summer report cover letter

8/13/2019 Summer Report Cover Letter

1/33

RAYMOND

UNDERSTANDING THE PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

OF RAYMOND AND GIVING OBSERVATION AND

RECOMMENDATION FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE SAME

SUBMITTED TO

MR. MANNATHAM PERUMAL

SENIOR MANGER HR

SUBMITTED BY

DEBA PRASANNA SAHOO

XAVIER INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT, BHUBANESWAR

5/31/2012

XAVIER INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT, BHUBANESWAR


2/33

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to thank Dr. Asit Mohapatra, Director-HR Textiles, for giving me an opportunity

to work in Raymond as a Summer Trainee. His expertise in Human Resources area and

knowledge about understanding life is amazing which would be remembered for life.

I would to like to thank Mr. Mannatham Perumal, Senior Manager Textiles, without whom

this project would not have been completed. His practical insights were immensely helpful in

shaping up the project and giving the final touch. His way of structuring and delivering things

and handling people is something to be learned.

I would also like to thank Mr. Aditya Chopra, Mr. Girish Yadav, Ms. Jasmine Sebastian, Ms

Minakshi, MS. Samvedna Rana and Mr. Vishal Kharse for helping me in carrying out this

project.


3/33

CONTENTS

Title Page Number

Executive Summary 1

Introduction 2

Objectives of performance management system 4

Data Analysis 5

Observation and Recommendation about current performance management

system in Raymond.

11

Comparison between Raymond and MF&L 13

Design Framework for Implementation of 360 degree appraisal method 17

Design Framework for the implementation of Balance score card Method 24

Conclusion 29


4/33

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report investigates the Performance Management System followed at Raymond Ltd.

A detailed analysis of the Performance Management System workbook 2012 13 was

done and discussed with Mr. Mannatham Perumal, Senior Manager-HR. the points came

out of it has been reported in this report.

After the study of the process a perception mapping of the effectiveness of the

performance management was done through questionnaire analysis.

A comparison of the performance management system prevailing at Raymond and that of

Madura Fashion and Lifestyle was done covering all important points.

360 degree Performance Evaluation Method and Balance Score card Approach method

was thoroughly studied and a design framework suitable for the company is suggested.

The methodology adapted was exploratory approach as relevant articles were reviewed

before giving observation, recommendation and design frame work for the methods to be

inserted in the performance management system.


5/33

INTRODUCTION

Incorporated in 1925, Raymond Limited has five divisions comprising of Textiles,

Denim, Engineering Files & Tools, Aviation and Designer Wear.

Raymond Textileis India's leading producer of worsted suiting fabric with over 60%

market share. With a capacity of 25 million meters of wool & wool-blended fabrics,

Raymond Textiles is the worlds third largest integrated manufacturer. The company exports

its suiting to more than 50 countries including USA, Canada, Europe, Japan and the Middle

East. Over the years, Raymond Textile has developed strong in-house skills for research &

development, which has resulted in path-breaking new products. Perceived as pioneer and

innovator, Raymond Textile has been responsible for raising the standard of the Indian

textiles industry.

Garment companies have been successful in the Indian market using different

approaches and distribution methods. Raymond, with its history of more than 75 years, relies

on its long-standing reputation; loyal customer base and well-established, extensive retails

network in over 400 towns through 30,000 retailers and over 270 exclusive Raymond Shops.

In fact, Raymond initiated the entire business of developing the menswear apparel

business. It started the development work through the introduction of its first brand, Park

Avenue. The readymade garments division has since then growth rapidly. It has created many

a pioneering trend such as ready to wear suits. Raymond has now become the leader among

ready-mades, in India, achieving a business turnover of over Rs. 200 crores with its three

brands-Park Avenue formal wear, Parx casual wear and Manzoni, a premium range of shirts,

suits and ties.

Raymond as a group enjoys a huge advantage over the competition that of vertical

integration right from manufacturing, to ready-to-wear to distribution. The main

components of a successful integrated ready-made garments manufacturer are Fabric design,

Garment design, State-of-the-art, Manufacturing systems, integrated logistics.

