This topic contains 0 replies, has 0 voices, and was last updated by  EduGorilla 2 years, 7 months ago.

  • Author
  • #1005819 Reply
    Select Question Language :

    Direction:Read the given passage and answer the questions that follow based on the information mentioned in it.
    Ms Suzene Kopec had applied for a job as a Technical Assistant (TA) in CRIS in response to an advertisement. Although she had cited three referees in her application, only one provided a reference. Mr. Adim Wilsali, principal of the State Secondary School, stated that Ms Kopec was admitted to the Umed Secondary School after passing GCE ‘O’ level. She was a diligent student, always among the few top students of her class, well-disciplined, respectful and obedient. For a while she was also the overseer of one of the girl’s hostels. Mr. Wilsali recommended her appointment.
    Ms Kopec joined CRIS on 21 June 1971, as a TA Grade III, with an initial salary of NSc 450 per annum, on a scale of NSc 450 to NSc 630 by NSc 30 increments. Her appointment was governed by the conditions of service for junior staff of the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, which included a six-month probation period. Even after confirmation, her services were liable to be dismissed on one month’s notice at the discretion of the Director.
    Her duties included providing assistance in field data retrieval, including statistical computations, and assistance in laboratory work.
    She was reported to be very hard working, both in the field and in the laboratory, but particularly so when under the supervision of the senior officer. The negative part of the report was that she was inclined to be chatty when supervision was relaxed and she visited the hospital rather frequently. According to the scientific staff with whom she has been working all along, her performance started deteriorating soon after she married in January 1973. On October 17, 1973, she was given a warning letter by the Head of the Plant Breeding Division, citing late arrivals with fancy excuses and loitering. This letter noted previous verbal warnings given by her immediate supervisor. Ms Kopec responded to the warning letter by improving her performance. Her annual performance review was due in another month. It was reported that she was doing well, but required more experience. Her overall performance was rated average (satisfactory), but not yet ready for promotion.

    The evaluator is asked to rank 10% employees in the best category, 20% in the next category, 40% in the middle category, 20% in before the low, and 10% in the lowest brackets.
    Which method follows the above procedure?

    Options :-

    1. Graphic rating scale method
    2. Forced distribution method
    3. Checklist method
    4. Management by Objective
    5. Forced distribution method.
    Post your Training /Course Enquiry
    Are You looking institutes / coaching center for
    • Bank PO, SSC, Railways
    • Study Abroad
    Select your Training / Study category
Reply To: Direction:Read the given passage and answer the questions that follow based on the information ment….
Your information:

Verify Yourself

Log in with your credentials


Forgot your details?

Create Account