Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The history of performance appraisal is quite brief. Its roots in the early 20th
century. But this is not very helpful, for the same may be said about almost ev
erything in the field of modern human resources management. As a distinct and fo
rmal management procedure used in the evaluation of work performance, appraisal
really dates from the time of the Second World War - not more than 60 years ago.
Yet in a broader sense, the practice of appraisal is a very ancient art. In the
scale of things historical, it might well lay claim to being the world's second
oldest profession!
There is, says Dulewicz (1989), ".. a basic human tendency to make judgments abo
ut those one is working with, as well as about oneself." Appraisal, it seems, is
both inevitable and universal. In the absence of a carefully structured system
of appraisal, people will tend to judge the work performance of others, includin
g subordinates, naturally, informally and arbitrarily.
The human inclination to judge can create serious motivational, ethical and lega
l problems in the workplace. Without a structured appraisal system, there is lit
tle chance of ensuring that the judgments made will be lawful, fair, defensible
and accurate. Performance appraisal systems began as simple methods of income ju
stification. That is, appraisal was used to decide whether or not the salary or
wage of an individual employee was justified.
The process was firmly linked to material outcomes. If an employee's performance
was found to be less than ideal, a cut in pay would follow. On the other hand,
if their performance was better than the supervisor expected, a pay rise was in
order. Little consideration, if any, was given to the developmental possibilitie
s of appraisal. It was felt that a cut in pay, or a rise, should provide the onl
y required impetus for an employee to either improve or continue to perform well
. Sometimes this basic system succeeded in getting the results that were intende
d; but more often than not, it failed.
For example, early motivational researchers were aware that different people wit
h roughly equal work abilities could be paid the same amount of money and yet ha
ve quite different levels of motivation and performance. These observations were
confirmed in empirical studies. Pay rates were important, yes; but they were no
t the only element that had an impact on employee performance. It was found that
other issues, such as morale and self-esteem, could also have a major influence
.
Most persons share a desire to know the answer to the question, "How am I doing?
" They want to know what is expected of them, how well they are meeting the expe
ctations, how they can improve, and some want to know how they might qualify for
higher responsibilities. The process of performance appraisal should provide th
e opportunity for discussion of these concerns. The process should also provide
the basis for enhanced communication among college personnel.
The performance appraisals can have a huge impact on the future of the employee
in the company. When the feedback is provided correctly and the manager makes a
follow up of all the agreements done during the performance appraisal interview,
the performance appraisals can work without any formal documents. As the HRM Fu
nction is responsible for the performance management process, it brings new and
better performance appraisal forms every single year. And the result usually fai
ls every year. The managers and the employees do not see the benefits of partici
pating in the performance review process as they take it as an activity driven b
y Human Resources for Human Resources.
Definition of Performance Appraisal
According to Flippo, "performance appraisal is the systematic, periodic and an i
mpartial rating of an employee’s excellence in the matters pertaining to his prese
nt job and his potential for a better job”.
“Appraisal is a process that provides an analysis of a Person’s overall capabilities
and potential, allowing informed decisions to be made for particular purposes”. A
n Important part of the process is assessment, whereby data on an individual’s pas
t and current work behavior and Performance are collected and reviewed.
Concepts
Typically, performance appraisal has been limited to a feedback process between
employees and supervisors. However, with the increased focus on teamwork, employ
ee development, and customer service, the emphasis has shifted to employee feedb
ack from the full circle of sources depicted in the diagram below. This multiple
-input approach to performance feedback is sometimes called “360-degree assessment”
to connote that full circle. There are no prohibitions in law or regulation agai
nst using a variety of rating sources, in addition to the employee’s supervisor, f
or assessing performance.
Research has shown assessment approaches with multiple rating sources provide mo
re accurate, reliable, and credible information.
For this reason, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management supports the use of mul
tiple rating sources as an effective method of assessing performance for formal
appraisal and other evaluative and developmental purposes. The circle, or perhap
s more accurately the sphere, of feedback sources consists of supervisors, peers
, subordinates, customers, and one’s self. It is not necessary, or always appropri
ate, to include all of the feedback sources in a particular appraisal program.
• SUPERIORS/MANGERS
Evaluations by superiors are the most traditional source of employee feedback. T
his form of evaluation includes both the ratings of individuals by supervisors o
n elements in an employee’s performance plan and the evaluation of programs and te
ams by senior managers.
