WO2013021393A1

WO2013021393A1 - An automated appraisal system and process thereof

Info

Publication number: WO2013021393A1
Application number: PCT/IN2011/000644
Authority: WO
Inventors: Bakshi AJAY
Original assignee: Hinduja Global Solutions Limited
Priority date: 2011-08-05
Filing date: 2011-09-19
Publication date: 2013-02-14
Also published as: EP2740081A1

Abstract

The invention relates to an online appraisal system (OAS) and the process for performance appraisal of the employees within an organization. This OAS comprises of Master Performance Segment (MPS), Master performance categories (MPC), Performance parameters for the employees in specific Master performance category, Means are provided to assess and define calculation type for performance parameter, evaluation and validation of calculated data. The process for online appraisal comprises of Identification of the performance parameters, Mapping against any one of Master Performance category, codification of performance parameter by OAS to give an identifier for each one of them called as Performance identifier(PID).Each PID have defined calculation type for performance parameter, evaluation and validation of calculated data which is finally uploaded into OAS after which the percentile job runs with the finally disclosed data and percentile score is generated for appraisal.

Description

Present invention relates to an online appraisal system and the process for performance appraisal of the employees within an organization. The appraisal is based on the true performance of the employee which is carried out by automatic appraisal system.

Background of Invention

Appraisals are a way of rewarding an employee for contributing towards the growth of the organization and a means for employee retention. Appraisals are normally awarded subsequent to the execution of following steps:

a) Every employee of an organization is evaluated with respect to some predetermined parameters assigned by the organization. The predetermined parameters are universal and applicable to all employees of the organization. Further, each of the predetermined parameter is assigned a value.

b) Every employee is assigned a score based on the aggregate of values accumulated through assessment of each of the predetermined parameter.

c) Normalization of the scores of all the employees is performed and a ranking based on the normalized scores are arrived at, for awarding the appraisals.

Normally, the above mentioned evaluations for organizations are performed in writing on paper evaluation forms, and the evaluation forms are collected, and the data is compiled and analyzed. Obviously, this is a labor-intensive process, and therefore costly to the company. Another problem associated with standard employee evaluation for organization is training cost consequently usually little or no training or instructions are provided regarding the expected ratings criteria. The training of every employee of a large corporation in the evaluation process would require large scale efforts, including large training seminars, which is an expensive exercise, especially for multi-national corporations. As a result of the absence of training or instructions relating to the expected ratings criteria, the actual employee evaluation received may vary dramatically, and may not necessarily accurately reflect performance of employees to enable accurate comparison to other employees throughout the company. For example, two employees having equal talents may be given inconsistent ratings, or a poor employee may be rated higher than a good employee. In another type of organization, where the processes keep changing every fortnight, it is not possible to keep track of individual assessment based on the process requirements. Standard parameters are used in all the processes which lead to discrepancy in the evaluation of the employee's performance in the organization. Normally, the criteria for evaluation would be quality, productivity and attendance. While attendance is a universal parameter and has no discrepancy in evaluating the same, the evaluation based on quality and productivity may vary from process to process. Hence, a universal evaluation method leads to a skewed assessment of employee performance. In ^"addition to all the above, the other limitation in the conventional evaluation system are as follows:

(a) Multiple forms are used for evaluation;

(b) Not transpa rent

(c) Annual evaluation (only once in a year)

(d) Gradation was defined at a high level (eg. Project level not on process level)

(e) Manual process of evaluation system delays Appraisals, no guarantee of security.

(f) Retrieval of documents is very tough due to large number of paper work.

Prior Art

US Application number US2011106569 teaches a system and a method of appraising and managing risk relating to technology needs using risk management processing engine. The invention gathers policy holder data, determining the risk associated with the data, creating a risk management policy for technology service events and technology service events and technology service situations in order to mitigate or eliminate the risk, and resolving serviceable events when risk is actualized .

