A STUDY ON PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL SYSTEM

AT KCP LIMITED.
BY
T.GANESHAN
Reg No: 311613631012
OF

MISRIMAL NAVAJEE MUNOTH JAIN

ENGINEERING COLLEGE
THORAIPAKKAM
A PROJECT REPORT
SUBMITTED TO THE
FACULTY OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES
In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the Degree
OF
MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMININSTRATION
ANNA UNIVERSITY
CHENNAI 600025.
JULY-2014

CERTIFICATES

BONAFIDE CERTIFICATE
Certified that this project report titled A STUDY ON PERFORMANCE
APPRAISAL SYSTEM is a bonafide work of MR. T.GANESHAN who carried out the
research under my supervision. Certified further, that to the best of my knowledge the work
reported herein does not form part of any other project report or dissertation on the basis of
which a degree or award was conferred on an earlier occasion on this or any other candidate.

Internal Guide
Mr. SIVA SHANKER
Department of Management Studies
Studies

(Head of the Department)

Dr. Shanthi Nachiappan
Department of Management

DECLARATION

DECLARATION
Im T.Ganeshan Registration No:- 311613631012 declare that the project report,
A Study On Performance Appraisal System With Special Reference To KCP Limited, Chennai
Private Limited is being submitted in partial fulfilment for the award of Master of Business
Administration is the original work carried out by me. It has not formed the part of any other report
submitted for award of any degree or diploma, either in this or any other University.

T.Ganeshan

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I am indebted to our corresponded and Secretary Mr. Harish L Metha for providing an excellent
environment and infrastructure at MNM Jain Engineering College, Chennai, for successfully for completing the
summer project.
I thank our Principle for providing all the required facilities for completing the project work.
I thank our Vice Principle for providing all the required facilities for completing the project work.
My sincere thanks to our beloved Head of the Department, Dr. Shanthi Nachiappan for permitting me
to do this project work.
I would like to thank Mr. Bagyaraj, Manager, Human Resources, for permitting me to carry out the
project work in the organization.
Next I would like to thank whose active interest in the project and insight helped me to define and
formulate my approach towards the project. I also thank the respondents and other employees for providing me
valuable data and guidance.
I thank my internal guide Mr. Siva Shanker MBA, for him contribution to this project and in providing
me valuable points in completing this project.
I express my thanks to the Management, KCP Limited, Chennai private limited for having given me
the opportunities to do my in project work in their esteemed concern.
I also thank the other faculty members for providing me their kind co-operation and valuable help in
completing the project work.

CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter No

Particulars
List of Tables

Chapter-1

1.1 Introduction
1.2 Industry Profile
1.3 Company Profile
1.4 Need of the study
1.5 Objectives of the study
1.6 Scope of the study
1.7 Limitations of the study

Chapter-2

2 Review of literature

Chapter-3

3. Research Methodology
3.1 Meaning of Research
3.2 Research Design
3.3 Method of data collection
3.4 Sample Methodology
3.5 Statistical tools and analysis

Chapter-4

Data Analysis and Interpretation

Chapter-5

Findings ,Suggestions and Conclusions

Appendix
Bibliography

Page. No

LIST OF TABLES
S.NO

CHAPTER

4.1.PERCENTAGE ANALYSIS

2
3

4.1.1.Gender of respondents
4.1.2.Qualification of respondents

4.1.3.Age of respondents

4.1.4.Experience of respondents

4.1.5.Income level of respondents

4.1.6.Respondents opinion towards PAS create good IR

4.1.7.Respondents opinion towards on EEM

10

4.1.8.Respondents opinion towards on CLM

11

4.1.9.Respondents opinion towards relationship with your higher authority

12

4.1.10.Respondents opinion towards co-operation with your subordinates

13

4.1.11.Respondents opinion towards on PAS

14

4.1.12.Respondents opinion towards PAS helps to achieve production targets

15

4.1.13.Respondents opinion towards best method of evaluating the performance

16

4.1.14.Indication of periodicity of the PAS wise distribution of respondents

17

4.1.15.Respondents opinion towards the method of PAS implemented in your

organization

18

4.1.16.Respondents opinion towards Increment in salary after performance

appraisal

19

4.1.17.Respondents opinion towards satisfy with PAS in your company

20

4.1.18.Respondents opinion towards after PAS increasing the percentage in your

organization

21

4.1.19.Respondents opinion towards gained any recognition after being appraised

under PAS

22
23
24
25
26

4.1.20.Respondents opinion towards on confidentiality or openness of PAS

4.2.CHI-SQUARE TEST
4.2.1.Relationship between ege and experience of respondents
4.3.WEIGHT AVERAGE METHOD
4.3.1.Respondent opinion towards relationship with you higher authority

PAGE NO

LIST OF CHART
S.NO

CHAPTER

4.1.PERCENTAGE ANALYSIS

2
3

4.1.1.Gender of respondents
4.1.2.Qualification of respondents

4.1.3.Age of respondents

4.1.4.Experience of respondents

4.1.5.Income level of respondents

4.1.6.Respondents opinion towards PAS create good IR

4.1.7.Respondents opinion towards on EEM

10

4.1.8.Respondents opinion towards on CLM

11

4.1.9.Respondents opinion towards relationship with your higher authority

12

4.1.10.Respondents opinion towards co-operation with your subordinates

13

4.1.11.Respondents opinion towards on PAS

14

4.1.12.Respondents opinion towards PAS helps to achieve production targets

15

4.1.13.Respondents opinion towards best method of evaluating the performance

16

4.1.14.Indication of periodicity of the PAS wise distribution of respondents

17

4.1.15.Respondents opinion towards the method of PAS implemented in your

Organization

18

4.1.16.Respondents opinion towards Increment in salary after performance

appraisal

19

4.1.17.Respondents opinion towards satisfy with PAS in your company

20

4.1.18.Respondents opinion towards after PAS increasing the percentage in your

organization

21

4.1.19.Respondents opinion towards gained any recognition after being appraised

under PAS

22
23

4.1.20.Respondents opinion towards on confidentiality or openness of PAS

4.2.CHI-SQUARE TEST

24

4.2.1.Relationship between Age and Experience of respondents

25

4.3.WEIGHT AVERAGE METHOD

26

4.3.1.Respondent opinion towards relationship with you higher authority

PAGE NO

ABSTRACT
This study titled, A STUDY ON THE PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL SYSTEM IN KCP
HEAVY ENGINEERING UNIT, THIRUVOTTIYUR, CHENNAI. This study gives a clear
picture about the Performance Appraisal System that is followed in the Organisation.
The Primary objective of the project is to ensure and provide an appropriate performance
appraisal system that best suits the company.
The study will give a detailed note about the HR&S department in the organisation. There is
specific statistical tool which i used to analyze the data that have been collected.
The study will enable the organisation and provide effective and beneficial measures for the
development of the organisation.
The study is helpful of gaining the practical knowledge about the organisation

CHAPTER-I

1.1 INTRODUCTION

Appraisal is the evolution of worth, quality or merit. Performance appraisal is

the key ingredient of performance management. Each year, employees and their immediate bosses
enter into an elaborate gaming exercise called the annual performance appraisal. Most of it is form
filling but every company still goes through the ritual.

