Anda di halaman 1dari 23

ASIAN CASE RESEARCH JOURNAL, VOL.

5, ISSUE 1, 27– 48 (2001)

ACRJ
Management Appraisal at Attock
This case was prepared by
Assistant Professor Syed Aqeel
Refinery Limited (A)
Tirmizi and Faiza Imtiaz of
the Lahore University of Man- Mr. Adil Khattak, Assistant General Manager (Human Resources)
agement Sciences as a basis
for class discussion rather and the senior management at Attock Refinery Limited (ARL) were
than to illustrate either effec- re-evaluating the role of the HR systems in light of the internal
tive or ineffective handling of and external changes that ARL was experiencing. Mr. Khattak, a
an administrative or business
situation. handsome man with a striking presence, sat in his sparsely deco-
rated office and reflected upon the state of the organization’s
Please address all correspon- Management Appraisal System. He had become increasingly con-
dence to: Assistant Professor
Syed Aqeel Tirmizi, Graduate cerned and his challenge was to examine the present system and
School of Business Adminis- make it responsive to the company’s changing environment. While
tration, Lahore University of summarizing the views of the staff and management, Mr. Khattak
Management Sciences (LUMS)
Opp. Sector U, LCCHS noted that the appraisal system was perceived to be subjective, in-
Lahore-54792, Pakistan. adequate in differentiating between high and low performers; and
E-mail: tirmizi@lums.edu.pk. only remotely linked to the reward system.

ORGANIZATIONAL BACKGROUND

The Attock refinery was set up under the name of Morgah in


1922 with initial capacity of 2,500 barrels per day (bpd). With
the increase in indigenous crude oils, new plants with a capac-
ity of 5,500 bpd were commissioned in 1940. Attock Refinery
Limited (ARL) was incorporated as a Private Limited Company
in November 1978 to take over the business of the Attock Oil
Company (AOC) in relation to crude oil refining and supplying
of refined petroleum products. It was subsequently converted
to a Public Limited Company in June 1979 and was presently
quoted on three stock exchanges of Pakistan.
Original paid up capital of the company was Rs 80 mil-
lion, which was subscribed by the holding company i.e. AOC,
the Government of Pakistan, the investment companies and the
general public. This was gradually increased to Rs 291.6 million
by the issue of bonus shares over the last 5 years.

© 2001 by World Scientific Publishing Co.


28 ACRJ

With additional discoveries of crude oil in the Potohar


area in 1979, two new crude distillation units with refining
capacity of 25,000 bpd were installed in 1980. Some of the old,
unsafe and uneconomical units installed in the 1940’s were closed
to streamline the operations. Recently ARL had replaced an
old 5,000-bpd Heavy Crude unit with one of 10,000 bpd. In
addition, a Catalytic Reformer of 5,000 bpd had also been added
for the production of Low Lead Premium Motor Gasoline. Prior
to this, ARL was producing only Regular grade gasoline. Both
units were equipped with the latest Distributed Control
System for controlling of plant operations.
The company completed the upgrading project at an
estimated cost of Rs. 2.696 billion. The installation of the new
state-of-the-art plant was completed within the scheduled time.
With this, the Refinery, besides processing 35,000 barrels of crude
per day, would also produce low lead premium gasoline and
150,000 tons per annum of paving grade asphalt
The Refinery production depended on indigenous crude
available in the northern and southern regions of the country.
It was capable of refining all types of light and heavy crude
produced in the Potohar area from different fields. Southern
crude from Badin Block was also being processed at ARL.
The company produced a wide range of petroleum prod-
ucts including Liquefied Petroleum Gas, Low Lead Premium
Motor Gasoline, Jet Fuels, Kerosene Oil, High Speed Diesel,
Diesel Fuel Oil, various grades of road asphalt, Furnace Fuel
Oil, Solvent Oil, Mineral Turpentine and Jute Batching Oil.
The organization had eight departments (see Exhibit 1).
There were approximately 155 employees in the management
staff and almost 550 in the non-management staff. Out of the
155 employees in the management staff approximately 60% had
received engineering education, about 2% had management and
accounting background respectively, and 36% had degrees in
general education.

