub-systems such as Training &
Development,

Career Management, Succession Planning, Reward & Recognition (Non-

Financial)

MISSION

 Transmission of power in large quantity with affordable price as per the

expectation of customers, Government of Orissa and OERC.
 Increase transmission network need based, to meet the demand of the
State in
2025
 Develop a portfolio of intra-State and some Inter-State transmission assets
in
national marketing including business expansion for evacuation of power
outside
the state in collaboration with PGCIL and others
 Adoption of best Construction and O & M practices supported by system
driven
processes enabled by cutting edge IT solutions
 Diversification of business by providing consultancy in the areas of
construction
and maintenance services and also in Telecommunication and other emerging
areas so as to achieve optimum utilisation of assets for generation of
additional
revenue
 Develop skilled and satisfied human resources, fostering a service oriented
attitude
to its customers/stake holders and becoming empowered to meet customer
need
in the changing scenarios
 Building Research and Development wing for adoption of new technology
 Discharge the social responsibilities with commitment on Environment
Protection,
Health, Safety, Energy conservation and Community Development
 Achieve excellence in project implementation
 practice higher standard of corporate governance and be a financially sound
Company.

VISION

OPTCL ranks as one among the leading Transmission Utilities in India,

transmitting quality, reliable and SECURED power with minimum transmission
loss at a competitive price.

AWARD ACHIVEMENTS

Optcl won the gold shield form ministry of power, government of india for
highest transmission availability bof 99.97% for the year 2013-2014

ODISHA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LIMITED (OPTCL) is the state

transmission utility responsible for intra state transmission and wheeling of
electricity under licence aissued by the Odisha Electricity Regulatory
Commission.OPTCL owns extra high voltage transmission system and operates
about 12170 cktkms of transmission lines at 400 kv,220 kv,132 kv,levels and
115 nos. Of grids with about 13917 MVA transformation capacities.
On 3.6.2015, OPTCL received the “ Gold Shield” Award from the ministry of
Power government of the India for having the “Highest Transmission System
Availability” of 99.97% in the country for the year 2013-14. The Award was
received by Sj. Hemant Sharma, IAS CMD, OPTCL and Sj. Prafulla Chandra
Tripathy, Chief General Manager(O&M), OPTCL in a award function held at
Vigyan Bhawan, New Delhi from Sj. Piyush Goyal, Hon’ble Minister of state
with independent charge for power, coal and new & renewable energy. It is
not the first time, but on previous two occasions, the state utility has succeded
in being considered as one among the best performing state in India Power
Sector. For 2009-10, OPTCL was awarded with Bronge Shield with 99.59%
transmission system availability and for 2012-14, A Gold Shield too with
99.97% transmission system availability. Transmission system availability is one
of the major key performance indicators (KPIs) for evaluating the performance
of any state/central transmission utility.

During the last five years, the peak demand of the state has increased almost
25% to 4100 MW which is handled by exciting network and equipment of the
transmission system. Advance planning and proactive steps in implementing
new projects ( Grids and Lines) are main factors that contributed to building up
a healthy transmission network in the state. Besides preventive system
improvements majors have helped by the system not only achieve this rare
feet but also reduce the transmission loss from 4.11% in 2009-10 to 3.76% in
2014-15.
 CHAPTER-4
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL
AT OPTCL

PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL IN OPTCL

Any organization comes into existence when a group of people join hands for
the attainment of certain common objectives. No organization can run
successfully unless there is someone to manage it objectives. It is the human
asset; the centre of all resources that convert all other resources into
productive resources to face this challenge,industry needs to review the
existing goals, structure, product system,product process,managerial qualities
and roles based on these appropriate strategies and action plan to OPTCL.
Thus OPTCL started the concept of human resource development in a broad
level. The organization was proved in November 1996. So in order to meet the
challenge and industrial needs, performance has become the necessity of the
organisation, which evaluates as individual’s skill, knowledge and attitude.

