Dear friends,
I came across this interesting case study. I would like to know your opinions on this.
Case Study
That was first Monday of May. I just finalized the list of officers and engineers who were selected for 2-year Executive Management Development Programme (EMDP) which was suppose to commence from Jun end. EMDP was sponsored by the company and was affiliated with renowned management institute.
Let me tell about the course. The criteria for selection was as under:
1) Employee must complete minimum five years with the company.
2) He should be rated minimum “Meets Expectations (ME)” during last three years Performance Appraisal.
3) He should complete other training programmes related to the managerial and executive effectiveness. (These programmes are residential programmes from 3-8 days)
Methodology for selection was as under
a) Every year the list of the officers who fulfils above criteria is declared,
b) Management Institutes carries Entrance Test (Written, GD, Presentations and Interview)
c) The participants are assessed thoroughly.
d) Final list of successful employees is declared for the course
Employees who are selected for the course has to sign three years Bond with the company. During the course every participant has to give the presentation on the progress and he has to take one developmental project in a month. This course has to be done after officer hours. Management Institute has designed the programme, which suits the requirement of the company and its business.
30 Employees were selected for the course and I sent the list to my VP for his approval.
I relaxed as I completed one task. The whole process was smooth. VP called me on phone and told that the list is fine with him. I just made a circular with details plan for communication. I save the file and was suppose to fire the print.
I saw Mr. Pradeep Jani coming towards me. Pradeep is a Sr. Manager and a very good Automobile Engineer who was handling the team of 10 engineers and around 150 blue-collar workmen in his shop. He was known for his short tempered and for his reactive personality among all the employees.
“Come on Pradeep. How are you?” I asked
“You people are not making me fine” he responded
“What’s happened yaar, we are here for you, tell me what’s happened?
“Tell me what the criteria for the selection for EMDP?” he asked. I explained him whole process.
“If your process is so through why I was not called for the entrance test? I am old employee, competed almost 11 years in the company, I am good engineer. My performance is good. Then why I am not called. Raman who is junior for me, new in the company got the opportunity?” He blasted on me.
“Cool down Pradeep. Let me check the case, will you take a coffee?” I got two cups from vending machine.
Pradeep was furious on me and was holding me responsible for not calling him for appearing for the test.
I check the personal history of Pradeep and told “Pradeep, I am sorry, but you are not consistent during last three appraisals”
“How? How you can say this?
I explained him about that data which was available on HRIS. Data shows that Pradeep was rated ME two times and one time RME, i.e. “Reasonably meets expectations”. It means he meets expectations, but need more consistent in his work. He agreed with the data available.
“Oh, Vinod, I was not knowing this fact that my rating will be linked everywhere. Otherwise I had not agreed with…..” He left the sentence in between.
“Yaa, tell me” I asked him
He was reluctant to tell. I decided to go in detail.
Question
Nithya
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
I came across this interesting case study. I would like to know your opinions on this.
Case Study
That was first Monday of May. I just finalized the list of officers and engineers who were selected for 2-year Executive Management Development Programme (EMDP) which was suppose to commence from Jun end. EMDP was sponsored by the company and was affiliated with renowned management institute.
Let me tell about the course. The criteria for selection was as under:
1) Employee must complete minimum five years with the company.
2) He should be rated minimum “Meets Expectations (ME)” during last three years Performance Appraisal.
3) He should complete other training programmes related to the managerial and executive effectiveness. (These programmes are residential programmes from 3-8 days)
Methodology for selection was as under
a) Every year the list of the officers who fulfils above criteria is declared,
b) Management Institutes carries Entrance Test (Written, GD, Presentations and Interview)
c) The participants are assessed thoroughly.
d) Final list of successful employees is declared for the course
Employees who are selected for the course has to sign three years Bond with the company. During the course every participant has to give the presentation on the progress and he has to take one developmental project in a month. This course has to be done after officer hours. Management Institute has designed the programme, which suits the requirement of the company and its business.
30 Employees were selected for the course and I sent the list to my VP for his approval.
I relaxed as I completed one task. The whole process was smooth. VP called me on phone and told that the list is fine with him. I just made a circular with details plan for communication. I save the file and was suppose to fire the print.
I saw Mr. Pradeep Jani coming towards me. Pradeep is a Sr. Manager and a very good Automobile Engineer who was handling the team of 10 engineers and around 150 blue-collar workmen in his shop. He was known for his short tempered and for his reactive personality among all the employees.
“Come on Pradeep. How are you?” I asked
“You people are not making me fine” he responded
“What’s happened yaar, we are here for you, tell me what’s happened?
