Hi, I am working in a manufacturing industry that manufactures and sells electronic products. I seek your advice for my confusion regarding the confirmation of probationers.
Parameters for Confirmation, Extension, or Termination of Probationers
What should be the parameters for the confirmation, extension, or termination of probationers?
Review Process for Probationers with Multiple Reporting Authorities
Also, if a probationer has two reporting authorities, how should they be reviewed? Is it necessary to collect reviews from both reporting authorities? Should I give separate review letters to both reporting authorities or take the remarks on the same form?
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
Parameters for Confirmation, Extension, or Termination of Probationers
What should be the parameters for the confirmation, extension, or termination of probationers?
Review Process for Probationers with Multiple Reporting Authorities
Also, if a probationer has two reporting authorities, how should they be reviewed? Is it necessary to collect reviews from both reporting authorities? Should I give separate review letters to both reporting authorities or take the remarks on the same form?
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Obviously two reports would be needed. But working under two different bosses is always difficult and should be avoided. What will you do if one boss is not happy or lukewarm?
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(1)
Amend(0)
3180From India, Pune
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
Avoiding Confusion in Dual Reporting Relationships
It is always advisable to avoid such confusion. There is no set industry norm to deal with such a situation, as far as I recollect. However, the sound principles of administration suggest that standard operating procedures should be laid down to avoid confusion and crisis in administering affairs. These can be established considering the nature of business, work processes, and hierarchical positions.
Therefore, where an employee has to report to two bosses, it is always advisable to decide who is the controlling authority for them. This helps determine who the competent authority is to finally evaluate the performance of an employee with dual reporting relationships. The controlling authority means the authority of the two that can exercise administrative control over the employee. Some helpful clues to decide the controlling authority can be:
• If the appointing authority is also the reporting authority, then they can be the controlling authority.
• If both are different, then the reporting authority who is:
a) Competent to take administrative decisions concerning the employee, like sanctioning leave, passing bills, or disciplinary action, etc., or
b) The reporting authority under which the employee does substantial work or works for a longer time than under the other authority during the appraisal period.
In such cases, the other authority (who is not the controlling authority) can send their report to the Controlling Authority, and the Controlling Authority can moderate the report of the other authority and submit a final report. This is one way to resolve the issue. You can think of other ways that fit into your methods of work, system, and hierarchy.
This is only a suggestion and not an industry norm, nor am I aware of any provision in the standing orders governing such a situation. However, an organization can frame its own standard operating procedures to bring clarity and avoid confusion in administering its affairs. Therefore, you can discuss with your senior leadership and resolve the confusion at your end. Other views are welcome.
Regards,
B. Saikumar
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(6)
Amend(0)
It is always advisable to avoid such confusion. There is no set industry norm to deal with such a situation, as far as I recollect. However, the sound principles of administration suggest that standard operating procedures should be laid down to avoid confusion and crisis in administering affairs. These can be established considering the nature of business, work processes, and hierarchical positions.
Therefore, where an employee has to report to two bosses, it is always advisable to decide who is the controlling authority for them. This helps determine who the competent authority is to finally evaluate the performance of an employee with dual reporting relationships. The controlling authority means the authority of the two that can exercise administrative control over the employee. Some helpful clues to decide the controlling authority can be:
• If the appointing authority is also the reporting authority, then they can be the controlling authority.
• If both are different, then the reporting authority who is:
a) Competent to take administrative decisions concerning the employee, like sanctioning leave, passing bills, or disciplinary action, etc., or
b) The reporting authority under which the employee does substantial work or works for a longer time than under the other authority during the appraisal period.
In such cases, the other authority (who is not the controlling authority) can send their report to the Controlling Authority, and the Controlling Authority can moderate the report of the other authority and submit a final report. This is one way to resolve the issue. You can think of other ways that fit into your methods of work, system, and hierarchy.
This is only a suggestion and not an industry norm, nor am I aware of any provision in the standing orders governing such a situation. However, an organization can frame its own standard operating procedures to bring clarity and avoid confusion in administering its affairs. Therefore, you can discuss with your senior leadership and resolve the confusion at your end. Other views are welcome.
Regards,
B. Saikumar
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(6)+1 more
Amend(0)
Dual Reporting in Regional or Branch Offices
Dual reporting normally arises when the employee is working in a regional or branch office, and their departmental head is located in the head office. In this case, their administrative reporting would be to the location/region/branch head, and functional reporting would be to the department head. If your case is the same, then you need to decide beforehand in consultation with the HR Head and management about the weightage to be given to the reporting heads. As a standard norm, the functional head should be given more weightage. Hence, you can maintain a 75% to 25% mix of the feedback received from the heads. It is always good to set a different set of questionnaires. For the administrative head, you can use a questionnaire related to behavior (major) and functional (KRA-linked minor). For the functional head, behavior (minor) and functional (KRA-linked major) can be considered.
Dual Reporting in the Same Department
However, if your case involves having two reporting bosses in the same department, the feedback should be taken from the department's head only. In the scenario where the employee reports to the department's head and the director, then you need to consider both, but more weightage should be given to the department's head, as they are ultimately responsible for the department's performance.
This is a suggestion only in case you do not have any policies established. It is always beneficial to formulate policies regarding the authority/power of heads/reporting bosses in cases of dual reporting if there are several cases like this.
Parameters for Termination/Promotion
Regarding your first query about the parameters for termination/promotion, these decisions cannot be defined by us. Your management will determine the parameters as every business has a different set of objectives. Therefore, it is advisable to discuss with them and formulate policies accordingly.
I hope this information will be helpful.
Kind regards,
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
Dual reporting normally arises when the employee is working in a regional or branch office, and their departmental head is located in the head office. In this case, their administrative reporting would be to the location/region/branch head, and functional reporting would be to the department head. If your case is the same, then you need to decide beforehand in consultation with the HR Head and management about the weightage to be given to the reporting heads. As a standard norm, the functional head should be given more weightage. Hence, you can maintain a 75% to 25% mix of the feedback received from the heads. It is always good to set a different set of questionnaires. For the administrative head, you can use a questionnaire related to behavior (major) and functional (KRA-linked minor). For the functional head, behavior (minor) and functional (KRA-linked major) can be considered.
Dual Reporting in the Same Department
However, if your case involves having two reporting bosses in the same department, the feedback should be taken from the department's head only. In the scenario where the employee reports to the department's head and the director, then you need to consider both, but more weightage should be given to the department's head, as they are ultimately responsible for the department's performance.
This is a suggestion only in case you do not have any policies established. It is always beneficial to formulate policies regarding the authority/power of heads/reporting bosses in cases of dual reporting if there are several cases like this.
Parameters for Termination/Promotion
Regarding your first query about the parameters for termination/promotion, these decisions cannot be defined by us. Your management will determine the parameters as every business has a different set of objectives. Therefore, it is advisable to discuss with them and formulate policies accordingly.
I hope this information will be helpful.
Kind regards,
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
It happened in the case of Secretaries and Sales personnel responsible for the sales of various products from different segments. We decided to take feedback from both of his reporting authorities. The average of both figures can be taken into consideration before making a decision about his confirmation.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR is an AI-augmented HR knowledge and collaboration platform, enabling HR professionals to solve real-world challenges, validate decisions, and stay ahead through collective intelligence and machine-enhanced guidance. Join Our Platform.
How to write HR policy.pdf
BEST HR POLICY.doc