Thus the assessment of how successful employees have been at meeting their
individual goals therefore becomes a critical part of HRM. This leads to the
topic of Performance Appraisal.

In OPTCL they have the system of Performance Appraisal of their employees.

The main objective of this Performance Appraisal system is to evaluate the
performance to promote their employees and to arrange for their various
training programs. If they require for enhancing their skills in their respective
areas and in contribution enhancement.

Employees are evaluated by how well they accomplish a specific set of

objectives that have been determined to be critical in the successful
completion in their job. This approach is frequently referred to as management
by objectives. MBO is a process converts constructive performance appraisal
process while evaluating its employees. It’s evaluation is based on quantitative
wise and objective wise.

Company set goals who to its employee by properly reporting with achieved
and if there is failure in reaching the target, what are the causes and reasons
behind it. Every evaluator has his or her own value sytem which acts as a
standard against which appraisals are made relative to the true or actual and
some mark low.

METHODS OF APPRAISAL

 Each offer the company will be appraised annually during the month of
April,May or June.
 The Appraisal process will be undertaken by the controlling officer.
 The Appraisal process will involve a proactive review by the concerned
and his controlled officer. The work activities and standard of
performance relating the both the job and behaviours of the officers will
provide appraisal process.
OBJECTIVES OF EPAR FORM

 Improving the performance of the individual officer and the

performance of the company as a whole.
 Recognizing the contribution of each officer.
 Identify opportunity for growth and development of the officer.

DURATION OF APPRAISAL SYSTEM

The time of constraints enable the employees to his or her capabilities in term
of performance as per duration allowed. In OPTCL, the Performance Appraisal
system is carried out annually.

EPAR IN OPTCL

In OPTCL, the staffs were categorized into executives and non executives. The
executive managers are categorized into 10 grades i.e., E1 to E10. The
evaluation of the performance of the employees is the most significant tool of
an organization. This help in assigning word according to the ability and
capacities and thereby identifying people for higher responsibility jobs. It helps
in developing a sense of confidence among employees. It also helps in
improving employer-employee relationship through mutual understanding,
trust and opennesss.

EXECUTIVE GRADE STRUCTURE

GRADE TITLE
E1 Management Trainee
E2 Junior Manager
E3 Assistant Manager
E4 Deputy Manager
E5 Manager
E6 Assistant General Manager
 E7 Deputy General Manager
E8 General Manager
E9 Senior General Manager
E10 Chief General Manager
Figure: The officers of the company are categorised

THE CONTAINS OF THE EPAR FORM

Appraisal is done annually and semi confidentially. The features of the EPAR
form can be broadly classified as follows:

1. Personal data
2. Calendar of appraisal activities
3. Level of reporting, reviewing and accepting officer
4. Self appraisal(open)
5. Performance interview/counseling
6. Appraisal by reporting officer(confidential)
7. Appraisal by reviewing officer(confidential)
8. Appraisal by accepting officer(confidential)
9. Statement of training and development needs

1. PERSONAL DATA : This column is meant to identify the appraisal properly

and it helps to file and trace the appraisal data easily. Above this column the
appraisal period need to be mentioned by the appraisal.

2. CALENDAR OF APPRAISAL ACTIVITIES : This contained the scheduled for

appraisal to make the system more purposeful and meaningful. The release of
forms starts from 15th Feb. towards the end period of the appraisal year and
completed appraisal to reach the appraisal cell (HRD) by31st March of the
relevant appraisal year.
3. LEVEL OF REPORTING,REVIEWING AND ACCEPTING OFFICER: This table of
appraisal form which indicate reporting, reviewing and accepting officers. It
has been arranging in hierarchial manner to avoid any confusion to appraisal.

4. SELF APPRAISAL: It provides an opportunity to appraise for self reflection.

The appraise mention his task and achievements which becomes a basis for
the further appraisal for the supervisor officer.
5. PERFORMANCE INTERVIEW: The reporting officer and appraise come closer
by this process. The reporting officer indicates the strength and weakness of
the appraise.