To participate on a global platform, one cannot do without any one of these

components. Logistics has to do with supply chain has to do with supply chain management.


6/33

It starts from the procurement of the basic raw material till the finished product reaches the

end consumer. In the ready-to-wear segment, the maintenance of the logistical chain is

challenging due to the various fits, collections and seasonality and also the challenges in

terms of colour and design, as requirements of both design and fabric change with season. At

Raymond, the entire supply chain management is managed through a state-of-the-art software

system, developed and tailored to meet its specific needs.

With a capacity of 25 million meters of wool & wool blended fabrics, Raymond ranks

among the top three integrated products in the world and has a 60 per cent market share in

India alone. Internationally it is known to be a quality supplier of fabric to many leading

global brands, having a consolidated position in the global fabric exports market. It exports

suiting to more than 50 countries including the U.S., Canada, Europe, Japan and West Asia.

Exploring potential markets for expansion is one of its prime focuses.

GROUP COMPANIES

Incorporated in 1925, the Raymond Group is a Rs. 1959 crore plus conglomerate

having businesses in textiles, readymade garments, engineering files & tools, prophylactics

and toiletries. The group is the leader in textiles, apparel, & files & tools in India and enjoys a

pronounced position in the international market. Raymond believes in excellence, quality and

leadership.

The group companies are:

Raymond Ltd. Raymond Apparel Ltd. ColorPlus Fashions Ltd. Silver Spark Apparel Ltd. Everblue Apparel Ltd. Celebrations Apparel Ltd. J.K. Files and Tools Ring Plus Aqua Ltd. J.K. Helene Curtis Ltd. J.K. Investo Trade (India) Ltd.


7/33

Objectives of Performance Management System

Performance Management process carried out should meet the following objectives:

1. Work plan for the entire year.2. Undertaking productive activities.3. Utilizing competencies in the best possible manner.4. Constant learning and developing ones own capabilities.5. Continuous improvement in performance.

To check out if the performance management process carried out achieves the following

objectives or not a questionnaire was designed which captured the complete process of

performance management process and the after effects of it. The questions were based on

likert scale and the data obtained were analyzed. The analysis done was Demographic

Analysis, Percentage Analysis and Chi square Analysis.

Sample Brief:

All the departments functioning in the Raymond campus at Thane was taken into

consideration for the study. Raymond has employee strength of 750 in the corporate office.

As per standards a sample population of 10% would have been apt for the study. The

questionnaire designed (100 copies) was floated in all the departments of which only 72 came

back. Thus the study was carried out on a sample size of 72.The following table shows the

sampling frame considered for the analysis:

Departments/D

esignations

Exec

utive

Offi

cers

Assistant

Manager

s

Deputy

Manager

s

Man

ager

Senior

Manage

r

Deputy

General

Manager

Tot

al

HR 3 2 1 1 7

Finance and

Accounts

1 3 1 1 1 1 8

Sales 2 2 7 8 1 1 1 22

Design 2 2 1 5

Product

Development

2 1 1 4

IT 3 3 1 7

SCM 5 3 2 1 11

Others 3 4 1 8


8/33

Total 5 9 26 19 7 4 2 72

The number of males was 49 and females 32. The average year of service in Raymond is 6.83

years. The grades covered were from executive to Deputy General Manager i.e. basically

lower level and middle level management.

Data Analysis

The questionnaire designed consisted of 15 questions capturing the essence of the

Performance Management Process carried out at Raymond. The respondents were asked to

answer the questions on a 5 point Likert Scale (Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neutral, Agree

and Strongly Agree).