Performance appraisal is a method of evaluating the behavior of employees in

the work spot, normally inkling both the quantitative and qualitative aspects of job performance.
Performance here refers to the degree of accomplishment of the tasks that makeup an individuals
job. It indicates how well an individual is fulfilling the job demands. Performance is always
measured in term of results. A student, for Example, may exert a great deal of effort while
preparing for examination but may manage to get a poor grad. In this came, the effort expended is
high but performance is low.

According to Mondy et al., Performance appraisal is a system of

review and evaluation of an individuals (or teams) Performance.

According to Gomej-Mejia et al., Performance appraisal involves the

identification, measurement, and management of human performance in organizations.

According to DeNisi., Performance appraisal is the system whereby

an organization assigns some score to indicate the level of performance of a target person or
group.

Methods of Performance appraisal system:

The foregoing list of major program pitfalls represents a formidable challenge, even
considering the available battery of appraisal techniques. But attempting to avoid these pitfalls
by doing away with appraisals themselves is like trying to solve the problems of life by
committing suicide. The more logical task is to identify those appraisal practices that are (a) most
likely to achieve a particular objective and (b) least vulnerable to the obstacles already discussed.
Before relating the specific techniques to the goals of performance appraisal stated at the outset
of the article, I shall briefly review each, taking them more or less in an order of increasing
complexity. The best-known techniques will be treated most briefly.

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 selection situations, particularly
those involving professional, sales, or managerial positions, essay appraisals from former
employers, teachers, or associates carry significant weight.

Graphic rating scale

This technique may not yield the depth of an essay appraisal, but it is more consistent and
reliable. Typically, a graphic scale assesses a person on the quality and quantity of his work (is he
outstanding, above average, average, or unsatisfactory?) and on a variety of other factors that vary
with the job but usually include personal traits like reliability and cooperation. It may also include
specific performance items like oral and written communication.

Field review
The field review is one of several techniques for doing this. A member of the personnel or
central administrative staff meets with small groups of raters from each supervisory unit and goes over
each employee's rating with them to (a) identify areas of inter-rater disagreement, (b) help the group
arrive at a consensus, and (c) determine that each rater conceives the standards similarly.

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.

Management by objectives
To avoid, or to deal with, the feeling that they are being judged by unfairly high standards,
employees in some organizations are being asked to set - or help set - their own performance goals.
Within the past five or six years, MBO has become something of a fad and is so familiar to most
managers that I will not dwell on it here.

Ranking methods
For comparative purposes, particularly when it is necessary to compare people who work
for different supervisors, individual statements, ratings, or appraisal forms are not particularly
useful. Instead, it is necessary to recognize that comparisons involve an overall subjective
judgment to which a host of additional facts and impressions must somehow be added. There is no
single form or way to do this. The best approach appears to be a ranking technique involving
pooled judgment. The two most effective methods are alternation ranking and paired comparison
ranking.
1. Alternation ranking:
Ranking of employees from best to worst on a trait or traits is another method for evaluating
employees. Since it is usually easier to distinguish between the worst and the best employees than
to rank them, an alternation ranking method is most popular. Here subordinates to be rated are
listed and the names of those not well enough to rank are crossed. Then on a form as shown below,
the employee who is highest on the characteristic being measured and the one who is the lowest
are indicated. Then chose the next highest and the next lowest, alternating between highest and
lowest until all the employees to be rated have been ranked.

2. 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.
Both ranking techniques, particularly when combined with multiple rankings (i.e., when two
or more people are asked to make independent rankings of the same work group and their lists
are averaged), are among the best available for generating valid order-of-merit rankings for
salary administration purposes.
Assessment centers
So far, we have been talking about assessing past performance. What about the assessment of
future performance or potential? In any placement decision and even more so in promotion
decisions, some prediction of future performance is necessary. How can this kind of prediction be
made most validly and most fairly?
360 Degree Feedback
Many firms have expanded the idea of upward feedback into what the call 360-degree feedback.
The feedback is generally used for training and development, rather than for pay increases. Most
360 Degree Feedback system contains several common features. Appropriate parties peers,
supervisors, subordinates and customers, for instance complete survey, questionnaires on an
individual. 360 degree feedback is also known as the multi-rater feedback, whereby ratings are not
given just by the next manager up in the organizational hierarchy, but also by peers and
subordinates. Appropriates customer ratings are also included, along with the element of selfappraisal. Once gathered in, the assessment from the various quarters are compared with one
another and the results communicated to the manager concerned.
Another technique that is useful for coaching purposes is, of course, MBO. Like the critical
incident method, it focuses on actual behavior and actual results, which can be discussed
objectively and constructively, with little or no need for a supervisor to "play God."

1.2 INDUSTRY PROFILE

HEAVY ENGINEERING UNITS
The first heavy engineering unit viz,Karachi Shipyard and Engineering Works Limited
(KSEW Karachi Shipyard and Engineering Works) was established in 1954 and after a gap of 14
years Pakistan Machine Tool Factory was set up in 1968 and then Heavy Mechanical Complex in
1971. Heavy Foundry and Forge Limited came into operation in 1977. To this trend a new impetus
was added with the commissioning of Pakistan Steel in 1984.
With the setting up of above mentioned units over a period of about 15 years potential has
been created for the manufacturing of a wide range of capital goods. Today Pakistan is capable of
producing basic metals from iron ore (serving as raw material for many industries), complete plants
on turn-key basis, construction machinery, material handling equipment, machine tools, electric
motors, switchgears, transport equipment, cargo ships, fishing trawlers etc)According to a survey
conducted by World Bank Consultants, the total out-put of the engineering industries amounted to
Rs.33.385 Billion during 1985-86 which included out-put of only Rs.3.265 Billion contributed by
capital goods sector. The value added in this sector was about 30 per cent. The total demand of
capital goods during 1985-86 was reported as Rs.13.602 Billion, the local industry meeting only
about 30 per cent of the total requirement.

