STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM:



CHAPTER-1

INTRODUCTION TO PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

1.1. INTRODUCTION

Performance appraisal is the step where the management finds out how effective it has been at hiring the placing employees. If any problems are identified, steps are taken to remedy them.

In the business world, investment is made in machinery, equipment and services. Quite naturally time and money is spend ensuring that they provide what their supplies claim. In other words, the performance is constantly appraised against the results expected.

One of the most expenses resource in which companies invest is manpower. The job of appraising performance against results is not very often carried out with same objective, if indeed it is done at all.

Performance appraisal, like other personnel functions forms eventually a line responsibility, all though involving the staff assistance and advice. At the very outset it may be painted out that performance appraisal is a continuous function and not merely an issue of form and reports.

“Performance appraisal is a systematic periodic and so far humanly possibly and impartial rating of employee’s excellence in matters pertaining to his present job and to his potentialities for a better job.”

By – Edwin B. Fillippo

There is, says Dulewicz (1989), "... a basic human tendency to make judgments about 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, including subordinates, naturally, informally and arbitrarily.

1.2. NEED OF THE STUDY:

Performance appraisal is needed to evaluate the behaviour of the employees in the work spot, normally including both quantitative and qualitative aspects of job performance. Performance appraisal is essential to understand and improve the employee’s performance through HRD. Performance appraisal indicates the level of desired performance, level of actual performance and the gap between these two. Performance appraisal is needed in order to provide information about the performance ranks bearing on which decisions regarding salary fixation, conformation, promotion, transfer and demotions are taken.

The appraisal in whatever form carried at various levels it is done with a view to identify the areas that can be improved, remove any determinants, identifying training needs, recognize individuals potential/strengths/weaknesses to see the suitability for promotions or to transfer to areas with more responsibility, to counsel if it required.

Performance appraisal helps employee development. It is a continuous process in every organization. It also helps in contributing to the employee growth and development through training and development programs.

1.3. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY:

➢ To asses the degree of awareness of performance appraisal among employees in the organization.

➢ To analyze the methods of Performance Appraisal.

➢ To evaluate the Performance appraisal program conducted in Hetero Drugs Ltd.

➢ To know the satisfactory levels and the comfortable levels among the employees.

1.4. SCOPE OF THE STUDY:

The scope of performance appraisal should include the following: provide employees with a better understanding of their role and responsibilities; increase confidence through recognizing strengths while identifying training needs to improve weaknesses; improve working relationships and communication between supervisors and subordinates; increase commitment to organizational goals; develop employees into future supervisors; assist in personnel decisions such as promotions or allocating rewards; and allow time for self-reflection, self-appraisal and personal goal setting

1.5. RESEARCH AND METHODOLOGY:

Sample Unit

The sample units are taken from the executives and non-executive of the Organization.

Sample Size

In the present study 50 employees were selected including executive and non-executives of production departments in Organization.

Sample Method

The sample for the study was chosen by means of Stratified random Technique.

Data Collection

Data collection is two types, they are

• Primary sources

• Secondary sources

• Primary Sources

Primary source of data is collected from the Organization. It was through questionnaires and surveys. By these the

data is collected from the employees of the Organization.

• Secondary Sources

* Secondary data has been compiled from the reports and official publications.

• Secondary data is also collected from the past records of the Organization.

1.6. LIMITATIONS:

• The study is confined to limited period of 45 days.

• The data collected by me through primary sources is constructed by the sample size which is only 50 employees.

• Due to the time constraints of some of the respondents this might have forced them to give casual response without evaluating the question seriously.

• Accuracy of the study is purely based on the information as given by the respondents

CHAPTER-2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

WHY HISTORY IN REVIEW OF LITERATURE??

2.1. HISTORY:

Although the interest in the use of performance appraisal has increased over the last thirty years, the practice of formally evaluating employees has excited for centuries. The performance appraisal system has undergone a lot of changes over the years as shown below:

1900 : Subjective appraisals

1940 : Increased Psychometric sophistication

1950 : Management by objectives (MBO)

1960 : BARS

1970-90 : Hybrid system and approach

2.2. PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL:

Organizations are run and steered by people. It is through people that goals are set and objectives realized. The performance of an organization is thus dependent upon the sum total of the performance of its members. According to Peter Drucker, ‘an organization is like a tune; it is not constituted by individual sounds but by their synthesis’. The success of an organization will therefore depend on its ability to measure accurately the performance of its members and use it objectively to optimize them as a vital resource.

Performance Appraisal (PA) refers to all those procedures that are used to evaluate the personality, the performance, and the potential of its members. Evaluation is different from judgment – the former being concerned with performance, the later with person. Performance appraisal could be formal or informal. Informal performance appraisal is a continuous process of feeding back information to the subordinates about how well they are

doing their work in the organization. The formal performance appraisal occurs usually annually on formalized basis and involves appraisee and appraiser in finding answers to the following questions:

• What performance was set out to be achieved during the period?

• Has it been achieved?

• What has been the shortfall and constraints?

• What are we going to do now?

• How will we know that we have done it?

• What kind of feedback can be expected?

• What assistance can be expected to improve performance? And

• What rewards and opportunities are likely to follow from the performance appraisal?

2.3. OBJECTIVES OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL:

Performance appraisal serves the following management objectives:

• To provide feedback to the employees so that they come to know where they stand and can improve the job performance.

• To provide a valid data base for personnel decisions concerning placement, pay, promotion, transfer, punishment etc.

• To diagnose the strengths and weaknesses of individuals so as to identify further training needs.

• To provide coaching, counseling, career plannings and motivation to sub-ordinates.

• To develop positive superior-subordinates relations and thereby reduce grievance.

• To facilitate research in human resource management.

• To test the effectiveness of recruitment, selection, placement and induction programs.

DEVELOPING A PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL SYSTEM

A formal performance appraisal system can provide a framework within which appraisers and appraise can operate. A performance appraisal system can be developed through a programmed comprising the following stages:

Determine overall approach to performance appraisal

The decisions on the overall approach to introduce performance appraisal should cover the following:

• What are the objectives of introducing performance appraisal?

• What benefits are anticipated from introducing performance appraisal?

• What are the main features of the approach to performance appraisal?

• Where and how should PA be introduced?

• Decide who is to be covered?

• Decide on whether the same approach should be adopted at each level?

• Define role of human resource department?

• Decide whether to use outside consultants?

The implementation programmed should cover the following:

1) Date of introducing performance appraisal in the whole or different parts of the organization (phased as necessary)

2) Procedure for evaluating the process

3) Briefing/ training programmed

2.4. PROCESS OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL:

Performance appraisal comprises the following steps:

• Select performance factors (based on job description) to be evaluated and set the standards to be achieved

• Set the performance review period

• Measure actual performance

• Compare performance with set standards and rate it with a suitable scale

• Communicate the rating to the appraise

• Use the performance appraisal for the desired purpose

Performance Criteria

In order to be effective, the criteria for performance appraisal should be genuinely related to success / failure in the job and should be amenable to objective judgment. It should also be easy for the appraise to administer and appear just and relevant to the employees, and strike a fair balance between sensitivity to the needs of the present job and applicability to the organization.

