Approach Paper on Appraisal and Promotion Policy

Transcription

1 Approach Paper on Appraisal and Promotion Policy A APPRAISAL SYSTEM Performance Planning and review The Performance Appraisal formats were modified to incorporate the KRA concept in our PMS process and has been made operational since KRA process seeks to align the aims, objectives and activities of all the executives with the aims and objectives of the organization. The KRA process has been designed in such a way that an executive is involved right from the planning to actual execution of the activities. This process if used effectively can become a very good planning and monitoring tool for an individual as well as for the management. Essentials of the KRA process:- 1. Mutual Discussion between appraiser and appraisee - This begins with communication of objectives and targets for the department by the appraiser and all executives under him are then required to formulate KRAs and targets they shall have to complete to achieve departmental goals which in turn shall help in achieving organizational goal. 2. KRAs Setting exercise at the beginning of appraisal period It is important that the goal setting exercise is done at the beginning so that executives are aware what is expected of them right from the start. 3. Monitoring of the KRA achievement - The KRAs set in the beginning have to be monitored at appropriate intervals. Our system provides for monitoring of the KRAs after six months which is called Mid Year Review. Both appraiser and appraisee have to review and discuss the progress made on the KRAs agreed. 4. Year End Review and Performance feedback-the appraisee is assessed on the achievement made on the agreed KRAs and feedback is provided on how the appraisee has performed. This allows him to assess his strengths and weaknesses and what more can be done to perform better. He is also assessed on Competencies, Values and Potential parameters. So, the Training and Development needs of the employees are also charted out. ART of writing KRAs KRAs stand for Key Result Areas i.e. important areas of work for which an employee is responsible and accountable for. However, writing the KRAs always remains a challenge and special attention should be paid while framing the KRAs. SMART KRAs should be set: S-Specific 1

2 KRAs should be easy to understand and should define specific desired future results. Specificity defines the goal by answering: who, what, when, why, how M-Measurable This criterion describes how each goal will be measured and the employee will know whether he/ she have achieved the result. The parameters for measurement should be either be a date, number or percentage. A-Achievable & Agreed KRAs should be so set that it is achievable and not something which is just impossible. A KRA which is very easy or too difficult discourages the person to direct all his efforts towards achievement of the target. The achievable target should be stretched but not impossible. Most important, the goal has to be decided by mutual consensus and agreement. R-Realistic & Relevant KRAs should be in alignment with the mission & guiding principles of POWERGRID and should relate to broader objectives that the individual s department wishes to achieve. The time frame allotted to achieve the KRAs should be reasonable so that the KRAs don t appear unrealistic. T-Time bound A time frame for goals should be established, taking into account other factors such as delivery by others & coordination. Area of Improvement The KRA process has been in vogue from 2009, and only 2 appraisal years have passed w.r.t. appraisers and appraises still in the stage of getting used to the KRA process i.e. mutual discussion and setting of KRA in the beginning, midyear review and year-end performance feedback. From the Corporate Centre, repeated emphasis and reminders regarding the above are made and also requested to send the compliance report that the KRA setting process and midyear review has been completed. In order to kick start and operationalize the mutual discussion at each stage of KRA process, we may make the KRA setting formal process and prepare a schedule for Regions/Departments. The schedule for setting of Annual Plan (KRA), Mid Year review and Year End Review and feedback have been communicated to all the regions/rldcs/departments. Proposal Step 1 - KRA meeting to be organized at Regional Head Quarter or a place identified by the Region at the beginning of the Appraisal Period. 2