• SELF-ASSESSMENT
This form of performance information is actually quite common but usually used o
nly as an informal part of the supervisor-employee appraisal feedback session. S
upervisors frequently open the discussion with: “How do you feel you have performe
d?” In a somewhat more formal approach, supervisors ask employees to identify the
key accomplishments they feel best represent their performance in critical and n
on-critical performance elements. In a 360-degree approach, if self-ratings are
going to be included, structured forms and formal procedures are recommended.
• PEERS
With downsizing and reduced hierarchies in organizations, as well as the increas
ing use of teams and group accountability, peers are often the most relevant eva
luators of their colleagues’ performance. Peers have a unique perspective on a co-
worker’s job performance and employees are generally very receptive to the concept
of rating each other. Peer ratings can be used when the employee’s expertise is k
nown or the performance and results can be observed. There are both significant
contributions and serious pitfalls that must be carefully considered before incl
uding this type of feedback in a multifaceted appraisal program.
• SUBORDINATES
An upward-appraisal process or feedback survey (sometimes referred to as a SAM,
for “Subordinates Appraising Managers”) is among the most significant and yet contro
versial features of a “full circle” performance evaluation program. Both managers be
ing appraised and their own superiors agree that subordinates have a unique, oft
en essential, perspective. The subordinate ratings provide particularly valuable
data on performance elements concerning managerial and supervisory behaviors. H
owever, there is usually great reluctance, even fear, concerning implementation
of this rating dimension. On balance, the contributions can outweigh the concern
s if the precautions noted below are addressed.
• CUSTOMERS
Executive Order 12862, Setting Customer Service Standards, requires agencies to
survey internal and external customers, publish customer service standards, and
measure agency performance against these standards. Internal customers are defin
ed as users of products or services supplied by another employee or group within
the agency or organization. External customers are outside the organization and
include, but are not limited to, the general public.
MANAGEMENT BY OBJECTIVES
The concept of ‘Management by Objectives’ (MBO) was first given by Peter Drucker in
1954. It can be defined as a process whereby the employees and the superiors com
e together to identify common goals, the employees set their goals to be achieve
d, the standards to be taken as the criteria for measurement of their performanc
e andcontribution and deciding the course of action to be followed.
The essence of MBO is participative goal setting, choosing course of actions and
decision making. An important part of the MBO is the measurement and the compar
ison of the employee’s actual performance with the standards set. Ideally, when em
ployees themselves have been involved with the goal setting and the choosing the
course of action to be followed by them, they are more likely to fulfill their
responsibilities.
Traditional methods Of Performance Appraisal
ESSAY APPRAISAL
In its simplest form, this technique asks the rater to write a paragraph or more
covering an individual s strengths, weaknesses, potential, and so on. In most s
election situations, particularly those involving professional, sales, or manage
rial positions, essay appraisals from former employers, teachers, or associates
carry significant weight. The assumption seems to be that an honest and informed
statement -either by word of mouth or in writing- from someone who knows a man
well, is fully as valid as more formal and more complicated methods.
The biggest drawback to essay appraisals is their variability in length and cont
ent. Moreover, since different essays touch on different aspects of a man s perf
ormance or personal qualifications, essay ratings are difficult to combine or co
mpare. For comparability, some type of more formal method, like the graphic rati
ng scale, is desirable.
FORCED-CHOICE RATING
Like the field review, this technique was developed to reduce bias and establish
objective standards of comparison between individuals, but it does not involve
the intervention of a third party. Although there are many variations of this me
thod, the most common one asks raters to choose from among groups of statements
those which best fit the individual being rated and those which least fit him.
The statements are then weighted or scored, very much the way a psychological te
st is scored. People with high scores are, by definition, the better employees;
those with low scores are the poorer ones. Since the rater does not know what th
e scoring weights for each statement are, in theory at least, he cannot play fav
orites. He simply describes his people, and someone in the personnel department
applies the scoring weights to determine who gets the best rating.
The rationale behind this technique is difficult to fault. It is the same ration
ale used in developing selection test batteries. In practice, however, the force
d-choice method tends to irritate raters, who feel they are not being trusted. T
hey want to say openly how they rate someone and not be second-guessed or tricke
d into making "honest" appraisals.