THE PETROLEUM INDUSTRY AND ARL’S NEW


STRATEGIC FOCUS

Until recently, oil refining in Pakistan had been a government-


regulated industry. The minimum return guaranteed by the
government to the oil refineries was 10% net of taxes on issued
capital. Returns over 40% were skimmed by the government.
MANAGEMENT APPRAISAL AT ATTOCK REFINERY LIMITED (A) 29

Exhibit 1. Attock Refinery Limited


May 5, 1999

C h ie f E xe c u tive O ffice r

M a n a g e r (s a le s & S e n io r M a n a g e r A s s is ta n t G e n e ra l S e n io r M a n ag e r M an ag er
C o m m e rc ia l (P & D & TS ) M an ag er (A c co u n ts ) (O p e ra tio n s )

M an ag er A s s is ta n t M a n a g e r M a n a g e r (H u m a n M an ag er
(T e ch n ic a l (E n g in e e rin g ) R e s o u rc e ) (M a in te n a n c e )
S e rvic e s )

Source: Company document

The Petroleum Policy announced in March 1994 removed the


40% limit on return if surplus percentage was to be used for
development and expansion plans. There were indications that
the government would further liberalize the oil and gas sector
to attract foreign investment.
The petroleum industry in Pakistan was experiencing a
major strategic shift due to internal and external environmental
changes, specifically due to deregulation of the industry and
entry of multi-national corporations. ARL had been forced to
come out of its shell, where the sales were locked and returns
guaranteed by the government. Shell (International) had already
taken over the Pakistan Burma Shell (PBS) and there were moves
by MOBIL and Askari Bank to take over Pakistan State Oil (PSO).
It was now competing in a dynamic and competitive environ-
ment. In the words of Mr. Khattak:
In the coming years it will be survival of the fittest, PARCO is
setting up a refinery in Multan with a capacity of 100,000 bpd. Once
its open market competition, our monopoly in the north will not be
there anymore. Some of our products would be surplus in the market.
So one option is to focus on value added down stream products* .
While the Government of Pakistan remained a share-
holder of ARL, the managerial control was with Attock Oil
Company. Now the top management wanted the company
to change its traditional work practices and become efficient
enough to compete with any international player. The changing
environment meant that the company would have to develop
a fresh strategy and supporting systems to be able to compete
effectively. The stated strategic objectives of ARL were
*Downstream products include products such as petrol, high speed diesel, jet fuel, bitumen etc.
30 ACRJ

expansion of refining capacity, up grading of technology, and


optimization of facilities and processes leading to the introduc-
tion of value-added products. ARL aimed to gain market
advantage in the North of the country through the develop-
ment and implementation of supporting systems and human
resources with a strong knowledge base.
After, Mr. Raziuddin, the present CEO took charge of
ARL, he made efforts to change the entire culture of the com-
pany. He treated the workforce as a valuable asset and wanted
to make sure that the employees were committed to their work
and contributed significantly to organizational effectiveness.
Outlining the role of HR in an organization’s success Mr.
Raziuddin observed:
The progress of any company depends on its Human Resources.
In turn, development of Human Resources is integral and one of the
most important functions of new corporate culture.
While commenting upon the new challenges and increas-
ing focus on HR’s role, Mr Khattak stated:
Now the emphasis is on cost-cutting, efficiency, gender equity,
training and development and appraisal system.

MANAGEMENT APPRAISAL SYSTEM

The management appraisal system at ARL, was based on an


appraisal instrument (see exhibit 2) known as the ‘Management
Appraisal Form’. The appraisal was carried out annually and
feedback was also provided to the employees towards the end
of the year. Information and data on employee’s performance
was also gathered at the end of the year.
The appraisal process was carried out in five steps (see
Exhibit 2). In the initial phase the instrument known as the
‘Management Appraisal Form’ included the appraisee’s
personal details, summary of job description and the appraisal
period. In the next section called Step 1, the appraiser evalu-
ated the target employee according to five broad performance
categories, namely, what he accomplishes, how he works, what he is,
what he knows, and what he feels. A five point rating scale known
as the appraisal code was used during this evaluation. Each of
these categories was further divided into sub-categories. The
sub-categories collectively made up 32 performance dimensions.
MANAGEMENT APPRAISAL AT ATTOCK REFINERY LIMITED (A) 31

Exhibit 2. ‘Management Appraisal Form’

