Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
introduction
a. To study various desk works of the Mirpur-10 Branch of Mercantile Bank Limited.
b. To analyze overall performance of the branch as well as Mercantile Bank
limited.
Broad Objective
To learn about the performance appraisal system of MBL.
Specific Objectives:
It was very difficult to collect the information from various personnel for the job
constrain.
Bank policy was not disclosing some data and information for various reasons.
The department people always remain busy due to lack of supporting employees so they
could not dedicate their full efforts
The annual report is the main secondary source of the information but this information
was not enough to complete the report and it was not identified clear idea about this bank.
Because of the limitation of information some assumption was made. So there may be
some personal mistake in this research.
The times 3 months are not sufficient to know all activities of the branch to prepare the
report.
Chapter 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
Once the employee has been selected, trained and motivated, he is then appraised for his
performance. Performance Appraisal is the step where the Management finds out how effective it
has been at hiring and placing employees. If any problems are identified, steps are taken to
communicate with the employee and remedy them. Performance Appraisal is a process of
evaluating an employee performance in terms of its requirements.
Performance Appraisal can also be defined as the process of evaluating the performance and
qualifications of the employees in terms of the requirements of the job for which he is employed,
for purposes of administration including placement, selection for promotions, providing financial
rewards and other actions which require differential treatment among the members of a group as
distinguished from actions affecting all members equally. Performance appraisal is a formal
system that evaluates the quality of a workers performance.
An appraisal should not be viewed as an end in itself, but rather as an important process within a
broader performance management system that links:
Organizational objectives
Day-to-day performance
Professional development
Appraisal system has been defined by Dulewicz (1989) as a basic human tendency to make
judgments about those one is working with as well as about oneself." Appraisal, it seems, is both
inevitable and universal. In the absence of a carefully structured system of appraisal, people will
tend to judge the work performance of others, including subordinates, naturally, informally and
arbitrarily.
The eminent management expert, McGregor defined the performance appraisal system as the
formal performance appraisal plans are designed primarily to meet the organizational needs and
to provide systematic judgments.
Appraisal also tells the employees as to how they are doing and about the required changes in
their behavior, attitudes, skills or job knowledge, in other words, making the employees aware as
to where they stand in the eyes of superiors. These form the basis for the coaching and
counseling of employees by their bosses.
The human inclination to judge can create serious motivational, ethical and legal problems in the
workplace. Without a structured appraisal system, there is little chance of ensuring that the
judgments made will be lawful, fair, defensible and accurate. Performance appraisal systems
began as simple methods of income justification. That is, appraisal was used to decide whether
or not the salary or wage of an individual employee was justified. The process was firmly linked
to material outcomes. If an employee's performance was found to be less than ideal, a cut in pay
would follow. On the other hand, if their performance was better than the supervisor expected, a
pay rise was in order. Little consideration, if any, was given to the developmental possibilities of
appraisal. If was felt that a cut in pay, or a rise, should provide the only required impetus for an
employee to either improve or continue to perform well. Sometimes this basic system succeeded
in getting the results that were intended; but more often than not, it failed.
For example, early motivational researchers were aware that different people with roughly equal
work abilities could be paid the same money and yet have quite different levels of motivation
and performance. These observations were confirmed in empirical studies. Pay rates were
important, yes; but they were not the only element that had an impact on employee performance.
It was found that other issues, such as morale and self-esteem, could also have a major influence.
As a result, the traditional emphasis on reward outcomes was progressively rejected. In the 1950s
in the United States, the potential usefulness of appraisal as tool for motivation and development
was gradually recognized. The general model of performance appraisal, as it is known today,
began from that time.
In modern times Performance appraisal may be defined as a structure formal interaction between
a subordinate and supervisor, that usually takes the form of a periodic interview (annual or semiannual), in which the work performance of the subordinate is examined and discussed, with a
view to identifying weaknesses and strengths as well as opportunities for improvement and skill
development .
In many organizations but not all appraisal result are used, either directly or indirectly, to help
determine reward outcomes. That is, the appraisal results are used to identify the better
performing employees who should get the majority of available merit pay increases, bonuses,
and promotions (Goel, 2008).
