Case Study of HRM in Kudremukh Iron Ore Company Limited Essay Example

existing performance assessment system can reduce the challenges faced by the raters.

Some options for improving the public presentation system include 360-degree rating, Competency based appraisal, and Skills Audit. Human Resource Management (HRM) provides a direction map for Recruit, Select, Train and Develop members of an organization. HRM focuses on the people's dimension in organizations. It involves making integrated decisions that shape the employment relationship, which impacts the ability of organizations and employees to achieve their goals. HRM is concerned with the people dimension in management because every organization relies on its people to acquire their services, develop their skills, motivate them to perform at higher levels, and ensure their commitment to organizational goals.

This is true, regardless of the type of organization – government, business, education, healthcare, entertainment, or social services. Thus, HRM refers to a set of programs, functions, and activities designed and implemented to enhance both employee and organizational effectiveness. The scope of HRM is extensive and can be summarized as follows:

An organization's goals can only be accomplished when individuals exert their utmost efforts.

Performance assessment is the key task in HRM to determine an employee's best public presentation in a given occupation. It is not an easy task, as it involves evaluating various factors such as job knowledge, quality and quantity of output, initiative, leadership abilities, supervision, reliability, cooperation, judgement, adaptability, health and more. It is important to consider not just past performance but also the employee's potential for future performance. The assessment also includes evaluating the employee's behavior.

Behaviour can have an active or passive nature - either doing something or doing nothing. Regardless of the manner,

behaviour has an impact on job outcomes. Other terms used for performance assessment include: performance evaluation, employee appraisal, employee performance review, personnel appraisal, performance rating, employee rating, and possibly (the oldest term used) merit evaluation. In a formal sense, employee appraisal is as ancient as humanity itself. Neither performance assessment is done in isolation; it is connected to job analysis. Job analysis identifies requirements which are then translated into performance standards, which ultimately serve as the basis for performance assessment.

The data related to evaluating the performance of employees in public presentations are recorded, stored, and utilized for various purposes. The main purposes of employee appraisal include the following:

• To determine promotions based on competency and performance
• To confirm the services of temporary employees after successfully completing their provisional period
• To assess the training and developmental needs of employees
• To decide on a salary increase in cases where regular wage scales are not established, such as in the unorganized sector
• To inform employees about their standing in terms of performance and provide constructive criticism and guidance for their development
• To enhance communication by creating a dialogue between superiors and subordinates, improving understanding of personal goals and concerns, and building trust between the evaluator and the evaluated
• Finally, performance assessment can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of HR programs such as selection, training, and transfers

Additionally, performance appraisal serves four broad categories of uses:

1. Developmental uses
2. Administrative uses/decisions
3. Organizational maintenance/objectives
4. Documentation purposes

Performance assessments can include various inaccuracies and biases known as "rating mistakes."

The rater's mistakes, including leniency or badness, central inclination, halo consequence, rater consequence, iPrimacy and Recency effects, perceptual set, performance dimension behavior, spill over consequence, and status consequence, can significantly impact assessment outcomes.

Overcoming these problems requires training for the raters. However, other factors such as pay-performance relationship, union pressure, turnover rates, time constraints, and the need to justify evaluations may be more influential than training in determining the evaluations given by raters. Therefore, improving evaluation systems involves addressing external factors like union pressure in addition to providing raters with training. For training to be effective, it should also address real-life issues such as the influence of unions on supervisors to rate everyone highly. Training helps improve the assessment system by addressing raters' mistakes such as aura, lenience, central inclination, and bias.

Training of raters is necessary to improve the factors that enhance the accuracy of performance evaluations while weakening those that decrease the truthfulness of the assessment. M.P.Birla Institute of Management suggests that one of the steps in designing an assessment program is to establish the evaluation criteria. It is important for the criteria to be relevant to the job. The six standards for evaluating performance include quality, quantity, timeliness, cost-effectiveness, need for supervision, and interpersonal impact. These criteria are based on the employee's past performance and behavior.

Quality, measure, seasonableness, and cost-effectiveness are objective factors, while demand for supervising and interpersonal impact are subjective factors. Objective measures are quantifiable and therefore useful in assessing employee performance. However, it is not always appropriate to evaluate employee performance solely based on quantifiable measures.

Subjective steps are reliant on human opinion and are susceptible to various errors such as leniency, bias, aura, and the like. In order to be useful, subjective steps should be based on a careful analysis of the behavior deemed necessary and important for effective job performance. How frequently

should an employee be evaluated? The common practice is to assess once every three months, six months, or once a year. According to a 1997 survey by Arthur Anderson, 70% of organizations conduct performance assessments once a year. Newly hired employees are evaluated more frequently compared to older ones.

Frequent evaluation is superior to phased rating. In the latter, feedback is delayed and the opportunity for the employee to take timely steps for improvement is lost. Frequent rating provides consistent feedback to the recipient, allowing them to enhance their performance if necessary. The performance of trainees and student nurses should be assessed at the conclusion of various programs.

Assessment Methods

The final step in designing an assessment program is to determine the method(s) of evaluation.

There are multiple methods available for measuring the quantity and quality of employee job performance. Each method discussed may be effective for different purposes and organizations. It is important to consider the specific type of employees when determining the appropriateness of these methods. Generally, these approaches can be categorized into past-oriented methods and future-oriented methods. Both groups have various techniques, some of which are explained in the following section.

Behavioral Anchored Rating Scales are a type of public presentation evaluation that focuses on specific behaviours or sets as indexs of effectual or uneffective public presentation, instead than on loosely stated adjectives such as "mean, above norm, or below mean''. Other fluctuations include Behavioral Observation Graduated Scales, Behavioral Outlooks Graduated Scales, and Numerically Anchored Evaluation Graduated Scales.

