bhel pms ppt
DESCRIPTION
BHEL Pms PptTRANSCRIPT
Workshop on PMS organised by DPE21st September, 2010
Performance Management
System in BHEL
The e-enabled Performance Management System for Executives
ABOUT BHEL
India’s Largest Engineering & Manufacturing Enterprise in the Infrastructure Sector
> 50 years old Government owned Navaratna PSE
2009-10 revenues of Rs.34000 cr, PBT of Rs. 6591 cr.
65% share of India’s installed generation capacity
Power Generation & Transmission, Industry, Transportation, Defence etc.
180 products
Presence in more than 70 countries
Large employee base
46,000 total employees 11,000 executives
All-India manufacturing, sales, support and projects operations
15 manufacturing locations 4 Power sector regions 36 Regional offices and sales & service centres > 100 sites
ABOUT BHEL
STRUCTURE OF PRESENTATION
BACKGROUND
KEY FEATURES OF MAP
MAP TOOLS
ISSUES FACED
ISSUES IN IMPLEMENTING PRP
ACR system was in operation upto 2000-01.
Lack of objectivity in appraisal was a common complaint. This was mainly on account of the following:
No provision for performance planning at beginning of year to define WHAT is to be done and HOW MUCH?
No visible co-relation between actual performance and final assessment which was done basically on Traits & Competencies.
No provision for feedback since the system was ‘Confidential’. Individuals did not know where they stood until the time of promotions.
BACKGROUND OF MAP
STRUCTURE OF PRESENTATION
BACKGROUND
KEY FEATURES OF MAP
MAP TOOLS
ISSUES FACED
ISSUES IN IMPLEMENTING PRP
Alignment & focus Employees performance aligned to the goals of BHEL.
Objectivity Measuring performance objectively based on targets defined at the beginning of the year.
Transparency Clear, transparent process of target setting and sharing of assessment with individual.
KEY FEATURES OF MAP
Consistency Consistent application of MAP tools across the organisation (standard KRAs, Unit of measurement)
Differentiation Identifying & rewarding high performers .
Development Developing individual competence & capability required for the role
e-Enablement Web-based system linking over 100 locations, covering around 11,000 executives. Centralised monitoring for effective implementation
KEY FEATURES OF MAP
STRUCTURE OF PRESENTATION
BACKGROUND
KEY FEATURES OF MAP
MAP TOOLS
ISSUES FACED
ISSUES IN IMPLEMENTING PRP
MAP TOOLSMAP TOOLS
KRA Masters
Normalisation
e-Enabling MAP
Balanced Scorecards
Rating Scales
Differentiation Tool
TOOLS SUPPORTING VARIOUS FEATURES OF MAP
FEATURES OF MAP
MAP TOOL
Alignment 1.Scorecards: Cascading of parameters & targets from Scorecards to individual plans.
2.KRA Masters : Enables selection of appropriate KRAs linked to objectives of Company / Unit/ Deptt. Scorecard.
Objectivity 1.Performance Plan clearly defines KRAs & targets at begining of year.
2.Rating Scales : Defining five levels of performance during target setting.
3. Final assessment based on achievements against pre-defined targets.
FEATURES OF MAP
MAP TOOL
Consistency KRA MASTERS: Standard KRAs & their unit of measurement. Used by all executives across the company.
RATING SCALES: 5-point scale with targets set at all levels.
Transparency E-enablement: Sharing of entire process from Performance Planning to Final Review including final rating.
Differentiation in performance levels
Differentiating Tool (A2): To account for stretch in targets & Contribution to Group Objectives
Normalisation Tool: To convert scores into Ratings
TOOLS SUPPORTING VARIOUS FEATURES OF MAP
FEATURES MAP TOOL
Developing Individual Competencies
Development Plan Section: Identifies role based competencies for development
Centralised monitoring
E- enablement: Enables centralised monitoring & follow up for completion of activities at each level (Appraisee, Appraiser, Reviewer etc.)