CRITICAL INCIDENT APPRAISAL
The discussion of ratings with employees has, in many companies, proved to be a
traumatic experience for supervisors. Some have learned from bitter experience w
hat General Electric later documented; people who receive honest but negative fe
edback are typically not motivated to do better - and often do worse - after the
appraisal interview. Consequently, supervisors tend to avoid such interviews, o
r if forced to hold them, avoid giving negative ratings when the ratings have to
be shown to the employee.
WORK-STANDARDS APPROACH
Instead of asking employees to set their own performance goals, many organizatio
ns set measured daily work standards. In short, the work standards technique est
ablishes work and staffing targets aimed at improving productivity. When realist
ically used, it can make possible an objective and accurate appraisal of the wor
k of employees and supervisors.
To be effective, the standards must be visible and fair. Hence a good deal of ti
me is spent observing employees on the job, simplifying and improving the job wh
ere possible, and attempting to arrive at realistic output standards.
It is not clear, in every case, that work standards have been integrated with an
organization s performance appraisal program. However, since the work-standards
program provides each employee with a more or less complete set of his job duti
es, it would seem only natural that supervisors will eventually relate performan
ce appraisal and interview comments to these duties. I would expect this to happ
en increasingly where work standards exist. The use of work standards should mak
e performance interviews less threatening than the use of personal, more subject
ive standards alone.
RANKING METHODS
For comparative purposes, particularly when it is necessary to compare people wh
o work for different supervisors, individual statements, ratings, or appraisal f
orms are not particularly useful. Instead, it is necessary to recognize that com
parisons involve an overall subjective judgment to which a host of additional fa
cts and impressions must somehow be added. There is no single form or way to do
this.
Comparing people in different units for the purpose of, say, choosing a service
supervisor or determining the relative size of salary increases for different su
pervisors, requires subjective judgment, not statistics. The best approach appea
rs to be a ranking technique involving pooled judgment. The two most effective m
ethods are alternation ranking and paired comparison ranking.
Alternation ranking:
In this method, the names of employees are listed on the left-hand side of a she
et of paper - preferably in random order. If the rankings are for salary purpose
s, a supervisor is asked to choose the "most valuable" employee on the list, cro
ss his name off, and put it at the top of the column on the right-hand side of t
he sheet. Next, he selects the "least valuable" employee on the list, crosses hi
s name off, and puts it at the bottom of the right-hand column. The ranker then
selects the "most valuable" person from the remaining list, crosses his name off
and enters it below the top name on the right-hand list, and so on.
Paired-comparison ranking:
This technique is probably just as accurate as alternation ranking and might be
more so. But with large numbers of employees it becomes extremely time consuming
and cumbersome.
To illustrate the method, let us say we have five employees: Mr. Abbott, Mr. Bar
nes, Mr. Cox, Mr. Drew, and Mr. Eliot. We list their names on the left-hand side
of the sheet. We compare Abbott with Barnes on whatever criterion we have chose
n, say, present value to the organization.
Ten Tips for Creating a Employee Appraisal System
Face the facts: Creating a new employee performance appraisal system is a diffic
ult undertaking. It’s even more difficult if the organization doesn’t have a logical
, well-tested, step-by-step process to follow in developing their new procedure.
• One
Get top management actively involved. Without top management’s commitment and visi
ble support, no program can succeed. Top management must establish strategic pla
ns, identify values and core competencies, appoint an appropriate Implementation
Team, demonstrate the importance of performance management by being active part
icipants in the process, and use appraisal results in management decisions.
.
• Two
Establish the criteria for an ideal system. Consider the needs of the four stake
holder groups of any appraisal system: Appraisers who must evaluate performance;
Appraisees whose performance is being assessed; Human Resources professionals w
ho must administer the system; and the Senior Management group that must lead th
e organization into the future. Identifying their expectations at the start help
s assure their support once the system is finally designed. Ask each group: "Wha
t will it take for you to consider this system a smashing success?" Don’t settle f
or less.
• Three
Appoint an Implementation Team. This task force should be a diagonal slice of b
oth appraisers and appraises from different levels and functions in the organiza
tion. The implementation team is responsible for accomplishing the two major req
uirements for a successful system. First, developing appropriate appraisal forms
, policies and procedures. Second (and the task too often overlooked) assuring a
successful deployment.
• Four
Design the form first. The appraisal form is a lightning rod that will attract e
veryone’s attention. Design the form early and get lots of feedback on it. Don’t bel
ieve anybody who tells you that the form isn’t important. They’re wrong. If you’re des
igning a new form internally, make sure it assesses both behaviors and results.