2.3 360Appraisal:
360 degree appraisal is an approach to performance appraisal that involves gathering
performance information from people on all sides of the manager above, beside, below and so
forth (De Nisi & Griffen, 2008). This approach allows management to 18 match the strengths
and weaknesses from each perspective and gain a more accurate, rounded view of a persons true
performance (Conway, 1996). Rees and Porter (2003, p.83) define 360 degree appraisal as a
process that involves the key people in a persons network of working relationships making
assessments of a persons performance. They subordinate being appraised is then given
structured feedback; this may involve feedback from subordinates and any key outside parties, if
it is practicable.
Some of the subordinates that may give feedback are the immediate manager, other management
in the organization, peers, internal and external customers and suppliers.
360 degree appraisal can be used to reduce the bias of the appraisal process by removing top
down ratings by managers. This is done by replacing them with a multisource assessment (Grint,
1993). However, Prowse and Prowse (2009, p.73) argued that a manager in 360-degree appraisal
collates feedback rather than judges performance and summarizes evaluations and so the
validity of upward appraisal means the removal of subjective appraisal ratings.
Using the 360 degree appraisal technique can mean there will be more negative feedback given,
and this is known to demotivate staff. It is therefore vital that the managers are using the
feedback received from the other raters wisely and ensure it is consistent and unbiased (De Nisi
and Griffen, 2007, Prowse and Prowse, 2009).
De Cenzo and Robbins (2007) feel that appraisers should only rate in those areas in where they
have substantial job knowledge. They should be as close as possible to the organizational level of
the employee being evaluated. If the appraiser is not in 19 positions where they can observe the
persons work behavior then there is a greater chance of inaccuracies.
They are the means of telling a subordinate how he is doing and suggesting needed changes
in his behavior, attitudes, skills or job knowledge. They let him know where he stands with
the Boss.
Superior uses them as a base for coaching and counseling the individual. On the basis of
merit rating or appraisal procedures, the main objectives of Employee Appraisal are:
To enable an organization to maintain an inventory of the number and quality of all managers
and to identify and meet their training needs and aspirations.
To determine increment rewards and to provide reliable index for promotions and transfers to
positions of greater responsibility.
To identify training and development needs and to evaluate effectiveness of training and
development programmers.
10
A performance appraisal system that meets these criteria is likely to have the greatest impact on
workers satisfaction with the appraisal process and their motivation to improve performance.
11
Encourage Discussion
Research studies show that employees are likely to feel more satisfied with their appraisal result
if they have the chance to talk freely and discuss their performance. It is also more likely that
such employees will be matter able to meet future performance goals. Employees are also more
likely to feel that the appraisal process is fair if they are given a chance to talk about their
performance. This especially so when they are permitted to challenge and appeal against their
evaluation.
Constructive Intention
It is very important that employees recognize that negative appraisal feedback is provided with a
constructive intention to help them overcome present difficulties and to improve their future
performance. Employees will be less anxious about criticism, and more likely to find it useful,
when the believes that the appraiser's intentions are helpful and constructive. In contrast , other
studies ( Baron 1988) have reported that destructive criticism which is vague , ill informed
, unfair or harshly presented - will lead to problems such as anger , resentment , tension and
workplace conflict , as well as increased resistance to improvement , denial of problems, and
poorer performance .
Appraiser Credibility
It is important that the appraiser (usually the employee's supervisor) be well-informed and
credible. Appraisers should feel comfortable with the techniques of appraisal, and should be
knowledgeable about the employees job and performance (Teel , 1977) . When these conditions
12
exist, employees are more likely to view the appraisal process as accurate and fair. They also
express more acceptances of the appraisers feedback and a greater willingness to change.
Traditional Methods
Modern Methods
job.
The traits selected by some organizations have been unwise and have resulted in legal action on
the ground of discrimination (Torre, 1996)
2.10 Advantages:
The greatest advantage of rating scales is that they are structured and standardized. This allows
ratings to be easily compared and contrasted - even for entire workforces.
Each employee is subjected to the same basic appraisal process and rating criteria, with the same
range of responses. This encourages equality in treatment for all appraise and imposes standard
measures of performance across all parts of the organization (David, 1993). Rating scale
methods are easy to use and understand. The concept of the rating scale makes obvious sense;
13
both appraiser and appraise have an intuitive appreciation for the simple and efficient logic of the
bipolar scale.
This result is widespread acceptance and popularity for this approach.
