M.B.A. DEGREE EXAMINATION, APRIL 2016
Third Semester
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT
(CBCS 2012 onwards)
Time 3 Hours Maximum 75 Marks
Part A 3 15)
Answer all questions.
All questions carry equal marks.
1. What for the results of the performance appraisal are
used?
2. What is competency?
3. Define assessment centers.
4. What are the plans of employee ownership?
5. What are focus groups?
Part B 10 50)
Answer all questions choosing either or
All questions carry equal marks.
6. What are the common errors that are generally
committed by the evaluators of performance
appraisal and how would you address them for an
effective appraisal?
Or
Explain the steps that are followed in an appraisal
process.
Sub. Code
641345
RW-11014
2
Sp2
7. Briefly describe the process involved in performance
planning with a suitable diagram.
Or
Write short notes on any two of the following
KRAs
Benchmarking
Role description.
8. Brief the steps of competency mapping. What are
uses of competency approach and benefits in an
organization?
Or
Explain the steps of BARS, its advantages and
disadvantages.
9. What are the objectives of a reward system? Can
rewards contribute towards enhancing performance
of employees?
Or
What rewards are given to recognize outstanding
work of individuals, teams or others connected with
the organization?
10. Briefly explain the elements of process of coaching.
Or
Discuss the methods of monitoring performance.
RW-11014
3
Sp2
Part C 10 10)
(Compulsory)
11. Read the following case and answer the questions
Kalyani Electronics Corporation Ltd. recently diversified
its activities and started producing computers. It
employed personnel at the lower level and middle level. It
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., Junior 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 system. 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 Manger, Joint
General Manager and General Manger has to be
appraised by the same group of the subordinates.
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
RW-11014
4
Sp2
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 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 anti-Prakash wave in
the company. But in view of the politicalisation, there is
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, to the workers assigned the following
overall scores: Prakash 560 points, Sastry 420 points;
and Anand 260 points.
Questions
How do you evaluate the worker's appraisal in this
case?
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 system?