The earlier concept of merit rating has yielded place to performance appraisal. In the merit rating system, merit was based upon personality traits such as leadership, ability to get along with others, decisiveness, creativity, industry, judgment, initiative and drive.

Management by objective (MBO) is an example of performance-based appraisal approach that involves setting objectives and comparing performance against those objectives. Objectives give greater freedom to both management and the employee in deciding how performance is to be measured. They also have greater motivational effect since the standards are discussed and agreed upon both by the management and the employees.

2.5. PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL METHODS:

There are two types of performance appraisal methods. Some of them are:

1. Traditional Method

Essay Method

The essay method involves an evaluator's written report appraising an employee's performance, usually in terms of job behaviors and/or results. The subject of an essay appraisal is often justification of pay, promotion, or termination decisions, but essays can be used for developmental purposes as well.

Since essay appraisals are to a large extent unstructured and open-ended, lack of standardization is a major problem. The open-ended, unstructured nature of the essay appraisal makes it highly susceptible to evaluator bias, which may in some cases be discriminatory. By not having to report on all job-related behaviors or results, an evaluator may simply comment on those that reflect favorably or unfavorably on an employee. This does not usually represent a true picture of the employee or the job, and content validity of the method suffers.

Ranking

Ranking methods compare one employee to another, resulting in an ordering of employees in relation to one another. Rankings often result in overall assessments of employees, rather than in specific judgments about a number of job components. Straight ranking requires an evaluator to order a group of employees from best to worst overall or from most effective to least effective in terms of a certain criterion. Alternative ranking makes the same demand, but the ranking process must be done in a specified manner (for example, by first selecting the best employee in a group, then the worst, then the second-best, then the second-worst, etc.).

Comparative evaluation systems such as ranking are rarely popular. No matter how close a group of employees is in the level of their performance, and no matter how well they perform on the job, some will rank high and some will end up at the bottom. Evaluators are often reluctant to make such discriminations. Also, rankings are unable to compare employees across different groups. For example, it is difficult to say whether the second-ranked employee in unit A is as good as or better than the second-ranked employee in unit B. Despite the problems of ranking methods, if an organization has a very limited number of promotions or dollars to allocate, rankings can be very useful in

differentiation among the employees.

Forced Distribution

Forced distribution is a form of comparative evaluation in which an evaluator rates

Subordinates according to a specified distribution. Unlike ranking methods, forced distribution is frequently applied to several rather than only one component of job performance.

Use of the forced distribution method is demonstrated by a manager who is told that he or she must rate subordinates according to the following distribution: 10 percent low; 20 percent below average; 40 percent average; 20 percent above average; and 10 percent high. In a group of 20 employees, two would have to be placed in the low category, four in the below-average category, eight in the average, four above average, and two would be placed in the highest category. The proportions of forced distribution can vary. For example, a supervisor could be required to place employees into top, middle, and bottom thirds of a distribution.

Forced distribution is primarily used to eliminate rating errors such as leniency and central tendency, but the method itself can cause rating errors because it forces discriminations between employees even where job performance is quite similar. For example, even if all employees in a unit are doing a good job, the forced distribution approach dictates that a certain number be placed at the bottom of a graded continuum. For this reason, raters and rates do not readily accept this method, especially in small groups or when group members are all of high ability.

Behavioral Checklist

A behavioral checklist is a rating form containing statements describing both effective and ineffective job behaviors. These behaviors relate to a number of behavioral dimensions determined to be relevant to the job.

Items from a behavioral checklist for a salesperson's job

Instructions

1. Please check those statements descriptive of an employee's behavior.

2. Calls on customers immediately after hearing of any complaints

3. Discusses complaints with customer

4. Gathers facts relevant to customers' complaints

5. Transmits information about complaints back to customers and resolves problems to their satisfaction

6. Plans each day's activities ahead of time

7. Lays out broad sales plans for one month ahead

8. Gathers sales information from customers, other salesmen, trade journals, and other relevant sources

Graphic Rating

Graphic rating scales are one of the most common methods of performance appraisal. Graphic rating scales require an evaluator to indicate on a scale the degree to which an employee demonstrates a particular trait, behavior, or performance result. Rating forms are composed of a number of scales, each relating to a certain job or performance-related dimension, such as job knowledge, responsibility, or quality of work. Each scale is a continuum of scale points, or anchors, which range from high to low, from good to poor, from most to least effective, and so forth. Scales typically have from five to seven points, though they can have more or less.

Acceptable rating scales should have the following characteristics

1. Performance dimensions should be clearly defined.

2. Scales should be behaviorally based so that a rater is able to support all ratings with objective, observable evidence.

3. Abstract trait names such as "loyalty," "honesty," and "integrity" should be avoided unless they can be defined in terms of observable behaviors.

4. Points, or anchors, on each scaled dimension should be brief, unambiguous, and relevant to the dimension being rated. For example, in rating a person's flow of words, it is preferable to use anchors such as "fluent," "easy," "unimpeded," "hesitant," and "labored," rather than "excellent," "very good," "average," "below average," and "poor."

Carefully constructed graphic rating scales have a number of advantages

1. Standardization of content permitting comparison of employees.

2. Ease of development use and relatively low development and usage cost.

3. Reasonably high rater and rate acceptance.

A disadvantage of such rating scales is that they are susceptible to rating errors which result in inaccurate appraisals. Possible rating errors include halo effect, central tendency, severity, and leniency. The halo effect occurs when a rating on one dimension of an appraisal instrument substantially influences the ratings on other dimensions for the same employee. As a result of the halo effect, an employee is rated about the same across all performance dimensions. Central tendency is a lack of variation or difference among ratings of different subordinates, wherein most employees tend to be rated as average. Leniency refers to an evaluator's tendency to rate most employees very highly across performance dimensions, whereas severity refers to the tendency to rate most employees quite harshly.

Mixed Standard Scales

Mixed standard scales are a relatively recent innovation in rating scales. They contain statements representing good, average, and poor performance based on behavioral examples obtained from knowledgeable persons, usually supervisors. An evaluator's task is to indicate whether an employee either fits the statement, is better than the statement, or worse than the statement. In a mixed standard scale, each performance dimension has three statements relating to it: one illustrating good performance, one average, and one poor. Thus, this mixed standard scale has nine statements, three for each of the three dimensions used. Statements in mixed standard scales are randomly mixed, tending to reduce rater errors by making it less obvious which statements reflect effective or ineffective performance.