2.11 Disadvantages:
Trait Relevance
Are the selected rating-scale trait clearly relevant to the jobs of all appraises? It is inevitable that
with a standardized and fixed system of appraisal that certain traits will have a greater relevance
in some jobs than in others. For example, the trait "initiative" might not be very important in a
job that is tightly defined and rigidly structured. In such cases, a low appraisal rating for
initiative may not mean that an employee lacks initiative. Rather, it may reflect that fact that an
employee has few opportunities to use and display that particular traits ( Mckellin , 1993) . This
relevance of rating scales is therefore said to be context sensitive. Job and workplace
circumstances must be taken into account.
Systemic Disadvantage
Rating scales, and the traits they purport to measure, generally attempt to encapsulate all the
relevant indicators of employee performance. There is an assumption that all the true and best
indicators of performance are included, and all false and irrelevant indicators are excluded
(Torre, 1996). This is an assumption very difficult to prove in practice. It is possible that an
employees performance may depend on factors that have not been included in the selected traits.
Such employees may end up with rating that do not truly or fairly reflect their effort or value to
the organization. Employees in this class are systemically disadvantaged by the rating scale
method.
Perceptual Errors
This includes various well-known problems of selective perception (such as the horns and halos
effect) as well as problems of perceived meaning. Selective perception is the human tendency to
make private and highly subjective assessments of what a person is "really like and then seek
evidence to support that view (while ignoring or downplaying evidence that might contradict it).
14
This is a common and normal psychological phenomenon (Torre, 1996). All human beings are
affected by it. In other words, we see in others what we want to see in them. An example is the
supervisor who believes that an employee is inherently good (halo effect) and so ignores
evidence that might suggest otherwise.
Instead of correcting the slackening employee, the supervisor covers for them and may even
offer excuses for their declining performance. On the other hand, a supervisor may have formed
the impression that an employee is bad (horns effect).
The supervisor becomes unreasonably harsh in their assessment of the employee, and always
ready to criticize and undermine those (Sanches, 1996). The horns and halo effect is rarely seen
in its extreme and obvious forms. But in its more subtle manifestation, it can be a significant
threat to the effectiveness and credibility of performance appraisal.
Perceived Meaning
Problems of perceived meaning occur when appraisers do not share the same opinion about the
meaning of the selected traits and the language used on the rating scales. For example, to one
appraiser, an employee may demonstrate the trait of initiative by reporting work problems to a
supervisor. To another appraiser, this might suggest an excessive dependence on supervisory
assistance - and thus a lack of initiative. As well, the language and terms used to construct a scale
as Performance exceeds expectations or below average Skill may mean different things to
different appraisers (De La Torre, 1996).
Rating Errors
The problem here is not so much errors in perception as errors in appraiser judgment and motive.
Unlike perceptual errors, these errors may be (at times deliberate. The most common rating error
is central tendency. Busy appraisers, or those wary of confrontations and repercussions, may be
tempted to dole out too many passive, middle-of-the-road ratings (e.g., "satisfactory" or
"adequate"), regardless of the actual performance of a subordinate. Thus the spread of ratings
tends to clump excessively around the middle of the scale (Sanches, 1996). This problem is
worsened in organizations where the appraisers do not feel confident with the task of appraisal.
15
16
Identify factors in the work environment that help or hinder performance effectiveness.
17
18
Chapter Three
Overview of the Organization
19
20
Strategic objective
To be one of the top three financial institutions in Bangladesh in terms of cost efficiency.
Financial objectives
To achieve a return on shareholders.
Equity of 20% or more on average.
Vision of MBL:
Would make finest corporate citizen MBL dreams to become the Bank of Choice of the
general public that includes both the consumer and the corporate clients. It has created a cadre of
young professionals in banking profession which has helped boosting productivity in the bank.
21
Core values:
For the customers:
Respecting worth and dignity of individual employees devoting their energies of the
progress of the bank.
Strengthening the corporate values and taking environment and social risks and reward into
account.