Source: Company document


32 ACRJ

Exhibit 2. (continued)
MANAGEMENT APPRAISAL AT ATTOCK REFINERY LIMITED (A) 33

Exhibit 2. (continued)

C. WHAT HE IS– Consider the degree to which the employee’s PERSONAL QUALITIES contribute to his effectiveness.
q Leadership – Effectiveness in developing in others the willingness and q Drive – Basic urge and energy to get things done?
desire to work towards a common objective.
q Dependability – Reliability in assuming and carrying out the
q Judgement – Soundness of conclusions, decisions, & actions. commitments and obligations of his position.
q Initiative– Ability to take action without being told. q Integrity & Honesty – Degree of honesty and integrity demonstrated
in performing the job.

Comments: *

D. WHAT HE KNOWS – Consider the employee’s KNOWLEDGE in his functional and related fields and his understanding
of environmental matters necessary to effective performance.
q Assigned Work – Knowledge of methods, techniques and skills in his q Company Philosophy and Objectives – Knowledge of the
functional field which are necessary to performance of his responsibilities. Company and its objectives, organization structure, and management
philosophy.
q Related Work – Knowledge of related functions, the understanding of
which has an influence on assigned work. q Development in Profession or Field – Acquaintance with ideas,
trends, techniques, and discoveries (both inside and outside the company)
q Knowledge of Industry practices pertaining to his work.
q Basic administrative skills. q Creative abilities – Abilities to introduce/accept change

Comments: *

E. WHAT HE FEELS - Consider his general ATTITUDE towards the Company and his Colleagues as reflected in his work
which contributes to effective performance.
q Adaptability to Company’s Culture – Ability to adopt local q Punctuality – Regularity in attending work and other assignments.
culture and creating a sense of belonging.
q Dedication – Conscientious for accomplishment of job even some times
q Socializing – Willingness and desire to mix up socially with Colleagues beyond the call of duty.
and other people concerning work.
q Safety & Security – Consciousness for fire prevention, safety and
q Relationship with CBA – Helpfulness in creating conducive and security of the Company’s employees and property.
good working atmosphere with CBA.

Other Factors: *

Comments: *

Dated: Signature of Appraiser NAME:

POSITION:

Appraisee’s own views about the appraisal.


34 ACRJ

Exhibit 2. (continued)
MANAGEMENT APPRAISAL AT ATTOCK REFINERY LIMITED (A) 35

Upon completion of Step 1, the appraiser was required


to provide his comments on the employee’s potential, his/her
development needs and any preferences given by the employee
about his/her career path.
The review committee set up for the appraisal purposes
and comprising of the Assistant General Manager, Maintenance
Engineering and Human Resources, Senior Manager Accounts,
Manager Operations and Manager Human Resources, completed
the remaining sections of the performance appraisal form. The
review committee was required to analyze the elements of per-
formance appraised in Step I and record significant findings.
While doing this the committee had to comment on the
employee’s greatest strengths and also list the areas in which
an employee’s performance could and should be improved. Fi-
nally it had to identify an employee’s training and development
needs.
In Step III the over all performance of the employee was
appraised and Step IV highlighted the employees capacity for
advancement in his present organization unit. Here the review
committee assessed what was the next suitable position for
the employee, whether the employee had the potential for
advancement, and if not, then what were the reasons. Finally
the Chief Executive Officer gave his comments and signed the
appraisal form.
Overall an employee was assessed against 32 perfor-
mance dimensions using a 5 point rating scale. Appraising an
employee on these dimensions was considered to be difficult
by most appraisers. The appraiser found it difficult to distin-
guish between certain dimensions. There was considerable
over-lapping, as noted by Mr Rana M. Akram, the Human
Resource Manager:
We felt that 32 traits were overlapping and some of them were
not even meaningful. Moreover if someone had to be rated as excel-
lent, good or even below average we had to come up with long, de-
scriptive sentences in English. So it was very difficult to come up with
new phrases every year.
The system was also perceived by the employees to
be very qualitative and subjective. There were no quantifiable
objectives against which the employees could be evaluated. Many
employees believed that it was on the sole discretion of the
appraiser to rate an employee as he wished. Sometimes the
manager could not even justify the remarks that he made on an
36 ACRJ