o In 1955- The Heavy Engineering Division of the KCP Limited, established in 1955, is a
sprawling, hi-tech complex that can roll out the entire range of heavy mechanical equipment for
the core sector industries. This complex is one of the largest, well integrated workshops of its kind
and has facilities for casting, fabricating and machining heavy equipment. KCP has a marked
presence in the supply of key mechanical machinery to the core sector industries.

o Jan 1964- In January 1964, there was a devastating fire in Heavy Engineering Corporation
(HEC), Ranchi, resulting in loss of property worth Rs. 40 lakh, which in those days was quite
colossal. The incident was followed by communal disturbances at Ranchi, Rourkela and
Jamshedpur. These happenings brought the drawbacks of the system of industrial security to
prominent relief.

o 1973- Incepted in the year 1973, Himmalaya Machinery Private Limited (Heavy engineering
company) is one of the reputed manufacturers, exporters and suppliers of industrial heavy
engineering plate forming machinery. Our offered range encompasses shipyard machinery, boiler
machines, back-hoe dozers, special machines, engineering process machinery, plate bending roll,
section bending machines, pipe forming machines, plate forming machines, plate bending
machines, plate straightening.

o 1980- The Wenco Group was established in 1980. As well as its heavy engineering activities
it also operates an Onshore/Offshore Services division, which provides expertise in fibreglass
piping systems to the mining and oil and gas industries. Our Heavy Engineering Division
incorporates the manufacture of Dished Heads as well as general and specialised plate pressing,
bending, rolling and structural section rolling operations, Paul Peca said. Basically, if it can be
engineered.

o 1985- L&T is acknowledged as one of the top five fabrication companies in the world. The
Heavy Engineering Division manufactures and supplies custom designed and engineered critical
equipment and systems to the needs of core-sector industries and the defence sector. It is the
preferred supplier of equipment for a select range of products, globally.

o Shipbuilding: L&T has a shipyard capable of constructing vessels of upto 150 metres long and
displacement of 20000 tonnes as its heavy engineering complex at Hazira. The shipyard is geared
up to take up construction of niche vessels such as specialised Heavy lift Cargo Vessels, CNG
carriers,

chemical

tankers,

defence&para

military vessels

and

other

role

specific

vessels.Construction of specialisedmid size vessels is being undertaken and capacity is being

augmented by additional infrastructure such as ship lift system and additional outfitting workshops
to extend the activities to ship repairs.The focus will be on construction of commercial vessels,
warships for the navy and the coast guard.

o 1988- James Howdens engineering works is one of the last remaining Victorian heavy

engineering works in Glasgow, and at the end of its life, this redbrick complex was the birthplace
of the tunnel boring machines which dug out the Channel Tunnel. The company, now called

Howden Group, is still in business but left their home of ninety years in Tradeston in 1988. The
buildings future has been in doubt ever since, and it currently lies empty.

o Mar 31,2001- This will be the first company in the heavy engineering sector (and a sick
company that too) to be successfully privatised by the Union Government. As on March 31,2001,
the companys net worth was a negative Rs 270crore. In January, the CCD had cleared a financial
restructuring package for Jessop & Company involving writing off/waiver of government loans
and infusion of fresh funds. However, this will be implemented only upon successful privatization
of the company.
o Apr 2003- The sector can be categorized into and light segments. Segment forms the majority of
the sector in India. In the year, out of the total production of US$ 22 Billion, the Heavy engineering
segment forms the majority of the engineering sector in India. In the year 2003-04, out of the total
engineering production of US$ 22 Billion, the heavy engineering market contributed over 80 per cent
with the light engineering segment accounting for the remaining. A key driver for increased
engineering exports is the trend towards shifting of global manufacturing bases to low cost countries
like India. This trend is expected to boost exports of engineering.

COMPANY PROFILE
BUSINESS
KCP is a diversified 100 million US$ business group with interests in Heavy Engineering, Sugar,
Cement, Hydel Power, Information Technology and Biotechnology.

Board of Directors
DR.V.L. Dutt Chairman and Managing Director
Dr. Dutt was educated in London, England and secured the Grad BIM Degree.
Dr. Dutt is the Chairman of The KCP Ltd, Fives-Cail KCP Ltd and KCP Vietnam Industries
Limited. Apart from KCP Group, Dr. Dutt is a Director on the Board of DCM Shriram Industries
Limited, Chairman of Chennai Willingdon Corporate Foundation and

Director of V RamakrishnaSonsPrivateLtd. Dr. Dutt is presently the Honorary Consul

General of the Republic of Turkey in Chennai, for the States of Tamilnadu, Kerala, Karnataka,
Andhra Pradesh and Union Territory of Pondicherry

Smt. V.L India Dutt

Joint Managing director

Smt. V.L. Indira Dutt, B.A (Economics) from Madras University is the Joint Managing
Director of the Company. Smt. Dutt serves as Director of Fives Cail - KCP Limtied, Velagapudi
Foundation; KCP Vietnam Industries Limited; KCP Technologies Limited and V Ramakrishna
Sons Private Limited.
Smt. KavithaDuttChitturi
Executive Director

Smt. KavithaDuttChitturi is a graduate in Business Management with specialization in

International Business from Cedar Crest College Allentown, Pennsylvania.
She also holds a Post-Graduate Diploma in Human Resources. She is also a Director of V
Ramakrishna Sons Private Limited.
Sri.V.Gandhi
Technical Director

Sri. V. Gandhi is a part of the senior management of KCP Ltd with 31 years of experience.
He is a Metallurgist by profession. He served as General Manager in FCB KCP, looking after
planning and procurement. He is also a Director of Fives-Cail KCP Limited.
Sri.V.H.Ramakrishnan
Director
Sri.V.H.Ramakrishnan, a Chartered Accountant and a Cost Accountant is a retired General
Manager of the Bank of India, with 35 years of experience in India and abroad. He is on the panel for
nominee Directors in IDBI and other financial institutions. Presently, he is a Director of Andhra Bank
and a member of the Group of Advisers of Shriram Group of Companies.

Sri.O. Swaminatha
Reddy Director
Sri. O. Swaminatha Reddy, a Chartered Accountant by profession has vast banking
and industrial experience spanning over decades. He has held various high ranking posts
which include Chairman of Andhra Bank and Chairman and Managing Director of Andhra
Pradesh State Financial Corporation.
Sri.PinnamaneniKoteswaraRao
Director

Sri. PinnamaneniKoteswaraRao, is an agriculturist and served as ZillaParishad Chairman

in Krishna District of Andhra Pradesh.

