Mecon
Mecon
Mecon
Mecon has recently moved from Performance Appraisal System (PAS) to Performance
Management System (PMS). The old system of Performance Appraisal in MECON was a
mechanism of evaluation of employees performance based on his/her past performance in
the complete financial year. There was no detailed feedback given to the employee about
his/her areas of improvement. The above process was unsuccessful in building the
competencies of employees and measuring their potential thereby leading to no alignment of
individual performance with strategic goals of the Organization.
The objective and rationale behind our study is as follows:
Primary Objective:
Secondary Objective:
To trace the drawbacks in prevailing system and suggest the latest methodology with
respect to same.
To support in bridging the gap between current performance and desired performance.
Performance
Management System (PMS)
Paper Form
Online System
No activity plan
No self-assessment
Self-assessment
No Performance Diary
Limited Transparency
Transparency is envisaged
5.
final
grade
obtained
from
Scope of PMS
7.
Clusters of PMS
E0 E2
Cluster B:
E3 E4
Cluster C:
E5 E6
Cluster D1:
E7 (DGM)
Cluster D2:
Cluster E:
E8 - E9
8.
Tiers of PMS
towards
the
9.
Significance
Individual
Duties
Contribution
towards
Department
Contribution
towards
Organization
Potential
Captures
actual work
performed in
the financial
year
Captures
attributes and
competencies;
ability
and values
Total
D1
D2
E0-E2
E3-E4
E5-E6
E7
(DGM)
E7 (DGM I/c
& Jt. GM
E8E9
45%
40%
35%
20%
10%
10%
15%
20%
20%
35%
40%
20%
10%
10%
15%
15%
20%
40%
30%
30%
30%
30%
30%
30%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Table 1
The weightage/marks allotted to Tier 4 (Potential) remains at a constant
value across different clusters as the behavioural attributes and
competencies; values and ability of an employee measured in this tier are
required at the same level in all the clusters. However, the type of
behavioural attributes and competencies required in an employee differs
across different clusters.
For example: An employee in E2 grade will be evaluated out of 45 for
Individual Duties and out of 10 for Contribution towards Organization
whereas an employee in E7 grade will be evaluated out of 20 for
Individual Duties and out of 15 for Contribution towards Organization.
However, employees across all clusters will be evaluated out of 30 for the
Tier 4 i.e. Potential.
A: E0-E2
Manager
Sr. Manager
B: E3-E4
AGM
C: E5-E6
DGM
D1: E7 (DGM)
Jt. GM / GM
GM / ED
GM
GM/ ED
ED/ Director
E: E8-E9
Director
CMD
CMD
Table 2
If in a particular case, minimum level officer is not available in the
Department, then the officer in the next higher grade will function as the
minimum level officer.
D1
D2
E0 - E2
E3 - E4
E5 - E6
E7
(DGM)
E7 (DGM I/c
& Jt. GM
E8 E9
50%
50%
40%
40%
40%
40%
30%
30%
30%
30%
30%
30%
20%
20%
30%
30%
30%
30%
Table 3
For example: An employee in E2 grade (Cluster A) will be evaluated out of
45 for Individual Duties by each of the Superior Officers R1/R2/R3, as per
Table 1. But the consolidated score of Tier 1 (Individual Duties) for that
employee will be evaluated by obtaining the weighted average of marks
given by R1/R2/R3, as per Table 3. Similar process will be followed for
evaluation of consolidated scores of all other tiers of that employee.
Explanation
Exceeds expectations
Table 4
In this regard, employees are also provided with a tool of Activity Plan
wherein they can mention the details of how each of the KPIs have to be
achieved by the employee as well as the time allocated to execute the
KPIs.
Due to the changing needs and business of our organization, KRAs and
KPIs may be modified, added or deleted every quarter but the total weight
of the Tier 1 should remain constant.
Secondly, after freezing KRAs, KPIs and their weightages, the employee
will be providing self rating depending on the allotted weightage to each
of the KPIs, as a self appraisal, based on how one thinks he/she has
performed the basic duties and responsibilities.
Thirdly, after the self appraisal, each of the Superior Officers (R1/R2/R3)
will be evaluating one by one the performance of the employee for Tier 1,
on the same rating depending on the allotted weightage to each of the
KPIs such that R1 & R2 cannot see marks given by either of them but R3
can see the marks given by both R1/R2. The order of evaluation by the
Superior Officers will be R1-R2-R3.
Marks given by employee or any of R1/R2/R3 can be either in integral
form or fractional form.
The employee can provide his remarks for each of the KPIs giving
justification of the self rating. Similarly, each of the Superior Officers
(R1/R2/R3) can also provide their valuable comment on the rating
provided by them, as a whole.
Once the marks given by R1/R2/R3 are frozen, as per Table 1, weighted
average for marks given by R1/R2/R3 (as per Table 3) can be computed
for each of the KPIs by the system and final consolidated score
corresponding to Tier 1 will be automatically calculated.
All the mathematical calculations carried out in Tier 1 are system
generated and not by employee or any of R1/R2/R3.
The targets set in the evaluation process of Tier 1 varies for employees of
different departments as well as for employees of same department &
different cluster but may or may not vary for employees of same cluster
and same department.
14.2
14.3
14.4
Tier 4: Potential
15
Index Evaluation
15.1
Performance Index
Performance Score
>63 marks
<=41 marks
15.2
Potential Index
Potential Score
>27 marks
-
<=17 marks
Rating
%age of Executives to be
kept
Outstanding
10% to 15%
Very Good
35% to 40%
Good
40% to 45%
Below Par
10%
Table 5
The PMS Grade, so obtained, will be deciding the Performance Related Pay
(PRP) of the employee based on the linkage method followed. However,
the employees getting the Grade C will not be given any PRP, as per the
DPE Guidelines.
The method of allotment of these grades to the employees is through the
Performance Grid.
HP
Performanc
AP
e
LP
LP
AP
HP
EP
Index
Potential Index
Table 6
First level of moderation for employees between grades E-1 to E-7 would
be carried out by GMs, at the individual level, for keeping the grades of
the employees under them, in the percentage band complying with DPE
(as per Table 5). For this, GMs will get the complete access to the scores
obtained by each employee in the evaluation across all tiers along with
the performance diary of each employee.
Second level of moderation for employees between grades E-1 to E-9
would be carried out by a single Performance Management Committee
(PMC), at the Organizational Level, consisting of committee of Directors,
for keeping the grades obtained by all the employees of the Organization
in synchronization with the percentage band complying with DPE and
follow a Bell Curve for the Organization as whole. For employees between
grades E-8 to E-9, there would be a single moderation only i.e. by PMC.
Gradings decided by PMC would be final.