A Project Report

On

Performance Appraisal Technique A Comparative Study

SUBMITTED BY
Jyoti Yadav
Roll No: 55

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARD OF

POST GRADUATE DIPLOMA IN BUSINESS MANAGEMENT
(2002-2004)

UNDER THE GUIDANCE

OF
Mr. SANJAY SINGH

NEW DELHI INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT, TUGHLAKABAD

NEW DELHI - 62

CERTIFICATE

This is to hereby certify that this work of project study

on

Performance

Comparative Study ,

Appraisal

Technique

is an originak work done by

Jyoti Yadav, Roll No. 55, student of PGDBM Programme

at the New Delhi Institute of Management . This
dissertation is in partial fulfi llment of the requirement
for the award of PGDBM as per the guidelines of the
New Delhi Institute of Management and AICTE .

Signature of Student

Signature

of Project Guide
( Mr. Sanjay Singh )

CONTENTS

Acknowledgement

Executive Summary

I. Introduction
a.

Theory on Performance Appraisal

II. Research Methodology

a. Problem
b. Rational of Problem
c. Variable
d. Objective
e. Scope of Survey
f. Research Design
g. Area of Information
h. Psychological Tool
i. Sample Size
j. Precautions
3

III. Company Profile

IV. Results and Discussions
V. Conclusion, Limitations and Implications
References
Annexure
a.

Sample Questionnaire

b.

Tabulation

AKNOWLEDGEMENT

Sincere gratitude to my internal guide Mr. Sanjay Singh, for

guiding me throughout the course of the project.

I would also like to thank Dr. M Adhikary, Director New Delhi

Institute of Management, for giving me this opportunity to do my
Final project.

Last but not the least I would like to thank my friends, and all
those who have helped me to complete this project.

(Jyoti Yadav)

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report is based on the project

Performance Appraisal

Technique: A Comparative Study.

The main objective of this project is to determine whether the

performance appraisal system used in HCL, EXL and Polaris are
effective. This is done by undertaking a survey on the satisfaction of
the employees on their appraisal technique.

The research is conducted on a sample size of 65 employees from HCL,

EXL and Polaris. The project is done based on three dimensions
namely, company performance appraisal system, supervision, and
clarity of role of the employee. The techniques used in these
organizations are studied and analyzed and compared with that of
Polaris.

The Research Design adopted is an exploratory one. Primary data is

collected using a feedback form, annual reports and online resources
have been used as secondary data, and these data has been analyzed
and interpreted by using statistical and graphical representations.

After analyzing the results we see that the appraisal technique that are
used in HCL and EXL are not on par with the system that is used in
Polaris.

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

PERFORMANCE APPRASIAL
A performance appraisal has been defined as any personnel decision
that

affects

the

status

of

employee

regarding

their

retention,

termination, promotion, transfer, salary increase or decrease, or

admission into a training program.
Performance appraisal is a systematic evaluation of present and
potential capabilities of personnel and employees by their superiors, or
a professional from outside. It is a process of estimating or judging the
value, excellent qualities or status of a person or a thing. It is a
process of collecting, analyzing, and evaluating data related to job
behavior and results of individuals. The appraisal system is organized
on the principle of goals and management by objectives. Management
decisions on performance utilize several integrated inputs: goals and
plans, job evaluation, performance evaluation, and individual history.
Performance appraisal can be either formal or informal. Formal system
is used for schedule regular sessions in which an employees
performance is discussed. Informal appraisals are unplanned, often
just chance statements made in passing about an employees
performance. Most organizations use a formal appraisal system. Some
organization use more than one appraisal system for different types of
employees or for different appraisal purposes. Organizations need to

measure employees performance to determine whether acceptable

standards of performance are being maintained. The six primary
criteria on which the value of performance may be assessed are:
quality, quantity, timeliness, cost effectiveness, need for supervision,
and interpersonal impact. The trend nowadays is in the direction of
attempting to measure what the man does rather than what he is- to
measure what is the output rather than what is the input. The
observations and understanding of the performance appraisal process
helped reduce a monumental task into something much more
manageable.
Importance of Performance Appraisal
-To estimate the overall effectiveness of employees in performing their
jobs,
-To identify strengths and weakness in job knowledge and skills,
-To

determine

whether

subordinates

responsibilities

can

be

expended,
-To identify future training and development needs,
-To review progress toward goals and objectives,
-To determine readiness for promotion,
-To motivate and guide growth and development.

Objectives Of

performance Appraisal

10

Performance appraisal plans are designed to meet the needs of the

organization and the individual. It is increasingly viewed as central to
good

human

resource

management.

The

broad

objectives

of

performances appraisal are:

1. To help the employee to over come his weaknesses and improve

his strengths so as to enable him to achieve the desired
performance.
2. To

generate

adequate

feedback

and

guidance

form

the

immediate superior to an employee working under him.

3. To contribute to the growth and development of an employee
through helping him in realistic goal setting.
4. To provide inputs to system of rewards (comprising salary
increment, transfer, promotions, demotions or terminations) and
salary administration.
5. To help in creating a desirable culture and tradition in the
organization.
6. To help the origination to identify employee for the purpose of
motivating, training
7. To generate significant, relevant, free, and valid information
about employees.

11

In brief, the main

purposes of performance appraisal are:

-To review past performance;

-To assess training needs;
-To help develop individuals;
-To audit the skills with in organization;
-To set targets for future performance;
-To identify potential for promotion.

In short, the performance appraisal of an organization

provides

systematic

administration;

judgments

suggests

needed

to

backup

changes

wage
in

and

ones

salary

behavior,

attitudes, skills, or job knowledge; and uses it as a base for

coaching and counseling the individual by his superior. Appraising
employee performance is useful for compensation, placement, and
development purposes.

12

Types of

Performance Appraisal- There are two types of

performance appraisal systems which are commonly used in

organizations:
1. Close ended appraisal system, and
2. Open ended appraisal system.

1. Close ended appraisal system- This system commonly used in

Government

organizations

and

public

enterprises,

and

confidential report is submitted on the performance of the

employee in the organization. The main shortcoming of this
system is that an individual is not informed about his/her
inherent strengths and weakness and, therefore, is not given an
opportunity to respond to the assessment made on him/her.

2. Open

ended

appraisal

system-

In

this

system,

the

performance of the individual is discussed with him, and he is

ranked in a five or ten point rating scale. The company used this
tool primarily for rewarding a good performer or for other
considerations like promotions. The main weakness of this
system is that all the employees are ranked in particular scale,
and whereas the good performers are rewarded, there is no
concerted effort to motivate the average performer in performing

13

better. Another weakness of the grading system is that the

appraisal may turn out to be more subjective in nature due to
insufficient data maintained on the individual.