Sri.A.Ramakrishna
Director

Dr. Anumolu Ramakrishna obtained his bachelors degree in Civil Engineering from the
Andhra University and M.Sc. in Structural Engineering from the College of Engineering, Guindy,
Chennai. He started his career in 1962 with Engineering Construction Corporation Limited (ECC),
then a wholly owned subsidiary of Larsen & Toubro Limited. ECC was subsequently amalgamated
with the parent company and is widely known as ECC Construction Division of Larsen & Toubro.
In 1966, Government of India sponsored him for practical training in Structural Engineering in the
erstwhile German Democratic Republic.
His specialized knowledge in structural engineering - precast and prestressed concrete and
industrialized methods of construction - has been recognized by Andhra University by conferring
upon him Honorary Degree of Doctorate of Science in 1997 and by Jawaharlal Nehru
Technological University through an Honorary Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in 2004.

After serving in various capacities Dr. Ramakrishna was inducted into the Board of
Directors of L&T in 1992 and was appointed as operational head of the ECC Construction
Division. He provided the leadership for the construction of scores of cement plants, steel plants,
power projects, refineries and petrochemical complexes besides outstanding buildings, roads,
bridges, harbours, airports, water supply projects and nuclear power plants. He was elevated to the
position of Deputy Managing Director in March 2000. Under his leadership, revenues of

L&T-ECC Division grew manifold - from Rs. 450 Cr. in 1992 to over Rs. 6,900 Cr. in 2004 when
he retired from the services of the Company.
Sri, Vijay Sankar
Director
Sri. Vijay Sankar holds a Masters in Business Administration from J.L. Kellogg
Graduate School of Management, Northwestern University and is also a qualified Chartered
Accountant. He is a Deputy Chairman of Sanmar Group. Vijay also serving as the Honorary
Consul for Spain in Chennai. He also serving as a Vice President of the Tamilnadu Tennis
Association.

MILESTONES
KCP is a diversified 1000 Crores (USD 192 Million) business group with interests in
Heavy Engineering, Sugar, Cement, Hydel Power, Information Technology and Biotechnology.

2011 Work On Hotel Project Commenced.

2011 The Second Cement Unit at Ramakrishnapuram Started.
2007 KCP Biotech Limited got merged with the KCP Limited.
2006 Wind Power generating Unit setup at Uthumalai village in TirunelveliDt of Tamil Nadu.
2002 KCP Biotech Limited setup at Biotech Park, Shameerpet, Hyderabad to manufacture biotech
related products.
2001 KCP Heavy Engineering Plant II setup at Arakonam near Chennai, to execute medium to large
sized fabrication projects.
1999 KCP Hydel Power Division setup at Nekkarikallu, Andhra Pradesh on the Guntur Canal of
Krishna riverto generate 8 MW of power.
1999 KCP Vietnam Industries Limited, a fully owned subsidiary of the KCP Limited setup to
manufacture sugar at ThuaThien Hue Province at Central Vietnam. This 2500 TCD plant was shifted
to Son Hoa District, Phuyen Province in 2001.

1999 KCP Technologies Limited setup to provide high quality IT Solutions & Engineering Technical
Services.
1995 FCB-KCP Limited, (now Fives Cail-KCP) setup as a joint venture with Fives Cail Group of
France for the design and manufacture of Sugar Plants.
1995 KCP Sugar Manufacturing Division demerger into a separate company, KCP Sugar & Industries
Limited.
1984 Arakonam Castings & Forgings Limited, started as a joint venture between The KCP Limited
and the Tamilnadu Industrial Development Corporation (TIDCO).
1984 Fuller KCP Limited, a joint venture with Fuller International Inc, USA was launched, for the
design and manufacture of large-sized cement plants and other mineral processing equipment. KCP
divested its stake to FL Smidth, Denmark in 1996.
1967 EIMCO-KCP Limited, started as a joint venture between The KCP Limited and EIMCO
Corporatation, USA. Currently a 100% subsidiary of KCP Sugar & Industries Limited.
1958 KCP Cement Division, setup at Macherla, Andhra Pradesh with a state-of-the-art cement
manufacturing plant. India's first dry process kiln was installed at Macherla by HUMBOLDT AG,
Germany in 1958 (while still a prototype in Europe).
1955 KCP Heavy Engineering Division Plant I, setup at Tiruvottiyur, Chennai consisting of an
integrated manufacturing facility, which caters to a wide range of heavy mechanical equipment and
sub-systems for core sector industries.
1941 An 800 TCD Sugar Plant was setup at Vuyyuru, Andhra Pradesh, India by Sri. V. Ramakrishna,
Founder Chairman of K

1.4NEED OF THE STUDY

The basic need of the study on the performance appraisal system is to know the awareness
of the employees on the performance appraisal system that is followed in by the company.

The purpose of the study is to know the evaluation process of performance appraisal system
that is followed in by the company and to ensure whether this is appropriate for the company. The
ineffective and inappropriate performance appraisal system may lead to decrease in output of the
company.

1.5 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

PRIMARY OBJECTIVE
A Study on Performance Appraisal in KCP Limited, Chennai

SECONDARY OBJECTIVE
To identify the need and understanding of performance appraisal system in
KCP to study the worker opinion on performance appraisal system In KCP
To find the satisfaction level of employees in their performance appraisal system
In KCP
To study the evaluation of performance appraisal system followed
To find whether this system appropriates for the Organization.

1.6 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The scope of the study is to provide better performance appraisal system that
appropriates for the Organization. Through this study the evaluation process of performance
appraisal system that is followed in by the company are analyzed.
This study helps to ensure and provide an appropriate performance appraisal system
that best suits the company and helps to increase the productivity.

1.7 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

The study covers only permanent workers & staffs. Executives, temporary workers and

contact labours may not have a full knowledge about the concept.

Interaction with the employees in the work spot is very less, because of their busy work
schedule.
Insisting the workers about the performance appraisal system as it helps to set and achieve

production targets.

The suggestion which is given by the employees is biased. Hence it was difficult to predict

the real fact.

The study was limited only to THE KCP LIMITED, THIRUVOTTIYUR, CHENNAI
and not to other industries.

CHAPTER-II

2.1REVIEW OF LITERATURE:
1.

Jiing-Lih Larry FarhHong Kong University of Science & Technology (HKUST) -

Department of Management & Organization and James D.WerbelIowa State University Department of Management and Marketing and author G.BedeianLouisiana State University,
Baton Rouge - William W. & Catherine M.Rucks Department of Management This study
investigated the effectiveness of a self-appraisal-based performance evaluation system (SABPE)
that incorporates self-assessment into traditional supervisory evaluation procedures. Its subject
sample consisted of 88 faculty members and their chairpersons at a land-grant state university.
Results indicated that (1) there was high congruency between self- and chairperson ratings, (2)
both ratings had moderate to high level of criterion-related validity, and (3) both faculty members
and chairpersons reported high SABPE acceptance. The implications of these results for future
self-appraisal research are discussed.
2.

