Analytical Study of Performance and Potential Appraisal in A.P.S. University, Rewa (M.P.)
Dr. Usha Tiwari*
Faculty, MBA (HRD), APS University, Rewa (M.P.) 486003
ABSTRACT:
Performance appraisal is the systematic evaluation of the individual with respect to his performance on the job and his potential for development. The aim of performance appraisal are: to improve organisational viability and growth through optimal utilisation of its human resources and to motivate the appraise towards giving his best to the organization by improving his performance and by developing the potential. Present study is undertaken with a view to asses performance and potential appraisal of non-teaching employees of A.P.S. University Rewa (M.P.). Result indicates the performance and potential appraisal appears average score and employees satisfaction on promotion and performance appraisal are poor/unsatisfactory.
KEY WORDS: Performance, Potential Appraisal, Promotion, University, Non-Teaching.
INTRODUCTION:
Performance Appraisal system is a systematic and objective way of judging the relative merit or performance of an employee's task. It is the process which helps to identify those who perform their assigned tasks well and also pinpoints those whose productivity is low.
According to Luthans (1981), "Today, performance appraisals are used not only for wage increases, transfers, promotions and layoffs, but also as a means of communication, motivation and development of all the employees in the organisation". Performance Appraisal is the systematic evaluation of the individual with respect to his performance on the job and his potential for development. The aim of performance appraisal can, therefore, be two-fold, (Brij mohan, 1993) viz.
(i). To improve organisational viability and growth through optimal utilisation of its human resources; and
(ii). To motivate the appraise towards giving his/her best to the organisation by improving his/her performance and by developing the potential.
Levinson (1976) has mentioned three functions of performance appraisal as :
1. It seeks to provide an adequate feedback to each individual for his performance;
2. It purports to serve as a basis for improving or changing behaviour towards some more effective working habits ;and
3. It aims at providing data to managers/supervisors with which they may judge future job assignments and compensation.
In this research paper an analysis of performance and potential appraisal of various categories of Group A, B, C and Overall employees of the non-teaching staff of A.P.S. University has been done through questionnaire.
OBJECTIVES:
1. To study the overall performance and potential appraisal among non- teaching staff of the university.
2. To analyse the factor wise performance and potential appraisal
in the university.
3. To assess the variations of satisfaction with performance and potential appraisal and promotion in different group of employees of the university.
METHODOLOGY:
This study is confined only to non-teaching staff of APS University Rewa (M.P.) .The study is based on primary data. The source of primary data is the responses of the employees obtained through questionnaire. The technique of interview and discussion has also been used as one of the diagnostic tool. To analysed the performance and potential appraisal in A.P.S. University Rewa questionnaires distributed among the various cadres of group A, B and C employees that is administration, supervisor and Assistant. The scoring has been obtained on a five point scale. In order to make the interpretation easier the mean score were converted into percentage score using the formula of Rao (1991) i.e.
Percentage score = (Mean Score-1) x 25
The degree of dimension have been divided into very good, Good, Average, Poor, Extremely poor.
Table-1 :- Factor wise mean score, Percentage and Categories of Performance and Potential Appraisal in different Groups of employees in A.P.S. University Rewa (M.P.)
|
S.N. |
Groups / Factors |
A |
B |
C |
Overall |
||||||||
|
MS |
% |
CAG |
MS |
% |
CAG |
MS |
% |
CAG |
MS |
% |
CAG |
||
|
1 |
Promotion Decision |
4.5 |
87.5 |
VG |
4.083 |
77.08 |
VG |
2.75 |
43.75 |
P |
3.28 |
57.0 |
AV |
|
2 |
Appreciation of Good work |
3.66 |
66.65 |
G |
2.75 |
43.75 |
P |
1.25 |
31.25 |
EP |
2.54 |
38.5 |
EP |
|
3 |
Work Assessment Report (ACR) |
3.83 |
70.86 |
G |
4.0 |
75.0 |
VG |
3.37 |
59.38 |
EP |
3.26 |
56.5 |
AV |
|
Avg.
|
Performance and Potential Appraisal |
3.999 |
74.98 |
VG |
3.611 |
65.28 |
AV |
2.791 |
44.28 |
P |
3.026 |
50.65 |
AV |
Categories- VG = Very Good, G = Good, AV = Average, P = Poor, EP = Extremely Poor
Table-2: Satisfaction analysis based on Promotion and Performance Appraisal of different Groups of employees in A.P.S. University Rewa (M.P.)