appraisee. One employee in the management staff was of the


view:
The appraisal system uses a 1-5 scale. 1 being exceptional
and 5 being below average. In addition to the scale, the
appraiser also has to give his own remarks i.e. he has to
support his marking with his comments. Now if someone is
given 2, the remarks that are given do not support that rating.
Similarly sometimes the remarks are really good but the
numbers are not according to the remarks.
Performance appraisal was carried out annually. Since
performance related data was not gathered regularly this some-
times led to problems. A manager recalled:
One of my friends felt he had worked really hard throughout
the year, but because he was unable to finish a task given to him by his
supervisor towards the end of the year, he ended up getting a bad
appraisal.
The system did not provide any formal feedback to the
employees about their performance. While discussing this is-
sue a manager offered the following comment:
This is how I believe it [appraisal] happens. The appraisal is
written by the manager, it is given to the committee and then we are
asked to sign it…but when everything is done then there is no need in
asking us what we feel about it, whether it is good or bad.
Another manager observed:
The appraisal is bureaucratic, your appraisal is written and
you don’t know what it is. The last day your boss shares the appraisal
with you and asks if you agree with it or not. You don’t have a lot of
choice other than to say that you do agree with it. You have to work
for the same person in the coming year too. By disagreeing with his
appraisal you actually start a dispute with him. You can’t really ar-
gue with the appraiser, you can only agree or disagree.
The employees generally felt that there was no proper
system of career progression in place at ARL. Promotion relied
heavily on the sole discretion of the appraiser as opposed
to being linked to the annual performance appraisal. There
were employees who had performed well and yet had not been
promoted for several years. ‘It is really the manager’s will to
promote or not to promote an individual’, complained an
executive. There was no separate assessment of promotional
capabilities of an individual; it was in fact part of the same
system. One member of the senior management staff felt that:
MANAGEMENT APPRAISAL AT ATTOCK REFINERY LIMITED (A) 37

In the current system past performance is not really an indica-


tor of future promotion; Elements of subjectivity are involved here.
For some managers the appraisal system was not ad-
equately linked to the reward system. They were not sure as to
how the increments were decided and on what grounds pro-
motion recommendations were made. One manager shared his
view:
We have two types of increments, normal and merit. The nor-
mal increment is 5%. The merit increment starts at 2.5% then 5%
and so on. So if someone is given a 5% increment and someone else
2.5% then there is really no way of telling that on what grounds the
increments were decided.
For some managers the problem was not with the ap-
praisal form but with the individual’s who completed the form.
As one manager observed:
What I feel is that most of the people at higher level don’t know
how to fill an appraisal form. If you have a query and you want to
question your appraisal then I believe there are very few people who
can justify what they have written. For example once in my appraisal
my boss gave me a low score on dependability, when I asked him why
I got a low score then he told me that it was because I never called him
for anything. So if I didn’t call upon him too many times then I did a
lot of work on my own at my own level, is this greater dependability
or if I keep calling someone for guidance is that dependability? As far
as I see things, there is nothing wrong with the appraisal system,
what makes the difference is t who is filling the appraisal. Whether
you have a numeric or descriptive system that really isn’t the problem.
The main thing is that the people doing the appraisal should be fair
enough and properly trained to write the right thing.

CONCLUSION

Mr. Khattak felt it important for the HR department to care-


fully consider the changing business environment and new
organizational goals, in any new initiatives it would consider.
He also wanted the department to address such issues as ob-
jectivity, differentiation and compensation. Pondering over the
complexities that he and his HR team faced concerning the
appraisal system in early 1999, Mr. Khattak was convinced that
the matter deserved their immediate attention.
38 ACRJ

ACRJ
Management Appraisal at Attock
Refinery Limited (B)
Amidst the changes in the company’s managerial
philosophy and strategy, concerns regarding the adequacy and
utility of the current management appraisal system continued
to surface in early 1999. The internal changes in ARL’s manage-
ment philosophy and the changes in its external environment
were thought to have serious implications for the company’s
HR systems, including the current management appraisal
system. The Administration and Personnel Department was
renamed as the Human Resource Department. In addition as
part of its new management philosophy the company adopted
the Management by Objectives approach. Mr. Adil Khattak,
Assistant General Manager Human Resources, felt that there
was an urgent need to immediately address the issues regard-
ing the appraisal system and to develop a new system that
was in sync with ARL’s new focus and vision. For this purpose,
he advised Mr. Rana M. Akram, Manager HR and his team,
to develop a new appraisal system and encouraged him to
work closely with the senior management team.

