Rationality of Promotion Policy in a Software Unit
Mountway is a software company with an annual turnover of Rs 3,800 million and a staff strength of 950 employees. The HR policy of the company states that the entry-level posts alone are to be filled through external recruitment, while the higher posts are to be filled only from internal sources-through the promotion of the existing employees. However, the external sources can be used as a last resort for filling the higher posts if either the existing employees are not sufficiently qualified or the job position cannot be left vacant for a long time.
The accounting package development division of the company has the following organizational structure:
Project manager
?
Team leader
?
Tier-II members
?
Tier-I members(entry level)
In each position, an employee has to complete five years of service before he becomes eligible for promotion to higher levels. In 2003, a tier-II member suddenly resigned his job and left the organization. To complete an ongoing project, the company urgently required a person in that category so it released an advertisement calling for applications from those who had completed at least two years of experience in that or equivalent category.
Though quite a few candidates applied for the post, Mr Guru Prasad, who had four years of experience in the same field, was eventually selected on the basis of his excellent performance in the interview and tests. As per the company policy, he was appointed as the junior-most staff member in the tier-II category, below the six persons who were already working in that cadre. His performance in the job was quite impressive and he exhibited leadership skills too.
One year after his joining the job, the post of team leader in his department fell vacant as the person in that position suddenly resigned to join another company. As the existing employees in the tier-II cadre did not possess the requisite years of experience (five years) for being considered for the team leader post, the company decided to fill the vacancy through external sources by placing an open advertisement through newspapers. Accordingly, the company called for applications from the candidates who had five years of experience in tier-II or equivalent cadre.
Mr Guru Prasad, who had four years of experience in his previous employment plus one year in the present company in the same category, met all the specifications mentioned in the advertisement. Hence, he applied for the post through the proper channel. However, the HR department took a different view of his application and decided to reject his candidature for the post. The argument of the HR department was that, if selected,
- Mr Guru Prasad would get a higher post after completion of just over one year"s service in this organization as against the normal requirement of five years' experience in each category.
- When Mr Guru Prasad joined tier-II, he was the junior-most in his category. If he was offered the higher post, he would, all of a sudden, become the boss of those in tier-II cadre. This could demoralize his senior members in his present cadre. There is every possibility that they might seek to leave the company at the earliest.
Discussion Questions
- Did the management make a mistake by not calling a capable person like Mr Guru Prasad, with a proven record, for an interview, just because he was an existing employee?
- Are there any drawbacks in the recruitment/promotion policies of the company?
- What are your suggestions to rectify the anomaly in the present situation? How will you avoid such situations in the future?