The average and standard deviation was calculated for each question in all and also

segregated department wise. The results obtained are shown below:

Total Questions:

Department wise segregation:

Human Resource:

Finance and Accounts:

Question No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

average 3.36 3.67 3.72 3.76 4.22 3.85 3.32 3.50 3.64 2.57 2.54 2.38 2.50 3.15 2.56

Standard Deviation 0.92 0.63 0.77 0.74 0.48 0.90 0.89 0.82 0.70 0.75 0.73 0.57 0.67 0.73 0.58

Question No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1

average 3.00 3.75 3.38 3.00 4.13 3.13 2.63 2.88 3.63 2.13 2.00 2.50 2.13 2.75 2.1



9/33

Sales:

IT:

SCM:

Design:

Product:

Others:

Graphic interpretation:

For the better interpretation of the data the five point likert scale is converted to Disagree (D,

Strongly Disagree and Disagree), Neutral and Agree (A, Agree and Strongly Agree) zones.

The consolidated result is as follows:

Question No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1

average 3.45 3.73 3.95 4.05 4.27 4.45 4.00 4.14 4.14 2.77 2.73 2.36 2.82 3.27 2.7


Question No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

average 2.57 3.00 3.71 4.00 4.29 3.43 2.86 2.86 3.00 2.57 2.71 2.29 2.57 3.57 2.29


Question No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

average 3.64 3.91 3.64 3.82 4.00 3.91 3.27 3.55 3.45 2.36 2.45 2.36 2.45 3.00 2.73


Question No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

average 3.00 3.60 3.80 3.40 4.40 3.20 3.00 2.80 3.20 2.80 2.60 2.20 2.20 2.80 2.60


Question No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

average 3.25 3.75 3.50 3.75 4.50 4.25 3.25 3.50 3.75 2.50 2.25 2.75 2.00 3.00 2.25


Question No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

average 3.13 3.38 4.00 4.25 4.25 4.25 3.38 3.50 3.50 2.38 2.75 2.63 2.38 3.63 2.75



10/33


11/33

D NS A

19.4437.50 43.06

Q 7

Series1

D NS A

12.50

33.3354.17

Q 8

D NS A

8.3323.61

68.06

Q 9

D NS A

52.7834.72

12.50

Q 10

D NS A

48.6143.06

8.33

Q 11

D NS A

58.3341.67

0.00

Q 12

D NS A

59.72

30.56

9.72

Q 13

D NS A

19.44

45.8334.72

Q 14

D NS A

45.83 51.39

2.78

Q 15


12/33

Chi Square Analysis:

1 observed expected chisqares

D 15 5 20

NS 23 13 7.69

A 34 54 7.41

35.10

Chisquares Dist 0.99989161

Chisquares test 2.38888E-08

2 observed expected chisquares

D 1 5 3.2

NS 27 13 15.07692308A 44 54 1.851851852

20.12877493

chisquares Dist 1

chisquares test 4.25689E-05


D 3 5 0.8

NS 25 13 11.07692308

A 44 54 1.851851852

13.72877493

chisquares Dist 1

chisquares test 0.001044322


D 5 5 0

NS 15 13 0.307692308

A 52 54 0.074074074

0.381766382

chisquares Dist 1



D 0 5 5

NS 2 13 9.307692308

A 70 54 4.740740741

19.04843305

chisquares Dist 1


6 observed expected chi squares

D 6 5 0.2

NS 17 13 1.230769231A 49 54 0.462962963

1.893732194

chisquares Dist 1



D 14 5 16.2

NS 27 13 15.07692308

A 31 54 9.796296296

41.07321937

chisquares Dist 0.998308375



D 9 5 3.2

NS 24 13 9.307692308

A 39 54 4.166666667

16.67435897

chisquares Dist 1



13/33


D 6 5 0.2

NS 17 13 1.230769231

A 49 54 0.462962963

1.893732194

chisquares Dist 1



D 38 5 217.8

NS 25 13 11.07692308

A 9 75 58.08

286.9569231

chisquares Dist 9.43638E-28



D 35 5 180

NS 31 13 24.92307692

A 6 54 42.66666667

247.5897436

Chisquares Dist 2.15884E-21



D 42 5 273.8

NS 30 13 22.23076923

A 0 54 54

350.0307692




D 43 5 288.8

NS 22 13 6.230769231

A 7 54 40.90740741

335.9381766

Chisquares Dist 4.79447E-36



D 14 5 16.2

NS 33 13 30.76923077

A 25 54 15.57407407

62.54330484

Chisquares Dist 0.752830517



D 33 5 156.8

NS 37 13 44.30769231

A 2 54 50.07407407

251.1817664




14/33

Observations from the data obtained:After the analysis of the data following observations came up

KRA setting: Only 61% of the employees have an complete understanding of the meaning

of KRA.