Methods of Performance Appraisal

It has classified into two groups:
1. Traditional Performance Rating
2. Result-Oriented Appraisal

1. Traditional Performance Rating MethodA. Graphic Rating Scales method- In this method employee
are rated on a scale, usually from 1 to 10, on traits and/or
behavior such as intelligence, neatness, and quantity of work
accomplished. The term used to define the oldest and most
widely used performance appraisal method. The evaluators are
given a graph and asked to rate the employees on each of the
characteristics. The number of characteristics can vary from one
to one hundred. The rating can be a matrix of boxes for the

14

evaluator to check off or a bar graph where the evaluator

checked off a location relative to the evaluators rating.
B. Simple ranking method- the oldest and simplest method of
performance appraisal is to compare one man with all other man
and place him in a simple rank order. In this way ordering is
done from the best to worst on their perceived performances.
The term ranking has been used to describe an alternative
method of performance appraisal where the supervisor has been
asked to order his or her employees in terms of performance
from highest to lowest. The method is both simple and natural
but its disadvantages are:

1. It is highly subjective,
2. Comparison

of

the

various

components

of

persons

performance is not done. People are compared as a whole,

3. The magnitude of differences in ability between ranks is not
equal and different position. For instance, the differences in
ability between the fifth and sixth individual may be much
greater in absolute terms then the differences between the sixth

15

and seventh. In terms of ranks, however, the differences

between these individual is the same.
4. Its use is difficult in large groups when the rater cannot compare
several people simultaneously. As an answer to this problem the
paired comparison method of ranking has been evolved. In this
method the rater compares each man in his groups with every
other man, with the final ranking of each worker determine by
the number of times he was judged better then the other. The
number of comparisons involved in this method is thus vary
large and can be determined by the following formula:
Number of comparison=

N (N-1) /2, where N stands for the no.

of man to be rated.
C. Forced choice method- This method combines rating with
scoring system and requires the evaluator to choose among
descriptions of employee behavior-scored according to a key. This
appraisal method has been developed to prevent evaluators from
rating employees to high. Using this method, the evaluator has to
select from a set of descriptive statements that apply to the
employee. The statements have been weighted and summed to
at, effectiveness index. In this manner bias is removed from the
appraisal process. In a research study, it was found that the use

16

of forced-choiced scale effectively eliminated the leniency error

while the use of a graphic scale format enabled bias to be
introduced. There are certain disadvantage of the forced-choice
scaling, and because of these disadvantages, its use is not
widespread.
D. Weighted Checklist method-This term used to describe a
performance appraisal method where supervisors or personnel
specialists familiar with the jobs being evaluated prepared a large
list of descriptive statements about effective and ineffective
behavior on jobs. The method has the advantages of requiring
only a reporting of facts from the rater. Since the values assigned
to different statements do not appear on the list, the rater does
not know how highly he has rated a giving individual. The
objections to this method are:

It is difficult to construct a good check-list,

A separate check-list is needed for each job because

statements used in one check-list to evaluate one category of
workers cannot be used in another check-list to evaluate
other category of workers.

17

Since the rater does not know the value given to different
statements, he may resent the system as a whole and may
not give it his whole-hearted support.

E. Critical incidents- This technique of performance appraisal

was developed by Flanagan and Burns. Under this procedure
raters

identify

critical

positive

and

negative

employees

performance (Behaviorally anchored rating scales can be derived

from these). The term used to describe a method of performance
appraisal that made lists of statements of very effective and very
ineffective behavior for employees. The lists have been combined
into categories, which vary with the job. Once the categories had
been developed and statements of effective and ineffective
behavior had been provided, the evaluator prepared a log for
each employee. During the evaluation period, the evaluator
recorded examples of critical behaviors in each of the categories,
and the log has been use to evaluate the employee at the end of
the evaluation period.
F. Forced Distribution- The term used to describe an appraisal
system similar to grading on a curve. The evaluator had been
asked to rate employees in some fixed distribution of categories.
One way to do this has been to type the name of each employee

18

on a card and ask the evaluators to sort the cards into piles
corresponding to rating.
G. Paired Comparison-The term used to describe an appraisal
method

for

ranking

employees.

First,

the

names

of

the

employees to be evaluated have been placed on separate sheets

in a pre-determined order, so that each person has been
compared with all other employees to be evaluated. The
evaluator then checks the person he or she felt had been the
better of the two on the criterion for each comparison. Typically
the criterion has been the employees over all ability to do the
present job. The number of times a person has been preferred is
tallied, and the tally developed is an index of the number of
preferences compared to the number being evaluated.
H. Field Review- When there is reason to suspect rater bias or
when some raters appear to be using higher standards than
others, graphic ratings are often combined with a systematic
review process. The field review is one of several techniques for
doing this. The personnel officer meets small groups of raters
from each supervisory unit and goes over each employees rating
with them to (a) identify areas of inter-rater disagreement, (b)
help the group arrive at a consensus, and (c) determine that
each rater conceives of the standards similarly.
19

This method is not widely used because supervisors generally

what they consider the staff interference. The process is also
very time-consuming.
I. Narrative or Essay Evaluation- The technique is very
common for appraising individuals for professional positions. In
these method employees performances are described in essays.
This appraisal method asked the evaluator to describe strengths
and

weaknesses

of

an

employee's

behavior. The

biggest

drawback of this technique is the variability of account, in length

and content. Hence it is difficult to compare two of account essay
appraisals. Some companies still use this method exclusively,
whereas in others, the method has been combined with the
graphic rating scale.

2. Result-Oriented Appraisal

The result-oriented appraisals are based on the concrete

performance targets which are usually established by superior
and subordinates jointly. This procedure has been known as
Management by Objectives(MBO).

20

A) Management by Objectives (MBO) - According to the Dr.

George
process

S.

Odiorne
whereby

Management
the

by objectives is a

superior

and

subordinates

managers of an organization jointly identify its common

goals,

define

each

individuals

major

areas

of

responsibility in terms of the results expected of him,

and use these measures as guides for operating the unit
and assessing the contribution of each of its members.
In other words, this appraisal method has worked to eliminate
communication problems by the establishment of regular
meetings, emphasizing results, and by being an ongoing
process where new objectives have been established and old
objectives had been modified as necessary in light of changed
conditions. MBO in essence involves the setting out clearly
defined goals of an employee in an agreement with his
superior. Carroll and Tosi (1973), in an extensive account of
MBO, note its following characteristics:

The establishment of organizational goals

The setting of individual objectives in relation to organizational

goals.