THE PROPOSED APPRAISAL SYSTEM

Mr. Akram finalized the design and development of a new


appraisal system in late 1999. After a series of presentations
to the senior management, the new appraisal system was
finalized and forwarded for approval to the Group CEO of
Attock Oil Company (AOC).
The highlight of the new system was its MBO approach.
A new appraisal instrument (see Exhibit 1) was developed.
In addition to the system’s focus on objectives, another new
element that had been added was the quarterly feedback.

© 2001 by World Scientific Publishing Co.


MANAGEMENT APPRAISAL AT ATTOCK REFINERY LIMITED (B) 39

The Appraisal Form had five parts. Form A was the


‘Management Personnel Targets Appraisal Form’ and was
filled out by the immediate supervising officer. For each area
of performance the employee together with his immediate
supervisor established certain targets. These targets were
assigned a weightage (W%) and assessed against predetermined
verification criteria. Targets achieved were also assigned a
rating (R). The net performance weightage was obtained by
multiplying W% by R. After calculating the net result for all
areas of performance the total rating points were calculated.
Form B was the ‘Management Personnel Performance
Appraisal Form’ and was also known as the Appraisal Record.
In addition to basic demographics the form recorded an
employee’s performance during the year on issues such as
discipline, attendance, positive and negative activities, targets
achieved and mid-term review.
The ‘Review of Personal Performance Form: C’ was also
filled out by the immediate supervising officer and was
shown to the appraisee when completed. The form had 16
performance dimensions that were assigned different weights
for different grades, which were represented in column
‘Weightage’. An appraisee was rated on each dimension on
a scale having five degrees each. The ratings given were put
in column ‘Performance Rating (a)’. To obtain the final
rating point performance dimension ‘weightage’ was multiplied
with the given ‘performance rating’. Final rating points were
added up and divided by 100 to get the final aggregate rating.
The number obtained was compared against the Scale for final
aggregate rating in performance rating table (for more details
see ‘Performance Rating Table’ on page 46) to get the final
rating for performance dimension. This number was put in the
requisite box and gave an individual’s overall performance
rating. Career advancement decisions were made for the
individual. A four-member review committee completed
the final part of the form.
The proposed system was implemented in the HR
department on a trial basis in January 2000. One of the goals of
the proposed system was to provide effective performance
feedback to the employees. One of the executives who was
on the team that designed the new system was of the view:
The main objective of the new system is to provide the employ-
ees proper feedback in terms of what the management wants. It is
very important for the employee to know on what basis he has been
40 ACRJ

appraised. Now that the subordinate and the immediate supervisor


will jointly set the verification criteria there will not be any
problems in terms of what the employee is expected to achieve.
Some managers felt that the new system would highlight
employees’ weaknesses and improvement needs.
Now we know the objectives an individual is required to achieve.
So we have some benchmarks to evaluate him. The management
can now pinpoint failures and highlight areas for improvement.
The system was also expected to resolve issues of
increments and promotions. According to another manager:
We did not have the criteria against which we could promote
someone or give him/her increment. Management had their own
reasons for suggesting promotions and increments. Now the
managers will have concrete factors for assessing performance
and recommending promotions and increments.
One of the executives felt that the proposed system
would put the employees in a better bargaining position.
From what I have heard and seen of the new system I feel
that by indicating to the top management that these are my training
needs, these are my targets, this is how I can contribute to
the betterment of the organization I am in a better bargaining
position. In the current system the appraisal is quite subjective. Your
appraisal really depends on your appraiser’s mood, your
relationship with him etc. But now with predefined targets we can
actually know what we were evaluated against.
It was hoped that by increasing the frequency of
appraisals in the new system it would become more objective.
Dr. Ilyas, Senior Manager –Technical Services, observed:
It is not fair to appraise someone at the end of the year. So
in the new system we have suggested quarterly appraisals, or
maybe semi-annual appraisals. This will make the appraisal more
objective.
Dr Ilyas also observed that the past performance was
a good predictor of future promotions and felt that the
proposed appraisal system would permit adequate assessment
for growth.