While 97% said they are aware of their key business deliverables. 97% of the employees face difficulties in writing KRA according to SAMRT. 72% of the employees have perception that their work is related to the

organizational goals and priorities.

Only 61% have vouched that their managers communicates the goals and

priorities of the organizations.

Discussions:

Only 43% are sure that they have periodic and continuous discussions withtheir manager regarding job performance.

54% of the employees have agreed that they are allowed to give valuableinputs on how to improvise their problem areas.

68% of the employees think that their managers give practical and valuablesuggestions to improve the problem areas.

Performance Evaluation:

Only 13% of the employees agree that they are able to figure out theirstrengths and weakness.

Only 8.33% of the employees agree that there is a fair evaluation system.Input for training:none of the employees think any training is provided to them for

improving their performance.

Reward and recognition: only 9% of the employees think that the reward and

recognition system is fair.

Performance improvement plan:Only 3% of the employees think that they have

gone through performance improvement procedures.


15/33

Observation and Recommendation about the current Performance

Management System Process going at Raymond

Employees do not understand the actual meaning of Key Result Areas (KRA) and thecorrect way to write those Key Result Areas. In this scenario it becomes important for

people managers and the Human Resource team to make the employees understand

the Key Result Areas. One of the initiatives already taken by the Human Resource

Department is to conduct KRA Workshops for each business unit. In the workshop

people a detailed explanation of KRA is given and instructions were laid out about the

mathematical approach to write KRA, which is according to SMART (Specific,

Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, Time bound). But there was lot of confusion about

on what guiding principles the KRA was to be written.

To overcome this type of confusion the organization should go for Balance Score cardapproach based on which every employee should write their KRA. The detailed

explanation of the approach is given at a latter part in this report.

The KRA written are primarily divided into three components such as BusinessDeliverables, Strategic Initiative and People Processes. The weightages assigned to

these depend on the designation of the person. GM level and above which includes

Director, Vice Presidents and President have the same distribution of weightages i.e.

50% Business Deliverables, 30% Strategic Initiatives and 20% People Processes. This

division works well for the GM level. But Strategic Initiative should have a higher

weightage for the Director, Vice President and President Level.

The time slot given for writing KRA is almost 45 days and more, which covers half ofthe first quarter. This can be reduced to a month so that enough time could be given

for the performance review process to be carried on.

The matrix reporting system followed is confusing when it comes to performanceevaluation. The final ratings obtained by an employee are the average of the rating

given by the functional boss and administrative boss. This actually leads to the


16/33

dilution of the ratings which is why the actual performance never comes out in front.

To overcome this 360 degree performance evaluation system should be implemented.

The detailed explanation of 360 degree evaluation is done at a later part in his report.

Mid-year review is done to assess the achievement for the six months and to plan forthe next six months. If the same review process is done quarterly, then the process

would become more robust.

The rating grid adopted here is confusing and complicated. Though the rating systemgiven handles the biasing error but it can be made more simplified.

The online interface of filling up KRA can be made more users friendly. Moreoverthe KRA can be made transparent i.e. every employee can look into each other KRA.

This would help in building trust among employees and one employee can what are

the responsibilities of other employee.


17/33

Comparison of Performance Management System between Raymond

and Madura Fashion & Lifestyle (MFL).

1. Performance Review Process: The performance review process of MFL and

Raymond are on the same line. The process followed is:

1. Review and revision of goals/KRAs, if required2. Self-Appraisal3. Managers Review4. Performance rating normalization5. Feedback Sessions6. Escalation resolution if necessary7. Closure of final rating.