21

A periodic review of performance as it relates to organizational

goals

Effective goal-setting and planning by top management

Organizational commitment

Mutual goal-setting

Frequent individual performance reviews

Some freedom in developing means of achieving objectives.

The MBO has been designed to overcome certain inherent
problems of traditional appraisal systems. It really constitutes a
new way of managing. Its major goal is to enhance the
superior-subordinate relationship, strengthen the motivational
climate,

and

improve

performance.

It

helps

to

improve

managerial performance and effectiveness. It provides a

workable framework to the manager within which he can make
decision which are in the best interests of the organization. The
key concepts of MBO are emphasis on results, participation,
human relations, and a regular review system. For the
successful

implementation

of

MBO,

proper

planning

and

preparation are required. To achieve success with MBO, it is

necessary

to

have

top

managements

full

support

and

22

commitment,

realistic

time-frame

for

implementation,

adequate training of people who would be involved in the

process, and a proper understanding of the role of MBO. The
key features of management by objective are as under:
1. Superior and subordinate get together and jointly agree upon
the list of the principal duties and areas of responsibility of
the individuals job.
2. The subordinate sets his own short term performance goals or
targets in co-operation with his superior.
3. They agree upon criteria for measuring and evaluating
performance.
4. From time to time, as decided upon, the superior and subordinate get together to evaluate progress towards the
agreed upon goals. At those meetings, new or modified goals
are set for the ensuring period.
5. The superior plays a supportive role. He tries, on a day to day
basis, to help the sub-ordinate achieve the agreed upon
goals. He counsels and coaches.

23

6. In the appraisal process, the superior plays less of the role of

a judge and more of the role of one who helps the subordinate attain the organization goals or targets.
7. The process focuses upon result accomplished and not upon
personal traits.
There are four main steps in MBO:
1.

Define the job. Review, with the sub-ordinates, his or her

key responsibilities and duties.

2.

Define expected results (sub-objectives). Here specify in

measurable terms what the person is expected to achieve.

3.

Measure the results. Compare actual goals achieved with

expected results.

4.

Provide feedback, appraise. Hold periodic performance

review meetings with sub-ordinates to discuss and evaluate
the latters progress in achieving expected results.

MBO has many benefits, since it:

Provides a way for measuring objectively the performance of
sub-ordinates.
Co-ordinates individual performance with company goals.

24

 Clarifies the job to be done and define expectations of job

accomplishment.
Improves superiors sub-ordinates relationships through a
dialogue that takes place regularly.
Fosters

increased

competence,

personal

growth

and

opportunity for career development.

Aids in effective overall planning system.
Supplies a basis for more equitable salary determination
especially incentive bonuses.
Develops factual data a promotion criterion.
Stimulates self motions, self discipline and self controlled.
Serves as a device for integration of many management
functions.
MBO has certain potential problems, as such:

It

often

lacks

the

support

and

commitments

of

top

management.

Its objectives are often difficult to establish.

25

Its implementation can create excessive paperwork if it is

not closely monitored.

It concentrates too much on the short run at the expense of

long-range planning.

It may lead to excessive time-consuming.

Organizations

are

increasingly

taking

resource

to

newer

initiatives for tracking performance and measuring it against

predetermined objectives, key results areas.

B) 360 Performance Evaluation

The 360-degree evaluation is a common tool in human resource
management. Simply put, it is a mechanism for evaluating
someone's performance based on feedback from everyone with
whom the individual comes in contactsupervisors, coworkers,
partners, subordinates, the general public. It is a method of
collecting

input

from

many

sources

in

an

employee's

environment.
This can be a powerful tool. Each of wants to know how we're
doing in our work. This method of collecting evaluative input is

26

an excellent source of motivation for employees because it

provides a truly honest assessment of how the employee and
her performance are viewed by a variety of constituents.
The 360-degree method uses confidential input from many
people who can truly respond to how an employee performs on
the job. The supervisor and employee meet to discuss the
feedback received.
This type of feedback helps employees see themselves as others
see them and allows them to seriously examine their behavior. It
can reveal areas in which employees are performing particularly
well and those areas in which there is room for improvement. It
provides information of which neither the employee nor the
supervisor may be aware. Specific input allows employees to
adjust

their

performance.

The most challenging aspect of the 360-degree evaluation is the

evaluators' concern about confidentiality. When implementing
this type of evaluation, it's best to assure other employees that
what they share will remain strictly confidential. Likewise,
explain to each employee that he will be evaluated by many
people, including those who know his work best.

27

This review process is also helpful for the supervisor. It can

provide

more

accurate

assessment

of

an

employee's

performance and help eliminate accusations of favoritism. The

360-degree process provides greater objectivity. And because
the

feedback

is

submitted

anonymously,

it

provides

supervisor with the most unbiased and accurate information

from

which

to

draw

performance

conclusions.

Most people are not able to see clearly how their performance
is either enhancing the work situation for others or detracting
from it. This performance evaluation method can help reveal
these areas and allow us to improve the way we do our job,
thereby creating greater harmony and better productivity in the
workplace. The 360-degree evaluation will help employees
identify their strengths so they can build on them at the same
time it addresses their skill gaps. It is a process that leads to
continuous learning, team building, growing self-confidence
and improved productivity.
Sounds like a winning system, right? It can be, but your
organization must be ready to accept the change from the
traditional method of employee evaluation. Your formal and
informal leaders must buy in to this idea and see the value of
28

its adoption. Some questions you should ask yourself include

the following:
360-Degree feedback:
Increases self-knowledge
Encourages continuous learning
Stimulates individuals to enhance their strengths
Identifies areas that need development
Provides guidance for positive change
Supports coaching and mentoring initiatives

Benefits
May improve service to customers if they are able to offer feedback
to the employee. 360 Degree Feedback offers a more complete
picture of the employee's performance. This feedback can provide
guidance on skills that an employee may need to develop.
How it is conducted:
1.Develop questionnaire A questionnaire used for 360 Degree
Feedback typically contains items that are rated on a 5 point scale.
These items may be developed to measure different dimensions of

29

job

performance (e.g., communication,

teamwork,

leadership,

initiative, judgment ...)

2.Ensure confidentiality of participants Steps must be taken to
ensure

the

confidentiality

of

the

feedback

results.

The

confidentiality helps ensure that the results are genuine.

3.Provide
involves

training/orientation

use

of

one

or

Often

more

the

feedback

questionnaires,

process

confidential

information, and involvement from many different areas of an

organization. Therefore, training and orientation to the feedback
process is needed to facilitate a smooth feedback process. During
this training/orientation, employees should be informed of what 360
Degree Feedback is and why it is being implemented at your
organization.
4.Administer

the

feedback

questionnaire

Distribute

questionnaire forms with instructions.