Name
Date of incorporation
Registered Office
Logo
Name of the Chairman of the Board
22
Number of branches
65
Services provided
Services
Paid up capital
4072.206(Million)
1425.338(Million )
Credit Card
Technology used
415.61
41.04
mbl@bol-online.com
Website
www.mblbd.com
SWIFT
MBLBBDDH
Table: At a Glance of M B L
23
Board of Directors
Executive Committee
Director
Md. Shahabuddin Alam, Director
24
Dhaka
Division
Chittagong
Rajshahi
Division
Division
EXISTING
BRANCHES
No Branch
Sylhet
Division
In Barisal
Khulna
Division
25
26
Board of Directors
The Board of Directors consists of 21 member elected from the sponsors of the Bank.
The Board of Directors is the apex body of the bank.
Board Committees
The Board of Directors who also decides on the composition of each committee determines the
responsibilities of each committee.
Executive Committees
All routine matter beyond delegated powers of management are decided upon by or routed
through the Executive Committee, subject to ratification by the Board of Directors.
Policy Committee
All mater relating to the principles, policies, rules, and regulation, ethics etc. for operation and
management of the bank are recommended by the Committee to the Board of Directors.
27
CHAIRMAN
Chief Advisor
Vice President
Abbreviations
GSD
CAD
ASI
CB
D&M
ID
R&P
Executive Officer
Officer
Asst. Officer
Merchant banking
Retail banking
In order to carry out the above operations of Mercantile Bank Ltd has set up the following
divisions, departments and units in its head office. For the operations by the above-mentioned
divisions, the bank has established the following divisions to provide support and internal
services.
29
Marketing division
b) Loan
c) Cards
Dual card
Debit Card
Prepaid Card
Lease Financing
Supplementary Card
Visa Card
Educational loan
Home loan
Cottage loan
School Banking
Polli loan
30
Import finance
Export finance
Structured finance
Loan syndication
Online banking
Mobile banking
SMS banking
SWIFT
Locker Facility
Account opening
31
32
Chapter-4
Research and methodology
33
34
dichotomous question to which the respondent must answer yes or no. Through closed
questions, the researcher will be able to limit responses that are within the scope of this study
Thus, the set of questionnaire was structured using the Liker format with a five-point response
scale. A Liker Scale is a rating scale that requires the subject to indicate his or her degree of
agreement or disagreement to a statement. In this type of questionnaire, the respondents were
given five response choices. These options served as the quantification of the participants'
agreement or disagreement on each question item. Below are the designated quantifications used
in the questionnaire?
strongly Disagree
Disagree
Agree
strongly Agree
Primary sources:
35
Secondary Sources:
Website of Mercantile-Bank-Limited
36
Chapter 5
Results and findings
37
Table: 1
Response
Strongly Disagree
Number of Respondent
0
Percentage
0%
Disagree
8%
12
48%
Agree
10
40%
Strongly Agree
4%
Total sample
25
100%
0%
8%
storngly Disagree
Disagree
48%
Figure 1
From the table above and graph charts above point out those 25 respondent representing
48% of the management and staff said that they feel neutral about of the work, they have
no objection. 40% agreed, 4% strongly agree and 8% did not agree. Most of the employee
thinks that appraisal process is not bad or not good. Its medium performance.
38
Table: 2
Response
Strongly Disagree
Number of Respondent
0
Percentage
0%
Disagree
4%
32%
14
56%
Strongly Agree
8%
Total
25
100%
Disagree
32%
56%
Figure 2
From the table above and graph charts above point out those 25 respondent representing
32% of the management and staff said that they feel neutral about of the work, they have
no objection. 56% agreed, 8% strongly agree and 4% did not agree, no one has strongly
disagreed. Most of the employee thinks that appraisal process is not bad or not good.
Most of the person is agreed about the performance.
39
Table: 2
Response
Strongly Disagree
0%
Disagree
12%
20%
12
48%
Strongly Agree
20%
Total sample
25
100%
Disagree
0% 12%
20%
Neither Disagree
Nor Agree
Agree
48%
storngly Agree
Figure 3
From the table above and graph charts above point out those 25 respondent representing
20% of the management and staff said that they feel neutral about of the work, they have
no objection. 48% agreed, 20% strongly agree and 12% did not agree, no one has
strongly disagreed. Most of the employee thinks that appraisal process is not bad or not
good. Most of the person is agreed about the performance.