MFL is very clear in Escalation Resolution process while its not the same with Raymond.

2. Different departments: Raymond follows the same Performance Management

system across all its departments whereas MFL has a different performance Management

system for its retail employees. MFL retail employees have a monthly appraisal. So the

KRAs are set in the first week of every month.

3. Rating methods: The rating grid of MFL is as follow:

Rating Overall Goal Achievement

Far Exceeds Expectation (FEE) > 120%

Exceed Expectation (EE) 110%119%

Met Expectation (ME) 90% - 109%

Below Expectation (BE) 60-89%

Far Below expectation (FBE)


18/33

The rating grid followed by Raymond is:

Rating Goal Achievement

Does not meet expectation Below 90%

Partially meets expectation 90 to 92%

Meets expectation 93 to 96%

Exceeds Expectation 97 to 103%

Exceptional Performance Above 103%

The rating grid of MFL is very demanding on the higher side as higher percentage is set for

met expectation, exceeds expectation and far exceeds expectation. Raymond on the other

hand is liberal on meets expectation, exceed expectation and exceptional performance.

4. Performance Improvement Plan: MFL follows a systematic and rigorous

performance improvement plan where in low performance employees are identified and a

developmental framework is designed to develop the required skills and competencies so as

to perform at a desired stage. The employees who have been evaluated as below expectation

and far below expectation are covered under this process. The cases identified for

development are either put in Performance improvement plan, if the problems are internally

correctible or in organizational development plan if the problem is externally correctible.

After this a performance development plan is prepared and acted regularly with regular

feedback. A total of three months is given for performance improvement, extendable up to 3

months.

Raymond does not have a detailed Performance development plan as of now. Though

manager or supervisor in charge is advised to design the individual development plan but no

detailed plan or structure exists over here.

5. Normalization process: MFL has a clear definition of the Normalization process

going on like taking into account the whole organization performance, business unit

performance, team performance and employee performance. Raymond does not have a clear

cut Normalization process defined.

6. Error handling process: Error handling is an important aspect in performance

management system as it leads to biasing in the ratings given because of favoritism. Thus


19/33

MFL gives error handling training to manager to counterfeit those. This kind of procedure is

not available at Raymond.

7. KRA/goal setting: MFL and Raymond both follow the same principle of setting KRA

according to SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Time bound). The

main objective of KRA setting is to disseminate business plan and target till last level in the

organization along with it building accountability. MFL uses Balance Score card technique to

ensure synergy and focus throughout the organization. The Balanced Score Card uses the

balanced metrics which link strategy to business performance. It covers the following four

Business Perspectives

Financial How do we look to our

shareholders?

Objectives that will lead to maximize

the return on capital and shareholders

value

Customer

Centricity

How do customers see us? Objectives where our customers

evaluate us on our product, product

quality, ease of accessibility delivery

time and service excellence

Internal Process What we must excel at? Objectives focusing on key Business

Process, existing operational process.

Learning &

Innovation

How can we continue to

improve and create Value

Objectives focusing on new products

and services introduced and time spent

in developing and enhancing the

knowledge base and competencies level

for future challenges and new ideas

implemented.

Raymond sets the key priority areas on Growth in Revenue, Profitability and Cash flow from

operations. The points mentioned before focuses only on the financial aspect. But while

setting goals employees are asked to set goals beyond financial numbers like customer

alignment, internal process optimization and people processes. On a broader view though it

covers four points of Balance Score card approach, main emphasis is laid on the financial

aspect only, which in away lessens the focus on the other three points. Moreover at Raymond

KRA of a person is again divided into three points i.e. Business Deliverables, Strategic


20/33

Initiatives and People Process. The weightage given to each of these is dependent on the

designation of the person as given below:

Designation Business

Deliverables

Strategic Initiatives People Process

President and Vice

Presidents

50% 30% 20%

Director & GM 50% 30% 20%

DGM, Senior

manager, Manager

70% 20% 10%

Deputy Manager &

below

90% 0% 10%

MFL doesnt have this kind of division in their system. At Raymond maximum weightage

given to a KRA is 25% and minimum weightage given to a KRA is 5%, but MFL doesnt

have this kind of system. At MFL an employee can write as much KRA and give weightages

accordingly.