IN THE FINAL ANALYSIS

By March 2000, no comprehensive data was available to


gauge the extent to which the new performance management
MANAGEMENT APPRAISAL AT ATTOCK REFINERY LIMITED (B) 41

system addressed some of the concerns expressed earlier


by various people since the new system was being implemen-
ted on a limited scale. Mr. Khattak and other senior managers
hoped that the proposed system supported the new organiza-
tional strategy and would help the company align HR focus
with its changing environment.
42 ACRJ

Management Appraisal at ARL (B) (Exhibit I)

NAME ___________________ SERVICE NUMBER ____________

ATTOCK REFINERY LIMITED


MANAGEMENT PERSONNEL TARGETS APPRAISAL

FORM – A
(To be filled by the immediate controlling officer and shown to appraisee when completed)

APPRAISAL PERIOD: FROM ____________________ TO _______________________

NAME OF EMPLOYEE ___________________________________________________________DESIGNATION_________________________________

SECTION / DEPARTMENT ______________________________________________________________________________________________________

SERVICE NUMBER _______________________

Sr. Area of Performance Yearly Targets Weightage Verification Criteria Targets Rating Net Result
No (W%) Achieved (R) (W%xR)
(4)
(1) (2) (3) (5) (6) (7)
1* ___________________ ___________________________ _________ _________________________ ________ _____ _______
2* ___________________ ___________________________ _________ _________________________ ________ _____ _______
3* ___________________ ___________________________ _________ _________________________ ________ _____ _______
4* ___________________ ___________________________ _________ _________________________ ________ _____ _______
5* ___________________ ___________________________ _________ _________________________ ________ _____ _______
6* ___________________ ___________________________ _________ _________________________ ________ _____ _______

Total Rating Points: ______

Weighted Average Rating = Total Rating Points ÷ 100

Signature Signature Signature


(Appraisee) (Section Incharge / Head) (Department Manager)

WEIGHTED AVERAGE ON ACHIEVEMENT OF TARGETS

Weighted Average Rating = (W1%xR1+W2%xR2+W3%xR3+W4%xR4+W5%xR5+W6%xR6) ÷ 100

NOTE: In case the employee has not achieved the agreed targets or prescribed standards, due to some reason beyond his
control, state the reason, which should not affect his overall performance evaluation. In that case the rating of last
year shall be treated as the final rating. In-competence or non-cooperation of subordinates and colleagues,
increased rate of absenteeism or mere rush of work should not be treated as reasons beyond control.

REMARKS, IF ANY:

_____________________ _____________________ _____________________


Appraisee Section Incharge/ Head Department Manager

5
Source: Company document
MANAGEMENT APPRAISAL AT ATTOCK REFINERY LIMITED (B) 43

Management Appraisal at ARL (B) (Exhibit I)

NAME ___________________ SERVICE NUMBER ____________

ATTOCK REFINERY LIMITED


MANAGEMENT PERSONNEL PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL RECORD

FORM-B

NAME OF THE EMPLOYEE __________________________________


SERVICE NUMBER __________________________________
DATE OF BIRTH __________________________________
ACADEMIC QUALIFICATIONS __________________________________
PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE __________________________________
DATE OF APPOINTMENT __________________________________
PRESENT DESIGNATION __________________________________
DESIGNATION ON APPOINTMENT __________________________________
DATE OF PROMOTION TO PRESENT POST __________________________________
GRADE __________________________________
PRESENT BASIC PAY __________________________________
APPRAISAL RATING IN THE LAST TWO YEARS __________________________________

1. Performance as observed during the year

a) Attendance * ____________________________
b) Discipline * ____________________________
c) Counseling or warnings * ____________________________
d) Other activities (positive) * ____________________________
e) Other activities (negative) * ____________________________

2. Any handicaps beyond control affecting the achievement of targets *________________________________

3. Targets achieved * ___________________________________________

4. Steps for the development of the employee taken during the year * _________________________________

5. Mid-term review * ___________________________________________

6. Other remarks * ___________________________________________

DATE SIGNATURE
(APPRAISER)
44 ACRJ

Management Appraisal at ARL (B) (Exhibit I)

NAME ___________________ SERVICE NUMBER ____________

ATTOCK REFINERY LIMITED


MANAGEMENT PERSONNEL PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

REVIEW OF PERSONAL PERFORMANCE

FORM - C

To be filled in by immediate controlling officer and shown to the appraisee when completed.