KanikaGoyalHindu

Girls

College,

JAGADHARI.AshokKhurana

Guru

Nanak

KhalsaCollege, YamunanagarNovember 24, 2010.The performance appraisal system has an

intrinsic motivational significance that facilitates learning and brings about role clarity which helps

people focus on performance development. It is a continuous process to understand the employees

ability, competencies, relative merits and worth of the organization. The present study explores
performance appraisal system (PAS) of National Thermal Power Corporation Limited (NTPC), a
leading public sector organization in the power sector. It is descriptive in nature, and based on
information obtained from secondary as well as primary source. The study observed that NTPC
believes in achieving organizational excellence through human resource. The organizations system
is based upon the four building blocks i.e. competence building, commitment building, culture
building, and systems building. At NTPC, performance appraisal system evaluates five
components namely performance, competencies, values, potential appraisal, performance and
potential appraisal. The study observed that the performance appraisal system in the organization
is capable to specifically address the developmental needs in order to overcome competency gaps
in the employees under appraisal.

3.

Michelle Brown University of Melbourne - Department of Management John Benson

University of Melbourne - Department of Management Industrial Relations Journal, Vol.

34, pp. 67-81, March 2003.Performance appraisal systems are a popular tool within organisations
to enhance employee commitment and productivity. This paper examines the consequences of
three aspects of a performance appraisal system (distributive justice, procedural justice and the
performance rating) on the level of emotional exhaustion reported by employees in a large public
sector research organisation.
4.

Wien claw, Ruth A Performance Appraisal - Research Starters Business.

Sep2010.Performance appraisal is the process of evaluating an employee's performance and

providing feedback. It is necessary not only for the individual to improve his/her performance on
the job so that s/he can earn the rewards (e.g., money, prestige, power) for which s/he is working,
but also important so that the organization can determine the degree to which its employees are
contributing toward meeting strategic goals and objectives. There are many ways to judge an
employee's performance on the job ranging from objective performance data to global rating scales
to more detailed rating scales that represent each of the important aspects of the job. No matter the
method used, however, it is vital that the rating scales be anchored to objective, well-defined
criteria of job success.

5.

Antoinette S. Hancock, Axia College of University of Phoenix A performance appraisal

system is a very important part of any successful organization. Both employees and organizational
management and leaders benefit from a well-structured performance appraisal system. The
evaluation portion of an appraisal system is normally performed by management. During this
portion, management evaluates an employee's performance to determine if there are any areas that
need improvement.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Meaning of Research
Research is refers to search for knowledge.Once can also research as a scientific and systematic
search for pertinent information on a specific topic. In fact, research is and art of scientific
investigation.
Research is composed of two syllables, a prefix Re and a verb Search
Re means again a new over again
Search means to examine closely and carefully to test and try to problem
Research is an organized and systematic way of finding answer to questions.

DEFINITION:
Research defines as systematized effort to gain new knowledge.

3.2 RESEARCH DESIGN

Research design constitutes the blue print for the collection, measurement and
analysis of date. It aids the scientist in the allocation of his/her limited resources by posting
crucial choice.

Research design is the plan and structure of investigation to conceive as to obtain

answer to research questions. The plan is the overall scheme or program of the research it
includes an outline of what the investigator will do from writing hypothesis and their
operational implication to the final analysis of date.

3.3 METHOD OF DATA COLLECTION:

Data collection is an act of collecting relevant and adequate data required from the
sample size. The research has used both primary and secondary data for the research.
1. Primary data
2. Secondary data

1. PRIMARY DATA:
Primary data are those data which is collected freshly or newly for a particular purpose.
Here the data are collected freshly from the employer and employee at Kcp limited.

2. SECONDARY DATA:
Any data, which have gathers earlier for some other purpose, are secondary data in the
hands of the research. The research has used secondary data from the following: books, company
profile and websites.

3.4 SAMPLE METHODOLOGY

3.4.1 SAMPLE UNIT
It is the basic objects upon which study or experiment is carried out. The
sampling unit is the study is at KCP limited Chennai
3.4.2 SAMPLE ELEMENT
The employees in KCP limited are selected are sampling element
3.4.3 TOTAL POPULATION
Population refers to entire group of people, events or things of interest that the
researcher wishes to investigate. The total population of KCP is 1000
3.4.4 SAMPLE SIZE
Sample size is derived from population of the study. As the population size is 1000
in that 10% of the population is selected as sample. The sample size is 100
3.4.5 SAMPLE METHOD
The Sample method used is convenience sampling refers to collection of
information from respondent of the population who are conveniently available to prove it

3.5 STATISTICAL TOOLS AND ANALYSIS

The analysis for the study is one on the basis of the data collection through questionnaire.
For abstracting the meaningful information from the data collected from the following tools were
used.

1. Simple percentage method.

2. Chi-square test.
3. Weight Average method
SIMPLE PERCENTAGE METHOD:
One of the tools used for analyzing the data is percentage method. Percentage refers to a
special kind of ratio, which is used to describe the relationship percentage reduces everything to
common base and there by allows meaningful comparison to be made.

Number of respondents
Percentage=

--------------------------------------*100
Total number of respondents

CHI-SQUARE TEST:
Chi-square test (pronounced as chi-square) is one of the simplest and most widely
statistical tool. The symbol chi-square test is the greek letter it wasfirstusedkarl person in the year
1990 the quality chi square describes magnitude of the discrepancy between theory and
observations.

The chi-square is calculated

as follows. < (Oi-Ei) 2
X2=-------------------~(R-1) (C-1)
Ei
Oi=Observed frequency
Ei=Expected frequency
R=Column
The chi-square test has the following steps:

1. State the null hypothesis calculated the number in each category.

2. Determine the level of significance the research is prepared to take.
3. Calculated chi-square by using the formula.
4. Find the critical value chi-square against the number of degrees of the
Freedom for the specified level of significance.
5. Compare the calculated value of chi-square with the tabulated value and
Determine the region of reflection.
WEIGHT AVERAGE METHOD

WAM = Total score / No of Respondents

CHAPTER-IV
DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION:

Data analysis and interpretation refers to the tasks of drawing inferences from the collected
facts after an analytical and experimental study. Interpretation is the device through which the
factor explains what have been observed by researcher in the course of the study. Interpretation is
essential for a simple reason that the usefulness and utility of research finding lie in proper
interpretation.
It is through interpretation the researcher can understand the abstract principle that works
beneath his findings. Interpretation leads to the establishment of explanatory concepts that can
serve as a guide for future research studies.
This chapter deals with the analysis and interpretation of the sample, data collected from
questionnaires, which were issued, to a sample of 100 employees. The company follows a
particular system regarding performance appraisal system in order to assess the present satisfaction
level among the workers and staff. The effectiveness of this system can be ascertained by analyzing
the responses given to the questionnaires.
The analysis is done based on the sample data, which has been reflected in various tables,
which helps to draw conclusions whether the measures followed by the organization to improve
the performance appraisal system, are effective.