21/33

IMPLEMENTATION OF 360DEGREE APPRAISAL SYSTEM

The 360 degree feedback process helps in development of objectives at two levels i.e. at an

individual level and an organizational level. For the individual level it helps the employees inknowing their abilities through the perspective of their supervisors, peers, direct subordinates

and self-examination. The perspectives given from supervisors, peers, direct subordinates and

self-examination are converted into numerical data. These data are used for the design of

personal development plan to address the areas of concern. For the organization level it helps

in improving organizational performance because it improves the abilities to work, manage

and lead the performance and attitudes of corresponding workgroups.

Competencies at Raymond

Leadership archetype:

show courage be honest demonstrate respect keep commitments genuinely contribute

LEADERSHIPCOMPETENCE

FRAMEWORK

CUSTOMER

CENTRICITY

PROCESS

ORIENTATION

CREATIVITY &INNOVATION

PERFORMANCEEXCELLENCE

COMMUNICATION

PEOPLEDEVLOPEMENT

BUSINESS

PERSPECTIVE


22/33

Personalized 360 degree report

Each employee should have his own personalized 360 degree report. It should contain the

following points:

Introduction to 360 degree. Explanation of competencies and leadership archetype. Scores and pattern of scoring. Interpretation of data. Overall 360 degree profile Open ended question listing Scores Summary Personal Development Planning

Blue Print for 360 degree implementation

Defining Scores

Competency Scores: For each of the seven competencies, scores are calculated takingthe mean of related item scores from everyone who completed the assessment on the

employee. The persons responsible for completing the assessment on an employee arehis/her supervisor, direct subordinates and peers. The self-assessment score is not

incorporated into this account.

Itemized Scores: The respondents have to rate employees on a 5 point rating scale i.e.Strongly Disagree (1), Disagree (2), Feel Neutral (3), Agree (4), Strongly Agree (5)

on how strongly they agree or disagree with the statements describing the various

competencies. Standard Deviation is calculated for each item to know the variance i.e.

how well individuals agree with one another on the item. The higher the deviation, the

more the group disagreed.

Overall Score: It is the average score of all items or the overall rating score. Comparison score: Several data points for assessment purposes are presented to

provide a reference for relative comparison. There are two types of comparison data.

The first type, Internal Comparisons, compares an employee scores with each other

and to the employees overall score to determine his/her relative areas of strength and

concern. The second, External Comparisons, compares an employees scores to those


23/33

of the organization and to the benchmark scores. This can help to determine in which

areas an employee is truly exceeding the averages.

Assessors:

Calculation of individual competency score:

The competency score for each of the competency is calculated separately. The steps taken to

do the same are as follows:

1. Define 8 to 10 statements which represent that competency.2. Ask the employees (supervisors, peers, direct subordinates and self) to rate on those

defined statements.

3. Calculate the mean of each statement.4. Calculate standard deviation5. Calculate the overall mean.6. Data representation and comparison.

Example:

The above points are shown through an example. Consider the competency Business

Perspective and suppose there are 10 respondents divided into 2supervisors, 5 peers, 2 direct

subordinates and 1 self.

EMPLOYEE

SUPERVISOR

DIRECTSUBORDINATES

SELF

PEERS


24/33

Step 1: Define statements: 10 statements are formulated that represents Business

Perspective appropriately.

Step 2: Rating those statements: Employees or respondents are then asked to rate. The

interface to a respondent should look like

Business Perspective 1 2 3 4 5

Statement 1

Statement 2

Statement 3

Statement 4

Statement 5

Statement 6

Statement 7

Statement 8

Statement 9

Statement 10

10 respondents (including self) have to fill up above form (each respondent has to fill up a

single form) for a single employee. Thus in total for Business perspective competency 10

forms is collected. After all the forms have been filled mean is calculated for each of the

statements.