Example of a mixed standard scale

Instructions

If the employee fits to the statement, put a? =? in the space opposite the statement. If the employee is better than the statement, put a? v?. If the employee is worse than the statement, put? X?.

1. Is on good terms with everyone. Can get along with people even in disagreement.

2. Employee's work is spotty, sometimes being all right and sometimes not. Could be more accurate and careful.

3. Has a tendency to get into unnecessary conflicts with people.

4. Is quick and efficient, able to keep work on schedule. Really gets going on a new task.

5. The accuracy of employee's work is satisfactory. It is not often that you find clear evidence of carelessness.

6. Gets along with most people. Only very occasionally has conflicts with others on the job, and these are likely to be minor.

7. Is efficient enough, usually getting through assignments and work in reasonable time.

8. Work is striking in its accuracy. Never any evidence of carelessness in it.

9. There is some lack of efficiency on employee's part. Employee may take too much time to complete assignments, and sometimes does not really finish them.

2. Modern Method

BARS - Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales

Behaviorally anchored rating scales (BARS) are rating scales whose scale points are defined by statements of effective and ineffective behaviors. They are said to be behaviorally anchored in that the scales represent a continuum of descriptive statements of behaviors ranging from least to most effective. An evaluator must indicate which behavior on each scale best describes an employee's performance.

BARS differ from other rating scales in that scale points are specifically defined behaviors. Also, BARS are constructed by the evaluators who will use them. There are four steps in the BARS construction process:

1. Listing of all the important dimensions of performance for a job or jobs

2. Collection of critical incidents of effective and ineffective behavior

3. Classification of effective and ineffective behaviors to appropriate performance dimensions

4. Assignment of numerical values to each behavior within each dimension (i.e., scaling of behavioral anchors)

Sample of BARS

INTERPERSONAL SKILL DESCRIPTION:

Develops and maintains a friendly rapport with others; demonstrates sensitivity to their feelings; respects the dignity of others and responds with empathy to their own sense .

Ratings 1 and 2: Demonstrates the ability to get along well with subordinates, managers, and peers; strives to achieve work group objectives. Can express own ideas, thoughts, and feelings and considers the needs, ideas, and feelings of others.

Ratings 3 and 4: Demonstrates the ability to apply factors of effective listening, on a one-to-one basis, such as displaying interest, not interrupting when another is speaking, and withholding judgments. Consistently provides honest (both positive and negative) feedback and provides constructive criticism when appropriate.

Ratings 5 and 6: Demonstrates the ability to consistently consider and respond to the needs and ideas of others which encourages and stimulates further communication. Effectively listens in group or one-to-one situations involving distractions, stress, complex information, or when the person speaking is emotional / distraught. Creates/maintains a positive working environment that encourages expression of thoughts, ideas, and feelings.

Management by Objectives

Management by objectives (MBO) involves setting specific measurable goals with each employee and then periodically discussing his/her progress toward these goals. The term MBO almost always refers to a comprehensive organization-wide goal setting and appraisal program that consist of six main steps:

1. Set the organization’s goals. Establish organization-wide plan for next year and set goals.

2. Set departmental goals. Here department heads and their superiors jointly set goals for their departments

3. Discuss and allocate department goals. Department heads discuss the department's goals with all subordinates in the department (often at a department-wide meeting) and ask them to develop their own individual goals; in other words, how can each employee contribute to the department's attaining its goals?

4. Define expected results (set individual goals). Here, department heads and their subordinates set short-term performance targets.

5. Performance review and measure the results. Department heads compare actual performance for each employee with expected results.

6. Review meetings Provide feedback. Department heads hold periodic performance with subordinates to discuss and evaluate progress in achieving expected results

Assessment Centers

The concept of an Assessment Centre is of recent origin in India. The Assessment Centers are mainly used for evaluating the performance and potential of executives and supervisors. In this method, the executives and supervisors come together to participate in a well designed stimulated exercises. They are assessed by the senior managers, psychologists and HR specialists for 2 to 3 days. After recording the employee’s behavior, the raters communicate the information with them. At the end of the process, feedback in terms of strengths and weaknesses is also provided to the employees.

360 degree Performance Appraisal

This is a new concept in performance appraisal, where the feedback is collected from all around – the employee, the superior, the subordinates, the peer group, and the customers. This is defined as the systematic collection and feedback of performance data on an individual or group, derived from a number of the stakeholders in their performance It is done in a systematic way via questionnaire or interviews.

Figure 2.2- Feedback Form

The process of performance appraisal

Figure 2.3- 360 Degree Feedback Automated System

The evaluation is very comprehensive in terms of employee’s skills, abilities, styles, and job-related competencies. This system has following advantages:

i. Higher validity and reliability of the evaluation

ii. Self-evaluation by the employees gets compared with the perception of others.

iii. Helps in maximizing employee potential in the race of challenges

The 360o feedback can be used in the organization for the above purpose. Moreover, the impact of his feedback on the organizations will be very beneficial. The technique

Uses of 360o FEEDBACK

• Self Development and individual Counseling

• Part of organized Training and Development

• Team Building

• Performance Management

• Strategic or Organizational Development

• Validation of Training and other Initiatives

• Remuneration

2.6. ERRORS OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL:

1. Rating Errors

Performance Appraisal may not be successful in appraising the performance and potential due to the following errors:

a. Halo Effect

It is the method of rating an employee high or low on the basis of overall impression. The rater may be impressed by any one trait of the employee and rate him high on all other traits as well. This error does not lead to the exact Performance Appraisal. This error can be minimized by rating all the employees on one trait before taking up another trait.

b. Stereotyping

Stereotyping involves forming a mental picture of a person on the basis of his/her age, appearance, caste or religion. This type of view destroys the actual performance appraisal

c. Central Tendency

This involves assigning average to all the employees in order to avoid commitment. This method is on appropriate because all the ratings are clustered at the midpoint.

d. Spill Over Effect

This method arises when past performance affects the present performance.

2. Lack Of Knowledge

The rater appraising the performance may fail to evaluate properly due to lack of experience and training.

3. Resistance by Trade Unions

Performance Appraisal is resisted by trade unions as it involves discrimination among its members. Negative ratings affect the interpersonal relations and industrial relations.

4. Negative Approach

If the management aims at punishing the employees rather than developing them, Performance Appraisal loses its value.

5. Personal Bias

The most important error of all arises from the fact that very few people are capable of objective judgments entirely independent of their values and prejudices.

6. Incompetence

Raters may fail to evaluate performance accurately due to lack of Knowledge of experience. Post appraisal interviews is often handled ineffectively.