APPRAISAL PERIOD: FROM ____________________ TO _______________________

PERSONAL DETAILS

NAME & SERVICE NUMBER DATE OF BIRTH QUALIFICATION YEARS OF EXPERIENCE DATE JOINED
OUTSIDE THE COMPANY COMPANY

JOB TITLE DEPARTMENT LOCATION Date Posted to Position Held During


Present Position Review Period

Grade Present Basic Salary


Date coming to
Generalist/ Grade Reports to
Specialist

POSITION SUMMARY (JOB DESCRIPTION)

HOW TO FILL THE FORM C:


• Performance dimensions have different weightage for different grades, which are represented in column, ‘Weightage’.
• An appraisee will be rated on each dimensions on a scale, each having five degrees.
• Ratings given will be put in column ‘Performance Ratings’ (a).
• To get the final ratings points multiply performance dimension ‘Weightage’ with ‘Performance Rating’ given.
• Add all “Final Rating Points” to get the ‘Final Aggregated Rating’ and divide by 100.
• Check the ‘Final Aggregated Rating Points’ at the Scale in Table A to get the Final Rating for Performance dimensions.
• Put the Final Rating in the requisite box.
MANAGEMENT APPRAISAL AT ATTOCK REFINERY LIMITED (B) 45

Management Appraisal at ARL (B) (Exhibit I)

NAME ___________________ SERVICE NUMBER ____________


Sr. Performance Dimensions Weightage (%) Ratings
No. Management Grade Levels Performance Final Rating Points
1&2 3&4 4A > (a) { (a) x Weightage }
1. JOB KNOWLEDGE
Possess knowledge of methods, techniques and skills and conversant with all 10 8 5
phases of assigned job and related matters.
2. EFFICIENCY ORIENTATION
Looks for the best use of resources: actively seeks ways to improve current
methods, systems, processes and structures, demonstrates deep concern and is 7 6 5
judicious with Company’s funds, properties and interests, makes productive
use of time to meet targeted standard levels.
3. PLANNING & ORGANIZING
Anticipates needs, forecasts conditions, plans, organize and monitors results 5 6 7
till completion of tasks assigned.
4. DECISION MAKING
Takes rational, sound and timely decisions based on relevant information and 4 6 7
facts.
5. DEPENDABILITY
Carries out commitments and obligations of his position efficiently,
7 7 7
expeditiously and honestly, takes quick and effective and reliable decisions
after considering available options and their implications.
6. DEVELOPING PEOPLE
Identifies and motivates others to improve their capabilities and standard of 5 6 7
performance through training, counseling and job rotation process
7. SAFETY CONSCIOUSNESS
Demonstrates concern for safety and complies with safety standards and 7 5 3
requirements while performing duty
8. COMMUNICATION SKILLS
Ability to listen carefully and to present facts and ideas verbally and in
5 7 10
written form in clear, effective and convincing manner invoking positive
responses.
9. LEADERSHIP
Develops in subordinates the will and desire to work towards a common
3 7 10
objective, assigns work to them and keeps track of progress and corrects
deviations to achieve the desired goals.
10. INITIATIVE
Does things before being asked to or forced by events and acts at the right 10 8 7
time.
11. PROBLEM SOLVING SKILLS
Logically breaking problems down into their essential elements, carrying out 8 7 7
diagnosis and developing solutions
12. TEAM SPIRIT
Exhibits team spirit in the performance of his duties to achieve overall 5 5 5
common objectives
13. INTERPERSONAL SKILLS
Building persuasive arguments based on logic / merits without hurting 5 5 5
feelings of others.
14. ADAPTABILITY
Ability to alter behaviour and opinions in the light of new information and 5 5 5
responding constructively to changing situations.
15. INNOVATION
Generates original and imaginative new ideas and suggests solution to 7 6 5
problems to achieve improvement in work operations
16. TENACITY
Remains stead fast and maintains stability of performance under pressure and 7 6 5
stressful conditions and pursues tasks until completed