6. APPRAISAL BY REPORTING OFFICER: This appraisal relates to the following

attributes:

1. Work performance (attributes):

 Technical and Personal knowledge on present job

 Achievements of the assignments/performed task and
responsibilities
 Qualities of work performance
 Technical knowledge and competence to take up higher

2. Managerial trait (attributes):

 Problem analysis and decision making

 Initiative/creativity
 Group effectiveness
 Communication skill
 Development and subordinates

Depending upon the level of executive appropriate weights is to these of

attributes. The reporting officer is to rate the appraise against the attributes
on point scale ranging from average to outstanding . the overall valuation in
point is to translate into an appropriate grading as below.

* Outstanding: Constantly outstanding performance despite the constraints,

excellence is the distinctive mark.

* Very Good: Exceeding high level of performance.

* Good: Meets what is accepted efficiently and effectively.

* Average: Requirements are just met.

* Below average: Does not even meet the basic requirements.

7.APPRAISAL BY REVIEWING OFFICER:

The reviewing officer takes into account all the information placed before him
and personal knowledge about appraise. He also assesses the potential of the
appraise for holding position in the next higher grade. His rating done by the
reporting officer.

8.APPRIASAL BY ACCEPTING OFFICER:

The rating of the appraise by the accepting officer is final and super cods the
evalution of the reporting and reviewing officer.

9.STATEMENT OF TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT NEEDS:

The training needs recommendation of the reporting and reviewing officer are
sent to the training and development wing for the purpose of training needs
analysis and preparation and annual training calendar.
 CHAPTER-5
DATA ANALYSIS
&
INTERPRETATION

1. Are you aware of the performance appraisal technique being followed at

OPTCL?

INTERPRETATION: It can be inferred that maximum employees are aware of

their Performance Appraisal technique i.e, 93.3% and employees not aware of
it is minimum i.e, 6.67%.
2. How many times performance appraisal is conducted in OPTCL?

INTERPRETATION: It can be inferred that 90% of the respondents say that PA is

conducted once a year and 10% of the respondents says there is no specific
time.

3. What is the reason for conducting performance appraisal in OPTCL?

INTERPRETATION: It can be inferred that 46.67% respondents feel that the

reason for conducting performance appraisal includes all the factors such that
identifying motivating methods, to decide monetary benefits and identifying
barriers of performance; and PA is conducted to identify motivating methods
only & to identify barriers of performance are felt by 26.67% respondents
each.
4. When is the performance appraisal conducted?
INTERPRETATION: It can be inferred that for 100% of the respondents PAs are
conducted during working hours.

5. Who conduct performance appraisal?

INTERPRETATION: It can be inferred that 96% of the respondents say that PA

are conducted by Superiors, 3% says PA are conducted by everyone & 1% says
that PA is conducted by peers.

6. Are you informed the reason for conducting performance appraisal

programs?

INTERPRETATION: It can be inferred that 77% of respondents says that the

reason for conducting PA is discussed always, 20% says it is never discussed
and 3% of the respondents says the reason for PA is discussed sometimes.
7. Does the performance appraisal programs relate to organizational goals?
INTERPRETATION: It can be inferred that 83% of the respondents says that PA
relates to some extent to organizational goals & 17% says to a high extent.

8. On what criteria is employee performance rated?

INTERPRETATION: It can be inferred that 96.67% respondents says that

employee performance is rated based on abilities and skills; & 3.33% says that
it is rated based on superiority.

9. Do you share your opinions and suggestions freely to the managers during
the appraisal program?

INTERPRETATION: It can be inferred that 50% respondents mostly feel free to

share their opinions and suggestions; 36.67% respondents feel PA program
meets expectation; 20% respondents feel outstanding OPTCL & 13.37%
respondents never feel free to share their opinions and suggestions.