2.7. BENEFITS OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL:

Performance appraisal is a formal exercise carried out for all executives and workers / staff with respect to their contribution made towards the growth of the organization. The aim is to measure the overall performance of an employee over a period of time, usually one year,

by his immediate supervisor so as to provide a feedback to the employee and aid the management. Performance appraisal does not merely measure the performance of the people but has many other benefits. The benefits of a successful appraisal system can be summed up as follows.

a) For the appraisee

i. Better understanding of his role in the organization – what is expected and what need to done to meet those expectations

ii. Clear understanding of his strength and weaknesses so as to develop himself into a better performer in future

iii. Increased motivation, job satisfaction and self-esteem.

iv. Opportunity to discuss work problems and how they can be overcome

v. Opportunity to discuss aspirations and any guidance, support or training needed to fulfill these aspirations.

vi. Improved working relationship with the superiors

b) For the management

i. Identification of performers and non-performers and their development towards better performance

ii. Opportunity to prepare employees for assuming higher responsibilities

iii. Opportunity to improve communication between the employees and the management

iv. Identification of training and development needs

v. Generation of ideas for improvements

vi. Better identification of potential and formulation of career plans

c) For the organization

i. Improved performance through the organization

ii. Creation of a culture of continuous improvement and success

iii. Conveyance of massages that people are valued

20

The above benefits will be realized only if performance appraisal considered as a process of management. It should not become a ‘scheme’ devised by the personnel department for managers to use in accordance with the directives of that department, and generate completed forms which are stored away in employees’ dossiers and then forgotten. Performance appraisal is a process for establishing sound understanding about what is to be achieved, and an approach to manage and develop people in a way which will increase the probability of achieving the goal-be it short term or long term.

2.8. PITFALLS:

Performance appraisal helps management to collect data on human resources and use it for enhancing responsiveness of the organization. Since performance appraisal is done by people who have emotions, there will always be some subjectivity. Some of the common pitfalls encountered in performance appraisal are the following:

Shifting standards

Performance Appraisal should be based on uniform and fair standards, lest employee might get confused and the organization might not be able to decide as to who is suitable and therefore should be promoted.

Different rater’s patterns

Managers differ in rating style – some rate harshly whereas other are quite lenient. This can be reduced by precise definition on the appraisal form. Subjectivity can also be moderated through a ‘multi-layered appraisal system’, where the immediate superior initiates the report which is reviewed by next higher level.

Central tendency

Many appraisal forms require the appraiser to justify outstanding or poor assessments. So many raters may prefer an easier path of rating most people as ‘average’.

First impression

Some raters may form an overall impression based on some specific qualities or features of the rate in the first the first meeting itself and carry it forward. Making assessment on too short a time span and inadequate knowledge is incorrect.

Latest behavior

At times, the appraisal is influenced by the most recent behavior, ignoring the most commonly engendered behavior during the entire period. Thus, a usually sober person may be treated as arrogant because he expressed his opinion.

Halo effect

Some raters have a tendency to rate high/low on all performance measures based on one of their characteristics. This can be reduced by rating employee on each of the performance measures.

Horn effect

Highly critical bosses have a tendency to compare performance of their subordinates with ‘what they did’. This is not correct because the performance is also depends upon the situation.

Stereotyping (rater’s Bias)

Some raters have a standard mental picture about a person because of that person’s sex, colour, caste, religion, age, style of clothing, political view, etc. Stereotyping results in an oversimplified view. Such assessments are based on false assumptions / feelings, rather than facts. Discretion should not become discrimination.

Spill-over effect

This is allowing past performance to influence present evaluation. In some organizations, when an employee reports on transfer, his earlier reports are also transferred along. This biases the mind of new boss.

CHAPTER-3

COMPANY PROFILE

COMPANY PROFILE:

Established in the year 1993, with the motto to best in API manufacturing. Hetero today embodies the vision of a top notch player in developing and commercializing categories, integrating in to a leading finished dosage manufacturer.

True to the statement, “where the Future Started Yesterday”, with a foresight on the current trends in the pharmaceutical market, Hetero has growth from strength to strength, combing its Research Strengths, manufacturing capabilities, Human Resources and well established quality management System.

With full-fledged marketing capabilities, the company has been able to market its products in over 80 countries in Asia, Middle-east, Eastern Europe and Latin America. With its compliance to the most straight regulatory requirements, Hetero has today gained foothold to market several of its API in the United States, Canada and Europe.

With all manufacturing facilities being supported by excellent infrastructure and compliance to the GMP requirements, Hetero has crossed numerous milestones in a comparatively short-period since its inception.

II. Mission Of Hetero Drugs Limited

Hetero’s Mission is to be a globally acclaimed pharmaceutical Company, Meeting the requirement of Healthcare imbibing the philosophy of both commercial and social concerns, driven by research and manufacturing capabilities.

III. Vision and Values Of Hetero Drugs Limited

Hetero visualizes itself as an aggressive player in the global pharmaceutical scenario, supplying genetic developed, combining intellectual property research strength and strong human resources inputs.

The company values the concepts of having social responsibilities in the course of its asset to gather heights. It strongly believes UN focusing on customer requirements and delivering the products at the right place.

Hetero considers its human resources as the core of all its capabilities and believes in tapping and honing the talents of its members to reach the Zenith of success.

It believes in continuous evaluation and improvement in all the factors that contribute in transforming the organization in to a global to reckon with.

Hetero takes due cognizance to the fact that the processes that it develops should be all eco-friendly and should not result in any consequences that harms the ecological

IV. Management Of Hetero Drugs

Board of Directors

Dr.B. Partha Saradhi Reddy - Chairman and Managing Director

B. Nagi Reddy - Executive Director

M. Pera Reddy - Finance Director – Director Corp.

A.V. Narasa Reddy - Tech

C.Bhaskara Reddy - Director – Quality Control

J.Sambi Reddy - Director –HR manager

M.Srinivasa Reddy - Director

B.Vamsi Krishana - Director

Company Secretary

C.Gopal Krishnan

V. Founder Of Hetero Drugs Limited

The spirit and brain behind the success story of Hetero is its founder Dr.B. Partha Saradhi Reddy, a scientist who started the company drawing immense strength from the vast and rich experience he gained during his earlier stint at the laboratory where he was instrumental in developing and commercializing processes for several APIs.

The company was started by him with a vision to be recognized as an aggressive company that combines its strength of R&D and manufacturing with define advantages in terms of cost and chemistry with a strong emphasis on Quality of the products.

The untiring efforts of the Chairman saw Hetero develop process for several products at relatively low cost, thus making it possible for several life saving drugs to be available at affordable process, meeting all the regulatory and Quality norms. With the organization having reached a point where it is identified among the widely recognized companies, the Chairman is now focusing on giving now dimensions to the company in terms of exploring possibilities of further growth, exploring new horizons in the field of Pharmaceutical development and evolving strategies to take the company to grater heights.

All the members of Hetero Family draw inspiration and motivation form the Chairman in Working towards achieving the Organizational Goals.

