Summer Internship Project Report

On
“A Comparative Study on Performance Appraisal System with special reference to Kreate
Technologies Pvt Ltd Vaishali”

Kreate Technologies Pvt Ltd (LLP)

Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Two Year Full Time Post
Graduate Diploma in Management
Session
2018 - 2020
Under the Guidance of

Ms. Ruchika Tyagi Dr. Richa N. Agarwal

Assistant Manager Associate Professor

Submitted By
Nishi Garg
BM018183

Institute of Management Studies,

16
17
Introduction

Performance appraisal system is the systematic assessment of employees’ performance in any

organization. Its main aim is to check the efficiency of existing workforce and bridging the gap of
required skills if found any. It also emphasize on giving rewards to the top achievers to infuse the
spirit of competition and hard work among employees. The traditional methods of performance
appraisal system used from many years are: Essay appraisal method, Straight ranking method,
paired comparison, critical incident method, field review, checklist method, graphic ratings scale,
forced distribution etc.

However, there are many modern methods that have been in trends nowadays as MBO, 360*
appraisal system, assessment centres, behaviourally anchored rating scale, human resource
accounting etc.

Objectives of the Research

To understand the process of performance appraisal system at Kreate Technologies Pvt Ltd
To find the similarities of performance appraisal system at Kreate Technologies in comparison
with Top level IT Companies.
To find the deficiencies of performance appraisal system at Kreate Technologies in comparison
with top level IT Companies.

Scope of the Research

This research is applicable to all the companies related to IT Sector as the data of top IT Companies
like HCL, Infosys, SAP, TCS, Wipro, IBM and Microsoft has been analysed. The major focus is
on to understand the different practices of performance appraisal followed among these companies
and do the benchmarking for Kreate Technologies.

Research Design

The research is qualitative in nature based upon secondary data in which case study method and
observation method has been used.

Qualitative
Study

Secondary
Data

Case Study Observation

Method method

Official Scholarly Online Trade

Statistics Journals Articles Journals

18
 Data Analysis

Parameters HCL Infosys SAP TCS Wipro IBM Microsoft

Rating
360 degree Balance 360 degree 360 degree 360 degree
PMS Method Rating Method Method, Paper
feedback Scorecard feedback feedback feedback
Based

Biannually,
Identification
quarterly, Biannually Annually Annually Annually Annually Biannually
of KRAs
weekly, daily

No. of At least once Twice in a Twice in a At least once a At least once a Twice in a
Twice in a Year
meetings a year Year Year year year Year

360 degree Self and Real time

Tools used for Economic 5 level grid
feedback, Manager feedback, Rating scale
reducing Performalogic Value added system,
continuous Evaluation Mobile app 1 to 5
biasness model Normalization
observation Forms ACE

Succession Succession
Career Career Career Career
planning, Setting KRA's, planning,
Part of PMS development development development & development
coaching, T T & D coaching, T
&T&D &T&D T&D &T&D
&D &D
Assessment of
MDP Final Rating Final Rating Final Rating SLDP Final Rating Final Rating
T & D needs

Rating scales Level basis Level Basis Level Basis Level Basis GP Rating Level Basis Level Basis

By the By the By the By the By the By the By the

Succession
suggestion of suggestion of suggestion of suggestion of suggestion of suggestion of suggestion
Planning
managers managers managers managers managers managers of managers

Retention Retention Retention Retention Retention

Strategy Retention Retention
strategy, T & strategy, T & strategy, T & strategy, T & strategy, T
linkage strategy, T & D strategy, T & D
D D D D &D
percentage
(8-10)% 10-12% 10-12% 10-12% 10% 10-12% 10-12%
promotions

The above parameters have been taken on the basis of case study analysis. It has found that 360
appraisal system along with rating scale and forced distribution is the most usable method among
the top level IT Companies.

The KRA’s are generally identified annually and biannually. No of meeting generally conducted
twice in a year. The common tools used for reducing biasness is normalization, real time feedback
through mobile app and continuous observation.

The training and development needs identified on the basis of skill gap found or on the basis of
mdp programmes.

19
 Benchmarking of Kreate Technologies

Parameters Kreate Technologies Status

PMS Method 180 degree feedback, rating system

Identification of
Biannually
KRAs

No. of meetings At least once a year

Tools used for

None
reducing biasness

Part of PMS None

Assessment of T &
None
D needs

Rating scales Level basis

Succession
By the suggestion of Manager
Planning

Strategy linkage None

percentage
(8-10)%
promotions

20
Findings
Kreate Technology is not using any tool for reducing biasness in the appraisal as other top
companies are doing in case of 360* appraisal system.
The Company has to focus on strategy linkage of the performance management system with the
long term objectives of the company.
The company is not using performance appraisal in identifying training and development needs
as the other top players are doing.
Setting KRA’s, mentoring and coaching is not the part of appraisal system.

Recommendations
The company should focus on providing proper training to Team leaders and HR personnel
regarding the usage of tool of appraisal system within the hrms.
There should be proper parameters for reducing biasness in appraisal as it is based on the peers
review.
The company should use innovative retention strategy as attrition rate is high in IT Sector.
The company must also focus on succession planning and give clear view of career progression
to its employees.

References
 Bagul (2014), “Study of Employee’s Appraisal system”, Scholarly Journal of Research
Marketing, Vol. I, Issue 2. pp. 287-292.
 Jansirani, Hatrikrishnan (2013), “A Study on Performance Appraisal System at Wipro
Infrastructure Engineering Pvt Ltd”, IOSR Journal of Business & Management, volume 9 issue
3, PP 08-23.
 Mishra (2013), “A Research Study on Employee Appraisal System Case of Hong Kong and
Shanghai Banking Corporation (HSBC Bank)”, International Journal of Business &
Management invention, Issue 2, PP – 60-67.
 Jeet & Sayeedu Zafar (2014), “A Study of HRM Practices and its Impact on Employees job
Satisfaction in Private Sector Banks: A Case Study of HDFC Bank”, International Journal of
advance research in computer science, Vol 2, Issue 1.
 Xavier (2015), “A Study on the Effectiveness of Performance Appraisal System and its
Influence with the Socio-Demographic Factors of the Employees of a Manufacturing Industry
in Tamil Nadu”, Vol 2 Issue 1.
 Hassan, Khan, Iqbal (2013), “Impact of HR Practices on Employee Satisfaction and Employee
Loyalty”, Middle East journal of Scientific research, Vol 16, Issue 1.
 Rani, Kumar (2014), “Performance Appraisal Research: A Study of Performance Appraisal
Practices in Private Banks”, Journal of Research in Commerce and Management, Vol III.
 Jain (2013), “Competency Mapping in Indian Industries”, International Journal of Emerging
Research in management & Technology, Vol 2, Issue 10.
 Karami (2013), “Analysing the Effectiveness of Reward Management System on Employee
Performance: Isfahan Regional Electric Company”, International Journal of Academic
Research in Business Science, Vol 3, Issue 9.
 Akuoko, Dwumah (2014), “Effect of Reward Systems on Employees’ Behaviour in Obusai
Municipality of Ghana”, International Journal of Social Science and Interdisciplinary
Research, Vol 3, Issue 1.
 Muogbo (2018), “Effective Reward Management As A Tool For Improving Employee
Performance In A Private Sector Organisation (A Study Of Selected Zenith Bank Branches In
Nigeria)”, International Journal of social Science humanities and invention, Vol 7, Issue 4,
PP – 106-117.
 Katerina, Andria, Gabriela (2013), “Identification of Employee Performance Appraisal
Methods in Agricultural Organizations”, Journal of Competitiveness, Vol 5, Issue 2.

21