40
Table: 4
Response
Strongly Disagree
Number of Respondent
0
Percentage
0%
Disagree
0%
4%
19
76%
Strongly Agree
20%
Total sample
25
100%
4%
0%
Disagree
76%
Figure 4
From the table above and graph charts above point out those 25 respondent representing
4% of the management and staff said that they feel neutral about of the work, they have
no objection. 76% agreed, 20% strongly agree and 0% did not agree, no one has strongly
disagreed. Most of the employee thinks that appraisal process is not bad or not good.
Most of the person is agreed about the performance.
41
Table: 5
Response
Strongly Disagree
0%
Disagree
8%
32%
10
40%
Strongly Agree
20%
Total sample
25
100%
0% 8%
Disagree
32%
40%
Figure 5
From the table above and graph charts above point out those 25 respondent representing
32% of the management and staff said that they feel neutral about of the work, they have
no objection. 40% agreed, 20% strongly agree and 8% did not agree, no one has strongly
disagreed. Most of the employee thinks that appraisal process is not bad or not good.
Most of the person is agreed about the performance.
42
Table: 6
Response
Strongly Disagree
0%
Disagree
0%
20%
17
68%
Strongly Agree
12%
Total sample
25
100%
Disagree
12% 0% 20%
68%
storngly Agree
Figure 6
From the table above and graph charts above point out those 25 respondent representing
20% of the management and staff said that they feel neutral about of the work, they have
no objection. 68% agreed, 12% strongly agree and 0% did not agree, no one has strongly
disagreed. Most of the employee thinks that appraisal process is not bad or not good.
Most of the person is agreed about the performance.
43
Table: 7
Response
Strongly Disagree
0%
Disagree
0%
32%
13
52%
Strongly Agree
16%
Total sample
25
100%
Disagree
32%
Neither Disagree
Nor Agree
Agree
52%
Figure 7
From the table above and graph charts above point out those 25 respondent representing
32% of the management and staff said that they feel neutral about of the work, they have
no objection. 52% agreed, 16% strongly agree and 0% did not agree, no one has strongly
disagreed. Most of the employee thinks that appraisal process is not bad or not good.
Most of the person is agreed about the performance.
44
Table: 8
Response
Strongly Disagree
0%
Disagree
4%
24%
12
48%
Strongly Agree
24%
Total sample
25
100%
0%4%
storngly Disagree
24%
Disagree
48%
Neither Disagree Nor
Agree
Figure 8
From the table above and graph charts above point out those 25 respondent representing
24% of the management and staff said that they feel neutral about of the work, they have
no objection. 48% agreed, 24% strongly agree and 0% did not agree, no one has strongly
disagreed. Most of the employee thinks that appraisal process is not bad or not good.
Most of the person is agreed about the performance.
45
Table: 9
Response
Strongly Disagree
0%
Disagree
0%
24%
13
52%
Strongly Agree
24%
Total sample
25
100%
0%
0%
24%
Disagree
Neither Disagree Nor
Agree
52%
Agree
storngly Agree
Figure 9
From the table above and graph charts above point out those 25 respondent representing
24% of the management and staff said that they feel neutral about of the work, they have
no objection. 52% agreed, 24% strongly agree and 0% did not agree, no one has strongly
disagreed. Most of the employee thinks that appraisal process is not bad or not good.
Most of the person is agreed about the performance.
46
Table: 10
Response
Strongly Disagree
0%
Disagree
0%
28%
13
52%
Strongly Agree
20%
Total sample
25
100%
0%
0%
storngly Disagree
28%
Disagree
52%
Figure 10
From the table above and graph charts above point out those 25 respondent representing
28% of the management and staff said that they feel neutral about of the work, they have
no objection. 52% agreed, 20% strongly agree and 0% did not agree, no one has strongly
disagreed. Most of the employee thinks that appraisal process is not bad or not good.
Most of the person is agreed about the performance.
47
Table: 11
Response
Strongly Disagree
0%
Disagree
0%
12%
15
60%
Strongly Agree
28%
Total sample
25
100%
storngly Disagree
0% 12%
0%
Disagree
60%
Figure 11
From the table above and graph charts above point out those 25 respondent representing
12% of the management and staff said that they feel neutral about of the work, they have
no objection. 60% agreed, 28% strongly agree and 0% did not agree, no one has strongly
disagreed. Most of the employee thinks that appraisal process is not bad or not good.
Most of the person is agreed about the performance.