5.Analyze the data Basic data analysis would include averages of
ratings. More complicated analyses may include item-analysis
and/or factor-analysis.

30

6.Develop and Distribute Results Feedback results should be

shared with the employee. It should not be mandatory that the
employee share the results with their supervisor.
Errors in Performance Appraisal
Differences

in

perceptions

and

value

system

influence

evaluations. Individual rater bias can seriously compromise the

credibility of an appraisal. Some of the common syndromes are:
1. Halo Effect- This is a tendency to let the assessment of a
single trait influence the evaluation of the individual on other
traits too. For example, an employee demonstrates high
degree dependability and from this behavior, a comparable
high degree integrity is inferred.
2. Horns Effect- This is a tendency to allow one negative trait
of employee to colour the entire appraisal. This result in an
overall lower rating then may be warranted.
3. Leniency

or

Constant

Error-

Depending

upon

the

appraisers on value system which acts as performance of

the employees. Some appraisers constantly assign high
values to all employees, regardless of merit. This is a
Leniency Error. The strictness tendency reverse situation,

31

where all individuals are rated too severely and performance

is understated.
4.

Central Tendency- This is the most common error that

occurs when a rater assigns mainly a middle range scores or
values to all individuals under appraisal. Extremely high or
extremely low evaluations are avoided by assigning average
rating to all.

5. Spill-over Effect- This refers to allowing past performance

to influence the evaluation of present performance.
6. Personal Bias- Perhaps the most important error of all
arises from the fact the very few people are capable of
objective judgment entirely independent of values and
prejudices.
Approaches to Performance Appraisals-There have been two
prevalent approaches to performance appraisal:
Traditional approach- This approach has also been known as the
organizational or overall approach. The traditional approach has
been primarily concerned with the overall organization and has
been involved with past performance.
Purposes of Traditional Performance Appraisals

32

Performance appraisal for evaluation using the traditional approach has

served the following purposes:
1. Promotion, separation, and transfer decisions
2. Feedback to the employee regarding how the organization
viewed the employee's performance
3. Evaluations of relative contributions made by individuals and
entire departments in achieving higher level organization goals
4. Criteria

for

evaluating

the

effectiveness

of

selection

and

placement decisions, including the relevance of the information

used in the decisions within the organization
5. Reward decisions, including merit increases, promotions, and
other rewards
6. Ascertaining and diagnosing training and development decisions
7. Criteria for evaluating the success of training and development
decisions
8. Information upon which work scheduling plans, budgeting, and
human resources planning can be used
Two serious flaws in the traditional approach to performance appraisal
exist. The flaws are:

33

Organizational

performance

appraisal

is

typically

primarily

concerned with the past rather than being forward looking

through the use of setting objectives or goals.

Performance appraisal is usually tied to the employees' salary

review. Dealing with salary generally overwhelmed and blocked
creative,

meaningful,

or

comprehensive

consideration

of

performance goals.
Developmental approach-This approach viewed the employees as
individuals and has been forward looking through the use of goal
setting.

Developmental Performance Appraisal Purposes

The developmental approach to performance appraisal has been
related to employees as individuals. This approach has been concerned
with the use of performance appraisal as a contributor to employee
motivation,
development

development,
approach

and

human

contained

all

resources
of

the

planning.

traditional

The

overall

organizational performance appraisal purposes and the following

additional purposes:

34

1. Provided employees the opportunity to formally indicate the

direction and level of the employee's ambition
2. Show organizational interest in employee development, which was
cited to help the enterprise retain ambitious, capable employees
instead of losing the employees to competitors
3. Provided a structure for communications between employees and
management

to

help

clarify

expectations

of

the

employee

by

management and the employee

4. Provide satisfaction and encouragement to the employee who has
been trying to perform well.
The Performance Appraisal Process
The performance appraisal process typically consists of four interrelated steps as follows:
1. Establish

(evaluator)

common
and

understanding

employee

between

(evaluate)

the

manager

regarding

work

expectations; mainly, the work to be accomplished and how that

work is to be evaluated.
2. Ongoing assessment of performance and the progress against
work expectation. Provisions should be made for the regular
feedback of information to clarify and modify the goals and

35

expectations, to correct unacceptable performance before it was

too late, and to reward superior performance with proper praise
and recognition.
3. Formal documentation of performance through the completion of
a performance and development appraisal form appropriate to
the job family.
4. The formal performance and development appraisal discussion,
based on the completed appraisal form and ending in the
construction of a Development Plan.
Expectations of a Manager in doing a Performance Appraisal
The following is typically expected from company managers when
doing performance appraisals:
1. Translate organizational goals into individual job objective.
2. Communicate management's expectations regarding employee
performance.
3. Provide feedback to the employee about job performance in light
of management's objectives.
4. Coach

the

employee

on

how

to

achieve

job

objectives/requirements.

36

5. Diagnose the employee's strengths and weaknesses.

6. Determine what kind of development activities might help the
employee better utilize his or her skills improve performance on
the current job.
Why Performance Appraisal often fails

Managers often resist (passively or actively)

May have limited contact with subordinate; may be poor at

giving feedback

Subordinates poor at receiving feedback

Managers often view it as wasted paperwork, especially if

nothing comes of their efforts

Interfere with their "coaching" function they prefer

Managers fear the emotions that can be unleashed; may fear not
being able to defend ratings

To be very legally defensible a system would have these components:

Employee participation in establishing performance standards

Standards based on critical elements of job, clearly recorded in

writing

37

Employee advised of critical requirements before the appraisal

System should not be based on interpersonal comparisons (eg.

curve)

Performance appraisal done in writing at least annually

Results tied to personnel decisions

Employees allowed to respond to charge orally and in writing

Appraisers must be provided training

Performance

appraisal

system

evaluated

and

refined

as

necessary

The actual experience with Performance appraisal is not encouraging

Employees are often less certain about where they stand after
the interview

Employees

evaluated

supervisors

less

favorably

after

the

interview than before it

38

Few constructive actions or significant improvements result from

interviews

Typical managers have limited contact with subordinates

Managers often resist conducting PA program

Improving the Design of the Appraisal System:

Uncouple Evaluation and Development: Many appraisal

systems inadvertently force the mixing of the roles of judge and
helper. The open problem-solving dialogue required for building a
relationship and developing subordinates should be scheduled at
a different time than the meeting in which the supervisor informs
the

subordinate

about

his/her

overall

evaluation

and

its

implications for important rewards.