Another US Application number US2011099115 teaches about a method of automating appraisals requested by a requesting party by providing an appraisal form via a remotely accessible interface for completion by an appraiser and then reviewing the completed appraisal form for validity and identifying any error and then also analyzing the validated form according to a series of rules and indicating items of interest and finally forwarding the appraisal to the requesting party.

Statement of the Invention

The invention relates to an online appraisal system and the process for performance appraisal of the employees within an organization

Wherein, an Online appraisal system (OAS) for analyzing the performance of the employees of an organization consisting of:

a. Master Performance Segment (MPS) defined by the organization.

b. Means to define weightage of the different performance segments of an organization.

c. Means to define master performance categories (MPC) and calculate weightage to performance category.

d. Means to define performance parameters for the employees in specific Master performance category.

e. Means to assess and define calculation type for performance parameter, evaluation and validation of calculated data.

f. Means to upload calculated data into OAS for codification of calculated data and transferring the said data to the controller for approval.

In another embodiment of the Invention, an online appraisal performance parameter structure of an organization comprising:-a) Departments with Department Head based on business needs of organization, b) Sub-processes having Sub-Process head (SPH) within the departments to identify the performance parameters, c) Employees with their Primary Reportee (PR) within the sub-process for whom the performance appraisal is being carried out.

In another embodiment of the invention, a process for online appraisal for performance comprises of:

a) ldentification of the performance parameters by the Organization on which employee performance to be evaluated within a sub-process of a department. b) Mapping of the identified performance parameter against any one of Master Performance category identified by organization.

c) codification of performance parameter by OAS to give an identifier for each one of them called as Performance Identfier(PID) d) Each PID to have defined calculation type for performance parameter, evaluation and validation of calculated data. b) Uploading the calculated data into OAS.

c) Validation of the Uploaded data by the system and Sub Process Head followed by closure of the calculated data by the SPH and Department Head.

d) running the percentile job with the finally disclosed data and generating percentile score.

Detailed Description

In organizations generally have more than one client business being handled simultaneously. To do that the business is categorized into departments. The activities involved in processes differ from department to department.

For impartiality and as a good employee encouragement practice, every employee needs to be evaluated correctly, since the value and complexity of each task assigned varies based on the process involved and the department associated with the said process is assigned.

There are varieties of tasks, so a department is further categorized into sub processes. This helps to differentiate skill and work done in a sub-process to other sub-process.

The applicant conceptualized and created a unique differential evaluation schema that performs an evaluation of employee based on the work with which the employee is associated; sub- process to which they are assigned; and the performance measuring parameters that are adopted to assess the sub-process.

Such an assessment prevents skewed evaluation of employees and results in transparent and evolved appraisal system. The differential evaluation schema adopted by the applicant is a multi-tiered process:

1. The first level includes identifying the departments (DID), sub-processes handled by the identified departments (SPID) and designating the parameters (PID) to each of the sub-processes; 2. The second level includes creation of a Centralized depository (Software application) for storing the data comprising DIDs, SPIDs and PIDs. The whole structure of organization thus gets mapped in Application;

3. The third level includes collating employee specific performance dataset for a given month and mapping it against structure created at first level. This happens for all employees in a given department and sub-processes;

4. The fourth level includes task of uploading monthly performance data generated at third level into Central Software by authorized up-loader. To protect the security and confidentiality of the data, only an authorized up-loader can feed the data in central repository;

5. The fifth level includes validation of the uploaded dataset by the Sub process Head and closing the same. If the uploaded data requires change then it can be reloaded before the dataset for month is closed. For proper authorization purposes, the loaded data can be closed only by respective Sub-process head;

6. The sixth level includes final closing of the entire department data by Dept head.

They are the final authority in closing the monthly performance data for all employees in their Department. Once Department Head closes the repository for that particular month, the monthly performance data points cannot be changed for that month-department combination;

7. The seventh level is generation of percentile score of each employee against the performance grouping.

The Organization Structure consists of master performance segment (MPS). Organization defines Master Performance Segment which will become the broad classification for type of evaluation. The Master performance segment can be Subjective Segment and Objective Segment and anything more depend on organization decision. The sum of Weightage for Master Performance segment should be 100.