TOOLS SUPPORTING VARIOUS FEATURES OF MAP
THE MAP CYCLE
THE MAP CYCLE
Performance Planning (Target setting)
Mid-year Review
Final Review
Normalisation Ongoing Feedback
Appraiser
Appraisee
April-May
October
April
May
STRUCTURE OF PRESENTATION
BACKGROUND
KEY FEATURES OF MAP
MAP TOOLS
ISSUES FACED
ISSUES IN IMPLEMENTING PRP
ISSUES FACED
PRP has made differentiation mandatory however, Managers are uncomfortable as transparency makes them answerable.
1. Tendency to give same score to majority
2. More vocal employees get better scores
3. People with softer targets get better scores
4. Assessment on absolute performance vs relative ranking in relation to other employees.
STRUCTURE OF PRESENTATION
BACKGROUND
KEY FEATURES OF MAP
MAP TOOLS
ISSUES FACED
ISSUES IN IMPLEMENTING PRP
SOME ISSUES IN IMPLEMENTING PRP
Difficult to justify NIL payment to lowest performer as he also contributes to overall Target. PRP Kitty could be distributed in two parts:
1. Company performance
2. Individual performance. Grade factor has large variation at the higher levels. Performance Factor across 5 levels will create huge
difference in pay-out within same grade affecting Team work.
Performance Rating of Directors & CMD.
Being a huge cultural shift PRP differentials should be increased gradually
Thank you
Eg. KRA- Order Booking (Rs. Crs.)
EMPLOYEEA
EMPLOYEEB
EMPLOYEEC
TARGET Rs. 5000 Crs Rs. 3000 Crs Rs. 1200 Crs
ACHIEVE-MENT
Rs. 4800 Crs Rs. 3000 Crs Rs. 1250 Crs
Assessment on absolute performance
Below expectation
Met expectation
Exceeded expectation
Relative ranking
1 2 3
CASCADE OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES THRU’ BALANCED SCORECARDS
Departmental Measures & Targets
BHEL’s Performance Measures and Targets
Financial Customer
Process Capability
Sector Performance Measures & Targets
Financial Customer
Process Capability
Corporate Department & FunctionPerformance Measures & Targets
Financial Customer
Process Capability
Unit Performance Measures & Targets
Financial Customer
Process Capability
Product Groups Materials Planning Other ServicesSupport Services
Financial Customer
Process Capability
Financial Customer
Process Capability
Financial Customer
Process Capability
Financial Customer
Process Capability
Financial Customer
Process Capability
Measures
1.2.3.4.
Targets
1.2.3.4.
Measures
1.2.3.4.
Targets
1.2.3.4.
Measures
1.2.3.4.
Targets
1.2.3.4.
Measures
1.2.3.4.
Targets
1.2.3.4.
Measures
1.2.3.4.
Targets
1.2.3.4.
Measures
1.2.3.4.
Targets
1.2.3.4.
Measures
1.2.3.4.
Targets
1.2.3.4.
Measures
1.2.3.4.
Targets
1.2.3.4.
Measures
1.2.3.4.
Targets
1.2.3.4.
Measures
1.2.3.4.
Targets
1.2.3.4.
Measures
1.2.3.4.
Targets
1.2.3.4.
Measures
1.2.3.4.
Targets
1.2.3.4.
Measures
1.2.3.4.
Targets
1.2.3.4.
Measures
1.2.3.4.
Targets
1.2.3.4.
Measures
1.2.3.4.
Targets
1.2.3.4.
Individual & Team Measures
STRATEGY MAP & MOU
Company BSC
Unit BSC
Deptt.BSC
Indl.Plans
1. Exhaustive list of Key Result Areas identified in 24 functions to enable executives prepare their plans.
2. Standard unit of measurement fixed for each KRA for uniformity in measurement.
3. KRAs classified into Operational and Capability building categories.
KRA MASTERS
MAP TOOLS
What gets measured get done
TOOL FOR DIFFERENTIATION
Factoring in softer & intangible aspects of Performance in the overall assessment
• Quality of work• Cost Consciousness• Process Orientation• Contribution to overall objectives of the Group
No two individuals within a group can have the same aggregate score on the above factors – system driven check
MAP TOOLS
3Meets
Expectations
2Moderately
BelowExpectation
4Moderately
AboveExpectations
1Significantly
Below Expectations
5Significantly
AboveExpectations
• A 5-point scale to assess the extent of achievement on KRA targets.