Choose Appropriate Performance Data: The behavior rating

scale, the critical-incident methods, and various MBO techniques
usefully guide the appraisal discussion toward reviewing specific
task behaviors or accomplishments -- feedback which is both
less threatening and more helpful to the person who wants to
improve

performance.

comprehensive

performance

management system might include MBO and behavioral ratings-which are, respectively, a means of managing what and how of
employee task-related behaviors.

39

Separate

Evaluations

of

Performance

and

Potential:

Current performance, as measured by the attainment of results,

is not necessarily correlated with potential for promotion.
Separation

of

assessments

of

performance

and

potential

militates against the superior's averaging his/her unconscious

assessment of these qualities and increases the likelihood of a
constructive, non-defensive dialogue.

Recognize

Individual

Differences

in

System

Design:

Persons differ in their needs for performance evaluation and

development, e.g., persons high in "nAch" may require more
frequent performance feedback. Within permissible bounds,
appraisal policies should permit managers to use different
methods depending on the particular employee being appraised.

Upward Appraisal: One way to mitigate the inhibitions of the

superior-subordinate power imbalance is to ask subordinates to
appraise

their

environment,

supervisor;

and

this

may increases

allows

influencing

motivation to enter

their
the

appraisal process openly; provides the supervisor an opportunity

to "model" the non-defensive behavior essential to a real
dialogue.

40

Self-Appraisal: Experiences with self-appraisal suggests that it

often results in lower ratings than the supervisor would have
given. Hence, the inclusion of self-appraisal before their coaching
or evaluation interview is likely to result in a more realistic rating
and a greater acceptance of the final rating by both ratee and
rater.

Ways to ensure smooth Performance Appraisals

Good Communication- At the core of performance appraisals lies
the need for healthy communication between managers and
employees. So spending time to dissolve performance-related
problems than evaluating performance at the end of the year is
what works well at the time of appraisals. So when performance of
subordinates is good through a year and it is communicated
properly to the team leaders during the year, the appraisal is easy
to do and comfortable for everyone concerned.
Appraisals as Partnership- It is not possible for managers to
constantly monitor what team members are doing and to do a fair

41

performance appraisal, it has to be treated as a two-way flow of

information between subordinates and superiors.
Comparing Employees-Many managers use the classic tool of
pitting team members against each other. This is done to ensure
everybody tries to deliver his or her maximum output. But this can
prove to be a negative technique, as the focus has to be on
fostering strong team spirits to enhance collective performance.
Focus

on

Positivity,

Not

Flaws-Everyone

is

interested

in

improvements. So appraisals have to revolve around parameters for

improvements in performance. Managers need to desist from
picking out flaws in individuals. To get the best out of people, team
leaders need to ensure that subordinates trust them and there is a
high level of motivation that drives the collective effort.
Linking Salary and Performance- All employees need to know
how they fared during a year regardless of whether their salary is
affected by their performance appraisal or not. It is a healthy
practice and it need not be essentially linked with a salary hike. So
an employee who may have hit a salary ceiling also needs a
performance appraisal to know how he can improve his productivity
even if this does not affect his compensation package anymore.

42

Rating Tools- All the managers who use rating system need to
understand that it is a subjective mechanism and though it may be
a faster way of doing performance appraisals but it needs to be
handled carefully.
Measuring Essential Factors- Evaluating the least important
things with respect to doing a job is one of the easiest errors
committed by managers. What is difficult to evaluate but critical are
factors like overall quality of service that will get and keep
customers. So managers need to focus on critical issues and factors
that affect the role performed by an individual rather than
superficial behavioral issue.
Avoiding Appraisals- Managers need to display a sense of
sincerity and commitment to the process of performance appraisals
to ensure subordinates feel the same way. Canceling or postponing
appraisals is not in the best interest of either an individual or the
larger teams.
Surprising Employees- Poor communication between managers
and subordinates is a sure way to ensure a disastrous performance
appraisal process. This must be avoided at all costs.
Seeing Individuals & Tasks Independently- Many managers
believe that all subordinates and all functions can be evaluated in

43

exactly the same way using the same procedures. This can have
adverse

results

for

performance

appraisals.

What needs to be understood is that each team member and role

requires different treatment and is influenced by different factors.
So some subordinates may need specific feedback while others may
need

higher

communication.

The

bottom

line

is

simple:

performance appraisals are not about finding flaws in individuals

but communicating expectations of improved performance. It
requires a commitment from both managers and subordinates to
identify and implement such mechanisms and processes that help
achieve high business results for the company as well as maximize
individual performance

44

CHAPTER II

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

45

REASEARCH METHODOLOGY

Problem

This study was undertaken to determine the satisfaction level of the

employees with their Performance Appraisal Technique. The research
literature says that 360 degree performance evaluation technique has
been proved not to be very effective (according to Watson Wyatt's
2001 Human Capital Index (HCI)). This research is an attempt to find
whether it has been effective in HCL and HSS, when compared to
Polaris which uses a different technique.

Rationale of problem
The following are the rationale behind the problem.

360-degree feedback as a performance appraisal technique is

found to be not very effective.

Single performance appraisal systems are found to be

ineffective.

Variable
In this study, the main variable was performance appraisal. To know
the effectiveness of this technique, the present study was designed to

46

compare and measure the satisfaction level of the employees with

regards to the Performance Appraisal Technique used between these
three companies.

Objective
The main objective of this research is to study and compare the
Performance Appraisal Technique and measure the satisfaction
level of the employees with the Performance Appraisal Technique HSS,
and POLARIS.

Scope of the Survey

This project was undertaken to know the extent to which the
employees of HCL, HSS and POLARIS, are satisfied and happy with
their performance appraisal system and environment which exists in
that organization.

Research Design

47

A Research design is purely and simply the framework or plan for a

study that guides the collection and analysis of data. The survey
research was used in this project, because employees feedback was
necessary for obtaining the data.
Since the project is being conducted in HCL, HSS and POLARIS on
satisfaction level, in the hope of new findings, we can conclude that
this is an Exploratory type of research.

Area of Information
The study was to be done on certain specific area of information.
These could be classified into:

Organizational System

Supervision

Role Clarity

Psychological Tool
The following psychological tool used in this study:
Employees Performance Appraisal Satisfaction Level Questionnaire
(Investigated 2004).
The survey research was used in this project, because employees
feedback was necessary for obtaining the data.

48

The problem areas covered in the questionnaire were:

1. Organizational System Questions (3, 5, 6, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15,
17)
2. Supervision Questions (1, 2, 9)
3. Role Clarity Questions (7, 8, 16)
Organizational System, Supervision and Role Clarity, of the
questionnaire are based on the Likert Scale model.