VI. Milestones and Awards Of Hetero Drugs Limited

The company has been Scaling New Heights on a Continual Basis. These achievements have been the result of concerned efforts on the part of different functions within the organization to achieve the organizational goal of being a leader. In its oath to success, Hetero has seen many a milestone being crossed and achieved many awards on various fronts. Award for exemplary work in R&D and marketing are just a few to name.

A track of few events that Hetero reaching its Zenith of glory are:

➢ National award for “Best Effort in Research and Development” form the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, Ministry of Science and Technology, Government of India, in the year 1996.

➢ Highest Exporter Award (for the year 1999) against stiff competition for internationally recognized domestic competitors.

HETERO – VISION ON GLOBAL MARKET

Having earned a foothold in the international pharmaceutical marketing, particularly in South America, Latin America, Asian and east and European countries, Hetero is now in the process of marketing an advent in to the competitive and tough pharmacy markets of United States, Canada, Europe and Japan.

Hetero has already made a starting towards this end, beginning with the marketing of its API’s in Canada and Japan. It is scheduled to enter the US market in the very near future, subsequent to the approval by the USFDA.

Having defined its goals and setup it’s mission to be a global player in the field of pharmaceutical manufacture and marketing, Hetero is in search of strategies alliances and joint ventures for days ahead.

Hetero plans to have tie - ups with eminent companies in pharmaceutical industry for the manufacture and supply of active pharmaceutical ingredients.

Hetero also intends to supply intermediate chemicals for several active ingredients being manufacture by notable companies. A step has already been taken in this direction and an agreement as been entered into for the manufacture and supply of intermediates.

Hetero has plans to work towards contract research with some well known companies.

With abilities in the field of Research and Development, Hetero wishes to enter the field of customs synthesis, which has already begun for a few companies.

Hetero has the capabilities for the transfer of technologies, process impurity profiles and formulating procedures for different products, Hetero is ready to share

It’s expertise with panies, to develop cost – effective manufacturing process in changing scenario where there is stiff competition in terms of both cost and quality.

“With untiring efforts and contributions towards becoming a leader in the manufacturing and marketing of pharmaceuticals, Hetero is inching itself towards the genith of success and is now a force to reckon with.”

INTERNATIONAL MARKET

M/S BORAL QUMICA, BARCELONA, SPAIN.

M/S RHENOCHEM LTD, SWITGERLAND.

M/S RESFAR SRL, ITALY.

M/S REMIDICA LTD, CYPRUS.

M/S BEEPHARMA, UNITED KINGDOM.

INDIAN MARKET

M/S ALKEM LABORATORIES LTD, MUMBAI.

M/S CIPLA LTD, MUMBAI.

M/S BLUE CROSS LABORATORIES LTD, MUMBAI.

M/S KOPRAN LTD, MUMBAI.

M/S MERIND LTD MUMBAI.

M/S SUN PHARMACEUTIACL INDUSTRIES,BARODA.

M/S CADILA LABORATORIES LTD, AHMEDABAD.

M/S ALEMBIS CHEMICAL WORKS CO.LTD, NEW DELHI.

M/S INTAS LABORATORIES LTD, HYDERABAD.

M/S NATCO LABORATORIES LTD, HYDERABAD.

M/S TARGOF PURE DRUG PVT LTD, HYDERABAD.

CHAPTER-4

DATA ANALYSIS

&

INTERPRETATION

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTREPRETATION:

Table 4.1- Do you think the Performance Appraisal programmes are timely conducted in Hetero Drugs Ltd?

Table 4.1- Performance Appraisal programmers conducted in Hetero Drugs Ltd

|S.no. |Statement |No.Of Employees |Percentage |

|1. |Yes |30 |60% |

|2. |No. |3 |6% |

|3. |Sometimes Only |9 |18% |

|4. |Very rarely |8 |16% |

| |Total : |50 |100% |

[pic]

Graph 4.1

Source

Questionnaire is given to the employees.

Analysis

From the above table,60% of the employees say that performance appraisal is timely conducted,6% of the employees said no,18% employees said it is sometimes conducted and 16% of employees said that it is conducted very rarely.

Interpretation

Majority of the employees said Performance Appraisal is timely conducted, some responded that it is sometimes conducted and some said it is rarely conducted, few said that it is not conducted. The duty of the company is to timely conduct the Performance Appraisal.

Table 4.2- Does Hetero Drugs Ltd creates a culture of excellence that encourages every employee?

Table 4.2- Culture of excellence that encourages every employee

|S.No. |Statement |No. Of Employees |Percentage |

|1. |Always Creates |20 |40% |

|2. |Creates |20 |40% |

|3. |Sometimes Only |5 |10% |

|4. |Very rarely |5 |10% |

| |Total : |50 |100% |

[pic]

Graph 4.2

Source

Questionnaire is given to the employees.

Analysis

From the above table it shows about the culture of excellence 40% of people always creates and 40% of the people said it creates and the10% of the people says only some times and 10% people says very rarely

Interpretation

Majority of the employees said culture excellence is always created, some responded that it is created, few said it creates sometimes only and few said it creates culture excellence very rarely. So the company should always create culture excellence to encourage the employees.

Table 4.3- Are the employees equipped with the necessary skills to perform their duties?

Table 4.3- Employees equipped with the necessary skills to perform their duties

|S.No. |Statement |No.Of employees |Percentage |

|1. |Always equipped |12 |24% |

|2. |Equipped |30 |60% |

|3. |Sometimes Only |5 |10% |

|4. |Very rarely |3 |6% |

| |Total : |50 |100% |

[pic]

Graph 4.3

Source

Questionnaire is given to the employees.

Analysis

From the above table it shows how employees equipped with the necessary skills to perform their duties 24% of the people are always equipped 60% of the people are only equipped 10% are equipped some times only and the rest 6% are very rarely equipped

Interpretation

Majority of the employees said that the people are only equipped, some responded that the people are always equipped, few said that people are equipped sometimes only and few said that people are very rarely equipped. So the company should encourage the employees to perform their duties with necessary skills.

Table 4.4- Do you think the performance plans of the company are fair and just and cover each & every employee of Hetero Drugs Ltd ?

Table 4.4- Performance plans of the company are fair and just and cover each & every employee

|S. No. |Statement |No.Of Employees |Percentage |

|1. |Yes |20 |40% |

|2. |No. |25 |50% |

|3. |Sometimes Only |3 |6% |

|4. |Very rarely |2 |4% |

| |Total : |50 |100% |

[pic]

Graph 4.4

Source

Questionnaire is given to the employees.

Analysis

From the above table it shows about the performance plans of the company are fair and just and cover each & every employee show s 40% shows Yes and the 50% shows NO 6% shows Some times only 4% shows very rarely

Interpretation

Majority of the employees said that performance plans are not fair, some responded that the plans are fair, few said sometimes and few said very rarely the plans are fair. So the company should try to justify the employees performance plans.