48
Table: 12
Response
Strongly Disagree
0%
Disagree
0%
28%
32%
Strongly Agree
10
40%
Total sample
25
100%
28%
0%
32%
Disagree
Neither Disagree Nor
Agree
Agree
storngly Agree
Figure 12
From the table above and graph charts above point out those 25 respondent representing
28% of the management and staff said that they feel neutral about of the work, they have
no objection. 32% agreed, 40% strongly agree and 0% did not agree, no one has strongly
disagreed. Most of the employee thinks that appraisal process is not bad or not good.
Most of the person is strongly agreed about the performance.
49
Table: 13
Response
Strongly Disagree
0%
Disagree
0%
20%
14
56%
Strongly Agree
24%
Total sample
25
100%
0% 20%
0%
56%
Neither Disagree
Nor Agree
Agree
storngly Agree
Figure 13
From the table above and graph charts above point out those 25 respondent representing
20% of the management and staff said that they feel neutral about of the work, they have
no objection. 56% agreed, 24% strongly agree and 0% did not agree, no one has strongly
disagreed. Most of the employee thinks that appraisal process is not bad or not good.
Most of the person is strongly agreed about the performance.
50
Table: 14
Response
Strongly Disagree
0%
Disagree
0%
13
52%
36%
Strongly Agree
12%
Total sample
25
100%
Performance appraisal in my
company is fair
storngly Disagree
12% 0%
0%
36%
52%
Disagree
Neither Disagree Nor
Agree
Figure 14
From the table above and graph charts above point out those 25 respondent representing
52% of the management and staff said that they feel neutral about of the work, they have
no objection. 36% agreed, 12% strongly agree and 0% did not agree, no one has strongly
disagreed. Most of the employee thinks that appraisal process is not bad or not good.
Most of the person is strongly agreed about the performance.
51
15. Employees are allowed to formally communicate with supervisor regarding the
appraisal results
Table: 15
Response
Strongly Disagree
0%
Disagree
0%
8%
19
76%
Strongly Agree
16%
Total sample
25
100%
storngly Disagree
0% 8%
Disagree
Neither Disagree Nor
Agree
76%
Agree
Figure 15
From the table above and graph charts above point out those 25 respondent representing
8% of the management and staff said that they feel neutral about of the work, they have
no objection. 76% agreed, 16% strongly agree and 0% did not agree, no one has strongly
disagreed. Most of the employee thinks that appraisal process is not bad or not good.
Most of the person is strongly agreed about the performance.
52
Table: 16
Response
Strongly Disagree
0%
Disagree
0%
12%
11
44%
Strongly Agree
11
44%
Total sample
25
100%
0% 12%
44%
Disagree
44%
Neither Disagree Nor
Agree
Agree
Figure 16
From the table above and graph charts above point out those 25 respondent representing
12% of the management and staff said that they feel neutral about of the work, they have
no objection. 44% agreed, 44% strongly agree and 0% did not agree, no one has strongly
disagreed. Most of the employee thinks that appraisal process is not bad or not good.
Most of the person is strongly agreed about the performance.
53
Table: 17
Response
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
0%
20%
14
56%
Strongly Agree
24%
Total sample
25
100%
0%
20%
Disagree
Neither Disagree Nor
Agree
56%
Agree
Figure 17
From the table above and graph charts above point out those 25 respondent representing
20% of the management and staff said that they feel neutral about of the work, they have
no objection. 56% agreed, 24% strongly agree and 0% did not agree, no one has strongly
disagreed. Most of the employee thinks that appraisal process is not bad or not good.
Most of the person is strongly agreed about the performance.
54
Table: 18
Response
Strongly Disagree
0%
Disagree
0%
32%
13
52%
Strongly Agree
16%
Total sample
25
100%
storngly Disagree
32%
Disagree
52%
Figure 18
From the table above and graph charts above point out those 25 respondent representing
32% of the management and staff said that they feel neutral about of the work, they have
no objection. 52% agreed, 16% strongly agree and 0% did not agree, no one has strongly
disagreed. Most of the employee thinks that appraisal process is not bad or not good.
Most of the person is strongly agreed about the performance.