10. Does the application system provide an opportunity for each opposite to
communicate the support he needs from his superiors to perform his job
well?
INTERPRETATION: It can be inferred that 40% respondents agree that the
application system provide an opportunity for each opposite to communicate
the supports need from his superiors to perform his job well; 36.67% couldn’t
say; 16.67% strongly agree & 6.67% disagreed.

11. Are the methods of performance appraisal properly implemented at

OPTCL?

INTERPRETATION: It can be inferred that 63.333% respondents agree that the

methods of PA are properly implemented; 30% respondents strongly agree &
6.67% respondents disagree the statement.

12. State your satisfaction through the performance appraisal program at

OPTCL?

INTERPRETATION: It can be inferred that 36.67% respondents feel that PA

program in OPTCL needs improvement; 30% respondents feel PA program
meets expectation; 20% feel outstanding OPTCL & 13.37% respondents feel
unsatisfied with the PA program in OPTCL.
13. Do you feel that Performance Appraisal encourages you to put in more
effort in reaching your goals?

INTERPRETATION: It can be inferred that 46.67% agree that PA encourages

putting more effort in reaching their goals; 30% respondents strongly agree;
13.33% are neutral and 10% respondents disagree.

14. Are both positive & negative points discussed to the employees?

INTERPRETATION: It can be inferred that 76.67% respondents say positive &

negative points are discussed to the employees & 23.33% respondents say
both points are not discussed to the employees.

15. Rate your appraisal programs?

INTERPRETATION: It can be inferred that 70% respondents feel PA program as

effective; 16.67% feel un based and 13.33% feel accurate.
16. Changes have been taken in OPTCL as a result of performance appraisal?

INTERPRETATION: It can be inferred that 36.66% respondents can’t take any

decision; 26.67% says changes taken for improvement in management –
employees relationship; 16.67% says changes taken in restructuring of
organization or individual objectives; 13.33% says changes taken in motivating
strategy & 6.67% respondents says changes in making in dissatisfied areas.

17. How effective OPTCL’s performance appraisal system improving overall

performance?

INTERPRETATION: It can be inferred that 40% respondents feel OPTCL’s PA

system improving overall performance effectively; 36.67% feel moderate
&23.33% feel highly effective.

18. Do you think performance helps to change behavior of employees?

INTERPRETATION: It can be inferred that 63.33% agreed thinking performance
helps to change in behavior; 16.67% respondents can’t say; 13.33% disagreed
& 6.67% respondent strongly agree.
19. Is the performance appraisal process of OPTCL is biased?

INTERPRETATION: it can be inferred that 63.33% respondents feel PA process

of OPTCL is not biased & 36.67% respondents feel the process as biased.

20. Is the performance appraisal review and updated & now & then?

INTERPRETATION: It can be inferred that 46.66% respondents says PA is

reviewed & updated frequently; 36.67% says occasionally & 16,67%
respondents says PA is never reviewed & updated.
 CHAPTER-6
CONCLUSIONS
&
SUGGESTIONS
 CONCLUSION

After having analyzed the data, it was observed that Performance Appraisal in
the concerned organization is an effective tool. Appraisals here are helping
individuals develop, improve organizational and feed into business planning,
they also help management in monitoring of standards, agreeing expectation
and objectives delegation of responsibility and tasks. Staff performance
appraisal also establish individual training needs & enable analysis & planning
of organizational training needs. It encourages employees productivity with
positive feedbacks. Thus, performance appraisal in OPTCL is satisfactory for its
effective management and evaluation of staff.