• Five
Build your mission, vision, values, and core competencies into the form. Perform
ance appraisal is a means, not an end. The real objective of any performance man
agement system is to make sure that the company’s strategic plan and vision and va
lues are communicated and achieved. Core competencies expected of all organizati
on members should be included, described and assessed. If your mission statement
isn’t clearly visible in the performance appraisal system, cynicism will likely r
esult. Values become real only when people are held accountable for living up to
them.
• Six
Assure on-going communication. Circulate drafts and invite users to make recomme
ndations. Keep the development process visible through announcements and regular
updates. Use surveys, float trial balloons, request suggestions and remember th
e cardinal principle — "People support what they help create."
• Seven
Train all appraisers. Performance appraisal requires a multitude of skills — behav
ioral observation and discrimination, goal-setting, developing people, confronti
ng unacceptable performance, persuading, problem-solving, planning, etc. Unless
appraiser training is universal and comprehensive, the program won’t produce much.
And don’t ignore the most important requirement of all: the need for courage.
• Eight
Orient all appraisees. The program’s purposes and procedures must be explained in
advance — and explained enthusiastically — to everyone who will be affected by it. S
pecific skills training should be provided if the new performance management pro
cedure requires self-appraisal, multi-rater feed-back, upward appraisal, or indi
vidual development planning.
• Nine
Use the results. If the results of the performance appraisal are not visibly use
d in making promotion, salary, development, transfer, training and termination d
ecisions, people will realize that it’s merely an exercise.
• Ten
Monitor and revise the program. Audit the quality of appraisals, the extent to w
hich the system is being used, and the extent to which the original objectives h
ave been met. (One of the great advantages of an online performance appraisal sy
stem is that all of these data are available instantaneously.)
Provide feedback to management, appraisers and appraisees. Train new appraisers
as they are appointed to supervisory positions. Actively seek and incorporate su
ggestions for improvement.
A company’s performance appraisal process is critically important. It answers the
two questions that every member of an organization wants to know: 1) What do you
expect of me? and 2) How am I doing at meeting your expectations? Using these t
en tips will help you develop or select a system to will give accurate and compl
ete answers to everyone.
Performance Appraisal for Employees at Different Levels
Performance appraisal is important for employees at all levels throughout the or
ganization. The parameters, the characteristics and the standards for evaluation
may be different, but the fundamentals of performance appraisal are the same. B
ut as the level of the employees’ increases, performance appraisal is more effecti
vely used as the tools of managing performance.
PERFORMANCE AS MANAGERS
The responsibilities of managers include a series of activities which are concer
ned with planning, organizing, directing, leading, motivating and controlling. M
anagers can be rated on the above parameters or characteristics
Criteria for measuring performance at different levels:
The criteria for measuring performance changes as the levels of the employees an
d their roles and responsibilities change.
A few examples for each level are described below:
For top level management
• Degree of organizational growth and expansion
• Extent of achievement of organizational goals
• Contribution towards the society
• Profitability and return on capital employed
For middle level managers
• Performance of the departments or teams
• Co-ordination with other departments
• Optimal use of resources
• Costs Vs. revenues for a given period of time
• The communication with superiors and subordinates
For front line supervisors
• Quantity of actual output against the targets
• Quality of output against the targets
• Number of accidents in a given period
• Rate of employee absenteeism
Current Global trends in Performance Appraisal Program
The performance appraisal process has become the heart of the human resource man
agement system in the organizations. Performance appraisal defines and measures
the performance of the employees and the organization as a whole. It is a tool f
or accessing the performance of the organization. The important issues and point
s concerning performance appraisal in the present world are:
The focus of the performance appraisals is turning towards career development re
lying on the dialogues and discussions with the superiors.
Performance measuring, rating and review systems have become more detailed, stru
ctured and person specific than before.
Performance related pay is being incorporated in the strategies used by the orga
nizations.
Trend towards a 360-degree feedback system
The problems in the implementation of the performance appraisal processes are be
ing anticipated and efforts are being made to overcome them.
In India, the performance appraisal processes are faced with a lot of obstacles,
the most prominent being the lack of quantifiable indicators of the performance
.