Checklists, on the other hand, are a set of adjectives or descriptive statements. The rater checks off the point if they believe the

employee possesses the listed trait, or leaves it blank if they do not. The rating is determined by the number of checks on the checklist.

The Critical Incident Technique is a method used to assess employee performance. It involves creating lists of statements categorizing effective and ineffective behaviors. These lists are specific to each job. A judge then prepares a log for each employee, recording examples of critical behaviors in each category during the evaluation period. The log is used to evaluate the employee at the end of the period.
The Forced Choice Method is another assessment method designed to prevent judges from rating employees too highly.

When using this method, the judge must choose descriptive statements that apply to the employee from a set. These statements are assigned weights and combined to create an effectiveness index. Forced Distribution refers to an assessment system that is similar to rating employees on a curve. The judges are required to rate employees according to a predetermined distribution of classes.

One way to accomplish this is to have each employee's name typed on a card and request judges to sort the cards into piles based on evaluation. Kudremukh Iron Ore Company Limited M.P.Birla Institute of Management Graphic Rating Scale - The term used to define the oldest and most commonly used performance assessment method. The judges are provided with a chart and instructed to rate the employees on each of the attributes. The number of attributes can range from one to one hundred.

The evaluation can be a matrix of boxes for the judge to check off or a bar graph where the judge marks off a location related to the judge's

evaluation. Narrative or Essay Evaluation - This appraisal method asks the judge to describe strengths and weaknesses of an employee's behavior. Some companies still use this method exclusively, whereas in others, it has been combined with the written evaluation scale. Management by Objectives - The management by objectives performance assessment method involves the supervisor and employee coming together to set goals in measurable terms.

The assessment method aims to address communication issues through regular meetings, emphasizing consequences, and maintaining an ongoing process of establishing new objectives and modifying old ones as needed in response to changing conditions. Paired Comparison is a term used to describe a ranking assessment method for employees. Initially, the names of the individuals to be evaluated are listed on separate sheets in a predetermined order, allowing for a comparison of each person with every other employee. The evaluator then determines which individual they believe performed better in each comparison based on a specific criterion. Typically, this criterion relates to the employee's overall ability to perform their current job.

The number of times an individual is preferred is recorded, and the resulting score is an indicator of the number of preferences compared to the number being evaluated. Kudremukh Iron Ore Company Limited M.P.Birla Institute of Management 28 Ranking. The term ranking is used to describe an alternative method of performance assessment where the supervisor is asked to rank their employees in terms of performance from highest to lowest. Weighted Checklist - The term used to describe a performance assessment method where supervisors or specialists familiar with the jobs being evaluated create a large list of descriptive statements about effective and ineffective behavior on jobs.

Performance Interview Performance Interview is another step in the assessment process. Once the Appraisal has been made of employees, the raters should discuss and review the performance with the ratees, so that they will receive feedback about where they stand in the eyes of the superiors.

Feedback is essential for improving performance, especially when it is fair. Specifically, Performance Interview has three objectives:

• To change the behavior of employees whose performance does not meet organizational demands or their own personal goals.
• To maintain the behavior of employees who perform in an acceptable manner.
• To recognize excellent performance so that it continues.
• Use of assessment data.

The final step in the evaluation process is the utilization of assessment data. The HR department must use the data and information generated through performance evaluation. In one way or another, the data and information derived from a performance assessment program can significantly impact employer-employee reward opportunities. Specifically, the data and information will be useful in the following areas of HRM at Kudremukh Iron Ore Company Limited M.P.

The text below lists various HR programs and processes, followed by suggestions on how management can improve performance reviews to make them more meaningful.

• Remuneration disposal
• Validation of choice programmes
• Employee preparation and development programmes
• Promotion, transportation and lay-off determinations
• Grievance and subject programmes
• HR planning Employees have become misanthropic about the public presentation direction procedure.

Management can take the following steps to improve performance reviews:

• Reinforce Positive Behaviors: Reinforcing positive behaviour will increase the chance of that
  

behaviour.

In summary, many employees perceive their performance reviews as useless. However, management can take several steps to make them more meaningful.Kudremukh Iron Ore Company Limited M.P.Birla Institute of Management Title: Enhancing Performance Management and Appraisal by Addressing the Root Cause Writer: Julie Freeman Website reference: www.hrmguide.com This article discusses why existing formal and informal approaches to Employee Performance Management and Appraisal (EPMA) often fail to meet expectations. Organizations encourage and even urge their managers to have regular informal conversations with employees about their performance. However, this is rarely implemented.

Furthermore, even when directors communicate with their employees, the communication often fails to have the desired impact on their morale, motivation, and productivity. Despite our efforts to date, managers still say they are uncomfortable giving feedback and discussing performance with their employees, especially if poor performance is involved. It identifies the root cause of the problems related to giving and discussing performance-related information in formal and informal settings and presents a solution to overcome them. Various suggestions for how the solution can be applied to meet different individual or corporate needs are also outlined. Only about 10% of managers have a natural ability to discuss performance with their

employees effectively.

According to the author, the problem does not seem to be a lack of ability within managers to honestly and accurately assess an employee's performance and potential. Most managers can do this very well. The problem lies in the fact that, to some extent, the majority of managers cannot effectively translate their knowledge about that performance into useful information and communicate it to the employee in a practical manner, regardless of the method they are asked to use. The proposed solution for this problem, according to the author, does not involve trying to improve the technical elements of any specific approach.