LCdr (ASW) TR DANIEL
PGD in Defence Management
Naval and Maritime Academy
(Accredited to General Sir John Kotelawala Defence University)
I declare that this dissertation contains no material which has been accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma in any university or equivalent institution, and that to the best of my knowledge and belief, contains no material previously submitted or written by any other person, except where due reference is made in the text of this Dissertation.
I carried out the work described in this under the supervision of Captain (ND) KJ Kularathne, RSP,Psc,MSc(D&SS)
COMMENTS OF THE SUPERVISOR
..................................................... Date ........................................
Sri Lanka Navy
Sri Lanka Navy is one of the largest organization in Sri Lanka with nearly 55000 men & women are working to date .SLN is not only one of the largest, but also diverse as more than 20 major professions are cohesion to form this organisation. Officers form the backbone of this large organisation; SLN and better performance of officers is a necessity to achieve organisational goals. Therefore performances of the officers are evaluated to identify, encourage, measure, improve, and reward their performances. At present, a single performance appraisal form (Nav 206) is used to evaluate commissioned officers of all ranks from Acting Sub Lieutenant to Rear Admiral. This research will be carried out to study the efficiency of existing performance appraisal system for officers in Sri Lanka Navy.
Key words – Performance Appraisal, Human Resource Management, Ranking
References: 5. Bretz, R. D.; G. T. Milkovich; W. Read (1992): The Current State of Performance Appraisal Research and Practice: Concerns, Directions, and Implications. Journal of Management (18), 312-352. 6. Brown, M.; J. S. Heywood (2005): Performance Appraisal Systems: Determinants and Change. British Journal of Industrial Relations (43), 659-679. 7. Callahan, J. S.; A. L. Brownlee; M. D. Brtek; H. L. Tosi (2003): Examining the Unique Effects of Multiple Motivational Sources on Task Performance. Journal of Applied Social Psychology (33), 2515-2535. 8. Cleveland, J. N.; K. R. Murphy; R. E. Williams (1989): Multiple Uses of Performance Appraisal: Prevalence and Correlates. Journal of Applied Psychology (74), 130-135. 11. Kerr, S. (1975): On the Folly of Rewarding A, While Hoping for B. Academy of Management Journal, 18(4): 769-783. 12. Kuvaas, B. (2006): Performance Appraisal Satisfaction and Employee Outcomes: Mediating and Moderating Roles of Work Motivation. International Journal of Human Resource Management (17), 504-522. 13. Levy, P. E.; J. R. Williams (2004): The Social Context of Performance Appraisal: A Review and Framework for the Future. Journal of Management (30), 881-905. 14. Murphy, K. J. (1999): Executive Compensation. In: Ashenfelter, O. and Card, D. (eds.), Handbook of Labour Economics, Vol. 3, North Holland. 15. Murphy, K. R. and Cleveland, J. N. (1995): Understanding Performance Appraisal. Thousand Oaks: Sage. 16. Murphy, K. J. and Oyer, P. (2003): Discretion in Executive Incentive Contracts. Working Paper. Stanford University. 17. Opatha, H.H.D.N.P. (2009). Human Resource Management: Personnel, Department of HRM, University of Sri Jayewardenepura, Sri Lanka. 18. Poon, J. M. L. (2004): Effects of Performance Appraisal Politics on Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention. Personnel Review (33), 322-334 19. Schular, R.S 20. Werther, B. W. and Davis, K. (1994), Human Resources and Personnel Management, New York: McGraw- Hill Book Company 21. Vassallo, P 22. Harbour, Jerry L. (1997). The Basics of Performance Measurement. New York, NY: Quality Resources 23. Maddux, Robert B 24. Mohranman, A., Resnick-West, S., & Lawler, E., (1989). Designing performance appraisal systems, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 25. Kane, J. S., & Freeman, K. A. 1987. MBO and performance appraisal: A mixture that 's not a solution, part 2. Personnel. February: 26-32. 26. Henderson, R. I., Performance Appraisal, Reston rub. Co., 2004 27. Kane, J