Organizations also define Master Performance Category that has to be governed at Organization Level. OAS then codify Master Performance Categories. Some example of Master Performance Categories are (Ex: P, Q, A) (Productivity, Quality, Attendance). An organization can have as many Master Performance Category as required by them. Organization can define the method in. which the monthly Performance categories are to be handled. The two ways are: 1. Percentile method or

2. Absolute method In Percentile Method, the monthly performance values are converted into Percentile values for employee in their working group and stored into database for future use. In Absolute method, the raw

monthly performance values are used as raw values only and stored for future use. Organization defines the Weightage of each of the Master Performance Category. The Weightage of Master Performance categories defined should be such that sum of all the Master Performance Categories equals 100.

Examples of MPC's are provided through Table 1 and Table 2. Table - 1 (MASTER PERFORMANCE CATEGORIES)

Applicant decided to have following as its Master Performance Categories.

Table - 2 (MASTER PERFORMANCE CATEGORIES WITH WEIGHTAGE)

Applicant decided to have following Weightage for its Master Performance Categories.

For Appraisal Department is created based on business need of organization. Organization can define Structure of Departments within organization. An organization has to create at least one Department. It is the choice of Organization to define number of departments according to their business needs. OAS Model is much flexible to create more than one department within an organization. Every department has a Department Head. At no time a department can be without a Dept Head. OAS will codify the departments. A department can be deactivated based on business needs only if there are no employees in it. Each department to have sub-sections called as sub-processes which reside within the department. Employees work within the sub- process in a department. One department should minimum have one sub-process. One department can have as many sub-processes as required by the department. OAS will codify the sub-processes. OAS Model is flexible to have as many sub processes within the department. A sub process can be deactivated based on business needs only if there are no employees in it. Exa mple of Depa rtment and their Sub processes are provided through Table 3.

Table - 3 (EXAMPLE OF DEPARTMENTS AND THEIR SUB-PROCESSES)

Organization identifies the performance parameters on which employee performance has to be evaluated within a sub-process within a department. This would be the responsibility of either Sub-process Head or Department Head. The performance parameter which has been identified as suitable for use then has to be mapped against any one of Master Performance category identified by organization. OAS will codify the performance parameter and will give an identifier for each one of them. After codification, the whole relationship is called as PID (Performance Identifier). Examples of Performance Parameters and Identifiers are provided through Table 4, Table 5, Table 6 a nd Table 7.

Table - 4 (EXAMPLE OF PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS)

5 AHT 13 Avg audits per day

6 Approvals Worked 14 Avg calls per day

7 ASPD 15 Avg Chat duration

8 ATT 16 Avg CPVs per day

Table - 5 (EXAMPLES OF PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS MAPPED TO MPC)

S.N. Performance Parameter Master Parameter Category

1 Mails actioned Productivity

2 ICQ Quality

3 AHT Productivity

4 Hold Productivity

5 HT Upsell Productivity

6 FC Productivity

7 ECQ Quality

8 ICE Quality

9 Not Ready Productivity

10 Shift Adherence Productivity

11 Logins Productivity

Table - 6 (EXAMPLES OF PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS ATTACHED TO SUB-PROCESS)

SP3

11 Dl Productivity Calls

SP3

12 Dl Quality ECQ

SP3

13 Dl Quality ICQ

14 Dl SP4 Productivity AHT

15 Dl SP4 Productivity Hold

16 Dl SP4 Quality CQ

Table - 7 (EXAMPLES OF PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS WITH PID)

Each PID has defined Calculation Type. The value of calculation type can only be either of Normal or Reverse. Each PID to have defined evaluation type. The value of evaluation type can only be either of Absolute or Range. Each PID to have defined validity period. The value of validity period can be extended or contracted based on the business need. Examples of Performance Identifiers with Validity period are provided through Table 8.