Followings are the findings during the study:-

a) The very concept of performance appraisal is marketed through

out the organization. People have accepted it & understood its
importance to the organization.
b) The job and role expected from the employees is decided well in
advance & that too with their consensus.
c) The time period for conducting the appraisal is once a year.
d) Some employees unaware of the appraisal system.
e) Appraisers review the system & recommend improvement
measures.
 SUGGESTIONS

Following are the suggestions for improvement:-

a) The performance appraisal system should be revised continuously

& discussion between the appraise & the appraiser for better
results.
b) Transparency into the system should be ensured through
discussion about the employees performance with the employees
concerned & trying to find out the grey areas so the trainee can be
implemented to improve on that.
c) Further, at the time of confirmation also, the appraisal from
should not lead to duplication of any information. Instead,
detailed appraisal of the employees work must be done; which
must incorporate both the work related as well as other personal
attributes that are important for work performance.
d) The marketing of the concept of performance appraisal through
out the organization should not start at the buttom, but instead by
the initiative of the top management.
e) Employees having low performance could be called individually,
encouraged and monitored closely to make improvements.
 CHAPTER-7

ANNEXURE
 QUESTIONNAIRE

A study on Performance Appraisal of employees in OPTCL, Bhubaneswar

Name- Age-

Designation-

Category – Executive ( ) Non-executive ( )

1. Are you aware performance appraisal techniques being followed at OPTCL?

(A) Yes (B) No

2. How many times performance appraisal is conducted in OPTCL?

(A) Once a Year (B) Twice a Year (C) No Specific times

3. What is the reason for conducting performance appraisal in OPTCL?

(A) To identifying motivating methods (B) To decide monetary benefits

(B) All of the above

4. When is the performance appraisal conducted?

(A) During working hours (B) During non-working hours

5. Who conduct performance appraisal?

(A) Superiors (B) Peers (C) Everyone (D) Outsider

6. Are you informed the reason for conducting performance appraisal
programs?

(A) Always (B) Sometimes (C) Never (D) Never

7. Does the performance appraisal programs relate to organizational goals?

(A) To a high extent (B) To some extent (C) To a low extent

8. On what criteria is employee performance rated?

(A) Based on abilities & skills (B) Based on management reference

(C) Based on superiority (D) Based on contribution

9. Do you share your opinions and suggestions freely to the managers

during the appraisal program?

(A) Mostly (B) Rarely (C) Never

10.Does the application system provide an opportunity for each opposite to

communicate the support he needs from his superiors to perform his job
well?

(A) Strongly agree (B) Agree (C) Can’t say (D) Disagree

11.Are the methods of performance appraisal properly implemented at

OPTCL?

(A) Strongly agree (B) Agree (C) Can’t say (D) Disagree

12.State your satisfaction through the performance appraisal program at

OPTCL?

(A) Unsatisfactory (B) Need improvement (C) Needs expectation (D)

Outstanding
 13.Do you feel that performance appraisal encourages to do put in more
effort in reaching your goals?

(A)Strongly agree (B) Agree (C) Neutral (D) Disagree (E) Strongly
disagree

14.Are both positive and negative points discussed to the employees?

(A)Yes (B) No

15.Rate your appraisal programs?

(A) Reliable (B) Effective (C) Accurate (D) Motivating

16.What changes have been taken in OPTCL as a result of performance

appraisal?

(A) Change in motivating strategy (B) Restructuring of organization or

individual objectives (C) Improvement in management employees
relationship (D) Making changes indissatisfied areas

17.How effective OPTCL performance appraisal system improving overall

performances?

(A) Highly ineffective (B) Ineffective (C) Moderate (D) Effective

18.Do you think performance helps to change behavior of employees ?

(A) Strongly agree (B) Agree (C) Can’t say (D) Disagree

19.Is the performance appraisal process of OPTCL is biased?

(A) Yes (B) No

20.Is the performance appraisal reviewed and updated now & then?

(A) Frequently (B) Occasionally (C) Never

 BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS REFERRED :-

 Personnel and Human Resource Management : P. Subharao

 Human Resource and Personnel Management : K. Aswathappa
 Annual Reports of OPTCL

WEBSITES REFERRED:-

 www.Google.com
 www.wikipedia.com
 www.Slideshare.com
 www.optcl.co.in