Table 4.5- Does Hetero Drugs Ltd encourages self appraisal in which the employees analyze and evaluate their own performance?

Table 4.5- Encouraging employees to analyze and evaluate their own performance

|S.No. |Statement |No.Of Employees |Percentage |

|1. |Always encouraged |20 |40% |

|2. |Encouraged |25 |50% |

|3. |Sometimes only |2 |4% |

|4. |Very rarely |3 |6% |

| |Total : |50 |100% |

[pic]

Graph 4.5

Source

Questionnaire is given to the employees.

Analysis

From the above table it shows the company encourages self appraisal in which the employees analyze and evaluate their own performance 40% employees are always encouraged and the 50% are not encouraged and 4% shows some times only and 6% shows very rarely

Interpretation

Majority of the employees are not encouraged, some responded that they were encouraged, few said sometimes and few said that they are encouraged very rarely for evaluating their own performance. So the company should try to encourage the employees for self appraisal.

Table 4.6- Do you think the employees have opportunities in fixing their performance standards?

Table 4.6- Employees having opportunities in fixing their performance standards

|S.No. |Statement |No.Of Employees |Percentage |

|1. |Yes |30 |60% |

|2. |No. |10 |20% |

|3. |Sometimes Only |5 |10% |

|4. |Very rarely |5 |10% |

| |Total : |50 |100% |

[pic]

Graph 4.6

Source

Questionnaire is given to the employees.

Analysis

From the above table it shows about the employees have opportunities in fixing their performance standards 60% shows YES and the 20% shows NO and rest shows

10% shows some times only and the 10% shows very rarely.

Interpretation

Majority of the employees have opportunities in fixing their performance standards, some responded that they do not have opportunities, few said sometimes and few said that they have opportunities very rarely. So the company should encourage the employees in fixing their performance standards.

Table 4.7- Are you satisfied with the performance standards fixed by Hetero Drugs Ltd for your job?

Table 4.7- Performance Standards

|S. No. |Statement |No.Of Employees |Percentage |

|1. |Greatly satisfied |15 |30% |

|2. |Satisfied |30 |60% |

|3. |Slightly satisfied |2 |4% |

|4. |Not satisfied |3 |6% |

| |Total : |50 |100% |

[pic]

Graph 4.7

Source

Questionnaire is given to the employees.

Analysis

From the above table it shows about the performance standards in an organization 30% people says greatly satisfied and 60% people shows satisfied and the 4% people are slightly and rest of the 6% are not satisfied.

Interpretation

Majority of the employees are satisfied with the performance standards, some responded that they are greatly satisfied, few said that they are slightly satisfied and few said that they are not satisfied. So the company should fix the performance standards in satisfying the employees.

Table 4.8- Does the management discuss performance and targets with you as and when required?

Table 4.8- Management discuss performance and targets when required

|S.No. |Statement |No.Of Employees |Percentage |

|1. |Yes |25 |50% |

|2. |No. |5 |10% |

|3. |Sometimes Only |15 |30% |

|4. |Very rarely |5 |10% |

| |Total : |50 |100% |

[pic]

Graph 4.8

Source

Questionnaire is given to the employees.

Analysis

From the above table it shows performance and targets in an organization 50% people says YES and the 10% of the people says NO 30% of the people in organization says some times only and the rest o them10%says very rarely.

Interpretation

Majority of the employees said that performance and targets are discussed, some responded that they are discussed sometimes only, few said that they do not discuss and few said that they discuss very rarely. So the company should discuss the performance and targets when required.

Table 4.9- Are the employees empowered and have the autonomy to plan, organize and do their work?

Table 4.9- Employees have the autonomy to plan, organize and do their work

|S.No. |Statement |No.Of Employees |Percentage |

|1. |Yes |25 |50% |

|2. |No. |5 |10% |

|3. |Sometimes Only |15 |30% |

|4. |Very rarely |5 |10% |

| |Total : |50 |100% |

[pic]

Graph 4.9

Source

Questionnaire is given to the employees.

Analysis

From the above table it shows in an organization 50% people says YES and the 10% of the people says NO 30% of the people in organization says some times only and the rest o them10%says very rarely.

Interpretation

Majority of the employees said that they are empowered and have autonomy to plan, some responded that they do not have the autonomy to plan, few said that they empower it sometimes only and few said that they empower the plans very rarely. So the company should empower the employee’s autonomy to plan and to organize their work.

Table 4.10- Do you think the supervisor is competent enough in appraising your performance?

Table 4.10- Supervisor is competent enough in appraising your performance

|S.No. |Statement |No.Of Employees |Percentage |

|1. |Yes |35 |70% |

|2. |No. |5 |10% |

|3. |Sometimes Only |5 |10% |

|4. |Very rarely |5 |10% |

| |Total : |50 |100% |

[pic]

Graph 4.10

Source

Questionnaire is given to the employees.

Analysis

From the above table it shows in an organization 70% people says YES and the 10% of the people says NO 10% of the people in organization says some times only and the rest o them10%says very rarely.

Interpretation

Majority of the employees said that the supervisor is competent enough in appraising the employee performance, some responded that they are not competent, few said that they are competent sometimes only and few said that they are very rarely competent. So the company should appraise the employee’s performance through supervisor.

Table 4.11- Do the Supervisors provides you with the needed guidance for achieving the accomplished performance targets?

Table 4.11- Supervisors provide the needed guidance for achieving the accomplished performance targets

|S.No. |Statement |No.Of employees |Percentage |

|1. |Yes |30 |60% |

|2. |No. |5 |10% |

|3. |Sometimes Only |10 |20% |

|4. |Very rarely |5 |10% |

| |Total : |50 |100% |

[pic]

Graph 4.11

Source

Questionnaire is given to the employees.

Analysis

From the above table it shows the Supervisors provide you with the needed guidance for achieving the accomplished performance targets 60% says YES and the 10% says no 20% of them says only for some times only and the rest of them 10% says very rarely.

Interpretation

Majority of the employees said that the supervisor provides guidance for achieving the targets, some responded that the supervisor do not provide guidance and few said that they provide guidance sometimes only and the rest said that they provide guidance very rarely. So the company should provide sufficient guidance to the employees to achieve the performance targets.

Table 4.12- Do you think your superiors encourage you to learn from your mistakes in a friendly manner?

Table 4.12-Superiors encourage to learn from your mistakes in a friendly manner

|S.No. |Statement |No.Of Employees | Percentage |

|1. |Greatly Encouraged |15 |30% |

|2. |Encouraged |30 |60% |

|3. |Slightly Encouraged |3 |6% |

|4. |Not Encouraged |2 |4% |

| |Total : | |100 |

[pic]

Graph 4.12

Source

Questionnaire is given to the employees.