|
S.N. |
Groups / Factors |
A |
B |
C |
Overall |
||||||||
|
MS |
% |
CAG |
MS |
% |
CAG |
MS |
% |
CAG |
MS |
% |
CAG |
||
|
1 |
Satisfied with Promotion |
3.166 |
54.15 |
AV |
3.25 |
56.25 |
AV |
1.76 |
11.5 |
EP |
2.06 |
26.5 |
EP |
|
2 |
Satisfied with Performance and Potential Appraisal |
3.18 |
54.5 |
AV |
3.2 |
55 |
AV |
2.33 |
33.36 |
EP |
|
41.5 |
P |
Categories : VG = Very Good, G = Good, AV = Average, P = Poor, EP = Extremely Poor
Analysis of Performance and Potential Appraisal system in A.P.S. University Rewa (M.P.)
The table 1 and fig 1 and 2 under reference shows the item wise mean score and percentage of the group A, B, C and overall performance and potential appraisal of the employees of APS University Rewa. Some of the trends noticed given below.
The performance and potential appraisal appears to be average. The average mean score and percentage has been calculated at 3.999 (74-98%) for group A, 3.611 (65.28%) for group B, 2.791 (44.28%) for group C. The average mean score and percentage of the overall performance and potential appraisal has been computed at 3.026 (50.65%).
The factors promotion decision and work assessment report (ACR) are contributing average scores and appreciation of good work is contributing extremely poor score.
Satisfaction analysis on Promotion Decision and Performance Appraisal
The table 2 and fig. 3 under reference shows mean score and percentage of the group A, B, C and overall employee satisfaction based on promotion decision and performance appraisal. The satisfaction on promotion decision appears to be extremely poor. The mean score and percentage has been calculated at 3.116 (54.15%) for group A, 3.25 (56.25%) for group B,1.46( 11%) for group C. The mean score and percentage of overall satisfaction with promotion decision has been computed at 2.06 (26.5%). The employees satisfaction on performance appraisal appears to be poor. The mean score and percentage has been calculated at 3.18 (54.5) for group A, 3.2 (55%) for group B, 2.333 (33.36%) for group C. The mean score and percentage of overall satisfaction with performance appraisal has been computed at 2.66 (41.5%)
CONCLUSION:
Result indicates the performance and potential appraisal appears average score and employees satisfaction on promotion and performance appraisal are poor/unsatisfactory
SUGGESTION:
(1) Appraisal and feedback system should be strengthened.
(2) There should be a scientific system of appraising performance of employees.
(3) Personnel policies should be strengthened.
REFERENCE:
Brij Mohan A. (1993): Performance Appraisal. Training manual for non academic staff in distance Education. PP.224-227.
Douglas MC Gregor (1957): An uneasy look at performance appraisal. Harward Business Review, May-June (1957) PP. 89-94.
Levinsion H. (1976): Appraisal of work performance. Harward Business Review, July- Aug. 1976 P.30.
Luthans Freg (1981): Organisational Behaviour .MC Graw Hill. (1981).
Mahendirtta P.R. (1984): University Administration in India and USA: Approaches, Issues and Implications. Oxford and IBH Pub. Co.New Delhi, P. 310.
Niazi AA. (1985): Appraisal and Administrative Decision in Personnel Management (Ed-Singh and Suri) Vani Educational Books New Delhi.
Tiwari Usha (2012): HRD mechanisms in a university organisation of Madhya Pradesh. H.R. Jour. of Management Vol. (5) (2) PP. 30-34.
Tiwari Usha (2012): Dimensions of Human Resource Development climate in University organisation H.R. Jour. of Management Vol 5 (2) PP. 74-79.
Tiwari Usha and Tiwari Sunil (2012a) : Human Resource development climate in a service organisation. H.R. Journal (An International Jour.) of Management Vol. 4 (2) March-12, PP. 41-46.
Toppo L. and T. Prusty (2012): From performance appraisal to performance management. IOSR Jour. of Business and Management Vol. 3 (1) PP. 1-6.
Received on 03.09.2014
Revised on 21.09.2014
Accepted on 28.09.2014
© A&V Publication all right reserved
Research J. Humanities and Social Sciences. 5(3): July-September, 2014, 260-263