Performance Management System adopted by Indian Oil Corporation Ltd

1. Performance Management Systemadopted byIndian Oil Corporation Ltd 21st September, 2010

2. Background • Purpose • Set up as a robust, transparent performance measuring system to reward according to individual/ small team performance, suitably differentiating higher performance, based on well defined performance measures.” • IndianOil implemented e-PMS for officers in 2005-06 • Five performance appraisal years completed. • Departmental promotion, individual based incentive and PRP disbursed based on ePMS output ratings and scores

3. Background HR action point identified in the Strategy Meet of June, 2009 based on DPE O.M. dated 26.11.2008, 09.02.2009 and 02.04.2009 Achieving Performance Differentiation (Bell Curve Approach) with Transparency Introduced system intervention in ePMS to improve Performance Bell Curve approach Transparency andprovide Opportunity to make representation against the entries and final grading

4. ePMS-tool for Performance Differentiation • ePMS seeks to determine individual performance and potential through a system that is: • Objective • Transparent • Aligned to the Business needs • Robust • Easy to Use and Manage • Each of the above is better achieved in an e-enabled system

5. ePMS –Key changes • Alignment of Performance Year with Financial Year (Apr-Mar) • Goal Setting driven down to all grades • Improvement in Target Setting process through stretch tool and 5 levels of target • Appraisal on Role Based Key Result Areas and Competencies and level based Values and Potential

6. ePMS features • Role based KRAs and KPIs • Special KRAs/Additional KRAs • Weightage to KPIs • Stretch Tool for target setting • Self Appraisal and Final rating • Performance diary • Monitoring of status

7. ePMS Features & Measurement

8. Performance Planning April - June April-May Feedback and Review Mid Year review & feedback October Ongoing monthly review and feedback Final Performance Appraisal April Appraisal Cycle

9. ABC grades KRA 60% Potential 15% Competency 15% Value 10% • DEF grades KRA 55% Potential 15% Competency 20% Value 10% System Design The relative weightages are as follows: • HI grades KRA 45% Potential 20% Competency 20% Value 15% • G grade KRA 50% Potential 15% Competency 20% Value 15%

10. Performance Planning

11. Stretch in target setting • Stretch is the degree of difficulty built into the target at the time of performance planning • Ensures uniformity in degree of loading of targets • Ensures balance across similar roles • Average stretch in a reporting group controlled

12. Stretch in target setting • Dimensions of Stretch • Target relative to previous years achievement • Dependence of uncontrollables • Complexity • Skill requirements • Need for Innovation

13. Performance Planning process Appraisee completes Performance Plan on KRA section by setting targets, assigning weightages for each KPI chosen in his plan Appraiser assigns stretch on each chosen target, makes modification if needed & Appraiser signs-off on the Plan Plan is sent to Reviewer for inputs and Final Sign-off Final Performance Plan for Appraisee is ready

14. Performance Appraisal

15. Scale for appraisal of KPIs • 5-point continuous scale Level 5 Level 4 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Significantly above expectations Moderately above expectations Just Meets Expectations Significantly below expectations Moderately below expectations

16. Performance Appraisal-Soft Skills • Competencies • Moving from ‘critical attributes’ to ‘competencies’. Competencies are like an iceberg. • Competencies are the underlying characteristics of individual/s i.e. Knowledge, Skills, Attitudes, Values, Self-Concepts, Traits and Motives that have a causal relationship with effective and/ or superior performance in a job situation. Lasting Measurable Predictive Trainable Deep Rooted

17. Performance Appraisal-Soft Skills • Values

18. Performance Appraisal-Soft Skills • Potential • Ability to shoulder higher responsibilities Senior Management Junior Management Adaptability to change Collaboration Cost Consciousness/ Resource utilisation Dependability Quality of Work / Output • Managing Change • Boundary Management • Entrepreneurial • Leadership • Enhancement of Quality and Output

19. Performance Diary

20. Final Year Review process System calculates the PMS Score as per weightages of elements and overall weight of sections based on KPI competencies, values andpotential Appraisee completes Self –Appraisal on KPIs & submits Appraiser determines Rating on each KPI, Competency, value and potential element Reviewer validates each rating and makes changes, if any Final KPI score is used for PRP. Overall grade is finalised by Countersigning officer. This is used for DPC The overall grade and assessment of integrity communicated through online display

21. Scale for Overall Grade • 5-point continuous scale 4.35….…..5.0 Outstanding 3.85…....4.349 Very Good 1………..1.999 Unsatisfactory 2……....2.999 Fair 3……….3.849 Satisfactory Significantly above expectations Moderately above expectations Just Meets Expectations Significantly below expectations Moderately below expectations

22. Calculation of Final Score – An Illustration

23. Benefits accrued… • Well defined Roles /targets/clear expectation for all officers • Performance cycle aligned with fiscal year • Appraisal process streamlined/Better monitoring/Online robust MIS • Opportunity to differentiate performance (bell curve approach) on a continuous linear scale from 1 to 5 and reward accordingly • Online display of Overall grade and assessment of integrity

24. Smooth and timely implementation of DPE guidelines on Variable pay/PRP

25. Thank You