Step3: Calculation of Mean: A single statement would have 9 respondents divided into

different categories i.e. supervisors, peers and direct subordinates. It is represented in the

following table with fictional data

Statement 1 Rating Mean

Supervisor 1 4 4.0

Supervisor 2 4

Peer 1 3

4.6

Peer 2 4

Peer 3 4

Peer 4 4


25/33

Peer 5 4

Direct Subordinates 1 3 3.5

Direct Subordinates 2 4

Similarly the means of all the other statements are calculated.

Step 4: calculation of standard deviation: For each statement standard deviation are

calculated according to the categories. It is represented in the following table with fictional

data.

Statement 1 Rating Mean Standard deviation

Supervisor 1 4 4.0 0

Supervisor 2 4

Peer 1 3

4.6

0.44

Peer 2 4

Peer 3 4

Peer 4 4

Peer 5 4

Direct Subordinates 1 3 3.5 0.70

Direct Subordinates 2 4

Similarly the standard deviations are calculated for each of the statements, which give

valuable information about the variance.

Step 5: calculate the overall mean: The overall mean is calculated by taking the rating mean

of all the statements together. It is represented below in the tabular form with fictional data.

Here self-rating score is taken into account for calculation of mean and past rating scores are

also taken for comparison.


26/33

Statements Supervisor Peer Direct

Report

Self Your

Score

Standard

Deviation

Past

Score

Remarks

Statement 1 4.0 4.6 3.5 5.0 3.90 0.56 - -

Statement 2 4.12 0.45Statement 3 4.67 0.65

Statement 4 3.75 0.74





Statement 9 4.34 0.59Statement 10 4.21 0.36

Overall Mean 3.71

Thus for Business Perspective competency the employee has got an overall rating of 3.71

out of 5.0.

Step 6: Data Representation and comparison: The above obtained data is represented in a

simple manner where the employee is able to figure out everything about his performance.

Also the scores are compared with organization score and bench mark score and it is

represented in the graphical form. The representation format is described below as in:

past score 0rganization score benchmark score competency score

3.64.05 4.12 3.71

Business Perspective


27/33

Calculation of total competency score: the total competency score is the mean of all the

individual competency score. It is represented graphically as shown below

3.714.2

4.7 4.54.2 4.4

3.67

Total Competency Score


28/33

IMPLEMENTATION OF BALANCED SCORE CARD TECHNIQUE

Strategy and strategic planning process are two pillars of the organizations. An organization

to be successful has to include both financial and non-financial indicators together in sheet,which is termed as Balance Score Card. Financial goals are also called as lagging

indicators as they tell about what has happened and to succeed in future depends on non-

financial goals also called as leading indicators.

A typical strategic planning process consists of the following steps:

1. Stakeholders and strategic objectives2. Stakeholders need3. Performance gap4. Performance improvement linked to internal process5. Process improvement priorities6. Performance metrics7. Communicating performance metrics8. Performance evaluation9. Feed back

Steps 6 to 9 of the strategic planning process relate to performance measurement,

communication and evaluation. These steps are dubbed as the Balance Score Card.

The current model of Balance Score Card looks at four perspectives i.e. financial, customer,

internal process and learning development.

Perspectives Description

Financial

Succeed Financially Appearance to shareholders

Customer Achieving vision. Appearance to Customers

Internal Processes Satisfy shareholders and customers Business process to excel.

Learning and development Sustain. Continuous change and improvement.


29/33

Building a Balance Score Card for Raymond:

The Balance Score Card focuses on the link between business processes and decisions and

results. It is considered as a guiding tool to strategy formulation, implementation andcommunication. The steps required to design a frame work for a balance score card is:

1. Strategic Analysis2. Strategic Mapping3. Measurement of Objectives

Strategic Analysis: It means defining the areas of strength and finding the areas of concern. It

can be done by SWOT analysis. For Example SWOT analysis of Raymond can be as follows:

Strength:

High brand equity Incongruence with the fashion trend. Large retail network. State of art machinery in plants. Highly adaptive to change. Good Infrastructure.