Table - 8 (EXAMPLES OF PID WITH VALIDITY PERIOD)

Calculation Type is defined to decide the way "Target Achieved %" has to be handled. There are parameters which are "Greater the better" and there are few which are "lesser the better". Example of "Greater the Better" are "Accuracy", "Quality Score" etc. Example of "Lesser the Better" are "AHT", "Abandon Rate" etc.

In case of "Greater the better", (Target Achieved % = Achieved / Target).

In case of "Lesser the better", (Target Achieved % = Target / Achieved).

Examples of Performance Identifiers with Calculation Type are provided through Table 9.

Table - 9 (EXAMPLES OF PID WITH CALCULATION TYPE)

Evaluation Type is a pa rameter which is used to group the employee performance in either of these two evaluation types (Absolute Method or Range Method). Some Businesses evaluate their floor based on "Absolute Method" while some control based on "Range Method". In Absolute Method, each employee is based on the absolute score that employee achieves. In Range Method, employees are grouped in a range based on the absolute value that they achieve based on the range boundaries set by Business Manager. Examples of Performance Identifiers with Calculation Type are provided through Table 10.

Table - 10 (EXAMPLES OF PID WITH EVALUATION TYPE)

Each department to have their appraisal system structure as defined in "Structure". It is responsibility of department head to ensure that employee performance is monitored based on structure and performance identifiers defined for sub-process in which employee is working in a given month. Every month, real performance of employee, as against each of identified PID's have to be uploaded into the OAS in monthly process. OAS will perform the task of validation of data with respect to data sent for loading. There are eight controls inbuilt into OAS to avoid error in loading. Once the loading is done, then SPH to validate the data to make sure that OAS reflects the correct data points of employee's performance. Sub Process Head (SPH) to close (signoff) the monthly data points which indicate that there are ok with the closure of their sub- processes for the month and will not change the data points for what-so-ever reasons. Once all SPH within a department have closed the data points, then department head has to close (sign off) the performance data points at department level. Once Department head closes the data points, OAS then performs percentile calculation. Once percentile calculation is done, then the achieved percentile scores are displayed to employee, their PR, SPH, DH and LH. This monthly process ensures that each employee is aware. of their monthly percentiles based on their real performance and there are no unnecessary ambiguities at the time of yearly appraisals. This also ensures that all the information about employee's performance is stored in one central online repository. This also ensures transparency in the way organization handles the employee evaluation process thereby generating good will and generating trust of employees.

Master Performance Categories can be divided in segments. Mostly 2 segments are enough. They are Objective Segment and Subjective Segment. However, OAS is capable to handle requirements of more than above 2 Segments.

In the present application we have 2 Master Performance Segment.

a. Objective Segment and

b. Subjective Segment

We need to define the Weightage of Master Performance Segments. The sum of the Weightage of Master Performance Categories should always be 100.

Here WOS % + WSS% = 100%

Performance Categories within Objective Segment and their Weightage can be defined follows;

Here WPCOSl%%+ WPCOS2%+ WPCOS3%+ + + WPCOSn% = 100% Master Performance Categories within Subjective Segment and their Weightage can be defined as follows;

Here WPCSS1%+ WPCSS2%+ WPCSS3%+ + + WPCSSn% = 100%

By now we have defined the objective performance categories within Objective segment.A monthly percentile score will be calculated for each objective performance category for each employee every month. This monthly percentile score (OMPS) will be based on performance data that is provided for each employee at end of month against their PID's.The monthly percentile score (OMPS) will be stored for each employee. At the end of 12 months, these OMPC percentile scores will be averaged for the year. (YAVGMPCOS1, YAVGMPCOS2 , , , ,

YAVGMPCOSn). A score (YSCOSn) is given to each of Objective Performance Category based on the grouping of yearly average percentile score. The yearly average scores are to be grouped in a range and value to be assigned based on pre decided range as follows:

Range Bracket for Yearly Average of YAVGMPCOSn for calculating YSCOSn

S. N. If Value of YAVGMPCOSn is from If Value of YAVGMPCOSn is to Score (YSCOSn)

1 Al Bl 1

2 Bl+0.001 CI 2

3 Cl+0.001 Dl 3

4 Dl+0.001 El 4

5 El+0.001 Fl 5 Once the yearly score (YSCOSn) for each Objective category is calculated then we need to find out its prorate weighted value (PRYSCOSn) based on the weight assigned to it as per Table B. So the yearly weighted prorate objective score is calculated as follows;

There are 2 steps to calculate the final yearly score for Objective segment. They are to calculate the final prorata yearly objective score (FPRYOS) and Then to calculate a final value by using the weight given to Objective segment (FVOS). To calculate Final Prorata yearly Objective score (FPRYOS):

FPRYOS = PRYSCOS1 + PRYSCOS2 + .... + + PRYSCOSn

To calculate final value of Objective Segment (FVOS)

FVOS = FPRYOS x WOS %

This FVOS value is very important and later used in conjunction with Final Subjective score to get the final performance score of employee. Subjective Scores are given by PR at the time of appraisal and the PR is free to decide what they feel should be given to appraise. The calculation of Subjective Scores is as follows; Performance Category of Subjective Segment

S. N. Performance Performance Category Code Weightage Score given Category

1 PCSSl CPCSSl WPCSS1% SI

2 PCSS2 CPCSS2 WPCSS2% S2

3 PCSS3 CPCSS3 WPCSS3% S3 n PCSSn CPCSS4 WPCSSn% Sn

Then the obtained subjective score will be

(SI* WPCSS1%) + (S2* WPCSS2%) + (S3* WPCSS3%) + + + (Sn* WPCSS1%) =

FPRYSS

Then the final subjective score will be

FPRYSS* WSS % = FVSS

After calculation of final Objective Score and final Subjective Score of Employee the Final performance score (FPS) will be

FPS - FVOS + FVSS

This score of FPS is the value on which the ranking of ABCD will be done within a Sub process during Annual Appraisal.

It was also conceptualized during creation of Appraisal Methodology that the PR should be able to select three values which as per PR are the "Areas of strength" for the appraise. It was also conceptualized during creation of Appraisal Methodology that the PR should be able to select three values which as per PR are the area of "Areas for Improvement" for the appraise.

Set of 26 values were finalized. The list of the 33 values is given in Table 11. These values are offered/ visible to PR while doing the online appraisal. PR cannot select the same value as the "Areas of Strength" and "Areas for improvement" for the given employee. Examples of "Areas of Strength" and "Areas for Improvement" are provided through Table 11. Table- 11

(Examples of Values for "Areas of Strength" and "Areas for Improvement")

The new Online Appraisal system (OAS) also has a facility where PR can feed into system if the appraise will be ready to take a new role/higher responsibility in a given time frame. This helps organization to have a data base of set of employees who were recommended by their seniors to don higher responsibilities, thus helping the organization in their leadership development.

The new Online Appraisal system (OAS) also has a facility where Appraisee can express their satisfaction rating about their appraisal process. Appraisee is provided a scale of 1 to 5 where 5 means most satisfied and 1 means least satisfied.

This has helped organization to get real first hand feedback on the process of how PR handled their appraisal.

The Appraisal process has two stages:

1. Monthly and

2. Yearly Stage Two types of Yearly appraisals can be handled in OAS.

1. Anniversary appraisal

2. Annual appraisal

Anniversary appraisal is the appraisal which is performed at the end of 12 calendar months from the Date of joining of any employee. If any employee has joined on 10 May 2009, then their anniversary appraisal will be done in the month of May 2010. By this method, employee would have completed 12 months in the organization from 10 May 2009 to 30 April 2010. Above method ensures that every employee first gets their Anniversary appraisal before they qualify for Annual appraisal. Anniversary appraisal is done only for those employees who are active employee in organization on 13th month since their date of joining.

Annual appraisals are done every year en-mass. Employee's performance for the duration of certain fixed 12 months is evaluated. Department Heads get to submit their rankings to HR by a pre-decided certain month so that HR can prepare their letters and distribute to employee in time. The criteria for qualifying for annual appraisals is that, Employees should have completed 15 months in organization on last day of annual evaluation period.

