Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited Visakhapatnam Steel Plant Visakhapatnam-530031

APPRAISAL PROCESS
PERFORMANCE PLANNING SELF-APPRAISAL AND MID-TERM REVIEW PERFORMANCE REVIEW DISCUSSION (PRDI) SELF APPRAISAL AND PERFORMANCE REVIEW (PRD-II) PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT DEVELOPMENT PLAN FINAL ASSESSMENT / GRADING FINAL

PERFORMANCE PLANNING (PART-A)

JOBS ARE IDENTIFIED ON THE BASIS OF ANNUAL PRODUCTION PLAN, ANNUAL / QUARTERLY BUSINESS PLAN AND OVERALL VISION, MISSION AND OBJECTIVES OF THE ORGANIZATION. BASED ON THE KRA IDENTIFIED FOR THE DIVISION / DEPARTMENT / SECTION, KEY PERFORMANCE AREAS OF INDIVIDUAL EXECUTIVES ARE IDENTIFIED. NOT LESS THAN 5 QUANTIFIABLE AND OBSERVABLE TASKS / TARGETS WITH SPECIFIC TIME-FRAME ARE SET BY THE REPORTING OFFICER FOR EACH EXECUTIVE JOINTLY AFTER DISCUSSION. THE TASK / TARGET SETTING IS TO BE COMPLETED BY 12TH APRIL OF EVERY YEAR OF ASSESSMENT AND BOTH THE APPRAISEE AS WELL AS REPORTING OFFICER SHALL SIGN ON THE SELF APPRAISAL.

SELF APPRAISAL & MID-TERM REVIEW

MID-TERM PERFORMANCE REVIEW (FOR THE PERIOD 1ST APRIL TO 30TH SEPTEMBER) TAKES PLACE IN THE 1ST WEEK OF OCTOBER BY THE REPORTING OFFICER. FOR THIS PURPOSE, SELF-APPRAISAL (PART-B) SHALL BE FILLED UP BY THE APPRAISEE DULY GIVING THE FACTUAL REPORT ON THE EXTENT OF FULFILLMENT OF TASKS / TARGETS, CONSTRAINTS FACED BY HIM AND HELP REQUIRED TO MEET THE SHORT-FALL, IF ANY. ON SUBMISSION OF SELF-APPRAISAL, THE REPORTING OFFICER HOLDS MID-TERM PERFORMANCE REVIEW DISCUSSION (PRD-I) SESSION WITH THE APPRAISEE. IN THIS SESSION, THE REPORTING OFFICER AND APPRAISEE DISCUSS THE EXTENT OF FULFILLMENT OF TASKS, THE CONSTRAINTS FACED, HELP NEEDED BY THE APPRAISEE TO AVOID FUTURE SETBACK IN TASKS / TARGETS ACHIEVEMENT AND THE THRUST AREAS FOR NEXT SIX MONTHS. IF REQUIRED MODIFICATION OR SUBSTITUTION OF TASKS MAY TAKE PLACE. AFTER PRD SESSION, THE APPRAISEE AND THE REPORTING OFFICER SIGN THE SELF-APPRAISAL AND MID TERM REVIEW REPORT, WITH DATE, AS A TOKEN OF HAVING DISCUSSED THE SUBJECT. 7
TH

THE ENTIRE EXERCISE IS TO BE COMPLETED BY OCTOBER OF EVERY YEAR.

SELF APPRAISAL AND FINAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW

FINAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW (FOR THE PERIOD 1ST OCTOBER TO 31ST MARCH) TAKES PLACE BY THE REPORTING OFFICER. FOR THIS PURPOSE, THE SELF-APPRAISAL (PART-C) SHALL BE FILLED UP BY THE APPRAISEE FOR THE SECOND HALF OF THE APPRAISAL YEAR (1ST OCTOBER TO 31ST MARCH) REFLECTING FACTUAL REPORT ON THE EXTENT OF FULFILLMENT OF TASKS / TARGETS AND PERFORMANCE HIGHLIGHTS FOR THE ENTIRE ASSESSMENT YEAR. AFTER SUBMISSION OF SELF-APPRAISAL, THE REPORTING OFFICER HOLDS PERFORMANCE REVIEW DISCUSSION (PRD-II) SESSION WITH THE APPRAISEE AND DISCUSSES THE EXTENT OF FULFILLMENT OF TASKS / TARGETS, CONSTRAINTS FACED, SHORTFALL, IF ANY, HIGHLIGHTS OF PERFORMANCE AND SUGGESTIONS TO IMPROVE PERFORMANCE. OUTCOME OF THE PRD-II SESSION NOTED IN THE COLUMN PROVIDED FOR IN THE APPRAISAL FORM (PART-C) AND SIGNED BY THE APPRAISEE AND THE REPORTING OFFICER. THE ENTIRE EXERCISE IS TO BE COMPLETED BY 12TH APRIL.

PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT

PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT IS DONE THROUGH A MULTI-TIER SYSTEM OF ASSESSMENT BY REPORTING OFFICER, REPORTING OFFICER(O), REVIEWING OFFICER AND PERFORMANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE (PRC). PERFORMANCE OF THE EXECUTIVES IS ASSESSED AGAINST A TOTAL FACTOR SCORE OF 100. PERFORMANCE AND POTENTIAL FACTORS FOR DIFFERENT LEVELS OF EXECUTIVES ARE AS UNDER: JO E4 E5 E6 E7 PERFORMANCE 70% 60% 40% POTENTIAL 30% 40% 60%

APPRAISEES ARE CLASSIFIED INTO FOUR GRADES IN ORDER OF MERIT AS O (86 & ABOVE), A (70 TO 85), B (50 TO 69) AND C (49 & BELOW). DEPENDING ON THE PERFORMANCE LEVELS, THE REPORTING OFFICER RATES THE APPRAISEES AS O (UPTO 10%); A (UPTO 20%); B (NOT LESS THAN 55%) AND C (UPTO 15%). THE REPORTING OFFICER ALSO RECORDS THE STRENGTHS, WEAKNESSES AND IDENTIFIES THE TRAINING NEEDS OF THE APPRAISEE.

Performance Assessment contd..

THE REPORTING OFFICER FORWARDS THE APPRAISAL FORM WITH PART-D, DULY FILLED IN AND SIGNED, TO THE REPORTING OFFICER(O) OR TO THE REVIEWING OFFICER, IF THERE IS NO RO(O). THE PERFORMANCE OF THE EXECUTIVES POSTED TO WORK IN OTHER DEPTTS IS APPRAISED BY LINE MANAGERS ALSO. SUCH A LINE MANAGER IS KNOWN AS REPORTING OFFICER (O). THE REPORTING OFFICER(O) MAKES HIS/HER ASSESSMENT INDEPENDENTLY IN THE SAME PATTERN AS DONE BY THE REPORTING OFFICER AND FORWARDS THE FORM WITH PART-D, DULY FILLED IN AND SIGNED, TO THE REVIEWING OFFICER. THE REVIEWING OFFICER RATES THE EXECUTIVE ON EACH OF THE FACTORS, ON THE SAME PRINCIPLE AS DONE BY REPORTING OFFICER AND FORWARDS THE FORM WITH PART-D, DULY FILLED IN AND SIGNED, TO THE APPRAISAL CELL. WEIGHT FOR DIFFERENT ASSESSMENTS IS (A) REPORTING OFFICER (50%), REVIEWING OFFICER (50%); (B) REPORTING OFFICER (50%), REPORTING OFFICER (25%) AND REVIEWING OFFICER (25%). THE APPRAISAL CELL COMPILES THE TOTAL SCORES BASED ON THE ASSESSMENT OF EACH INDIVIDUAL FACTOR BY THE REPORTING OFFICER, REPORTING OFFICER(O) AND REVIEWING OFFICER AND PUTS UP TO PRC CONCERNED.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN
PART-E OF THE PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL FORM PROVIDES FOR RECOMMENDATION REGARDING DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF THE APPRAISEE BASED ON HIS / HER STRENGTHS. A SET OF TRAINING PROGRAMMES ARE AVAILABLE, WHICH CAN BE CONSIDERED FOR RECOMMENDING TRAINING PROGRAMMES TO THE APPRAISEE CONCERNED. BASED ON THE DEVELOPMENTAL NEEDS SO IDENTIFIED, HRD GROUP INITIATES REQUISITE ACTION FOR TRAINING ETC. HODs WORK OUT A SUITABLE INTERVENTION PLAN FOR THOSE WHO ARE GIVEN FINAL GRADE AS C

FINAL ASSESSMENT / GRADE (PART-F)

THE APPRAISAL CELL PUTS UP THE DATA OF FINAL SCORE OF THE CONCERNED APPRAISAL GROUP GIVING THE NUMBER OF APPRAISEES IN EACH CATEGORY AND PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION IN DIFFERENT GRADES TO THE PERFORMANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE (PRC). THE APPRAISAL GROUP CONSISTS OF APPRAISEES BELONGING TO SECTIONS / DEPTTS FUNCTIONALLY RELATED TO EACH OTHER AND CONSIDERED AS ONE LOP FOR PROMOTION. THE CHAIRMAN OF PRC ARE GENERALLY THE DIVISIONAL HEAD FOR EXECUTIVES UPTO E-2 GRADE AND FUNCTIONAL DIRECTOR FOR GRADES ABOVE E-2 UPTO E-6 AND CMD FOR E-7 AND ABOVE AND MEMBERS ARE HODs OR DIVISIONAL HEADS OR DIRECTORS DEPENDING ON APPRAISAL GROUP. THE PRC STUDIES THE DISTRIBUTION PATTERN OF PRIMARY GRADINGS AND HARMONIZES THE GRADES OF SOME OF THE APPRAISEES, IF NEEDED, TO REMOVE DISPARITIES, IF ANY, IN GRADINGS. THE MODERATION MAY NOT BE OF MORE THAN ONE STAGE UP OR DOWN WITH RESPECT TO THE PRIMARY GRADINGS. THE PRC DECIDES THE FINAL GRADINGS ENSURING THE DISTRIBUTION OF APPRAISEES AS UNDER: Grade % of executives
*O } A } Upto 30% B Not less than 55% C Upto 15% (* upto 10% as O)