Competency Mapping
Competency Mapping
Competency Mapping
1.1 INTRODUCTION
IT Industry
Government Initiative
Strengths Weaknesses
Opportunities Threats
• The main objective of this project is to study the organization and its
functional wings.
• This project has been undertaken to share my experiences on
competency mapping as well as to enhance my understanding of this
fascinating subject by doing some study and research.
• The project explains the meaning of competency mapping, different
method used to evaluate the performance of employees, its effective
implementation and the benefits of the system.
• It also aims at understanding the problems associated with
competency mapping and suggests measures to be adopted to
overcome these issues.
• Overall objective of the project is to understand the effectiveness of
competency mapping systems.
1.8 SCOPE OF THE STUDY
Literature Survey
INTRODUCTION
DEFINITION:
COMPONENTS OF COMPETENCY
FIRST STAGE:
SECOND STAGE:
THIRD STAGE:
Measurement of competency.
FOURTH STAGE:
FIFTH STAGE:
SIXTH STAGE:
There are some useful benefits of using competency model for the
company, managers, and employees as well.
FOR MANAGERS:
FOR EMPLOYEES:
Provide the basis for a more objective dialogue with their manager or
team about performance, development, and career related issues.
1. Motives: the things a person consistently thinks about or wants that cause
action. Motives “ drive, direct, and select” behavior toward certain actions or
goals and away from others.
E.g. Achievement-motivated people consistently set challenging goals for
themselves and use feedback to do better.
Assessment Centres
Use multiple methods and multiple assessors to enhance
objectivity.
Use psychometric tests, stimulation exercises, presentations, in
basket exercises, interviews, role plays, group discussions etc.
Methods used depend on nature of competencies
Competencies can be identified by experts, HR specialists, job
analysts, psychologists etc.. in consultation with line managers,
current and past role holders, supervisors, internal customers
and subordinates.
RESEARCH MEANING
RESEARCH DESIGN
SOURCES OF INFORMATION
Primary data
The information of data was collected for the first time by the
researcher, it is referred to primary data. The data sources used in this study
primary data collected from the employees of Mani India Technologies (P)
Ltd.
Secondary data
Secondary data are the data that already exists which could be utilized
accordingly. Secondary data for this study are collected through the
organization library, brouchers, reports and from company website.
Data collection tool
Population Size:
All the items under consideration in any field of inquiry constitute the
universe or population.
SAMPLING PROCEDURE
i. Sampling technique
The collected information has been processed both manually and with
the help of computers and analyzed suitably.
The following statistical tools are used in this study,
No . of respondent s
Percentage = ×100
Total no . of respondent s
WEIGHTED AVERAGE
X=Σwx/Σw
CORRELATION
Table 4.1.1
Gender Percentage
Number of
S.No Gender respondents Percentage
1 Male 58 58
2 Female 42 42
Chart 4.1.1
Gender Percentage
male
Female
Inference:
In the sampling 58% people are male and 42% people are female.
Table 4.1.2
Experience Percentage
Number of
S.No Year of experience respondents Percentage
1 0–1 68 68
2 1.1 – 2 22 22
3 2.1 – 4 6 6
4 4.1 – 6 4 4
Chart 4.1.2
years of experience
80
68
number of respondents
70
60
50
40 Table 2 Percentage
30 22
20
10 6 4
0
0-1 1.1 - 2 2.1 - 4 4.1 - 6
years
Inference:
From the table it is clear that, 68% of the people are having 0 – 1
years of experience. 4% of the people only are having 4 – 6 years of
experience. Most of the employees are fresher and their recruitment was
based on the Competency. The greater part of this study is to identify the
effectiveness of the competency based recruitment.
Table 4.1.3
Stress tolerance
Number of
S.No Opinion respondents Percentage (%)
1 Maximum 52 52
2 Above average 40 40
3 Average 8 8
4 Below average 0 0
5 least 0 0
Chart 4.1.3
Stress tolerance
60
52
50
No.of respondents
40
40
30 percentage
20
8
10
0 0
0
maximum above avg avg below avg least
5 point scale
Inference:
From the above table it is clear that 52% of the respondents are
maximum that the stress tolerance. 40% of the respondents above average
and 8% of the respondents are average of the employees i.e. almost 92 % of
them are able to manage their work related stress.