During the Appraisal cycle the situation will be something as follows: In a department (Dl) there will be 1000 people. Out of 1000 people some 600 people will be eligible for their annual appraisal as per their date of joining and anniversary appraisal cycle. These 600 people will be divided among 5-6 sub processes. Each of these 600 people also has a PR whom they report. The monthly percentile score for each employee comes from monthly percentile run and is stored in the system. The final weighted objective score of each employee is calculated by the system, during the period of their annual appraisal. The PR has to give subjective rating to employees who report to them and are due for annual appraisal. PR has to declare the strength and area of improvement. PR has to mention if employee will be ready to take up higher responsibilities in a given time frame. PR has also facility to comment few lines about employee, special achievement etc.,. Once PR completes their review they have an option to submit and send to SPH for ranking of employee. SPH review happens in two ways:

A: comments by SPH on the form completed by PR's.

B: ranking of employees.

Ranking of employees can happen only when PR ratings are submitted for every employee in a given sub process. Ranking of employees happens based on the distribution of ranking as decided.

In extreme cases where number of employees to be ranked within a sub process are less than X then SPH is given the freedom to mark ranking as per given in Table 12. Once the rankings are done then online appraisal forms goes to department head for acceptance. Once the department head accepts then the data point goes to HR department for their processing.

A unique problem was occurring during Anniversary Appraisal. During Anniversary Appraisal, the numbers of employees were very-very less. Many a times there will be only 1-3 people in a SP who will fall into anniversary appraisal cycle. In that condition it was not having enough numbers to do force ranking of ABCD. Example of Grid for Anniversary Ranking is provided through Table 12.

Table - 12

(Examples of Values for cases where count is less)

A solution was conceptualized for handling the above situation which had become issue for last 4-5 years. Solution worked as mentioned below. Based on Annual Ranking, a table was generated which will tell the organization about the scores with respect to ABCD ranking in each Sub process.

These ranges which are obtained during Annual appraisal of one cycle are then rationalized for Anniversary Appraisal cycle for forthcoming 12 months. Thus it ensures that every possible score is covered in the range so that any employee does not miss on their rank. The range of scores and the linked rank is programmed into the system. Example of Grid for Anniversary Ranking is provided through Table 13.

Table- 13

(Examples of Values for Anniversary Appraisal)

The objective score in any case gets calculated based on rules set in system. This method is same for both Annual and Anniversary appraisal system. Then like in Annual appraisal, PR feeds the subjective scores of employee. OAS calculates the final score of employee as in Annual appraisal.

In the next step OAS determines the ranking that has to be given to employee. This OAS ranking is result of program fed into OAS based on grid mentioned in above solution. Thus the ranking is done in Anniversary system. Once SPH accepts the ranking, it goes to Dept head for acceptance

Once the department head accepts, then the data point goes to HR department for their processing.

Brief Description of the Drawings

1. Figure 1 illustrates about the appraisal map of the organization.

2. Figure 2 illustrates about the organization structure. 3. Figure 3 illustrates about the appraisal performance structure.

4. Figure 4 illustrates about the appraisal parameter structure.

5. Figure 5 illustrates about the organization appraisal process (monthly activities).

6. Figure 5 illustrates about the annual performance appraisal cycle.

Claims

An Online appraisal system(OAS) for analyzing the performance of the employees of an organization comprising : g. Master Performance Segment (MPS) defined by the organization.

h. Means to define Weightage of the different performance segments of an organization.

i. Means to define master performance categories (MPC) and calculate Weightage to performance category.

j. Means to define performance parameters for the employees in specific Master performance category,

k. Means to assess and define calculation type for performance parameter, evaluation and validation of calculated data.

I. Means to upload calculated data into OAS for codification of calculated data and transferring the said data to the controller for approval and closure,

m. Generating Percentile score from the finally disclosed data for appraisal.