• Used during Target Setting for each KRA.
• The required level of achievement for each of the other four ratings are also defined.
RATING SCALES
MAP TOOLS
NORMALISATION
Process of categorising individuals within a department into E / VG / G / F / P, based on Performance Scores.
Principle of ‘Normal distribution’ used to define the percentage in each category.
MAP TOOLS
NORMALISATION MATRIX
1 2 3 4 5
E 5% 10% 10% 15% 20%
VG 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%
G 35% 35% 40% 35% 35%
F 30% 25% 20% 15% 10%
P 20% 15% 10% 10% 5%
100% 100% 100% 100% 100%Ind
ivad
ual
Rati
ng
Company / Unit / Department Ratings
NORMALISATION
It ensures alignment between individual ratings and performance of the Company, Unit & Deptt.
- Percentage of high performers (Rating ‘E’) in a Deptt. that has achieved its performance objectives is greater than the percentage of high performers in a Deptt. which has not fully achieved its performance objectives.
- Percentage of high performers in a year in which the company has met its objectives is greater than the year when the company has not fully achieved its objectives.
MAP TOOLS
KRA
Implementation of Special Improvement Projects taken under IMPRESS
Item Weightage (%) 5
Level 5 4 3 2 1
Target 0.0 30.0 45.0 60.0 75.0
Unit of Measurement No. of days delayed from scheduled date
Scheduled Date 31-03-11
Action Plan, Resources, Assumptions and Milestones
To complete and sucessfully implement the project within schedule date. MILESTONE: 31st MARCH 2011
Special Improvement Project Conversion of Long seam welding machine to Cirseam welding machine(OD3)
KRA
Shop turnover (Physical & / or Financial)
Item Weightage (%) 20
Level 5 4 3 2 1
Target 10169.0 8000.0 7000.0 6000.0 5000.0
Unit of Measurement Money value/ Numbers/ Tonne.
Action Plan, Resources, Assumptions and Milestones
1.Proper planning of men, machine & materials. 2. Preparation of weekly schedule and adherence to it. 3. Conducting periodic review. 4. Monitoring the daily output. RESOURCES: 1.Availablity of materials. 2. Skilled manpower. 3. Availability of documents. ASSUMPTIONS: 1.All MCL in time. 2. All the documents in time. 3. All the machines will work effectively.
Unit Name
Plan submitted by
Appraisee
Plan approved by Apprai
ser
Plan approved by Reviewer
Self Apprai
sal submitted by
Appraisee for Mid year
review
Mid year Revie
w discussion
documented
by Apprai
ser
Self Apprai
sal submitted by
Appraisee for
Final review
Final Revie
w done
by Apprai
ser
Final Revie
w accepted by apprai
see
Final Revie
w accepted by Reviewer
Part-B completed
by AA
(No.) (No.) (No.) (No.) (No.) (No.) (No.) (No.) (No.) (No.)