4.1.1 Gender of respondents

Gender

No. of Respondents Percent

Male

100

100.00

0.0

100

100.0

Female

Total

INFERENCE
From the above table, it is inferred that 100 %of the respondents are male and 0
% of the respondents are female

4.1.1 Gender Of respondents

Gender of respondents

0%

100%

Male

Female

4.1.2 Qualification of respondents

Qualification No. of Respondents Percent
UG

5.0

PG

15

15.0

ITI

44

44.0

DIPLOMA

36

36.0

Total

100

100.0

INFERENCE:
The above table shows that 44% of respondents are in the education
qualification of ITI, 5% of the respondents are in the education qualification of UG.

4.1.2 Qualification of respondents

Q
u
a
l
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
r
e
s
p
o
n
d
e
n
t
s

Qualification of respondents

Diploma
ITI

PG

UG
0

10

20
Percent

30
No of Respondents

40

50

4.1.3 Age of respondents

AGE

No. of Respondents

Percent

20-30

25

25.0

31-35

31

31.0

36-40

36

36.0

Above 40 year

8.0

100

100.0

Total

INFERENCE:
From the table clearly showing 36% of employees are 36-40 year, 31% of employees
are in the range of 31-35 year, 25% of employees are in the range 20-30 year, 8% of
employees are in the range of above 4 year.

4.1.3 Age of respondents

Age of respondents
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
20-30

31-35

36-40

No of Respondents

above 40
Percent

total

4.1.4 Experience of respondents

Experience

No. of Respondents

Percent

Less than 1 year

11

11.0

1-5 year

47

47.0

6-10 year

32

32.0

More than 10 year

10

10.0

Total

100

100.0

INFERENCE:

From the above statistical analysis that 47% of respondents come under 1-5years. 10%
of respondents come under above more than 10 years.

4.1.4 Experience of respondents

EXPERIENCE OF RESPONDENTS
More
than
101 year
Less
than
year 11%
6-10 year 10%
32%
1-5 year
47%

4.1.5 Income level of respondents

Monthly income

No. of Respondents Percent

Below 5000

15

15.0

5000-10000

22

22.0

10000-20000

44

44.0

Above 20000

19

19.0

Total

100

100.0

INFERENCE:

It is inferred from the above statistical analysis that 44% of respondents coming
10,000-20,000. 15% of respondents come above 20,000.

4.1.5 Income level of respondents

Income level of respondents

Above 20000
19%

Below 5000
15%

5000-10000
22%
10000-20000
44%
Below 5000

5000-10000

10000-20000

Above 20000

4.1.6 Respondents opinion towards PAS creates good IR

Opinion

No. of Respondents Percent

Yes

85

85.0

No

15

15.0

Total

100

100.0

INFERENCE:
To tell about the opinion towards performance appraisal system creates good
IR, 85% of respondents says yes, 15% of respondents says no opinion towards performance
appraisal system creates good IR.

4.1.6 Respondents opinion towards PAS creates good IR

100

80

85

85

60
40
20
15

0
Yes

15
No

No. of Respondents

Percent

4.1.7 Respondents opinion towards on EEM

Opinion

No. of Respondents Percent

Highly satisfied

19

19.0

Satisfied

58

58.0

Neutral

23

23.0

Dissatisfied

Highly dissatisfied

100

100.0

Total

INFERENCE:
From the table clearly showing that 58% employees are Satisfied with
EEM, 23% of employees are Neutral satisfied, 19% of employees are Highly satisfied.

4.1.7 Respondents opinion towards on EEM

Respondents opinion towards on EEM

Neutral
23%
Other
Satisfied
0%
58% Highly satisfied
19%

Highly
Dissatisfied
dissatisfied
0%
0%

Highly satisfied
Satisfied
Neutral
Dissatisfied
Highly dissatisfied

4.1.8 Respondents opinion towards on CLM

Opinion

No. of Respondents

Percent

Highly satisfied

29

29.0

Satisfied

48

48.0

Neutral

22

22.0

Dissatisfied

Highly dissatisfied

1.0

100

100.0

Total

INFERENCE:
From the table clearly showing that 448% employees are Satisfied with CLM,
29% of employees are Highly satisfied, 22% of employees are Neutral satisfied.

4.1.8 Respondents opinion towards on CLM

Respondents opinion towards on CLM

Highly
Dissatisfied
dissatisfied
Neutral
0%
Highly satisfied
22% 1% 29%

Highly satisfied
Satisfied
Neutral
Dissatisfied

Satisfied
48%

Highly dissatisfied

4.1.9 Respondents opinion towards relationship with your higher authority

Opinion

No. of Respondents

Percent

Excellent

37

37.0

Good

45

45.0

Fair

12

12.0

Poor

4.0

Very poor

2.0

100

100.0

Total

INFERENCE:

It is inferred from the above statistical analysis that 45% of respondents says good. 2% of
respondents says very poor of the relationship.

4.1.9 Respondents opinion towards relationship with your higher authority

Respondents opinion towards relationship with

your higher authority
100
50
0
Excellent

Good

Fair

No. of Respondents

Poor
Percent

Very poor

4.1.10 Respondents opinion towards Co-operation with your subordinates

Opinion

No. of Respondents Percent

Excellent

34

34.0

Good

49

49.0

Fair

12

12.0

Poor

3.0

Very poor

2.0

100

100.0

Total

INFERENCE:

It is inferred from the above statistical analysis that 49% of respondents says good.
2% of respondents says very poor on Co-operation with your subordinate.

4.1.10 Respondents opinion towards Co-operation with your subordinates

Respondents opinion towards Co-operation

with your subordinates
Very poor
Fair
Excellent
0

20

40
No. of Respondents

60
Percent

80

100

4.1.11 Respondents opinion towards on PAS

Opinion

No. of Respondents

Percent

Evaluation of employees

43

43.0

Promotion of employees

34

34.0

20

20.0

3.0

100

100.0

Job satisfaction of
employees
Motivation
Total
INFERENCE:

It is inferred from the above statistical analysis that 43% of respondents shows their
opinion on Evaluation of employees. 3% of respondents shows their opinion on motivation.