Global trends
The emergence of following concepts and the following trends related to Performa
nce appraisal can be seen in the global scenario:
360 DEGREE APPRAISAL
360 degree feedback, also known as multi-rater feedback , is the most comprehen
sive appraisal where the feedback about the employees’ performance comes from all
the sources that come in contact with the employee on his job. Organizations are
increasingly using feedback from various sources such as peer input, customer f
eedback, and input from superiors. Different forms with different formats are be
ing used to obtain the information regarding the employee performance.
TEAM PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL
According to a wall street journal headline, “Teams have become commonplace in U.S
. Companies”. Most of the performance appraisal techniques are formulated with ind
ividuals in mind i.e. to measure and rate the performance of the individual empl
oyee. Therefore, with the number of teams increasing in the organizations, it be
comes difficult to measure and appraise the performance of the team. The questio
n is how to separate the performance of the team from the performance of the emp
loyees. A solution to this problem that is being adopted by the companies is to
measure both the individual and the team performance. Sometimes, team based obje
ctives are also included in the individual performance plans.
RANK AND YANK STRATEGY
Also known as the “Up or out policy”, the rank and yank strategy refers to the perfo
rmance appraisal model in which best-to-worst ranking methods are used to identi
fy and separate the poor performers from the good performers. Then the action pl
ans and the improvement opportunities of the poor performers are discussed and t
hey are given to improve their performance in a given time period, after which t
he appropriate HR decisions are taken. Some of the organizations following this
strategy are Ford, Microsoft and Sun Microsystems.
Why Do We Need Performance Appraisals?
Performance Appraisal is an objective system to judge the ability of an individu
al employee to perform his tasks. A good performance appraisal system should foc
us on the individual and his development, besides helping him to achieve the des
ired performance. This means that while the results are important the organizati
on should also examine and prepare its human capital to achieve this result. Thi
s holds true even for new inductees.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Now, when The Chokhi Dhani become a strong International Brand, we are replicati
ng this goodwill in many other locations in India So that, you. Anyone who has v
isited Chokhi Dhani knows what we are, those who haven t..., have heard about us
. Chokhi Dhani Pune, Indore and Mumbai are already working and Chokhi Dhani is r
eady to come in Panchkula, Surat, Goa, Kolkata and many other locations.
ACHIEVEMENT
As you enter the vast property, “Ram Ram sa…” “Padharo Sa...” ring out as greetings. You a
re welcomed with drums, tilak and Kutchi Ghodi. Camel ride, head massage, giant
wheel and numerous other fun and games have won the vice president’s award for thi
s unique project Chokhi Dhani — an attempt towards reviving authentic Rajasthani v
illage — of Kalyan has got recently the national award – As you enter the vast prope
rty, “Ram Ram sa…” “Padharo Sa...” ring out as greetings. You are welcomed with drums, til
ak and Kutchi Ghodi. Camel ride, head massage, giant wheel and numerous other fu
n and games have won the vice president’s award for this unique project Chokhi Dha
ni — an attempt towards reviving authentic Rajasthani village — of Kalyan has got re
cently the national award – As you enter the vast property, “Ram Ram sa…” “Padharo Sa...” r
ng out as greetings. You are welcomed with drums, tilak and Kutchi Ghodi. Camel
ride, head massage, giant wheel and numerous other fun and games have won the vi
ce president’s award for this unique project Chokhi Dhani — an attempt towards reviv
ing authentic Rajasthani village — of Kalyan has got recently the national award –
Chokhi Dhani Group is a Private Sector Company that offers services in Hotels /
Resorts with Annual Total Turnover of 10-100 Crs and with Employee Strength of 2
51-500.
Pune
Mumbai
Surat
Ahmedabad
Panchkula
Ludhiana
Sonepat
Chennai
Raipur
2.
INTERPRETATION:
The graph shows that the level of motivation is 10% very high, 48% is high, 20%
is moderate, 10% low and 12% is very low.
INTERPRETATION:
The above table shows that 56% respondents say ‘yes’ the employees are credible of a
ppraiser and 44% respondents say ‘no’ about it.
INTERPRETATION:
The analysis shows that the satisfaction level of chokhi dhani is average. 28% r
espondents are satisfied with the performance appraisal system which is accepted
by most of the employees.
4. Is there a complaint channel for the employees who are dissatisfied with the
performance appraisal system?
RESPONCES NO. OF RESPONDENTS %
YES 15 30
NO 35 70
TOTAL 50 100
INTERPRETATION:
The analysis shows that 70% respondents accept that they are provided good commu
nication channel for employees and 30% say no about it.