“Tell me what the criteria for the selection for EMDP?” he asked. I explained him whole process.
“If your process is so through why I was not called for the entrance test? I am old employee, competed almost 11 years in the company, I am good engineer. My performance is good. Then why I am not called. Raman who is junior for me, new in the company got the opportunity?” He blasted on me.
“Cool down Pradeep. Let me check the case, will you take a coffee?” I got two cups from vending machine.
Pradeep was furious on me and was holding me responsible for not calling him for appearing for the test.
I check the personal history of Pradeep and told “Pradeep, I am sorry, but you are not consistent during last three appraisals”
“How? How you can say this?
I explained him about that data which was available on HRIS. Data shows that Pradeep was rated ME two times and one time RME, i.e. “Reasonably meets expectations”. It means he meets expectations, but need more consistent in his work. He agreed with the data available.
“Oh, Vinod, I was not knowing this fact that my rating will be linked everywhere. Otherwise I had not agreed with…..” He left the sentence in between.
“Yaa, tell me” I asked him
He was reluctant to tell. I decided to go in detail.
Question
- What should be the importance of Performance Management System in such circumstances?
- What were the main reasons for monitoring performance?
- Which method of appraisal should be used for Pradeep’s case.
Nithya
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Nithya,
This is such a nice situation and experience for all. These kinds of situations happen often in a manufacturing industry rather than the service or corporate scene because in industries, seniority is first and foremost considered. Mr. Pradeep, as you mentioned, has felt his seniority in this case and is frustrated. That is the reason he came to your cabin and asked for the reason. He has worked for eleven years and knows well about the procedures of the PMS followed. The seniority made him ask about the system.
Every management should think over what kind of PMS will suit their system. The importance of the PMS in such a situation is clearly stating the procedures and criteria we looked at. It should include discipline, KRA achieved, flexibility, reliability in his work, any specific appraisal for accomplishing new tasks, improvements, or any fines, etc. This should be the bottom line in PMS. With this data, we are able to proceed with a smooth appraisal.
The reasons for monitoring performance are to bring him up in the growth ladder by giving sufficient training and help. Moreover, if we don't have data of performance, we are unable to answer the questions raised by others. Every HR should have solid data in hand to argue. Without data, how can we justify?
In Pradeep's case, you don't need to change the existing practice. Instead, have a word with the VP about this since this is like a starting point of misunderstanding between Pradeep and his junior. You also mentioned that candidates have to take up new projects. For those projects to become successful, we also need Pradeep's efforts. So, put forth these things to the VP and ask him to suggest. Let him suggest for this, and if not, you already have training programs for the year. Try to engage Pradeep in most programs so that next year he can be selected. Also, convey your efforts to Pradeep. This will help him understand the situation and your role too.
Regards,
Ram
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
1This is such a nice situation and experience for all. These kinds of situations happen often in a manufacturing industry rather than the service or corporate scene because in industries, seniority is first and foremost considered. Mr. Pradeep, as you mentioned, has felt his seniority in this case and is frustrated. That is the reason he came to your cabin and asked for the reason. He has worked for eleven years and knows well about the procedures of the PMS followed. The seniority made him ask about the system.
Every management should think over what kind of PMS will suit their system. The importance of the PMS in such a situation is clearly stating the procedures and criteria we looked at. It should include discipline, KRA achieved, flexibility, reliability in his work, any specific appraisal for accomplishing new tasks, improvements, or any fines, etc. This should be the bottom line in PMS. With this data, we are able to proceed with a smooth appraisal.
The reasons for monitoring performance are to bring him up in the growth ladder by giving sufficient training and help. Moreover, if we don't have data of performance, we are unable to answer the questions raised by others. Every HR should have solid data in hand to argue. Without data, how can we justify?
In Pradeep's case, you don't need to change the existing practice. Instead, have a word with the VP about this since this is like a starting point of misunderstanding between Pradeep and his junior. You also mentioned that candidates have to take up new projects. For those projects to become successful, we also need Pradeep's efforts. So, put forth these things to the VP and ask him to suggest. Let him suggest for this, and if not, you already have training programs for the year. Try to engage Pradeep in most programs so that next year he can be selected. Also, convey your efforts to Pradeep. This will help him understand the situation and your role too.
Regards,
Ram
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Preethi,
AIMA provides the program. You can check the details at www.aima-ind.org.
Regards,
Nithya
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
AIMA provides the program. You can check the details at www.aima-ind.org.
Regards,
Nithya
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Looking for something specific? - Join & Be Part Of Our Community and get connected with the right people who can help. Our AI-powered platform provides real-time fact-checking, peer-reviewed insights, and a vast historical knowledge base to support your search.