3 (i) (ii) 1 st to 15 th January for E1-E5 level executives. KRA meeting shall be chaired by Department Heads, Site Heads, Project Heads, etc. 1 st to 15 th April for E6-E7A level executives. KRA meeting shall be chaired by ED of the region for E6-E7A level executives. In the KRA meetings various objectives and targets for the coming year will be outlined and performance of the previous year will be reviewed. This process will enable all the executives to discuss the performance of previous year and give performance feedback to their subordinates. This will also help the subordinates to set the new KRAs for the current year keeping in mind the performance feedback and targets of the region/department. This will help in completing the KRA setting process in a time bound manner and also ensure mutual discussion between appraiser and appraisee. To start with a Corporate Representative from the Appraisal Group can be associated in the KRA setting process of the Region to assist and clarify any doubt with respect to the PMS system. Step 2 - The KRAs for the current year finalized in step -1 will be compiled and kept with the Regional Head for monitoring and review. The KRAs finalized in the Appraisal Format shall be signed and kept with the Appraiser. A copy of the Annual Performance Plan will also be given to the individual executives for the reference. Step 3 - months. Mid Year Review may be over seen by the Regional HR after six As pointed out earlier, the KRA setting and evaluation of the employees on the same will be ideal in achievement of individual, departmental and organizational objectives only if the KRA setting exercise happens in the beginning by mutual discussion between appraiser and appraisee. KRA setting Guidelines 1. A list of indicative KRAs which emerged after a series of workshops in various regions and Corporate Center are available on the PMS site which could be further refined, developed and strengthened based on suggestions and feedback. 2. Individual KRAs which cover the work performed by the individual will flow down from the Organizational/ Regional/ Departmental MOU. 3. All Regional Heads/ Projects Heads/ O&M Heads are requested to ensure that the safety is necessarily included as KRAs. Minimum 10% weight-age in AAR up to DGM level and 5% for General Managers and Executive Director levels. With every fatal accident in their jurisdiction, there would be deduction of 10% marks for officials up to DGM level and 5% marks in the level of GM/ED. 3

4 4. The heads of Department/ Sections are also requested to ensure that the executives looking after Forest Clearance and Land Acquistion activities should necessarily include these as their KRAs with suitable weightage. 5. Since CSR is an integral part of the MOU signed with Ministry of Power, the heads of Regions/ Sub Stations are also requested to necessarily include CSR activities as KRA for themselves and for the executives responsible for CSR activities. 6. Self developmental KRAs like contribution to Knowledge Management should necessarily be included in the individual KRAs and these would have a 5% weightage. A sample list of such KRAs is provided in the KRA directory as Common KRAs which is available on the PMS site. 7. A 5% weightage should necessarily be given to a KRA for development of subordinates, in case of executives who have subordinates reporting to him. Subordinate development would include sending subordinates for training as 5.5 man days training is a mandatory for all the employees in our MOU signed with Ministry of Power. 8. Additional 5% weightage should necessarily be given to a KRA for New Initiatives in the work done in the department. 9. KRAs should be made objective with specific targets for completion. The target should be either in a Number/ Date/Days or Percentage. 10. Minimum weightage for any KRA shouldn t be less than 5%. 4

5 B- MODERATION / NORMAL DISTRIBUTION CURVE/ BELL CURVE The revised Performance Management System were introduced w.e.f Calendar year 2009 for executives in E1 to E5 levels. The marks awarded in the Appraisal Report format were distributed in the five point scale and the following criterion was adopted. This criterion was also approved by the POWERGRID Board of Directors in its 220 th meeting held on SCORE RATING Outstanding Very Good Good Average Not Satisfactory Below 40 In accordance with clause 8.1 of System of POWERGRID Annual Performance Assessment of executives; Normal Distribution Pattern of any population with minor variation is as under: SCORE PERCENTAGE Outstanding 15-20% Very Good 35-40% Good 40-45% Average 15-20% Not Satisfactory 0-5% Further, as per clause 8.2 of Appraisal system, the above mentioned distribution pattern is not confined to the population falling in the zone of consideration for promotion alone but is applicable for the total population. The moderation for E1 E5 level executives is done every year in the month of January / February, Region-wise. At Corporate Center, it is done department wise. During the moderation process, the various committees over the years found it difficult on many occasions to compulsorily down grade, the executive ratings to meet the normal distribution pattern requirement especially in the last two gradings i.e. Average and Not Satisfactory. The committee members have been of the opinion that POWERGRID has always achieved all its MOU targets and has been rated excellent for last many years, therefore, down grading 20-25% of the executives is very de-motivating for the executives. Whenever an executive is rated Average or Not Satisfactory, the Appraiser in the next year finds it difficult to rate the same person Outstanding / Very Good even with improved performance, as a result the individual generally suffers in promotion for about 3 to 4 years. Thus just one Not satisfactory report impacts the individual s promotion for 3 to 4 years because the total marks are much below the overall promotability marks, which is very de-motivating. As per DPE circular dated 26 th November, 2008 regarding Board level and below Board level executives and Non Unionized Supervisor in Public Sector Enterprises (CPSEs) revision of scales of pay w.e.f stipulates that all CPSEs need to adopt a robust PMS system and follow a Bell curve 5

6 Approach in grading the officers so that not more than 10% to 15% executives are outstanding /Excellent. Similarly, 10% of executives should be graded as below Par. On study of practices being followed in other organization, it has been found that various organizations have adopted the Bell Curve with some modifications to suit them for example some organization moderate all the executives into just three buckets of Outstanding 30 %, Good 65% and below average 5%. Few organizations follow a percentile system of grading and moderation percentages also differ based on organizational MOU achievement. In this case the organization ensures that no two persons in the same department/region are given same score. The differentiation in scores is made even till the last two decimals points. However, in case still the scores become same, forced ranking method is used to differentiate between two individuals. Proposal a) We may divide the total executive population into four buckets based on performance e.g. SCORE PERCENTAGE Outstanding 30% Very Good 55% Good 10% Average Not Satisfactory 5% b) We can make the normal distribution curve based on organizational rating on MOU score e.g. ORGANISATIONAL MOU SCORE EXCELLENT VERY GOOD GOOD Outstanding 40-50% 20-25% 10-15% Very Good 45-65% 45-55% 25-30% Good 10-20% 30-45% 60-65% Average Not Satisfactory 0-5% 0-5% 5-10% c) We can make the normal distribution curve based on respective region/department rating on internal MOU score. REGION/DEPARTMENT WISE MOU SCORE EXCELLENT VERY GOOD GOOD Outstanding 40-50% 20-25% 10-15% Very Good 45-65% 45-55% 25-30% Good 10-20% 30-45% 60-65% Average Not 0-5% 0-5% 5-10% Satisfactory 6

7 d) We can make the normal distribution curve based on respective region/department rating on internal MOU score and organizational MOU score put together. ORGANISATIONAL MOU SCORE EXCELLENT VERY GOOD GOOD REGION/DEPARTMENT WISE MOU Excellent Very Good Good OS-40% VG-45% G- 10% A-5% OS-30% VG-50% G-13% A-7% OS-20% VG-45% G-25% A-10% OS-30% VG-50% G-13% A-7% OS-15% VG-45% G-30% A-10% OS-10% VG-40% G-38% A-12% OS-20% VG-45% G-25% A-10% OS-10% VG-40% G-38% A-12% OS-05% VG-30% G-50% A-15% 7

8 C- DISCLOSURE OF APPRAISAL RATING An appropriate policy for disclosure of appraisal ratings has to be designed which provides for an appeal mechanism to allow aggrieved employees to represent. The key features of the policy are suggested below: 1. The Appraisal disclosure should cover executives from E1 to E7A level. The Appraisal system of E8 and above is prescribed by DPE which has the disclosure and appeal mechanism. 2. Once the moderation of the appraisal reports is completed, the appraisal ratings so finalized shall be communicated to the regional ED who in turn shall communicate the same to the individual executives. Alternatively, after the e-enabled PMS system is introduced, the appraisal ratings of an executive can be disclosed directly in the individuals Login on PMS Website. 3. The aggrieved employees shall be required to submit their representation in writing through regional HR to the Corporate Appraisal Group. 4. Corporate Appraisal Group shall compile all the representation received and submit the same to Appellate Authority. 5. Appellate Authority shall comprise of all functional directors (Director (Personnel), Director (Operations), Director (Projects) and Director (Finance)) 6. The Appellate Authority can examine the Appraisal Reports, seek views of individual employee, the Reporting, Reviewing and Countersigning Authority. 7. The changes in the appraisal rating as recommended by Appellate Authority shall be incorporated in the final grading of the appraisal reports only if such a change results in either a step higher or lower in the overall grading. 8. The final rating after examination of representation shall be communicated to the individual as suggested at Point No Decision of the appellate authority shall be final and binding for all. 10. The changed score shall be used as the final score for all purposes like promotion and PRP. It is important to complete all the process of communicating the rating, receiving representation, examining representation and again communicating the revised rating to individual employee in a time bound manner. This assumes importance as the CPC process has to be completed and promotion 8

