英语论文网

s capable personalities, appropriate logical training of advancement, and forms and effective reward for cooperation and loyalty, long term service, etc. (Yoder,1979). It increases satisfaction in the employees that their talents and capabilities are being recognized. In turn, they trust the organization and devote for the accomplishment of organizational goals and objectives.

In Nepal, the Civil Service Act was promulgated in 1956 which stated that promotion should be given to civil service personnel on the basis of work efficiency (Civil Service rule, 1993). Many changes have been done in the promotion system of the employee in the government organization since that time. 

The Administrative Reform Commission formed under the chairmanship of Mr. Vedananda Jha suggested that the promotion criteria for civil service personnel should include (a) seniority, (b) experience, (c) academic qualification and training, and (d) departmental performance report including co-operative attitude. Another Administration Reform Commission formed under the chairmanship of Mr. B.B. Thapa noted as promotion occupied special importance in the career development of employees, so capability to hold higher promotion and the capacity to perform the work satisfactory in the present position were the main criteria of promotion (Government of Nepal, 1996, Report of Commission). Amendments were done in the Civil Service Rules in 1978 and 1983. Similarly the Administrative Reform Committee formed under the chairmanship of the then prime-minister Mr. G.P. Koirala in 1991 emphasized performance oriented promotion system. The new Civil Service Act, 1993 laid stress on performance ability with criteria such as past performance, seniority, work experience of remote area, and academic qualification. Similarly, the comparative weight-ages of promotion criteria of civil service employees were changed after 1992.

NASC's study on promotion system of civil services stated that there was lack of clarity in its purpose and no consistency in the average promotion period between level and services. The risk of subjectivity in merit rating was a major apprehension in the minds of civil servants for giving more weight to merit rating. Even the performance evaluators' views were in favor of 'no link of the promotion with the performance'. Basic perquisites for sound performance appraisal practices, such as clear organizational and sectional objectives, individual job descriptions, adequate and reliable information system etc. were not properly provided in the civil service. Majorities were in favor of number allotting 50 percent of seats to the promotion by competitive examination as compared to the exiting 25 percent, in some cases even less.

Williams (1972) ascertained that managers lacked adequate means or determination to control the motivation and productivity of their workforce. Job description, performance appraisal and output indicators were non-existent; rewards and sanctions were irrationally applied; salaries were not genuinely related to knowledge and or effort requirements; offices had inadequate facilities; poor co-operation and limited delegation. The top of the decision making level was congested by trivialities while middle-level staff were in a soporif本论文由英语论文网提供整理，提供论文代写，英语论文代写，代写论文，代写英语论文，代写留学生论文，代写英文论文，留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。