CORPORATE OFFICE
297 297 297 0 0 2 0 0 0 0
BHOPAL 1309 1309 1309 0 0 8 7 3 2 0
EDN BANGALORE
686 686 686 0 0 2 2 2 0 0
CMG 4 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CENTRAL STAMPING UNIT
26 26 26 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
EPD BANGALORE
94 94 94 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Performance Cycle Tracker – Unit-wise Summary
Staff No Staff Name
Current Phase
Current Status
Pending With Accepting Authority (AA)
3793257 P.K. Biswas
PLANNING Performance Plan approved by reviewer
2104709, E9, Shri A V Krishnan, GENERAL MANAGEMENT, HPBP TRI
2171880 SHRI Nirmal Kumar Narjari
PLANNING Performance Plan approved by reviewer
2104709, E9, Shri A V Krishnan, GENERAL MANAGEMENT, HPBP TRI
2067080 SHRI Ramachandran
ENDYEAR Final Review is under final approval by reviwer
SHRI KUMAR R (E8)
null
Performance Cycle Tracker Report
KRA
Cycle time reduction for a product / assembly/Proces
Item Weightage
(%) 10
Level 5 4 3 2 1
Target 10.0 8.0 6.0 4.0 2.0
Unit of Measurement % reduction
Action Plan, Resources, Assumptions and
Milestones
1. To study the cir seam welding Process. 2. To train the existing welders for tandem welding. 3. To arrange necessary facilities and resources in time with the help of WTC
KRA
Number of fresh welders qualified for additional position and customers
Item Weightage
(%) 10
Level 5 4 3 2 1
Target 15.0 10.0 8.0 6.0 4.0
Unit of Measurement Number
Action Plan, Resources, Assumptions and
Milestones
Action plan: Planned to qualify 15 welders in IBR. Resources: WTC with all facilities to impart training. Milestone: 31st March 2011
Bucket I
Unit Name
Unit Score
Unit Rating
1 Unit 1 4.85 5
2 Unit 2 4.85 53 Unit 3 4.75 4
4 Unit 4 4.74 4
5 Unit 5 4.74 4
6 Unit 6 4.68 4
7 Unit 7 4.68 4
8 Unit 8 4.67 3
9 Unit 9 4.45 3
10 Unit 10 4.40 3
11 Unit 11 4.35 3
12 Unit 12 4.30 3
Level 5=1.2 = 2 units
Level 4=4.8 = 5 units
Level 3=4.8 = 5 units
Assigning ratings to Units
Distribution of NCs Performance Cycle
Unit Total No. of NCs
Level 5 Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Unit Score
Unit Rating
Unit 2
16 3.2 7.2 4.8 0.8 4.85 5
Rounded off to 4 NCs 8 NCs 4 NCs -
Assigning ratings to NCs within Units
Unit 2 : Rating 5
Sl. No. NC NC Score
NC Rating
1 NC 1 4.95 5
2 NC 2 4.95 5
3 NC 3 4.94 5
4 NC 4 4.92 5
5 NC 5 4.91 4
6 NC 6 4.91 4
7 NC 7
4.91 4
8 NC 8 4.91 4
9 NC 9 4.9 4
10 NC 10
4.9 4
11 NC 11
4.9 4
12 NC 12
4.89 4
13 NC 13
4.88 3
14 NC 14
4.88 3
15 NC 15
4.85 3
16 NC 16
4.06 3
Level 5=3.2 = 4 NCs
Level 4=7.2 = 8 NCs
Level 3=4.8 = (5) 4
NCs
Level 2=0.8 = (1) Nil
Assigning ratings toNCs within Units….contd
NC 7 : NC Score 4.91; NC Rating 4
BSC Holders NC
Name Grade MAP Score
Final Rating
1 Mr A E6A 4.92 A+
2 Mr B E6 4.9 A+
3 Ms C E& 4.89 A
4 Ms D E7 4.88 A
5 Mr E E6 4.85 A
6 Mr F E6 4.85 A
7 Mr G E6A 4.8 B+
8 Ms H E7 4.8 B+
9 Mr I E6A 4.752 B+
10 Mr J E7 4.704 B
Level 5 = 2 executivesLevel 4 = 4 executivesLevel 3 = 3 executivesLevel 2 = 1 executive
The system cannot run Normalisation rationally for small populations. Hence distribution into Ratings has been done manually using standard tables for BSC NCs.
Creating the BSC holders NC
NC 7 : NC Score 4.91; NC Rating 4
NC for KRA population
Name Grade MAP Score
Final Rating
1 Mr A E4 5 A+
.. Mr B E6 5 A+
6 Ms D E1A 5 A+
7 Ms E E3 5 A
… Mr J E4 5 A
16 Mr L E2 4.993 A
17 Mr M E2 4.94 B+
… Ms Q E2 4.925 B+
30 Mr S E6A 4.915 B+
31 Mr T E5 4.91 B
… Mr U E5 4.7916 B
36 Mr X E2 4.35 B
37 Mr Y E3 3.5145 C
38 Mr Z E1A 3.5 C
Ratings are assigned by the system
A+ = 6 executives
A = 10 executives
B+ = 14 executives
B = 6 executives
C = 2 executives
Normalisation of KRA holders