FINAL AGGREGATED RATING POINTS

Name of the Appraiser ______________________________


FINAL RATING
Date ______________________________
Signature ______________________________

APPRAISEE’S VIEWS

Name of Appraisee ______________________


Signature ______________________ Date: _____________________
46 ACRJ

Management Appraisal at ARL (B) (Exhibit I)

NAME ___________________ SERVICE NUMBER ____________

PERFORMANCE REVIEW
(To be filled in by the Appraiser)

Given an overall assessment of performance highlighting noteworthy and key performance strengths after taking into consideration
achievements against objectives, competency dimensions and any unexpected external / other factors during the year which not
covered in the objectives. Indicate achievements as well as areas of improvement. *

DEVELOPMENT NEEDS / PLANS

1. List the individual’s greatest strengths as determined on the basis of overall performance assessment (This
will provide an important indication of the direction in which development should be planned) *

2. List the areas in which the appraisee needs improvement and development. Indicate briefly the step or plans
for improvement such as training, job rotation, counseling, special assignments etc. *

3. Has the Appraisee expressed any preference about his career pattern? If so, please state. *

ASSESMENT / RATING POINTS:

- Outstanding = 1
- Good = 2
- Above Average = 3
- Average = 4
- Below Average = 5

SUMMARY OF RATINGS

- Rating on performance standards / targets (Form – A) =


- Rating on dimensions (Form – C) =
- Final rating [30% (Form A) + 70% (Form C) =

- Consensus of Average Rating Values) =


(Summation of total rating values divided by number
of raters if more than one person has rated the employee)

PERFORMANCE RATING TABLE


Rating Abbreviation Increment Rating Description Scale for Final Aggregated Rating
Percent Points
(%)
Outstanding OS 12.5 1 The employee who excel in all aspects of their work 0.50 to 1.49 = 1
Good G 10 2 The employees who excel in most aspects of their work 1.50 to 2.49 = 2
Above AA 7.5 3 The employees who are qualified, competent and produce quality 2.50 to 3.49 = 3
Average outputs
Average A 5 4 The employees who meet average standards as to most job 3.50 to 4.49 = 4
requirement but are deficient in the execution of a particular part of the
job.
Below BA 2.5 5 The employees whose work is unsatisfactory. They can be terminated 4.50 to 5.00 = 5
Average if despite reasonable opportunity being given have not attained
satisfactory work standards.
MANAGEMENT APPRAISAL AT ATTOCK REFINERY LIMITED (B) 47

Management Appraisal at ARL (B) (Exhibit I)

NAME ___________________ SERVICE NUMBER ____________


OVERALL PERFORMANCE RATING (To be Tick Marked)

OUTSTANDING - 1 GOOD - 2 ABOVE AVERAGE – 3 AVERAGE - 4 BELOW AVERAGE- 5

1. Is the individual promotable to the next grade or position ahead?

Yes

No

(To be Tick Marked)


Ready Now 1 to 3 Year 4 to 5 Year

POSITION / GRADE:

2. Is there any special impediment to his promotion


to the next grade such as age, non-availability of
position in the authorized strength, lack of basic
qualifications, resistance to accept responsibilities,
unwillingness to change work location etc?

3. Does he appear to have the potentials to advance Yes Can’t Judge No


beyond the next position? (To be Tick Marked) Now

If practicable name the position to which it is believed ____________________________________________


he has potential to advance.

If the answer is no, state the reason. ____________________________________________


____________________________________________
____________________________________________

REVIEWED BY DEPARTMENT MANAGER

Name of Appraiser: __________________ Name: _______________


Signature: __________________ Designation: _______________
Date: __________________ Signature: _______________
Date: _______________
48 ACRJ

Management Appraisal at ARL (B) (Exhibit I)

NAME ___________________ SERVICE NUMBER ____________

FINAL REVIEW AND ASSESSMENT OF APPRAISAL COMMITTEE

FINAL ASSESSMENT:
(To be Tick Marked)
OUTSTANDING - 1 GOOD -2 ABOVE AVERAGE – 3 AVERAGE - 4 BELOW AVERAGE- 5

COMMENTS: *

Signature Signature Signature Signature


(Chairman – Appraisal Committee) (Member) (Member) (Member)

REMARKS: *

Date: ________________________ Chief Executive Officer


1