Analysis

From the above table it shows the superiors encourage you to learn from your mistakes in a friendly manner 30% says YES and the 60% says no 6% of them says only for some times only and the rest of them 4% says very rarely.

Interpretation

Majority of the employees said that the supervisor greatly encourage to learn from mistakes in a friendly manner, some responded that the supervisor encourages to learn from mistakes and few said that they encourage slightly and the rest said that they do not encourage. So the superior should encourage the employees to learn from mistakes in a friendly manner.

Table 4.13- Does your supervisor effectively communicate the results of your performance appraisal regularly?

Table 4.13- Supervisor effectively communicate the results of performance appraisal regularly

|S. No. |Statement |No.Of Employees |Percentage |

|1. |Yes |30 |60% |

|2. |No. |5 |10% |

|3. |Sometimes Only |10 |20% |

|4. |Very rarely |5 |10% |

| |Total : |50 |100 |

[pic]

Graph 4.13

Source

Questionnaire is given to the employees.

Analysis

From the above table it shows the supervisor effectively communicate the results of your Performance appraisal regularly 60% says YES and the 10% says No 20% of them say only for some times only and the rest of them 10% says very rarely.

Interpretation

Majority of the employees said that the supervisor effectively communicates the results of performance regularly, some responded that the supervisor does not communicate and few said that they sometimes communicate and the rest said that they communicate very rarely. So the supervisor should regularly communicate with the employees about the performance results.

Table 4.14- Is the goal setting levels capable enough to stretch you capabilities to the extreme limit?

Table 4.14- Goal setting levels capable enough to stretch you capabilities to the

extreme limit

|S.No. |Statement |No.Of Employees |Percentage |

|1. |Yes |30 |60% |

|2. |No. |5 |10% |

|3. |Sometimes Only |10 |20% |

|4. |Very rarely |5 |10% |

| |Total : |50 |100% |

[pic]

Graph 4.14

Source

Questionnaire is given to the employees.

Analysis

From the above table it shows the goal setting levels capable enough to stretch you capabilities to the extreme limit60% says YES and the 10% says No 20% of them says only for some times only and the rest of them 10% says very rarely.

Interpretation

Majority of the employees said that the goal setting levels are capable enough to stretch the capabilities to extreme limit, some said that there are no such goal setting levels to stretch the capabilities, few said sometimes it is there and few said the goals are very rarely stretched to the extreme limits. So the company should set the goals in order to stretch the capabilities to the extreme limit.

Table 4.15- Are the key competencies identified by Hetero Drugs Ltd well in advance?

Table 4.15-The key competencies identified in advance

|S. No. |Statement |No.Of Employees |Percentage |

|1. |Yes |35 |70% |

|2. |No. |5 |10% |

|3. |Sometimes Only |5 |10% |

|4. |Very rarely |5 |10% |

| |Total : |50 |100% |

[pic]

Graph 4.15

Source

Questionnaire is given to the employees.

Analysis

From the above table it shows the key competencies identified 70% says YES and

the 10% says No 10% of them says only for some times only and the rest of them 10% says very rarely

Interpretation

Majority of the employees said that the key competencies are identified in advance, few said that they are not identified few said that they are identified sometimes only and the rest said that they are very rarely identified. The company should identify the key competencies in advance.

Table 4.16- Do you employees receive feedback about their potential for higher level jobs?

Table 4.16- Employees receive feedback about their potential for higher level jobs

|S. No. |Statement |No.Of Employees |Percentage |

|1. |Yes |30 |60% |

|2. |No. |5 |10% |

|3. |Sometimes Only |10 |20% |

|4. |Very rarely |5 |10% |

| |Total : |50 |100 |

[pic]

Graph 4.16

Source

Questionnaire is given to the employees.

Analysis

From the above table it shows the employees receive feedback about their potential

for higher level jobs 60% says YES and the 10% says No and the 20% of them

says only for some times only and the rest of them 10% says very rarely

Interpretation

Majority of the employees said that they receive feedback for higher level jobs,few said they do not receive, few said that they receive sometimes only and the rest receive very rarely. The company should give feedback to the employees for higher level jobs.

Table 4.17- Do you think good performance is recognized in your company with sufficient rewards and incentives?

Table 4.17- Good performance is recognized with sufficient rewards and incentives

|S.No. |Statement |No.Of Employees |Percentage |

|1. |Yes |35 |70% |

|2. |No. |5 |10% |

|3. |Sometimes Only |5 |10% |

|4. |Very rarely |5 |10% |

| |Total : |50 |100 |

[pic]

Graph 4.17

Source

Questionnaire is given to the employees.

Analysis

From the above table it shows the good performance is recognized in your company with sufficient rewards and incentives 70% says YES and the 10% says No and the 10% of them says only for some times only and the rest of them

10% says very rarely

Interpretation

Majority of the employees said that the company recognizes good performances with rewards and incentives, few said it does not recognize, few said it recognizes only sometimes and the rest said that it recognizes very rarely.

Table 4.18- Is there a clear link between pay and performance?

Table 4.18- A clear link between pay and performance

|S.No. |Statement |No. Of Employees |Percentage |

|1. |Yes |30 |60 |

|2. |No. |5 |10 |

|3. |Sometimes Only |10 |20 |

|4. |Very rarely |5 |10 |

| |Total : |50 |100 |

[pic]

Graph 4.18

Source

Questionnaire is given to the employees.

Analysis

From the above table it shows the a clear link between pay and performance

60% says YES and the 10% says No and the 20% of them says only

for some times only and the rest of them5% says very rarely

Interpretation

Majority of the employees said that there is a clear link between pay and performance, few say there is no link, few say that sometimes there is a link and the rest say that the link is very rare. There should be link between pay and performance.

Table 4.19- Finally are you satisfied with the present Performance Management System in Hetero Drugs Ltd?

Table 4.19- Satisfied with the present Performance Management System

|S.No. |Statement |No.Of Employees |Percentage |

|1. |Greatly Satisfied |15 |30 |

|2. |Satisfied |20 |40 |

|3. |Slightly satisfied |10 |20 |

|4. |Not satisfied |5 |10 |

| |Total : |50 |100 |

[pic]

Graph 4.19

Source

Questionnaire is given to the employees.

Analysis

From the above table it shows how the satisfied with the present Performance Management System show that 30% are greatly satisfied and 40% are satisfied and the 20% are slightly satisfied and the rest 10% are un satisfied.

Interpretation

Majority of the employees said that they are satisfied with the present performance of the Management System, few say that they are greatly satisfied and few say that they are slightly satisfied and the rest say that they are not satisfied. The Management System of the company should be satisfactory.

Table 4.20- Are the career paths of every employee laid down with opportunities and limitations clearly specified?