Sample Size:
respondents

The survey was conducted in the organization, 25

from

each

organization

(HCL

and

HSS)

and

15

respondents from POLARIS were taken in this study. All these

respondents were from the executive level of the organization.
The sampling unit is only the employees of the organization. Sample
unit consists of one employee per questionnaire. This survey was done
inside the organization.
Precautions:

The sampling used for this study was a simple random sampling
method.

The questionnaire was filled by directly meeting the employees

of the organizations.

All the questions were answered by the respondents.

49

CHAPTER III

COMPANY PROFILE

50

COMPANY PROFILE

HCL Info systems

HCL Info systems Ltd. is India's premier information enabling

company. Products & services include Computers, Laptops, Servers,
Storage, Enterprise Networking, Copiers, and Digital Projectors &
Communication Devices. This is backed by HCL's service support
infrastructure - the widest in the country
HCL has developed and implemented solutions for multiple market
segments, across a range of technologies in India. We have been in
the forefront in introducing new technologies and solutions.
HCL philosophy is, "what gets measured, gets reviewed and what gets
reviewed, gets improved HCL has a Performance Tracking System, a
daily to weekly to monthly to quarterly review system. This is done
through tracking enablers and results. This leads to customer
satisfaction (both internal and external), people satisfaction and
business growth.
HCL's belief for holistic quality improvement is realized through the
adoption of 360 Degree Feedback. It shares a reciprocal relationship
with various processes facilitating continuous improvements in areas

51

such as selection, career planning, goal setting, reward schemes and

culture.
Assessments in HCL are not just for improvement and development,
but are also well recognized and rewarded.

Culture
HCL believes in "Leadership built on Trust". HCL has an open and
entrepreneurial environment. HCLites are synonymous with passion for
performance, high need for achievement and commitment to job. A
core value of high integrity with a Never-Say-Die approach is ingrained
and visible in their people, practices and processes.
Their

philosophy

of

Celebrating

Competition

and

Caring

Management, is apparent in our efforts to maintain the quality of work

life and a balance of personal / professional life through fun at work.

OBJECTIVES
MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES
To fuel initiative and foster activity by allowing individuals freedom of
action and innovation in attaining defined objectives.

PEOPLE OBJECTIVES

52

To help people in HCL Infosystems Ltd. share in the company's

successes, which they make possible; to provide job security based on
their performance; to recognize their individual achievements; and
help them gain a sense of satisfaction and accomplishment from their
work.

CORE VALUES

uphold the dignity of the individual

honor all commitments

committed to Quality, Innovation and Growth in every endeavor

responsible corporate citizens

Hughes Software Systems Limited (HSS)

Hughes Software Systems Limited (HSS) was incorporated in

India on 30th December 1991 with Hughes Network Systems (HNS), a
unit of Hughes Electronics Corporation (HUGHES), USA. HUGHES, a
world-leading provider of digital television entertainment, broadband
services, satellite-based private business networks, and video and data
broadcasting, reported revenues of $8.9 billion in 2002. HNS, a unit of
HUGHES, is the world's largest provider of broadband satellite network

53

solutions for businesses and consumers, with over 400,000 systems

installed in more than 85 countries.
With the opening of the Indian economy in the early nineties, HUGHES
was attracted by the long-term potential of outsourcing software
development and chose to set up a subsidiary in India to supplement
HNS' R&D efforts.

HSS began its operations in New Delhi with a team of about 20

professionals

and

was

initially

focused

on

developing

software

solutions in the areas of VSAT-based networks for voice and data,

cellular

wireless

telephony,

packet

switching

and

multi-protocol

routing. Within three years, HSS grew to 240 professionals and in

1995, shifted to its present campus at Electronic City, Gurgaon, a New
Delhi suburb. Today, over 2100 professionals work on cutting edge
technologies

at

six

state-of-the-art

facilities

near

New

Delhi,

Bangalore, India's Silicon Valley and Nuremberg, Germany.

At HSS our people practices focus on personal and professional

development to dynamically align individual goals with organizational
objectives.This credo and the innovative practices that have evolved
from it, has earned HSS the recognition of being counted among the

54

top twenty five employers in India in a Business Today-Hewitt

Associates survey.

HSS also won the coveted CIO Award 2001 for the usage of
Information Technology in Human Resource Management. The award
was in recognition of HSS' initiatives in using IT to create and drive its
people practices.
The CIO Awards instituted by Technology Media Group's CIO magazine
is a recognition for companies that have demonstrated innovation in
areas like - creation of new technology offerings for significant benefits
in the market place, refining, redefining and improving relationships
with outside technology partners and creation of internal processes for
continued success of the organization.

At HSS we bring together the best people and the best ideas. To show
how much we value our employees' contributions, we offer some of the
best rewards in the industry - a comprehensive package that adds up
to a lot more than just a paycheck.
Company Lease for Residential Accomodation
Car Plan
Medical Insurance Policy
Provident Fund

55

Gratuity
Internal Job Posting Program (IJPP)
Policy on Self Development

The

company

encourages

employees

to

undertake

educational

programs to enhance their professional skills. Employees who want to

undertake further studies may discuss their educational plan with their
supervisor and the HR team. An employee becomes eligible for the
same after one year of employment at HSS.

Polaris Software

Polaris Software, a leading global provider of financial Technology

Solutions and offshore IT Services, is a debt free and a cash rich
company with a cash reserve of over $20 million.
The blend of industry-leading products, domain knowledge, project
management skills and extensive experience has helped Polaris deliver
complete solutions that can help organizations improve quality of
service while building customer loyalty. Some of the most successful

56

financial services firms have partnered with Polaris to optimize their

technology investment, saving millions of dollars over the course of the
relationship.
Polaris product suite offers comprehensive solutions that can be
seamlessly integrated into the existing systems and technologies of
any financial institutions. Polaris offer solutions for all domains corporate

banking,

retail

banking,

trade

finance,

credit/risk

management, cash management, treasury management, lending,

investments and securities mutual funds, credit cards and insurance.
Polaris is the worlds first CMMi Level 5 company. Its physical and
information security practices meet the stringent security standards of
the worlds top financial firms like Citigroup and AIG.
With 4500 employees, 22 offices in 13 countries, 6 Software
engineering Centers in India and a Business Continuity Center in
Singapore, Polaris is right sized for providing maximum value to its
customers

Passion for excellence in people practices is primarily fuelled by their

belief in the power of peopleware. People Practices are constantly
geared

towards

environment,
learning

providing

unlimited

opportunities,

our

scope

associates

for

opportunity

personal
to

with

terrific

growth,

work

in

work

tremendous

cutting

edge

57

technologies,

empowerment

to

charter

their

own

careers,

and

excellent rewards.

