Recruitment/talent Acquisition, Career Counselling
Ceo And Md Of 3 Uk Based Mnc's
Currently Not Working. Looking For Job Opportunities
In my opinion, academic qualifications from a Business School or any other Institute, prove only one aspect of a candidate.
They have proved that they are capable to study the subject(s), absorb the content, evaluate material facts, advance intelligent thinking, promote innovation and work under pressure (exams). All this in a somewhat controlled environment.
Naturally, after thus proving themselves, they expect accelerated growth, and why not have they not earned it?
However, any pay hike should always be on merit for the job done and not on academic success, thereby bringing fairness, particularly to those in the organization who may not have the paper qualification but have vast experience.
Don't forget accelerated promotions are also equal to increase in pay.
Hope the above helps in your mindset.
28th May 2013 From United Kingdom, Barrow
Academic Qualifications & Performance [meaning grades] ONLY form the ELIGIBILITY criteria to join a company.
Once the individual joins a company he/she is expected to begin to put into practice what he/she learnt @ college & fine-tuned by the company thru it's Training processes. So obviously, his/her performance on the job ought to matter from then on.
Harsh is right in saying--"accelerated promotions are also equal to increase in pay".
Pl note that the Sector/Domain isn't really relevant--whether it be the Textiles sector or IT or any other. The general framework & logic being the same, what would essentially differ would be the parameters of Quantum of Hikes, Position/Designation after Confirmation & the Responsibilities assigned to the confirmed individual between sectors, depending on the general practices in that sector--the last two parameters would surely have been factored-in by your company even before the hiring of the MTs.
28th May 2013 From India, Hyderabad
Firstly post entry in the company, in my view no differentiation should be made based on their college etc.
MTs performance should be the only differentiating factor.
While taking them on, you must have shared with them their role/JD, key projects to be handled etc. Have you identified competencies for them/this level ?
Has their been any reviews (quarterly or so) of their performance?
You should ideally create a confirmation process and template for them.
After one year the following could be few parameters for assessment:
- Performance against KRAs
- Performance on major projects handled, if any
- Any initiatives taken apart from the JD
- Evaluation against the Competencies
You may evaluate all your MTs against the parameters and finalize the ratings.
You may keep it simple and look at only 3 categories - BE, ME, EE. Increment for ME and EE cases and action plan for BE cases. You may check on the increment trend for these MTs in companies from similar industry.
However, while finalizing these keep few points in mind which may come up later:
- What happens to the MTs next year onwards - I presume they get mainstreamed and will be included in normal appraisal cycle
- Do they get full increment or prorate increment next time
- If you have finalised/announced increments for others, how much difference you would like to maintain b/w MTs and normal officers. To clarify further, how much difference in increment you intend to keep b/w your existing AMs (who are part of appraisal) and these AMs (just confirmed MTs -assuming the MTs will be confirmed as AMs)
I request other members to add to this.
29th May 2013 From India, Hyderabad
Quarter 1 - no targets only
Quarter 2 - Targets can be given(KRAs)
Quarter 3 - Targets can be given(KRAs)
Quarter 4 - Targets can be given(KRAs)
Assessment can be done at end of every quarter and the final rating can be calculated and increment can be given accordingly.
18th February 2014 From India, New Delhi