Table 4.1.4
1 Maximum 44 44
2 Above average 32 32
3 Average 22 22
4 Below average 2 2
5 least 0 0
Chart 4.1.4
50 44
number of respondents
40
32
30
22 Percentage
20
10
2 0
0
maximum above avg avg below avg least
5-point scale
Inference:
Detail consciousness
Number of
S.No Opinion respondents Percentage (%)
1 Maximum 37 37
2 Above average 30 30
3 Average 20 20
4 Below average 8 8
5 least 5 5
Chart 4.1.5
Detail consciousness
37
number of respondents
40
35 30
30
25 20
20 Percentage
15
8
10 5
5
0
g
g
um
t
av
as
av
av
le
im
w
ov
ax
lo
ab
be
m
5-point scale
Inference:
In spite of the less experience, the sample population have agreed that
they are able to concentrate on the detail consciousness. 67 % of the people
have fall under this category and 20% of them showed neutral response.
Table 4.1.6
Team Player
Number of
S.No Opinion respondents Percentage (%)
1 Maximum 35 35
2 Above average 25 25
3 Average 20 20
4 Below average 15 15
5 least 5 5
Chart 4.1.6
Team player
40 35
number of scale
35
30 25
25 20
20 15 Percentage
15
10 5
5
0
g
g
g
um
t
av
av
as
av
im
le
e
w
ov
ax
lo
ab
be
m
5-point scale
Inference:
60 % of the people have agreed that they are having good team spirit
and they believe in same. The worrying factor is remaining 40 percent has
neutral and below; being in the knowledge based industry, the people should
have team work. This can be one of the training need for the further
development of the organization.
Table 4.1.7
Number of
S.No Opinion respondents Percentage (%)
1 Maximum 35 35
2 Above average 26 26
3 Average 19 19
4 Below average 14 14
5 least 6 6
Chart 4.1.7
40 35
Number of respondents
35
30 26
25
19 Percentage
20
14
15
10 6
5
0
maximum above avg avg below avg least
5-point scale
Inference:
Numerical interpretation
Number of
S.No Opinion respondents Percentage (%)
1 Maximum 45 45
2 Above average 32 32
3 Average 16 16
4 Below average 7 7
5 least 0 0
Chart 4.1.8
Numerical interpretation
50 45
Number of respondents
40
32
30
Percentage
20 16
10 7
0
0
maximum above avg avg below avg least
5-point scale
Inference:
Table 4.1.9
Programming Knowledge
Number of
S.No Opinion respondents Percentage (%)
1 Maximum 50 45
2 Above average 32 32
3 Average 14 16
4 Below average 4 7
5 least 0 0
Chart 4.1.9
Programming Knowledge
60
50
Number of respondents
50
40
32
30 Percentage
20 14
10 4
0
0
maximum above avg avg below avg least
5-point scale
Inference:
Table 4.1.10
Number of
S.No Opinion respondents Percentage (%)
1 Maximum 48 48
2 Above average 34 34
3 Average 12 12
4 Below average 6 6
5 least 0 0
Chart 4.1.10
Knowledge on respective
60
Number of respondents
48
50
40 34
30 Percentage
20
12
10 6
0
0
maximum above avg avg below avg least
5-point scale
Inference:
82% have agreed that they are very well equipped in Coding concepts,
standards and specification to perform a particular job profile. The
recruitment was efficient in hiring these resources with preferred
competence.
Table 4.1.11
Technical skills
Number of
S.No Opinion respondents Percentage (%)
1 Maximum 32 32
2 Above average 34 34
3 Average 22 22
4 Below average 9 9
5 least 3 3
Chart 4.1.11
Technical Skills
40
34
Number of respondents
35 32
30
25 22
20 Percentage
15
9
10
5 3
0
maximum above avg avg below avg least
5-point scale
Inference:
From the above table it is clear that 34% of the respondents are above
avg that the Technical skills. 32% of the respondents’ maximum to the
above statement, so the technical skills is almost effective.
