Page 143 - DMGT406_HUMAN_RESOURCE_MANAGEMENT

Human Resource Management

Notes


Case Study Policies and Performance Appraisal

alyani Electronics Corporation Ltd, recently diversified its activities and started
producing computers. It employed personnel at the lower level and middle level.
KIt has received several applications for the post of Commercial Manager –
Computer Division. It could not decide upon the suitability of the candidate to the position,
but did find that Mr. Prakash is more qualified for the position than other candidates. The
Corporation has created a new post below the cadre of General Manager i.e., Joint General
Manager and asked Mr. Prakash to join the Corporation as Joint General Manager.
Mr. Prakash agreed to it viewing that he will be considered for General Manager's position
based on his performance. Mr. Anand, the Deputy General Manager of the Corporation
and one of the candidates for General Manager's position was annoyed with the
management's practice. But, he wanted to show his performance record to the management
at the next appraisal meeting. The management of the Corporation asked Mr. Sastry,
General Manager of Televisions Division to be the General Manager in-charge of Computer
Division for some time, until a new General Manager is appointed. Mr. Sastry wanted to
switch over to Computer Division in view of the prospects, prestige and recognition of
the position among the top management of the Corporation. He viewed this assignment
as a chance to prove his performance.
The Corporation has the system of appraisal of the superior's performance by the
subordinates. The performance of the Deputy General Manager, Joint General Manager
and General Manager has to be appraised by the same group of the subordinates.
Mr. Anand and Mr. Sastry know very well about the system and its operation, whereas
Mr. Prakash is a stranger to the system as well as its modus operandi. Mr. Sastry and
Mr. Anand were competing with each other in convincing their subordinates about their
performance and used all sorts of techniques for pleasing them like promising them a
wage hike, transfers to the job of their interest, promotion, etc. However, these two
officers functioned in collaboration with a view to pull down Mr. Prakash. They openly
told their subordinates that a stranger should not occupy the 'chair'. They created several
groups among employees like pro-Anand's group, pro-Sastry's group, Anti-Prakash and
Sastry group, Anti-Anand and Prakash group.

Mr. Prakash has been watching the proceedings calmly and keeping the top management
in touch with all these developments. However, Mr. Prakash has been quite work-conscious
and top management found his performance under such a political atmosphere to be
satisfactory. Prakash's pleasing manners and way of maintaining human relations with
different levels of employees did, however, prevent the emergence of an anti-Prakash
wave in the company. But in view of the political atmosphere within the company, there
is no strong pro-Prakash's group either.
Management administered the performance appraisal technique and the subordinates
appraised the performance of all these three managers. In the end, surprisingly, the workers
assigned the following overall scores. Prakash: 560 points, Sastry: 420 points; and
Anand: 260 points.
Questions
1. How do you evaluate the worker's appraisal in this case?

2. Do you suggest any techniques to avert politics creeping into the process of
performance appraisal by subordinates? Or do you suggest the measure of dispensing
with such appraisal systems?

136 LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY