SHUBHAM KAMBOJ

Register No – 2227558
Section -1MBAH
Decision Sheet
Of
Reward encourages beast…. oops, best!

8888888888888888888888888888888/
ABOUT COMPANY:
 YHMH was an organization working in hospital consultancy.
 YHMH is a non-governmental organization.
 They have experience of 24 plus year.
 It had not only contributed in delivery of service at public health facilities but also in
private hospitals.
 Provided consultancy service for setting up a new hospital, planning and
infrastructure development in a hospital.
 planning and infrastructure development in a hospital.
 exploratory studies for increasing the retention and motivation of the hospital staff.
 improving patient outcomes and patient satisfaction by focusing on quality of
services, facilitating accreditation of hospitals by Quality Control of India (QCI),
NABH (National Accreditation Board for Hospitals and Healthcare Providers), JCI
(Joint Commission
International), etc.
 One important aspect which contributed to quick rise of YHMH was its culture.
 YHMH took pride in stating that it had imbibed some of the integral values of OB in
its culture and it was the key behind its success.
 the organization had three major layers. At the helm of affairs, was the Director, then
programs officers followed by project officers.
PROBLEM STATEMENT:
Reward management is concerned with the formulation and implementation of strategies and
policies that aim to reward people fairly, equitably and consistently in accordance with extent
to which their work has met the laid down objectives.
ASSUMPTIONS: -
 No transparency regarding award amount and not disclosed.
 Favouritism.
 Absence of parameters of assessment.
 Good work was not endorsed at YHMH.
 High attrition rate.
 Success rate of wining proposal came down.
CRITERIA:
 Verifiable preselected goals
 Appraisal of manager as manager.
 Selection of job-related criteria.
 Rating forms.
 Performance target.
 Adequate monitoring of performance.
OPTION AND IMPACT: -

8888888888888888888888888888888/
 1. APPRAISAL AGAINST VERIFIABLE OBJECTIVE: -
ADVANTAGE: -
 the great advantage of being operational
 Appraisal actually a part of manger job.
 There are always questions of how well a person did.
 furnishes strong presumptions of objectivity and reduces the element of pure
judgment in appraisal.
DISADVANTAGE: -
 entirely possible for persons to meet or miss goals through no effort or fault of their
own.
 Luck often plays a part in performance.
 Goal attainment tends to be short-run in practice.

2. APPRAISING MANAGERS AS MANAGERS: -

the whole list of 73 key questions, on the functions of the manager and then dealing
with each function series of questions.
ADVANTAGE: -
 removes communication difficulties.
 tool for management development.
 Found useful in pinpointing areas in which weaknesses exist and to which
development should be directed.
DISADVANTAGE: -
 Time consuming.
 Focus on only managerial aspect and not to technical qualification.
 Subjectivity involved.

3. A TEAM EVALUATION APPROCH: -

 The criteria selected for evaluation
 Apart from managerial skill in this approach technical skill also included.
 Also use for promotion and for personnel development.
 high degree of accuracy.
 fair method than other because of involvement of criteria and raters.

RECOMMENDATION: -
 Implementing a team evaluation approach because employees work in teams is part
of the consulting sector. So, this approach is helpful in evaluation.
 Use of performance review software to reduce time.

8888888888888888888888888888888/
  Monitoring progress
 Pay for performance when employees achieve challenging goals instead of
according to a person’s title or the length of service.

CONCLUSION: -
This case helps us to understand appraisal management. Employee efficiency is the primary
consideration for the employer. All the profit the firm makes depends on the productivity of
the employees. As in this case, we can see that the company's success decreased and attrition
rates increased because employees were not happy with the reward management in the
organization. so, we can learn from this case when companies fail to meet the fair evaluation
principle; the same incentives cause the problem.

8888888888888888888888888888888/