Table 4.1.12
Programming Skills
Number of
S.No Opinion respondents Percentage (%)
1 Maximum 48 48
2 Above average 34 34
3 Average 12 12
4 Below average 6 6
5 least 0 0
Chart 4.1.12
Programming skills
60
Number of respondents
48
50
40 34
30 Percentage
20
12
10 6
0
0
maximum above avg avg below avg least
5-point scale
Inference:
From the above table it is clear that 48% of the respondents are
maximum that the programming skills. 34% of the respondents above
average to the above statement, so the programming skills is effective.
Table 4.1.13
Initiative
Number of
S.No Opinion respondents Percentage (%)
1 Maximum 2 2
2 Above average 18 18
3 Average 40 40
4 Below average 25 25
5 least 15 15
Chart 4.1.13
Initiative
45 40
Number of respondents
40
35
30 25
25
18 Percentage
20 15
15
10
5 2
0
maximum above avg avg below avg least
5-point scale
Initiative: Take voluntary steps to address existing and potential
problems at the work place
Inference:
From the above table it is clear that 40% of the respondents are
average that the initiative. 25% of the respondents above average to the
above statement, so the initiative among the employees only average level.
Table 4.1.14
Time management
Number of
S.No Opinion respondents Percentage (%)
1 Maximum 13 13
2 Above average 40 40
3 Average 29 29
4 Below average 10 10
5 least 8 8
Chart 4.1.14
Time Management
45 40
Number of respondents
40
35
29
30
25
Percentage
20
13
15 10
8
10
5
0
maximum above avg avg below avg least
5-point scale
Inference:
Table 4.1.15
Team spirit
Number of
S.No Opinion respondents Percentage (%)
1 Maximum 38 38
2 Above average 39 39
3 Average 16 16
4 Below average 6 6
5 least 1 1
Chart 4.1.15
Team Spirit
45
38 39
Number of respondents
40
35
30
25
Percentage
20 16
15
10 6
5 1
0
maximum above avg avg below avg least
5=point scale
Inference:
From the above table it is clear that 39% of the respondents are above
avg that the Team spirit 38% of the respondents maximum to the above
statement, so the team spirit is effective
Table 4.1.16
Flexibility
Number of
S.No Opinion respondents Percentage (%)
1 Maximum 14 14
2 Above average 37 37
3 Average 23 23
4 Below average 14 14
5 least 12 12
Chart 4.1.16
Flexibility
40 37
Number of respondents 35
30
25 23
20 Percentage
14 14
15 12
10
5
0
maximum above avg avg below avg least
5-point scale
Inference:
Table 4.1.17
Precision in communication
Number of Percentage
S.No Opinion respondents (%)
1 Maximum 47 47
2 Above average 32 32
3 Average 12 12
4 Below average 8 8
5 least 1 1
Precision in communication
50 47
45
40
35 32
30
25 Percentage
20
15 12
10 8
5 1
0
maximum above avg avg below avg least
Inference:
Table 4.1.18
Committed to responsibilities
Number of
S.No Opinion respondents Percentage (%)
1 Maximum 42 42
2 Above average 36 36
3 Average 10 10
4 Below average 6 6
5 least 6 6
Committed to responsibilities
45 42
Number of respondents 40 36
35
30
25
Percentage
20
15 10
10 6 6
5
0
maximum above avg avg below avg least
5-point scale
Inference:
The above graph says that the sample population is committed for the
job and they are willing to perform with commitment. They are very keen on
the responsibilities given to them
Table 4.2.1
Number Of
respondents( Weighted Values
S.No opinion W) value (X) (W*X)
1 Maximum 42 5 210
3 Average 10 3 30
4 Below average 6 2 12
5 least 6 1 0
Table 4.2.2
1 Maximum 44 5 220
3 Average 22 3 66
4 Below average 2 2 4
5 least 0 1 0
Table 4.2.3
Detail consciousness
1 Maximum 37 5 185
3 Average 20 3 60
4 Below average 8 2 16
5 least 5 1 5
Table 4.2.4
Team Player
Number Of Weighte Values
S.No opinion respondents(W) d value(X) (W*X)
1 Maximum 35 5 175
3 Average 20 3 60
4 Below average 15 2 30
5 least 5 1 5
The least was towards team player and it can be consider as a training
need. So the workshops, training and couching is recommended.