Weakness:

Ageing workforce Slow decision making due to multilevel transaction High non-productive work processes Knowledge gap Compartmentalized mindset Inadequate IT infrastructure.

Opportunity:

Exploring other similar markets outside India. More focus on casual wear. Focus on women wears.


30/33

Threats:

FDI in textile. Price competition from China, Thailand and Malaysia. Design competition from local players.

SWOT analysis gives a clear picture of strategic vision which helps in creating value for

stakeholders. This can be called as strategic theme.

Strategic Mapping: It is the pictorial description of the strategy and its elements. The also

shows the linkages and interaction between various variables. It is believed if strategy is

shown systemically in map, it increases the chances of success. Thus strategic mapping helps

in integrating and kinking all elements and variables with each other and with the

organizations overall objectives. The following diagram depicts the different element of

strategy under four perspectives.


31/33

Perspectives Description

Financial

Customer

Internal Processes

Operation

s

Regulatory

and Social

Innovation

Process

Manage

Customer

Increase

Service,

product,

delivery

Aggressive

marketing

New

Product

Develop

ment

Manager

of

customer

erosion

Political & environment

Customer Retention

Customer Satisfaction

Market Share

Customer Profitability

Low value customers to high

value customers

Lon term Shareholder value

Cost Reduction Revenue Growth


32/33

Learning andDevelopment

Following conditions are necessary for the proper implementation of

Balance Score Card:

Top Management support and commitment: The top management and senior managershould be committed to drive it down through the organization. It is essential that the

top and senior management fully understand the concept and the process of balance

score card.

Determination of critical success factors: The entire organization should be involvedin finding the critical success factors which should be of superior quality, minimum

defects, higher returns, after sales service, competency etc.

Translate critical success factors to measurable objectives: It is very important totransfer the factors into measures as the organization would not lead to anywhere

without these. Financial measures are easy to define but it is a challenge to define

non-financial measures as a number of them could be unique to organization for

Human Capital

(Skills,

knowledge,

Attitude)

Organizational

Capital

(Culture,

Leadership,Attitude)

Informational

Capital

(System, Data

base,Networks)

Competency

development

KM

Attract

and

retain

employe

e

OCTAPA

CE

Profiling

Innovation

IT skill

develo

pment


33/33

which no standards exist. The measures should be precise and consistent surrogate for

achieving the desired objectives.

Link performance measures to rewards: A reward system that is easily understood andis prompt in rewarding employees motivates them to attain greater heights.

Install a simple tracking service: A performance metrics ant targets are of no value ifthey are not tracked quickly, feedback not provided and lessons not learnt.

Create and link the balance score cards at all level of the organizations: Anorganization will better serve its purpose of providing delight to all its stake holders if

it develops score card at corporate, divisional and individual levels. There should be a

link between these scorecards. The divisional score card should follow from corporate

score card and the individual score card should follow from divisional score card.

Communication: the balance score card is a communication device whichcommunicates strategy and its components to all levels of organization.

Linking strategic planning, balance score card and budgeting process: The strategicplanning process that builds a balance score card should be linked to the budgeting

process to set priorities and to allocate resources to strategic initiatives.

CONCLUSION:

The Performance Management System is at nascent stage in Raymond. Lots of activities are

being initiated by the Human Resource Department to stream line the process but still lot of

loop holes exists. IT infrastructure available can be leveraged to a great extent to support

the Performance Manage System. Better method of setting KRA and Appraisal System can

be implemented to make it near perfect.

Internship at Raymond was an enriching experience that would be remembered for life. It

helped me both professionally and personally. Professionally I had a holistic view of HR

world in the corporate life. I got to know the nuances of the HR field which would help me in

shaping my corporate career.

summer report cover letter

Documents