Table 4.20- career paths of every employee laid down with opportunities and limitations clearly specified

|S.No. |Statement |No. Of Employees |Percentage |

|1. |Yes |30 |60 |

|2. |No. |5 |10 |

|3. |Sometimes Only |10 |20 |

|4. |Very rarely |5 |10 |

| |Total : |50 |100 |

[pic]

Graph 4.20

Source

Questionnaire is given to the employees.

Analysis

From the above table it shows the career paths of every employee laid down with opportunities and limitations clearly specified 60% says YES and the 10% says No and the 20% of them says only for some times only and the rest of them5% says very rarely

Interpretation

Majority of the employees said that career paths of every employee laid down with opportunities and limitations clearly specified, few said that career paths does not laid down the with opportunities and limitations, few said that it sometimes only laid downs with opportunities and limitations and the rest said that it occurs very rarely. The career paths of every employee should lay down with opportunities and limitations.

CHAPTER-5

FINDINGS and SUGGESTIONS

FINDINGS:

• 70% of the employees said that the supervisor is competent enough in appraising the employee performance.

• 50% of the employees said that they are empowered and have autonomy to plan.

• 50% of the employees said that the performance and targets in an organization are not discussed.

• 60% of the employees are satisfied with the performance standards.

• 60% of the employees have opportunities in fixing their performance standards.

• 50% of the employees are not encouraged by the company for self appraisal in which the employees analyze and evaluate their own performance.

• 50% of the employees said that the performance plans of the company are not fair and just and cover each & every employee.

• 60% of the employees said that the people are only equipped with the necessary skills to perform their duties.

• 40% of the employees said that the culture of excellence is always created and 40% of the employees said it creates culture excellence.

• 60% of the employees said that performance appraisal is timely conducted.

• 60% of the employees said that the career paths of every employee lays down with opportunities and limitations clearly specified.

• 40% are satisfied with the present Performance Management System.

• 60% of the employees said that there is a clear link between pay and performance.

• 70% of the employees said that the good performance is recognized in your company with sufficient rewards and incentives.

• 60% of the employees said that the employees receive feedback about their potential for higher level jobs.

• 70% of the employees said that the key competencies are identified in the organization.

• 60% of the employees said that the goal setting levels capable enough to stretch you capabilities to the extreme limit.

• 60% of the employees said that the supervisor effectively communicate the results of their Performance appraisal regularly.

• 60% of the employees said that the Supervisors provide you with the needed guidance for achieving the accomplished performance targets.

SUGGESTIONS:

• Appraisal should be done by the immediate boss.

• The interpersonal relationship between appraiser and the appraise should be enhanced.

• Appraisal of an employee should be done based on his / her actual performance

• Outsiders of HR consultants and assessments centers of appraisal should not be encouraged.

• Clearly identified individual goals based on the performance should be framed and appraisal should be based on those individual goals.

• Adequate and periodical feedback of employees should be framed and appraisal should be on those individual goals.

• Parameters of the appraisal system should be quantitatively measurable giving accurate scores on the employee’s performances.

• Measurement of variable like employee’s knowledge over his / her job, leadership qualities, responsibilities and actual performance should be done.

• Previous year’s appraisal benefits should be given adequate weight age

• Make aware of appraisal in the organization to every employee.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

BOOKS:

• Kothari.C.R. (2000), Research methodologies, Wishwa prakasham publishers, New Delhi.

• Prasad.L.M., Human resource management.

• French Windell. (2000) organizational development, All India publishers and distributors, Chennai.

• Subba Rao. P. (2004) Human Resource Management and Industrial Relation, Himalaya publishers, Mumbai

• Aswathappa. K., Human Resource and Personnel Management, Tata McGraw Hill Publication Co.Ltd., New Delhi.

WEBSITES:

•

•

•

•

•

QUESTIONNAIRE:

1) Do you think the Performance Appraisal programs are timely conducted in hetero drugs Ltd?

1) Yes 2) No 3) Sometimes only 4) Very rarely

2) Does hetero drugs Ltd creates a culture of excellence that encourages every employee?

1) Always 2) Creates 3) Sometimes only 4) Very rarely

3) Are the employees equipped with the necessary skills to perform their duties?

1) Always 2) Equipped 3) Sometimes 4) Very rarely

4) Are the career paths of every employee laid down with opportunities and limitations clearly specified?

1) Yes 2) No 3) Sometimes 4) Very rarely

5) Do you think the performance plans of the company are fair and just and cover each & every employee of hetero drugs Ltd?

1) Yes 2) No 3) Sometimes 4) Very rarely

6) Does hetero drugs Ltd encourages self appraisal in which the employee analyzes and evaluates his own performance? 1) Always 2) Encourage 3) Sometimes 4) Very rarely

7) Do you think the employees’ have opportunities in fixing their performance standards?

1) Yes 2) No 3) Sometimes 4) Very rarely

8) Are you satisfied with the performance standards fixed by hetero drugs Ltd your job? 1) Greatly Satisfied 2) Satisfied 3) Slightly Satisfied 4) Not Satisfied

9) Are you satisfied with the performance standards fixed by hetero drugs Ltd for your job?

1) Greatly satisfied 2) Satisfied 3) Slightly Satisfied 4) Not Satisfied

10) Does the management discuss performance and targets with you as and when require?

1) Yes 2) No 3) Sometimes 4) Very rarely

11) Are the employees empowered and have the autonomy to plan, organize and do their work?

1) Yes 2) No 3) Sometimes 4) Very rarely

12) Do you think the supervisor is competent enough in appraising your performance?

1) Yes 2) No 3) Sometimes 4) Very rarely

13) Do the Supervisors provide you with the needed guidance for achieving the accomplished performance targets?

1) Yes 2) No 3) Sometimes 4) Very rarely

14) Do you think your superiors encourage you to learn from your mistakes in a friendly manner?

1) Greatly Encouraged 2) Encouraged 3) Slightly Encouraged

4) Not Encouraged

15) Do your supervisor effectively communicate the results of your performance appraisal regularly?

1) Yes 2) No 3) Sometimes 4) Very rarely

16) Are the goal setting levels capable enough to stretch you capabilities to the

extreme limit?

1) Yes 2) No 3) Sometimes 4) Very rarely

17) Are the key competencies identified by hetero drugs Ltd well in advance?

1) Yes 2) No 3) Sometimes 4) Very rarely

18) Do you think good performance is recognized in your company with sufficient rewards and incentives?

1) Yes 2) No 3) Sometimes 4) Very rarely

19) Is there a clear link between pay and performance?

1) Yes 2) No 3) Sometimes 4) Very rarely

20) Finally are you satisfied with the present Performance Management System in hetero drugs Ltd?

1) Greatly satisfied 2) Satisfied 3) Slightly Satisfied

4) Not Satisfied

-----------------------

Boss

Peers

Team members

Feedback once form

Customers

Self

Staff

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download