55
19. Does performance appraisal process help to raise organizations total output
Table: 19
Response
Strongly Disagree
0%
Disagree
0%
16%
13
52%
Strongly Agree
32%
Total sample
25
100%
storngly Disagree
0% 16%
Disagree
52%
Neither Disagree Nor
Agree
Figure 19
From the table above and graph charts above point out those 25 respondent representing
16% of the management and staff said that they feel neutral about of the work, they have
no objection. 52% agreed, 32% strongly agree and 0% did not agree, no one has strongly
disagreed. Most of the employee thinks that appraisal process is not bad or not good.
Most of the person is strongly agreed about the performance.
56
20. Is there any conflict arise between employees after performance appraisal is made?
Table: 20
Response
Strongly Disagree
0%
Disagree
0%
10
40%
36%
Strongly Agree
24%
Total sample
25
100%
storngly Disagree
0%
40%
Disagree
36%
Neither Disagree Nor
Agree
Figure 20
From the table above and graph charts above point out those 25 respondent representing
40% of the management and staff said that they feel neutral about of the work, they have
no objection. 36% agreed, 24% strongly agree and 0% did not agree, no one has strongly
disagreed. Most of the employee thinks that appraisal process is not bad or not good.
Most of the person is strongly agreed about the performance.
57
Table: 21
Response
Strongly Disagree
0%
Disagree
0%
12%
13
52%
Strongly Agree
36%
Total sample
25
100%
0% 12%
36%
Disagree
52%
Figure 21
From the table above and graph charts above point out those 25 respondent representing
12% of the management and staff said that they feel neutral about of the work, they have
no objection. 52% agreed, 36% strongly agree and 0% did not agree, no one has strongly
disagreed. Most of the employee thinks that appraisal process is not bad or not good.
Most of the person is strongly agreed about the performance.
58
5.2 Findings
After my own work experiences as well as discussion with honorable officers I have found in my
study that there are several important problems that need to focus on for better performance
appraisal procedures of MBL.The findings of my study are-
The PAS criteria are well communicated with all stakeholders related with PAS.
employees.
Miss match between employees expectation and current PAS practicing in MBL.
Majority of the employees are not significantly satisfying about the current PAS.
59
Chapter 6
SWOT analysis
60
Mercantile Bank Limited has nationwide image of providing quality service. It provides
excellent and prompt services with higher degree of secrecy to corporate and mass level of
customers even internationally.
MBL abides by a set of core values that reflects high commitment to customer:
1. Responsive to customers needs.
2. Flexible in approach
3. Professional in manner
4. Strive for service excellence.
A group of qualified experienced, dedicated and well-trained personnel employing the best
effort to accomplish the organizational objective.
Strong network throughout the country and correspondent relationship with almost all
international and local banks operating in Bangladesh created a good accessibility and
relationship with people.
They have adopted Green Banking an ecofriendly move by placing solar panel.
Weakness:
Online Banking quality and service is poor than the other private bank.
ATM booths are not available like DBBL, Prime Bank etc.
61
Opportunities:
Bonus is given for more than one time in a year this is another reason of the employees
satisfaction.
Promotion system of MBL is perfectly structured for the employees inspiration. Generally
promotion has been every three years after.
Threats:
Some foreign and private banks are becoming so advanced that can be a threat to
mercantile Bank Ltd. At present in retail banking Standard Chartered Bank and in business
banking American Express Bank, Hong Kong Shanghai Banking Corporation are going
well.
Bangladesh bank provides some rules and regulations for all banking institutions. Whether
the rules and regulations suit the organization or not, it must obey these that sometimes
impose barriers on daily normal operation.
Also some private banks like Dutch Bangla Bank, Prime Bank, Bank Asia, etc. had
introduced Shariah based banking which is a new concept that attracts almost every level
people towards them.
62
Chapter 7
Recommendations and
conclusions
63
7.1 Recommendations
As I have gone through all the departments under Human Resources Management. I have come
up with some points, which can improve the efficiency as well as quality of the work. Though
the bank was found as a productive concern, the study reveals that the bank could do much more
if it was handled more efficiently. Also sonic problems of the Bank were given above. However,
some steps may be taken to improve the efficiency and to increase the performance of the Bank
in future which are given below-
An unbiased and clear appraising method should practice so that only actual
A well and friendly corporate atmosphere should create among HRD and various
64
7.2 Conclusions
As an organization the MBL is much more structured compared to any other listed bank
operation in Bangladesh. Mercantile Bank Limited is a customer oriented financial institution. It
remains dedicated to meet up with the ever growing expectations of the customer.
