PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT

SYSTEM AT ARL
Presented to:
Dr. Shabana Naveed
Presented by:
M. Shehiryar
Zeeshan
Ali Nasir
Ahmed Faraz
Babar Ali
Hamza Mujahid
CEO MESSAGE

In today’s highly competitive and performance driven business climate, both globally and
locally, we cannot afford to rest on our laurels. Our highly professional and dedicated human
resources [team] works in a culture supportive of openness, fairness, meritocracy, team
knowledge sharing and innovation in the relentless pursuit of continual improvement and
achieving excellence.
— M. Adil Khattak, chief executive officer, Attock Refinery Limited
COMPANY BACKGROUND
Attock Refinery Limited
Petroleum refining company

The Attock Refinery Limited is a Pakistani petroleum company which is a subsidiary of UK-
domiciled Attock Oil Company. It is active in crude oil refining in the country. The company is
based in Rawalpindi, Punjab, Pakistan. The company is listed on Pakistan Stock Exchange
(PSX)

Parent organization: Attock Oil Company

Founded: 1922
Headquarters: Rawalpindi
PROBLEM IDENTIFIED

How to improve Performance Appraisals?

Saeed reflected on whether a system that gave almost equal ratings and
increments to all could contribute to elevating a performance-oriented
culture. Was a change needed?
COMPANY MISSION & CORE VALUES
Our mission is to be a model diversified energy resources and petrochemical organization
exceeding expectations of all stakeholders. We will achieve this by utilizing [the] best blend of
state-of-the-art technologies, high performing people, excellent business processes and synergetic
organizational culture.

Integrity and Social

Quality
Ethics Responsibility

Learning &
Teamwork Empowerment
Innovation
HR AT ARL AND THEIR PROJECTS

1) Maintenance
2) Operations
3) Technical Services
4) Engineering
5) Finance & Corporate 1) Employee Development &
Affairs Training
6) Human Resource & 2) Succession Management
Administration 3) Performance Awards
7) Commercial & Material 4) Promoting Learning
Management Culture
8) Health, Safety,
Environment & Quality
9) Business Review &
Assurance
DEFINING THE PM SYSTEM @ ARL

Two Dimensions
Performance Performance
Targets Dimensions
(40%) Scale 1-5 (60%)

The performance appraisal was a regular process conducted

each year in October/November when managers reviewed the
previous year’s performance with their subordinates and set
new objectives for the upcoming year. Mid-term appraisal was
conducted in March/April where performance was only
discussed without written documentation.
CONTINUED
The appraisal management system at ARL was segregated into two periods — pre-1999
and post-1999
Appraisals Pre-1999
• What the employee accomplished
• How the employee worked
• How an employee’s personal qualities
contributed to effectiveness on the job.
• The extent of the employee’s knowledge in the
relevant functional and related fields.
• The employee’s general attitude towards the
company and colleagues
Appraisals Post-1999
Focused on Objective Setting
Type A form: Provided the format for setting targets
according to each area of performance depending
on the responsibilities of each individual.
Type A-1: consisted of basic demographics and
recorded an employee’s performance on issues such
as attendance, counselling or warnings, discipline,
targets achieved and mid-term review.
Type B: Outlined the 16 performance dimensions
that were assigned different weights according to
different management grade levels.
 THE CREATION OF A PERFORMANCE-ORIENTED CULTURE

Positively viewed by all employees

Manager explains:
Corporate objectives

Departmental Targets

Section Targets

Individual Targets
• Target setting provides direction to employees and facilitated planning of their
activities by prioritizing and channelling their efforts.

• Employees perceived appraisals as development tool to nurture them by

addressing competency gaps and objective setting.

• Some described it as ‘complex task’ and found difficult to set concrete targets
each year.
 EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL
TRAINING SESSIONS

• Target setting
• Fakher Shah an external trainer • Define competencies

• Asif Saeed an internal trainer

• Debates about usefulness of competency measurement had also needed to be

addressed.
• Employees wanted to know how to measure competencies?
• Not much distinguish between good and poor performers.
• Employees not valuing the assessment, because of remote link between rewards
and performance e.g. low increment, same level of increment.
• For a stronger performance culture they should assign 70% weight to
performance objective and 30% to behavioural part.

It is the clarity which needs to be brought regarding both

target setting and competencies
The End