Lakshya Movement
Polaris prides itself, as a Lakshya-driven Organization. Lakshya is one
of the most powerful mechanisms that we have evolved for the
organizational goal setting process. The most remarkable feature of
the Lakshya process is that all associates of Polaris are involved in this
process of organizational introspection and collective visioning. Every
year, from the past 5 years, teams across the organisation come
together for brainstorming sessions and contribute to the refinement
of growth strategies

Lakshya happens in three stages: pre-Lakshya, Lakshya and postLakshya

Pre-Lakshya - Open-Space Workshops with Process Facilitation done by

the CEO and Business Leadership Team. Discussion on challenges and
vision for the next 3 to 5 years are held.

Lakshya- This is a 3-day off-site exercise involving Konarks and Top

Management

participation.Leading

Management

Consultants

too

58

invited. Pre-Lakshya inputs are carried forward to Lakshya. The energy

and passion unleashed at this event defies description Momentous and
Path-Breaking Business Decision taken here.

Post-Lakshya- Its all about communicating the vision back to the

people.It completes the Process of Bottom-Up self-examination.

59

CHAPTER IV

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

60

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Description of the measure:

Organizational System is a standard 10 item measure designed

to assess the extent that in which organizations employee are
satisfied with their performance appraisal system.

Respondents indicate their extent of agreement on a 5 point

scale

(1=strongly

disagree,

5=strongly

agree),

hence

evaluation is on a scale of 10 to 50, with an average of 30, such

that a high score indicates that the employees are satisfied with
their organizational system and a lower score indicates that they

61

are not satisfied. In case, if the question shows negative aspects,

then the ranking order will be reverse.

For example, question number 11 and 13 are negative in nature,

in which case weightage will be count on a 5-point scale
(5=strongly disagree, 1=strongly agree).
Mean scores of all the employees is presented in the following
graph. (The scale is in the range of 10 to 50).
From the above chart, it is evident that the measure of HCLs
performance appraisal system is 31.68 which are just above
(average-30) the average. HSS also has a very low score of 35.28,
but that of Polaris is 40.66 which indicates that the company
system is good for employees instead of HCL and HSS and
employees are satisfied with their system.

The Standard Deviation of the means is as follows

HCL

= 2.52

EXL

= 2.9

Polaris = 1.57

62

Description of the measure:

Another dimension is Supervision which contains standard 3item measure designed to assess the extent that in which
organizations employee are satisfied with their supervision which is
given by manager/supervisor of the organization.

Respondents indicate their extent of agreement on a 5 point

scale

(1=strongly

disagree,

5=strongly

agree),

hence

evaluation is on a scale of 3 to 15, with an average of 9, such that

63

a high score indicates that the employees are satisfied with their
supervision and a lower score indicates that they are not satisfied.

Mean scores of all the employees is presented in the following

graph. (The scale is in the range of 3 to 15).
From the above chart, it is evident that the measure of HCLs
supervision 9.08 which are just above (average-9) the average.
HSS also has a low score of 10, but that of Polaris is 11.66 which
indicates that the company supervision is very good for employees
instead of HCL and HSS and employees are satisfied with their
supervision.
The Standard Deviation of the means is as follows
HCL

= 1.57

EXL

= 1.55

Polaris = 1.238

64

Description of the measure:

Role clarity is a standard 3-item measure designed to assess the
extent that in which organizations employee are satisfied with their
role in the organization.
Respondents indicate their extent of agreement on a 5 point
scale

(1=strongly

disagree,

5=strongly

agree),

hence

evaluation is on a scale of 3 to 15, with an average of 9, such that

a high score indicates that the employees are satisfied with their
role in the organization and a lower score indicates that they are
not satisfied. Mean scores of all the employees is presented in the
following graph. (The scale is in the range of 3 to 15).
From the above chart, it is evident that the measure of HCLs
performance appraisal system is 9.4 which are just above (average9) the average. HSS also has a very low score of 10.2, but that of
65

Polaris is 12 which indicates that the employees are clear with their
role.
The Standard Deviation of the means is as follows
HCL

= 1.81

EXL = 1.13

Polaris = 1.8

Description of Results

The Sum of the means of all the three dimensions were taken and the
result is as shown above. This gives an indication of the overall
effectiveness of the performance appraisal system within the
organizations.
When the three organizations are compared, Polaris has a higher
rating of about 64.26 on a scale of 16 to 80, where as HCL and HSS

66

have scores of 50.16 and 55.48 respectively. This shows that the
appraisal system used in Polaris is more effective than HCL and HSS.

HCL
Dimensions

Mean

EXL

S.D.

Mean

Polaris
S.D.

Mean

S.D

Company's System

31.68

2.52

35.28

2.9

40.66

1.57

Supervision

9.08

1.57

10

1.55

11.6

1.238

Role Clarity

9.4

1.81

10.2

1.13

12

1.8

Total

50.16

55.48

64.26

67

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION, LIMITATION
AND IMPLICATION

CONCLUSION

68

From the comparative analysis we find that the employees of the

POLARIS are very much satisfied instead of HCL, EXL. In both these
companies, employees are not much satisfied with their performance
appraisal system which is existing in the organization.
In the analysis part all graphs shows that the both (HCL and EXL)
companies have lower rating rather then POLARIS. In some areas their
rating is relatively high but most of the areas show that the employees
have some problem with their existing system, supervision which is
given

by

the

managers/superiors

and

about

their

roles

and

performance.
HCL and EXL use 360-feedback for evaluation of performance of
the individual. Adopted by a growing number of organizations, 360degree feedback is widely accepted as an effective performance
management tool. But new research shows that 360-degree feedback
programs may hurt more than they help. Unless everyone participating
in a 360-degree program is trained in the art of giving and receiving
feedback, the process can lead to uncertainty and conflict among team
members.

That

doesn't

necessarily

mean

360-degree

feedback

programs should be abandoned. But it does mean organizations should

take a second look at their performance management programs to see
if they are accomplishing what they are supposed to.
Through the process at which the organization is growing, gives
69

unsatisfactory results at all levels of the organization.360-degree

suffers

from

various

barriers,

we

cannot

change

the

whole

organizations process and routine tasks, but we can follow some

strategies to improve performance appraisal of the employees of the
organization.
On the other side, POLARIS is using different kind of technique
for evaluating performance of the employee called Lakshya. When
we compare 360-degree feedback to Polariss Lakshya then we find
that Lakshya is much better then 360-degree feedback. Lakshya is
a combined technique of performance appraisal.