9 order has to be issued latest by 31 st March. In order to complete all tasks in time, following time schedule is also suggested :- Sl. No. Particulars E1 to E5 E6 to E7A A HOPs of region should collect all the appraisal reports of the region by 7th January 20th April B AARs from all the regions should reach the Corporate Appraisal Group by 10th January 30th April C Moderation of all Regions and Department at Corporate Center should be completed by 05th February 15th June D Communication of Appraisal Rating to individual Executives 08th February 30th June E Executives should submit their representation to the HOP in regions and Appraisal Group in Corporate Center by 13th February 10th July F All representations from regions to be submitted to Corporate Appraisal Group by 15th February 13th July G Submit all representations to Appellate Authority by 18th February 15th July H I J Appellate authority to complete the examination process by 20th to 23rd February 20th to 25th July The findings of the appellate authority to be communicated to the appellant(s) 25th February 30th July Complete CPC of all regions and Corporate Center 28th March -- K Promotion orders 31st March -- 9

10 D. PROMOTION POLICY POWERGRID subscribes to the philosophy of generating growth from within the organization and therefore as a general policy looks within the Company for suitable persons with requisite skills, expertise, merit and suitability for filling-up senior executive post through promotion. The promotion of executives to higher grades is on the basis of Eligibility Period, Annual Appraisal Rating (AAR), Grade Service and CPC marks. In case of promotion to Chief Manager & above levels, interview is also one of the criteria for selection of candidates for higher post. Due to nature of operation, the line offices/ sub-stations are geographically widespread over entire stretch of country. Most of the offices/ sub-stations are located in inhospitable/ difficult conditions where posting of executives to manage such establishments/stations is one of the major concerns of management. The Company is engaged in highly specialized field of power transmission and operation of national grid. It involves handling of highly sophisticated equipments & system s/technology in transmission field. Therefore it becomes essential that senior level post should be held by employees having experience of site/ field posting. It is observed that employees once posted continue to stay at one location/ assignment/ function for long duration. This tends to bring about complacency in performance. Further employees posted in site/ fields are in disadvantageous position vis-à-vis those posted in cities as far as facilities are concerned. Therefore, in order to give fair opportunity to all executives, site/ field posting should be mandatory. Working in different locations will also enable executive to acquire multidimensional knowledge and skills for self development which will be useful for his future growth in the company. Keeping in view the above, it is proposed to introduce additional eligibility condition of minimum 03 years experience in Field/ Site posting (executive level) before promotion to the post of Manager and minimum 05 years experience in Field/ Site posting (executive level) before appointment to the post of Additional General Manager. Other terms & conditions will be as follows: (i) Posting of an Executive in the State of domicile to which he/ she belongs will not be considered in minimum 03/5 years experience of site/ field posting. 10

11 (ii) Field /Site posting for different functions are as under: Sl.No: Functions Field/ Site posting means: 1. All functions other than the function Establishment / office located in India such as sub-station, transmission line, mentioned at RLDCs, DMS, ST, RE etc, foreign posting Sl.No:2 & 03 in consultancy assignment excluding below. REGIONAL HEADQUARTERS & 2. HR, Finance, Law Vigilance, ESMD, IT. CORPORATE CENTRE. Establishment/ offices located in India, foreign posting in consultancy assignment excluding CORPORATE CENTRE. 3. Telecom Establishment/ offices located in India excluding NATIONAL TELECOM CONTROL CENTRE/ CORPORATE CENTRE. Eligibility period of Field/ Site posting in aforesaid functions shall be considered as on the date of consideration for promotion. The eligibility condition for promotion shall not be applicable for Company Secretariat. Executive posted in Corporate Centre and transferred to RHQ- NRTS-1/NRLDC will not be considered as Field/ Site posting for function mentioned under Sl.No:2. (iii) (iv) Executive who joins the Company from other organization in different executive levels will also be required to fulfill the eligibility period before being considered for appointment on promotion to the post of Additional General Manager. Executives in the level of E1- E7 willing to be posted in Site/ Field can give their option by 15 th of November every year to HR Department of respective Region/CC duly forwarded by Head of Department. (v) CMD will have powers to relax the eligibility condition of minimum 03/5 years of site/field posting in case of personnel posted in specialized discipline such as Technology Development, Contract Services, Engineering department etc. (vi) However for those executives in the level of Manager/ DGM who are presently in zone of consideration of promotion and who are not able to fulfill the minimum eligibility period of site/field posting as mentioned above will also be considered for promotion as a special dispensation provided the executive is willing to serve in field/ site posting for 03/05 year period on promotion. The special dispensation will be applicable for 03 years in case of executives in the level of Manager and 05 years in case of executives in the level of DGMs. ******************* 11