Committees Recommendation on

the Replacement of Mr. Ashok

Sparkling Glass Limited
735 Words
2

Contents
Situation Analysis: ......................................................................................................................................... 2
Priorities for the Role: ................................................................................................................................... 3
Analysis of the Profile: .................................................................................................................................. 4
Performance Evaluation: .............................................................................................................................. 5

Table 1: Kanna's performansfs;ldjf ............................................................................................................... 5
Table 2;e';lst'ls............................................................................................................................................... 6













Situation Analysis:
Mr. Ashok, General-Shift-in-Charge of Sparkling Glass Limited (SGL) is to retire in a few months. He is the
general shift supervisor and he also looks after production planning, scheduling and costing. As the
3

members committee we are given with the responsibility to identify a suitable replacement for Mr.
Ashok.
Options:
To find a replacement for Mr. Ashok from the profiles of four other shift-in-charges: Mr. Khanna,
Mr. Punjabi, Mr. Gupta and Mr. Gulati
To extend the tenure of Mr. Ashok
To recruit a new person

Figure 1: Available Options
Priorities for the Role:
Based on the current situation, the priority of the role includes,
1. Costing The Company is making loss due the imbalance in production and sales cost, the new
person should be in a position to achieve balance.
2. Employee Engagement The new person must maintain a good relationship with the employees
and should channel the demands from top level management.
3. Production Planning Should have a prior knowledge or experience in production planning and
meet the demands on-time.
4

4. Scheduling Should have a good hands-on experience on scheduling,
5. Technology Should have a deep knowledge in the glass technology.
6. Experience Should have relevant work experience in the Glass industry.
Analysis of the Profile:
A brief profile comparison of the four shift-in-charges under various attributes is given in the below
table. A Performance evaluation is done for them based on these details.
Khanna
Punjabi Gupta Gulati
Total
Experience
5 years 12 years 3 years 5 years
Company
Experience
3 years 12 years 3 years 1 year
Qualification
Glass Technologist.
Completed 1 year
course in Management.
Undergoing a course on
production planning
and management
Diploma.
Good Glass
Technologist.
Good with numbers
and planning.
Diploma in Glass
Technology.
Other qualification
through
correspondence
courses.
Costing**
No No No No
Planning**
Yes No Yes No
Scheduling**
No No Yes No
Communicatio
n Skills*
Good Average Average Average
Training
Skills*
None Good None None
Employee
Relationship*
Poor Good Poor. ( Barely Adequate) Good
Customer
Relationship*
Good None None None
Productivity#
Below Average Average Average Above Average
Table I: Profile Comparison
* *Factors are considered if the person has either educational background or a relevant experience in that category
5

# Factors are calculated in the scale of Below Average, Average and Above Average
* Factors are rated in the scale of Good, Average, Poor and None
Good If there are instances attributing to the skill.
Average If there are no Instances but has the skill.
Poor If there are bad instances relating to the skill.
None If there is any relevant experience related to the Skill.
Performance Evaluation:
All the candidates will be evaluated on the scale of five. Each Attribute is given with the special weight-
age based on the order of priority required for the role. For instance, Costing is given with a weight-age
of four since it is the most required skill for the role. A person is rated based on the following
considerations,
1- Person has no idea about the skill.
2- Person has knowledge about the skill or if a person has a bad experience
3- Person has relevant experience or educational background relating to the attribute.
4- Person has achieved in relation to the attribute.
5- Person is exceptional in that attribute with significant achievements.
Mr. Khanna:
Table 1: Kanna's performansfs;ldjf
Attributes Weightage
Maximum
Rating Rating Comments
Costing 4 5 2 No Relevant Experience
Production Planning 3 5 3
Currently doing an evening course on
production planning.
Scheduling 3 5 2 No Relevant Experience
Employee
Relationship 3 5 2
Attitude towards the workers is not
really good
Experience 2 5 3 Has Relevant Experience
Productivity 2 5 2 Does not put extra hours for the job
Technology 3 5 4
Glass Technologist, Completed 1 year
course in Management

Overall Rating 2.55

Table II: Mr. Khannas Performance Evaluation
Mr. Khanna is the most qualified person among the four. He is good with communication and he was
able to sort out a customer complaint with his skills. However, his performance has deteriorated in the
last one year for unknown reasons. He does not put in extra hours required for the job. Further, his
attitude towards the workers is not very good.
Mr. Punjabi:
6

Mr. Punjabi is the most experienced person among four. He is a good trainer and maintains a good
relationship with workers and management. However, he has less qualification when compared to the
others preferred for this role.



Table 2;e';lst'ls
Attributes Weightage
Maximum
Rating Rating Comments
Costing 4 5 2 No Relevant Experience
Production Planning 3 5 2 No Relevant Experience
Scheduling 3 5 2 No Relevant Experience
Employee Relationship 3 5 5
He is a good trainer and gets along
with the workers well.
Experience 2 5 5
Has around 12 years of experience
in the same company.
Productivity 2 5 3
Average and no instance of
putting extra effort.
Technology 3 5 2 Has Diploma.

Overall Rating 2.85

Table III: Mr. Punjabis Performance Evaluation
Mr. Gupta:
Attributes Weightage
Maximum
Rating Rating Comments
Costing 4 5 3
Learned enough to handle costing
on his own
Production Planning 3 5 4 Good in Planning
Scheduling 3 5 4 Good in Scheduling
Employee Relationship 3 5 2
Relationship with workers is
barely adequate
Experience 2 5 2 Less Experienced among the four
Productivity 2 5 3
just good enough to perform his
tasks
Technology 3 5 3 Glass technologist.

Overall Rating 3.05

Table IV: Mr. Guptas Performance Evaluation
7

Mr. Gupta, the less experienced of the four is a good glass technologist and also good with numbers and
planning. He also has the potential for growth. However, his performance is rated as average. His
relationship with workers is barely adequate.
Mr. Gulati:
Mr. Gulati has ability to learn and grasp well. He also maintains good employee relationship and has the
capability to handle tense situation. He also puts extra hours across shifts whenever required. However,
he is new to the company. He does not have hands on experience on planning and scheduling.
Attributes Weightage
Maximum
Rating Rating Comments
Costing 4 5 2 No Relevant Experience
Production Planning 3 5 2 No Relevant Experience
Scheduling 3 5 2 No Relevant Experience
Employee Relationship 3 5 4
He has solved the critical labour
problem
Experience 2 5 3 Has Relevant Experience
Productivity 2 5 5
He is exceptional and puts in extra
hours that job demands
Technology 3 5 2 Diploma

Overall Rating 2.7

Table V: Mr. Gulatis Performance Evaluation
Other Alternatives:
Retaining Mr. Ashok:
Mr. Ashok has hands on experience in the role for many years. He was not responsible for the loss
incurred by the company in the past two years. However, his tenure cannot be extended for a longer
duration as it is a short term remedy and it will also incur more expense to the company.
Hiring a New Recruit:
Hiring a new recruit with required skill sets for the job will be a suitable option. However, this process
will take time. It will also affect the morale of other employees competing for the same role. The new
person will take some time to settle which is not well suited for the present companys situation.
Recommendations:
From the above analysis it is evident that none of them posses all the required skills preferred for the
profile. Since SGL is anticipating profit for the current year, the committee strongly recommends
extending Mr. Ashoks tenure by 6 months. After 6 months the committee suggests Mr. Gupta for Mr.
8

Ashoks replacement based on the performance evaluation. The committee also recommends Mr. Ashok
to train Mr. Gupta during this interim period.