An Online Appraisal System (OAS) according to claim 1, wherein Master Performance segment (MPS) is of subjective type.

An Online Appraisal System (OAS) according to claim 1, wherein Master Performance segment (MPS) is of Objective type.

An Online Appraisal System (OAS) according to claim 2 or 3, wherein the sum of Weightage for subjective and objective type of Master Performance Segment is 100.

An Online Appraisal System (OAS) according to claim 4, wherein the Objective type is further categorized into Master Performance Category i.e. Productivity, Quality and Attendance.

An Online Appraisal System (OAS) according to claim 4, wherein Master Performance Category of Objective type can be categorized according to the need of the Organization.

An Online Appraisal System (OAS) according to claim 5 or 6, wherein sum of the Weightage of Master Performance Categories of Objective type is 100.

8. An Online Appraisal System (OAS) according to claim 2, wherein the Subjective type is further categorized into different Master Performance Categories according to role of employee and need of the Organization.

9. An Online Appraisal System (OAS) according to claim 2, wherein sum of the Weightage of Master Performance Categories of Subjective type is 100.

10. An Online Appraisal System (OAS) according to claim 1, wherein the controller is Sub- Process Head or Department Head.

11. An online appraisal system performance parameter structure of an organization comprising:- a) Departments with Department Head based on business needs of organization. b) Sub-processes having Sub-Process head (SPH) within the departments to identify the performance parameters.

c) Employees with their Primary eportee (PR) within the sub-process for whom the performance appraisal is being carried out.

12. An online appraisal performance parameter structure according to claim 11, wherein there should be at least one department within an organization with a department head.

13. An online appraisal performance parameter structure according to claim 11, wherein a department can be deactivated based on business needs only if there are no employees in the department.

14. An online appraisal performance parameter structure according to claim 11, wherein each department should have at least one sub-process.

15. An online appraisal performance parameter structure according to claim 11, wherein a sub-process can be deactivated based on business needs only if there are no employees in the department.

A process for online appraisal for performance comprising: a) Identification of the performance parameters by the Organization on which employee performance to be evaluated within a sub-process of a department. b) Mapping of the identified performance parameter against any one of Master Performance category identified by organization. c) codification of performance parameter by OAS to give an identifier for each one of them called as Performance Identifier(PID)

d) Each PID to have defined calculation type for performance parameter, evaluation and validation of calculated data.

e) Uploading the calculated data into OAS.

f) Validation of the Uploaded data by the system and Sub Process Head followed by closure of the calculated data by the SPH and Department Head.

g) Running the percentile job with the finally disclosed data and generating percentile score.

17. A process for online appraisal for performance according to claim 16, wherein the calculation type can either be normal or reverse type.

18. A process for online appraisal for performance according to claim 16, wherein the evaluation type can either be absolute method or range method.

19. A process for online appraisal for performance according to claim 18, wherein the Absolute Method, each employee is assessed based on the absolute score that employee achieves.

20. A process for online appraisal for performance according to claim 18, wherein the Range Method, employees are grouped in a range based on the absolute value that they achieve based on the range boundaries set by Business Manager.

21. A process for online appraisal for performance according to claim 16 , wherein Once percentile calculation is done, then the achieved percentile scores are displayed to employee, their PR, SPH, DH.

22. A process for online appraisal for performance as according to claim 16, wherein the process is carried out on monthly and yearly appraisal basis.

23. A process for online appraisal for performance according to claim 22, wherein the yearly appraisal consists of anniversary or annual appraisal.

24. A process for online appraisal for performance according to claim 23, wherein the anniversary appraisal is only for the active employee in an organization.

25. A process for online appraisal for performance according to claim 23, wherein the anniversary appraisal is carried out on 13^th month from their date of joining the organization.

26. A process for online appraisal for performance according to claim 23, wherein the annual appraisal is done for each employee.

27. A process for online appraisal for performance according to claim 23, wherein the annual appraisal is carried out on employees who have completed at least 15 months in organization on last day of annual evaluation period.