4.1.11 Respondents opinion towards on PAS

Respondents opinion towards on PAS

Evaluation of employees

3%
20%

Promotion of employees
43%
Job satisfaction of
employees

34%

Motivation

4.1.12 Respondents opinion towards PAS helps to achieve production targets

Opinion

No. of Respondent Percent

Strongly agree

24

24.0

Agree

63

63.0

Neutral

9.0

Disagree

4.0

Strongly disagree

100

100.0

Total

INFERENCE:
Nearly 63% of respondents are Agree with the PAS, 4% of respondents disagree that
PAS helps to achieve production targets.

4.1.12 Respondents opinion towards PAS helps to achieve production targets

Respondents opinion towards PAS helps to

achieve production targets
80
60
40
20
0
Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

No. of Respondent

Disagree

Percent

Strongly disagree

4.1.13 Respondents opinion towards Best method of evaluating the performance

Opinion

No. of Respondents Percent

Checklist

13

13.0

Point allocation

31

31.0

Essay appraisal

41

41.0

360 degree appraisal

15

15.0

Total

100

100.0

INFERENCE:

It is inferred from the above statistical analysis that 41% of respondents says essay
appraisal method is best method. 13% of respondents says checklist method is best method.

4.1.13 Respondents opinion towards Best method of evaluating the performance

Respondents opinion towards Best

method of evaluating the performance
15%

13%

31%
41%

Checklist

Point allocation

Essay appraisal

360 degree appraisal

4.1.14 Respondents opinion towards indication of periodicity of the PAS

Opinion

No. of Respondents Percent

Personal performance

42

42.0

Department performance

29

29.0

Company performance

24

24.0

Assigned goal

5.0

100

100.0

Total

INFERENCE:
From the above statistical analysis that 42% of respondents indicates that personal
performance. 13% of respondents says checklist method is best method.

4.1.14 Respondents opinion towards indication of periodicity of the PAS

Respondents opinion towards indication of

periodicity of the PAS
5%
5%

24%
24%

Personal performance

42%42%

Department performance
Company performance
Assigned goal

29%
29%

4.1.15 Respondents opinion towards the method of PAS implemented in your

organization

Opinion

No. of Respondents

Percent

Merit

24

24.0

Grading

12

12.0

Others

8.0

Job oriented achievement

56

56.0

Total

100

100.0

INFERENCE:
It is inferred from the above statistical analysis that 56% of respondents says job
oriented achievement method of PAS is implemented. 8% of respondents says others method
of PAS is implemented in the organization.

4.1.15 Respondents opinion towards the method of PAS implemented in your

organization

Respondents opinion towards the method of

PAS implemented in your organization
100
50
0

No. of Respondents

Percent

4.1.16 Respondents opinion towards increment in salary after performance appraisal

Opinion

No. of Respondents Percent

Yes

84

84.0

No

16

16.0

Total

100

100.0

INFERENCE:
Amount the 100 employees surveyed most of them say that they are increment in salary after
performance appraisal system i,e.84% of them say that they satisfied with the increment in
salary after PAS and remaining 16% of them say that they not satisfied with the increment in
salary after PAS

4.1.16 Respondents opinion towards increment in salary after performance appraisal

Respondents opinion towards increment in

salary after performance appraisal
16%
Yes
No

84%

4.1.17 Respondents opinion towards satisfy with PAS in your company

Opinion

No. of Respondents Percent

Highly satisfied

17

17.0

Satisfied

57

57.0

Neutral

19

19.0

Dissatisfied

1.0

Highly dissatisfied

6.0

100

100.0

Total

INFERENCE:
It is inferred from the above statistical analysis that 57% of respondents are satisfied.
1% of respondents dissatisfied with the PAS in their company.

4.1.17 Respondents opinion towards satisfy with PAS in your company

Respondents opinion towards satisfy with PAS

in your company
100
50
0

No. of Respondents

Percent

Column1

4.1.18 Respondents opinion towards after PAS increasing the percentage

in your organization
Opinion

No. of Respondents Percent

10-20%

7.0

20-30%

44

44.0

30-40%

22

22.0

40-50%

18

18.0

50% above

9.0

100

100.0

Total

INFERENCE:
From the above statistical analysis that 44% respondents says that 20-30% increases in after
PAS in the organization. 9% of respondents says that 50% above increases in after PAS in the
organization.
4.1.18 Respondents opinion towards after PAS increasing the
percentage in your organization

Respondents opinion towards after PAS

increasing the percentage in your organization
50% above
30-40%
10-20%
0

20

40
Percent

60

80

No. of Respondents

100

120

4.1.19 Respondents opinion towards gained any recognition after being appraised
under PAS

Opinion

No. of Respondents Percent

Strongly agree

24

24.0

Agree

54

54.0

Neutral

16

16.0

Disagree

4.0

Strongly disagree

2.0

100

100.0

Total

INFERENCE:
It is inferred from the above statistical analysis that 54% of respondents Agree. 2% of
respondents strongly disagree that gained any recognition after being appraised under PAS.

4.1.19 Respondents opinion towards gained any recognition after being appraised under

RESPONDENTS OPINION TOWARDS

GAINED ANY RECOGNITION AFTER BEING
Strongly
APPRAISED
UNDER PAS
Disagree disagree
4%

2%

Strongly agree
Neutral
16% 24%
Agree
54%

4.1.20 Respondents op inion towards on confidentiality or openness of PAS

Opinion

No. of Respondents

Percent

It is fairly confid ential

32

32.0

It is moderate confidential

52

52.0

It is poor confid ential

16

16.0

Total

100

100.0

INFERENCE:
From the above statistical analysis that 52% of respondents agree that it is moderate
confidential. 16% of respondents agree that it is poor confidential.
4.1.20 Respondents op inion towards on confidentiality or openness of PAS

4.2. CHI-SQUARE TESTS

AIM: - To find out the significant relationship between Age of respondents and Experience
of the respondents
H0: - There is no significant relationship between Age of respondents and Experience
of the respondents
H1: - There is significant relationship between Age of respondents and Experience
of the respondents

Age of respondents * Experience of the respondents

Age of respondents

AGE

No. of Respondents

Percent

20-30

25

25.0

31-35

31

31.0

36-40

36

36.0

Above 40 year

8.0

100

100.0

Total

Experience of respondents

Experience

No. of Respondents

Percent

Less than 1 year

11

11.0

1-5 year

47

47.0

6-10 year

32

32.0

More than 10 year

10

10.0

Total

100

100.0

Combined value:
Age And
Experience

20-30

31-35

36-40

Above 40

Total

Less than 1 year

11

1-5 year

12

28

47

6-10 years

14

32

More than 10
years

10

Total

25

31

36

100

Calculation Value
Observed
frequency

Expected
frequency

(Oi-Ei)