In MBL, Board of directors formulates banks policies, management functions on approved
policies In addition, board of directors takes care the interest of shareholders & all other
stakeholders, management remains compliant with the policies, regulations, laws given by board
of directors, Bangladesh bank, other regulators However, MBL gives importance on their
customers, employees and shareholders. They want to achieve strong corporate growth through
financial inclusion. They try providing solutions at a minimum cost based on a high level of
satisfaction of all segments of our customers, thus also contributing to the prosperity of our
employees and shareholders.
MBL is trying to develop innovative and technologically advanced products and services that
satisfy their customer needs.
There are many benefits to implementing a regular and systematic performance appraisal system
within an organization. In order to gain the most benefit from performance appraisals it is
recommended that a system is developed in consultation with workers and managers, and clear
links are established between appraisals and valued rewards and outcomes. If resources permit,
information on work performance should be obtained from multiple sources. Performance
appraisals can be a powerful tool for increasing motivation and improving work practice if
conducted in a constructive, open and supportive manner.
Finally if the MBL control their expense by HRM and take proper steps to overcome their little
limitations, they will become a first rows bank of Bangladesh.
65
Chapter 8
References and Appendix
66
8.1 References
Reference Book:
Dewakar Goel (2008)
Performance Appraisal And Compensation Management: A Modern Approach. pp 8 - 272.
Dulewicz V. (1989)
Performance appraisal and counselling, in Herriot, P., Assessment and selection in
organizations: methods and practices for recruitment and appraisal, John Wiley & Sons, New
York, pp645-649.
Baron, R.A. (1988)
Negative effects of destructive criticism: impact on conflict, self-efficacy, and task performance,
Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol 73, pp199-207.
Bannister, B.D. & Balkin, D.B. (1990)
Performance evaluation and compensation feedback messages: an integrated model, Journal of
Occupational Psychology, Vol 63, June, British Psychological Society.
Heneman, R.L., Greenberger, D.B. & Anonyou C., (1989)
Attributions and exchanges: the effects of interpersonal factors on the diagnosis of employee
performance, Academy of Management Review, Vol 32, No 2.
Larson, J.R. (1989)
The dynamic interplay between employees' feedback-seeking strategies and supervisors' delivery
of performance feedback, Academy of Management Review, Vol 14, No 3.
Cash, M. (1993)
[in] Collins, R. (1993) (Ed.), Effective Management, CCH International, Sydney.
67
Harris, D.M. & DeSimone, R.L. (1994) Human Resource Development, Dryden Press, Forth
Worth.
Bernardin, H. J., Kane, J. S., Ross, S., Spina, J. D., and Johnson, D. L. (1996)
"Performance Appraisal Design, Development, and Implementation." In Handbook of Human
Resource Management, Gerald R. Ferris, Sherman D. Rosen, and Darold T. Barnum ed.,
Cambridge, Mass: Blackwell, pp462-493.
Illgen, Daniel R., Barnes-Farrell, Janet L., and McKellin, David B. (1993)
"Performance Appraisal Process Research in the 1980s: What Has It Contributed to Appraisals
in Use?" Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 54: pp321-368.
Websites:
www.mblbd.com
www.bangladesh-bank.org
www.performanceappraisalprocess.com
http://www.humanresources.hrvinet.com/graphic-rating-scales/
www.performanceappraisalprocess.com
Other References
Annual Statement of MBL
Monthly Reports of MBL
Statement of Affairs
Different Types of Forms of MBL
68
8.2 Appendix
QUESTIONNAIRE OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL
Personal Information
Name:
Organization:
Designation:
Age:
Below 25
Gender:
Marital status:
25-35
Male
35-40
40-45
More than 45
Female
Single
Married
3 5 Years
Instructions
Please read the following statements and indicate the extent of your agreement with the
statements on a five point Liker-scale. Please mark your answer.
1 = Strongly Disagree (SD), 2 = Disagree (D), 3 = Neither Disagree Nor Agree (N), 4 =
Agree (A) 5 = Strongly Agree (SA)
No.
Items
Scale
1
1.
2.
3.
4.
69
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
70