Table 4.2.5
1 Maximum 35 5 175
3 Average 19 3 57
4 Below average 14 2 28
5 least 6 1 6
Table 4.2.6
Numerical interpretation:
1 Maximum 45 5 225
3 Average 16 3 48
4 Below average 7 2 14
5 least 0 1 0
Table 4.2.7
1 Maximum 50 5 250
3 Average 14 3 42
4 Below average 4 2 8
5 least 0 1 0
Table 4.2.8
1 Maximum 48 5 240
3 Average 12 3 36
4 Below average 6 2 12
5 least 0 1 0
Inference:
Table 4.2.9
Technical skills
1 Maximum 32 5 160
3 Average 22 3 66
4 Below average 9 2 18
5 least 6 1 6
Total Σw=100 Σwx=383
Table 4.2.10
Programming Skills
1 Maximum 48 5 240
3 Average 12 3 36
4 Below average 6 2 12
5 least 0 1 0
Table 4.2.11
Initiative
1 Maximum 2 5 10
2 Above average 18 4 72
3 Average 40 3 120
4 Below average 25 2 50
5 least 15 1 15
Table 4.2.12
Time management
1 Maximum 13 5 65
3 Average 29 3 87
4 Below average 10 2 20
5 least 8 1 8
Initiative 2.67 IV
Inference:
One of the least weighted average in the entire study is the initiatives
of the employees. Since more than 65% of the employees falls in the
category of less than one year experience, they new employees may not be
have that much stuff to take the initiatives.
The very important factor like the programming skills are showing
good numbers and it is very much necessary for the organization.
Table 4.2.13
Team spirit
Number Weighted Values
S.No opinion no respondents value(X) (W*X)
1 Maximum 38 5 190
3 Average 16 3 48
4 Below average 6 2 12
5 least 1 1 1
Table 4.2.14
Flexibility
1 Maximum 14 5 70
3 Average 23 3 69
4 Below average 14 2 28
5 least 12 1 12
Table 4.2.15
Precision in communication
1 Maximum 47 5 235
3 Average 12 3 36
4 Below average 8 2 16
5 least 1 1 1
Table 4.2.16
Committed to responsibilities
1 Maximum 42 5 210
3 Average 10 3 30
4 Below average 6 2 12
5 least 6 1 6
Flexibility 3.27 IV
Inference:
In this category flexibility is the worrying factor and this will improve
as the organization matures.
4.2 Correlation
4.2.1 To find the correlation coefficient between the
organizational culture of MIT and its productivity of the employee.
Technical skills 32 34 22 9 3
(X)
Programming 46 36 11 6 1
skills (Y)
22 11 2 -9 4 81 -18
Inference:
References:
Websites:
1. www.citehr.com
2. www.wikipedia.com
3. www.managementparadise.com
4. www.12manage.com
5. www.manisoftinternational.com
6. www.maniindiatech.com
Questionnaire
Personal Details :
Name :
Department :
Current position :
Years of experiences :
Reporting authority :
Competency Mapping
1. Personal competencies
1 Stress tolerance: 5 4 3 2 1
Cope up with work strains
that arises as a consequence
of working situations of
targets, deadlines, work load
and pressure from superiors
3 Detail 5 4 3 2 1
consciousness: Explore into
the necessary details, so as
to get the exact information
needed
2 Numerical 5 4 3 2 1
interpretation:
Comfortable with numerical
facts and exercises
quantitative reasoning
effectively to derive solution
3 Programming 5 4 3 2 1
Knowledge: Posses very
good programming
(Software Language Skills)
knowledge
4 Knowledge on Respective 5 4 3 2 1
Coding concepts,
standards and
specification
2 Programming 5 4 3 2 1
Skills: Have excellent
Software coding knowledge
and able to apply this
knowledge to the work for
the effective performance of
the job things
3 Initiative: Take 5 4 3 2 1
voluntary steps to address
existing and potential
problems at the work place
2 Flexibility: Alter 5 4 3 2 1
and deviate individual work
plan to suite to the changing
needs of the organization
and the department
3 Precision in 5 4 3 2 1
communication
4 Committed to 5 4 3 2 1
responsibilities: Exercise
the responsibilities with
trust, sincerity and
commitment