(Oi-Ei)2

(Oi-Ei)2/Ei

8
2
1
0
5
12
28
2
8
14
5
5
4
3
2
1

02.75
03.41
03.96
00.88
11.75
14.57
16.92
03.76
8
09.92
11.52
02.56
02.5
03.1
03.6
00.8

5.25
-1.41
-2.96
-0.88
6.75
-2.57
11.08
-1.76
0
4.08
-6.52
2.44
1.5
0.1
-1.6
0.20

27.56
1.99
8.76
0.77
45.56
6.60
122.77
3.10
0
16.65
42.51
5.95
2.25
0.01
2.56
0.04
Total

10.02
0.58
2.21
0.875
3.88
0.45
7.26
0.82
0
1.68
3.69
2.32
0.90
0.003
0.71
0.50
35.898

(Oi-Ei) 2
X2=-------------------

Ei
= 27.56/2.75 = 10.02
Degree of Freedom
(R-1) (C-1)
(4-1) (4-1)
(3) (3)
=9
Calculated Value 35898 > FV = 21.488
Result
Since the Calculated value is greater that tabular value the alternative hypothesis is
accepted

4.3 Weight Average Method

4.3.1 Respondents opinion towards relationship with your higher authority

Opinion

No. of Respondents

Percent

Excellent

37

37.0

Good

45

45.0

Fair

12

12.0

Poor

4.0

Very poor

2.0

100

100.0

Total

Tabular Value
Particular

Frequency

weight

Freq*Weig

Excellent

37

185

Good

45

90

Fair

12

36

Poor

Very poor

Total

100

15

321

WAM = Total score / No of Respondents

T.S = 321
No of R = 100
WAM = 321 / 100 = 3.1.

Result
As the WAM comes nearly to it after that the relationship of the higher authority
for respondents

CHAPTER-V
5.1 FINDINGS
Majority of the respondents are employed from the designation of skilled-I in the organization.

Most of the respondents are from the department of Foundry and Quality services.
44% of respondents are Qualified in ITI field.
Most of the respondents are from the Age group of 36-40 years.
Majority of the respondents are Experienced between 1-5 years.
It is observed that the employees earned 10000-20000 from the monthly income.
85% of respondents agree that Performance appraisal system creates good industrial relations.

58% of respondents are satisfied with Essay Evaluation Method used for PAS.
48% of respondents are satisfied with the Check List Method used for PAS.
Most of the respondents say they are maintaining Good relationship with the higher authority.

49% of respondents say that they are good at co-operation with the subordinates.
Majority of the respondents say Evaluation of employees is PAS in their opinion. 63%
of respondents agree that PAS helps to achieve production targets.
41% of respondents say that Essay appraisal is the Best method of evaluating the performance.

56% of respondents agree that Job oriented achievement is the method of PAS implemented
in your organization.
84% of respondents agree that they receive increment in salary after performance appraisal.
57% of respondents are satisfied with the PAS in the company.
20-30% increase is there after PAS in the organization.
54% of respondents agree that recognition is gained after being appraised under PAS.
52% of respondents say that the confidentiality is moderate.

5.2 SUGGESTIONS
The Relationship between the workers and higher authority has been increased.
Due to the Evaluation of Performance appraisal system (PAS), job satisfaction has been
increased.
Workers are motivated by providing influencing factors such as awards, salaries,
intrinsic & extrinsic rewards, promotion.
Performance appraisal system (PAS) has been helpful to measure the performance of the
employees.

CONCLUSION

The relationship between the workers and the higher authority has been increased due
performance appraisal system. The workers are motivated by providing influencing factors such
as awards, salaries, intrinsic & extrinsic rewards, promotion. By evaluating the employees
performance, the productivity level has been increased due to the appraisal of the workers
performance.

ANNEXURE
QUESTIONNAIRE ON PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL SYSTEM
DEMOGRAPHIC FACTORS
Name:
Designation:
Department:
1) Gender:
a) Male

b) Female

2) Educational Qualification:
a) UG

b) PG

c) ITI

d) Diploma

a) 20-30

b) 31-35

c) 36-40

d) Above 40 years

3) Age

4) Year of Experience
a) Less that 1 year

b) 1-5

c) 6-10

d) More that 10 years

5) Monthly Income
a) Below 5000

b) 5000-10000

c) 10000-20000

d) Above 20000

STUDY FACTORS
6) Whether the performance appraisal system creates good industrial relation?
a) Yes

b) No

7) Give your opinion about the check list method used for performance appraisal system?
a) Highly satisfied

b) Satisfied

c) Neutral

d) Dissatisfied

e) highly dissatisfied

8) Give your opinion about the essay evaluation method used for performance Appraisal System ?
a) Highly satisfied

b) Satisfied

c) Neutral

d) Dissatisfied

e) highly dissatisfied

9) How would you rate your relationship with your higher authority?
a) Excellent

b) Good

c) Fair

d) poor

e) very poor

10) What is your opinion about co-operation with your subordinates?

a) Excellent

b) Good

c) Fair

d) poor

e) very poor

11) Do you think performance appraisal system helps to change the behavior of employees?
a) Highly satisfied

b) Satisfied

c) Neutral

d) Dissatisfied

e) highly dissatisfied

12) In your opinion performance appraisal system is?

a) Evaluation of employees

b) Promotion of employees

c) Job satisfaction of employees

d) Motivation

13) Do you think performance appraisal system helps people to set and achieve production targets?
a) Highly satisfied

b) Satisfied

c) Neutral

d) Dissatisfied

e) highly dissatisfied

14) Which do you think best method of evaluating the performance?

a) Checklist

b) Point allocation

c) Essay appraisal

d) 360 degree appraisal

15) Please indicate the periodicity of the following performance appraisal system?
(Monthly, Quarterly, half yearly, yearly)
Personal performance

Department performance

Company performance

Assigned goal

16) Which method of performance appraisal system is implemented in your organization?

a) Merit

b) Grading

c) Others

d) Job oriented achievement

17) Do you receive any increment in your salary after performance appraisal?
a) Yes

b) No

18) Do you satisfy with the performance appraisal system in your company?
a) Highly satisfied

b) Satisfied

c) Neutral

d) Dissatisfied

e) highly dissatisfied

19) How much percentage increasing in after performance appraisal system in your Organization?
a) 10-20%

b) 20-30%

d) 40-50%

e) 50% Above

c) 30-40%

20) Have you gained any recognition after being appraised under performance appraisal system?
a) Highly satisfied

b) Satisfied

c) Neutral

d) Dissatisfied

e) highly dissatisfied

21) Give your opinion on confidentiality are openness of performance appraisal system?
a) It is fairly confidential
c) It is poor confidential

b) It is moderate confidential