INTERPRETATION:
This shows that most of the respondents are unaware about responsibilities.
INTERPRETATION:
From the graph we can see that majority of the employees are not given a chance
to rate their own performance in the CHOKHI DHANI.
INTERPRETATION:
It can be seen from results that most of the employees get De-motivated because
of a poorly conducted appraisal. To some extent employees dont coordinate with t
heir team members. Thus resulting in reduction of output.
INTERPRETATION:
The analysis shows that level of corruption is moderate in CHOKHI DHANI. And 10%
respondents say that there is no corruption in the DHANI.
INTERPRETATION:
The analysis shows that mostly the performance is evaluated on the basis of perf
ormance and attendance matters least.
INTERPRETATION:
The analysis shows that mostly the performance feedback is communicated orally a
nd detailed feedbacck is given in rare cases.
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The existence of a proper complain channel was also of utmost importance to the
appraisees. They should be given a chance to convey their greviences to the top
management.
The results also indicate that the there is no communication of top management p
lans and business goal to the appraisee. The appraisers on the other hand feel t
hat the goals and plans have been clearly communicated to the appraisees. Commun
ication is very essential for any system to function efficiently. Therefore the
appraisers should look into this matter and see to it that the goals and plans a
re communicated effectively.
The findings suggest that for success of Appraisal system the credibility of app
raiser is of utmost importance.
Another point to be noticed is that even in the other forms of Performance Appra
isal also the employees expect that they should be given a chance to rate their
own performance. This can allow the employee to analyze ones own performance whi
ch gives new insights on how one is performing and what are the critical points
where he has to put his best and improve upon.
As per the Appraiser, a poorly conducted appraisal system would lead to demotiva
tion and ineffective teamwok which will result in inefficient functioning and lo
w productivity in the organization. Therefore, if at all they feel there is diss
atisfaction among the appraisee’s they should motivate them. Achievement, recognti
on, invelvement, job satisfaction and development can motivate the employees to
a large extent. Along with this satisfactory working conditions and appropraite
awards also play an important role.
Also a majority of employees were satisfied with the current appraisal system al
though they requested for some changes.
Most of the employees were also not clear about the criteria on which ratings we
re given to each employee while conducting the performance appraisal. Instead of
secrecy there should be openess. Because of lack of communication, employees ma
y not know how they are rated. The standards by which employees think they are b
eing judged are sometimes different from those their superiors actually use. Pro
per communication of these ratings can help the employers achieve the level of a
cceptability and commitment which is required from the employ.
CONCLUSION
Performance appraisal is a formal review of employee performance. At a performan
ce appraisal, objectives or targets are agreed between manager and employee. At
each subsequent appraisal, current and past performance is compared and targets
are reviewed. It is a prescribed system with a meeting arranged after a set peri
od to review the targets set by the previous appraisal. This may be six-monthly
or annually, depending on your organization.
Nonetheless, the performance appraisal is not only a means to review performance
standards and specific targets. It is a means to:
1. Identify current job performance levels
2. Identify individual employee strengths and weaknesses
3. Motivate and encourage the individual employee
4. Reward employees for their contribution to organizational objectives
5. Identify training and development needs
6. Identify potential performance standards
7. Plan future development of the individual
8. Discuss salary, promotion and training
The performance appraisal assesses individual employees in terms of their job pe
rformance. Training evaluates individual employees in terms of knowledge, skills
and behaviour, and how they affect overall performance and the achievement of i
ndividual and organizational goals.
A performance appraisal is looking for results, where the role of training is to
direct the process of achieving results. The final stage in the performance app
raisal is the action plan to achieve targets. The appropriate action may require
training to increase knowledge, improve skills or change behaviour.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
WEBBILIOGRAPHY
www.projectparadise.com
www.allprojectreport.com
www.google.com
www.fotolia.com
BOOKS REFFERED
DESSLER, GARY, HUMAN RESUORCE MANAGEMENT, 11TH EDITION, PRENTICE HALL OF INDIA,
2008
ASWATHAPPA, K, HUMAN RESOURCE AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT, 4TH EDITION, THE Mc Graw
HILL COMPANIES, 2009
PATNAYAK, BISWAJEET, HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, 3RD EDITION, PRENTICE HALL OF IN
DIA, 2007
MAGAZINES
BUSINESS WORLD
BUSINESS TODAY
INDIA TODAY