This research shows that the technique which is used by this company
(POLARIS) is very effective for the employees of this organization.
Employees rely on their companys system and strength to cope with
problems, and they feel free to interact or communicating with
manager/supervisor

on

important

issues

of

the

organization.

Employees feel satisfied with companys system, with their jobs and
roles in the organization.

LIMITATIONS

70

Every research has certain limitations and even this project is

not free from it. Though most of them could be avoided, some of
them which inhibited this research are listed as follows.

Sample Size taken was very small. It did not represent the
whole sample universe. For a very highly effective research
the sample size has to be very big. 65 (25 employees of
two companies and 15 employees of the other) chosen for
this research would not represent the whole sample.

Sometimes employees did not respond truly. They might

have been in a hurry or busy with some other work and
hence the feedback would have been given for the sake of
giving. Hence data collected cannot be said to be precise.

In this survey there was a lack of statistical secondary

data, which hindered some of the comparative analysis
which would have made this project more effective.

The survey was conducted at the Gurgaon branches and

only in software division. Hence the results of this project
cannot

represent

the

Performance

Appraisal

of

all

employees in other divisions and branches.

IMPLICATIONS

71

Some of the implications which could be deduced from this study

are as follows:

The results derived show the satisfaction level of the

employees in these organizations.

The results of HCL and EXL implies that even though the
satisfaction level is favorable since it is above average, but
when compared with Polaris, it is very low.

The satisfaction level gives an indirect indication of the

effectiveness of the performance appraisal system.

This implies that 360 degree appraisal system is not too

bad for a company, but it would be better if companies
would check whether this system is effective in their
organization.

Polaris uses a multiple performance appraisal system,

different from HCL and EXL, and the employees of Polaris
were very much satisfied with their system.

72

73

REFERENCES

Books
Harper W Boyd, Jr. Ralph Westfall, Stanley F. Starch, Marketing
Research (VII Edition), AITBS Publications
Rao V. S. P. Human Resource Management , Excel Books, 1st
Edition, 2000
Tripathi P C, Human Resource Development , Sultan Chand and
Sons, 3rd Revised Edition, 2002
SARMA A. M., Personal and Human Resource Management,
Himalaya Publishing house, 4th revised Edition, 2003

Magazines
Human Capital Magazine
Internet
www.hrresources.com
www.hclinfosystems.com
www.hssworld.com
www.polaris.co.in
www.hr-survey.com

74

ANNEXURE

75

Employee Performance Appraisal Satisfaction Level

Questionnaire
(Please be objective in your assessment. This research is meant for academic
purpose only and information given will be used for the same.)

Name (Optional):

Designation:

Age:

Gender: Male

Female

Please indicate the extent to which you agree with the following statements.
1=Strongly Disagree 2=Disagree 3=Cant Decide 4=Agree 5=Strongly Agree
S.No.
1 2

1.

Ihaveregulardiscussionswithmymanager/supervisoraboutmy

2.

performanceandmydevelopment
Ihaveconfidenceinmylinemanagersabilitytoassessmy

3.

performanceeffectively
Theannualappraisalhelpsmetoperformmyjobbetter

4.

Individualperformanceshouldinfluencetoincreaseinhispay

5.

Thepromotion/gradingprocessatcompanyisfairandtransparent

6.

basedonperformanceappraisal
Iamhighlymotivatedinmycurrentjob

7.

Ithinkmyappraisalisconductedfairly

8.

Mymanager/supervisoriseffectiveatcommunicatingimportant

9.

issuesthatmayaffectmeormyjob
Companygenerallyrecognizesindividualcontributiontoitssuccess

10.

IthinkIwillbelookingtoworksomewhereelseinthenearfuture

11.

Excellentperformersshouldreceivemorethanaverageperformers

12.

Ihavelimitedopportunitiestodevelopandprogressinmycareer

3 4 5

76

13.

Ienjoyworkingforthiscompany

14.

IgetallthetrainingIneedtodomyjobeffectively

15.

Iamclearaboutthedefinitionofmyjobandtheperformance

16.

whichisexpectedofme
Iknowandunderstandwhatthecompanysstrategicobjectivesare

77

Master
Chart
1=Strongly Disagree
System

2=Disagree

3=Cant Decide

4=Agree

QuestionQuestion-3
HCL
HSS
PLRS

Question-

5
1
0
0
0

2
0
0
0

3
24
16
13

4
76
64
67

5
0
20
20

HCL
HSS
PLRS

6
1
0
0
0

2
36
36
0

3
16
8
20

4
48
56
47

5
0
0
33

QuestionQn-10
HCL
HSS
PLRS

2
40
36
0

3
0
4
20

4
60
60
53

5
0
0
27

HCL
HSS
PLRS

2
36
72
47

3
40
16
13

4
24
12
13

5
0
0
0

HCL
HSS
PLRS

2
48
72
53

3
16
8
20

4
36
20
0

5
0
0
0

1
0
0
0

2
32
12
0

3
40
8
20

4
28
80
40

5
0
0
40

HCL
HSS
PLRS

2
36
32
0

3
20
8
20

4
44
60
53

5
0
0
27

1
0
0
0

2
44
32
13

3
20
8
20

4
36
60
33

5
0
0
33

HCL
HSS
PLRS

1
0
0
0

2
36
12
0

3
8
0
20

4
56
88
40

5
0
0
40

1
0
0
0

2
40
20
6.7

3
24
20
20

4
36
60
40

5
0
0
33

Question-

14
1
0
0
27

1
0
0
0

12
1
0
0
27

QuestionQn = 13

HCL
HSS
PLRS
Question-

11
1
0
0
0

5=Strongly Agree

15
1
0
0
0

2
16
40
0

3
0
0
20

4
84
60
47

5
0
0
33

HCL
HSS
PLRS

Qn-17
HCL
HSS
PLRS

Supervision
QuestionQuestion-1
HCL
HSS
PLRS
Feedback
Question-7

Question-

2
1
0
0
0

2
44
32
6.7

3
8
8
20

4
48
60
60

5
0
0
13

HCL
HSS
PLRS

Question-

9
1
0
0
0

2
40
28
0

3
12
12
20

4
48
60
60

5
0
0
20

HCL
HSS
PLRS

Question-

78

8
HCL
HSS
PLRS

1
0
0
0

2
44
40
0

3
0
0
27

4
56
60
40

5
0
0
33

HCL
HSS
PLRS

16
1
0
0
0

2
40
32
0

3
32
20
40

4
28
48
40

5
0
0
20

HCL
HSS
PLRS

1
0
0
0

79

2
24
0
0

3
12
16
27

4
64
84
53

5
0
0
20