Previously the element of interest and personal motivation were found missing, the technical capabilities of the employees have never been a matter of debate, however the personal and mental capacities and limitations are either ignored or not respected which resulted in the poor performance of the organization. Apparently, the rise in the demands pertaining to the particpation of the employees and the industrial democracy has also distorted the professional environment. Such all complains were lately resolved and answered through the unique approach of the organization, the organization has understood the significance of the employees, and had realized that their performance is not based upon their professional capabilities, but rather it is the function of the mental capability of the employee related to the friendly and conducive environment offered to the employees occasionally. The need of the employees that focus upon peaceful, conducive and liberal environment has been ensured, which required the reevaluation of the professional practices of the organization. The primary focus of the organization has shifted, the organization has practiced shift towards the aspirations of the employees, and has tried to ensure that beside customer satisfaction, the element of the employee satisfaction is respected and followed. The satisfaction of the employee is not restricted to remuneration or any other financial privileges, rather it is based upon the fact that whether the mental and physical limitations of the employees are respected, to ensure that the mental stress shall not derail the professional enthusiasm of the employees. The organization followed and adopted several sort of actions to ensure that the standards are protected and secured, and the morale of the employees is boosted which will subsequently result in the enhancement of the performance (Mahler, 1986). Comparative Analysis

The company has realized that the leadership bench strength, which ensures 'the availability of strong and deep pools of talent, and is able to assume a number of varied leadership roles at various levels' (Hamel, 2000), although the issue has technical limitations, however if the companies initiate their new talent-management practices with proper objectives, will achieve better picture, 'it is not substantial to move forward with a vague sense of improving leadership bench depth, when new practices unfold without a clear sense of what results must be delivered, they become mere activity generators', which will demoralize the employees, and will demote any practice relevant to the performance enhancement program. The company has decided over to review their annual organization review policy, and has intended to replace it with the system of ongoing dialogue (Hamel, 2000).

In contrast, the General Electric, IBM, or Citicorp, have adopted different strategy, where 'it is often best to start with a few key practices likely to produce tangible results, geared to the needs of the company', the management of the company has to coordinate with the Human Resource leadership to decide over the 'set of outcomes and targets for the process', such comprehensive and detailed overview will ensure the success of the performance enhancement policies (Hamel, 2000).

The organization should ensure that either on quarter or annual basis the employees and organization are able to share a table, and discuss their mutual needs and the measures required for the resolution of the grievances of each party. It is important for the organization to ascertain that the employees are conveyed their respective assignments and the expectation associated with the task are brought into the notice of the subordinates. The performance review are helpful for supervisor, as the periodic evaluation proceedings make the concern authorities 'more honest in their relationships with their subordinates' (Carter, 2007), and make them more responsible towards their supervisory role. Through such period evaluation, the employees are judge their 'personal strengths and areas of development' (Carter, 2007). The professional commitment gets a renewal once such evaluations are undertaken, and it has been observed that the participation of the employees into party affairs also get concentrated, therefore it ultimately 'improves morale, improves credibility of management, improves the organization's overall effectiveness and prevents wastage of management's time towards auditing and monitoring of proceedings' (Carter, 2007). The fair proceedings of the performance appraisal of the employees can carried, if prior to its execution, the management design a 'legally valid performance review process', and introduce 'standard form for the performance appraisals' (Carter, 2007),...

The employees should be informed about the launch of the plan, so that the employees are able to perform with preparedness and cautious, such an attitude will improve the overall working and productivity of the organization. The employees are to be informed so that they should consider any of the action by the management as offensive or secretive, it is important that every employee is part of activities within the organization. Prior to the execution of the performance appraisal, it is important for the management to offer an opportunity to the employees to contribute and suggest any recommendation to the employers with reference to their task and responsibilities, the employees should be requested to add credentials in their services towards the organization, where applicable. The employee performance appraisal should be conducted without any discriminatory attitude, and no preference should be given to any of the employees on the basis of their sex, race, and religious affiliation.
Theory X & Theory Y

The Theory X and Theory Y was proposed by Douglas McGregor in his book titled the Human Side of Enterprise. The set of theory was aimed at the evaluation of the motivation level of the employee, 'both of these theories begin with the premise that management's role is to assemble the factors of production, including people, for the economic benefit of the firm' (Andrew, 2005).

The Theory X is based upon the assumption that the average person 'dislikes work and attempts to avoid it, and has no ambition, wants no responsibility, and would rather follow than lead; the employee is considered to be self-centered and therefore does not care about organizational goals, the employee is reluctant to adopt any changes and therefore is resistant towards change, and is gullible and not particularly intelligent' (Andrew, 2005). The major assumption of the Theory X is that the employee performs only for the sake of money and security. According to the theory the management 'approaches can range from a hard approach to a soft approach' (Patrick, 2000). The hard approach is based upon 'coercion, implicit threats, close supervision, and tight controls, essentially an environment of command and control' (Andrew, 2005). However, the soft approach is 'to be permissive and seek harmony with the hope that in return employees will cooperate when asked to do so' (Chris, 1990). It has been observed that neither of the approaches can be regarded as optimal, the hard approach is responsible for 'hostility, purposely low-output, and hard-line union demands' (Website, 2007), whereas the soft approach is responsible for 'ever-increasing requests for more rewards in exchange for ever-decreasing work output' (Leslie, 2001). According to McGregor, certain problems has been identified with Theory X, and has argued that satisfied need is no longer a source of motivation, therefore as per the theory the organization has to rely upon 'money and benefits to satisfy employees' lower needs, and once those needs are satisfied the source of motivation is lost' (Patrick, 2000). The Theory X is therefore a source of hindrance, and dilutes the 'satisfaction of higher-level needs'. As per the explanation of the theory, 'the only way that employees can attempt to satisfy their higher level needs in their work is by seeking more compensation, so it is quite predictable that they will focus on monetary rewards' (Patrick, 2000), whereas in actual practice the money shall never be considered a source of self-fulfillment.

The Theory Y was proposed to compensate for the deficiencies in the Theory X, based upon the fact that 'the higher-level needs of esteem and self-actualization are continuing needs in that they are never completely satisfied, and it is these higher-level needs through which employees can best be motivated' (Leslie, 2001). The Theory Y is based upon the assumptions that, 'the responsibility of the employee shall be as natural as play and rest, and the employee has the potential to be self-directed to meet their work objectives if they are committed towards their employers, the employees will be committed to their objectives if rewards are in place that address higher needs such as self-fulfillment, and the employee will seek responsibility, and the employees will handle responsibility because creativity and ingenuity are common in the population' (Leslie, 2001).

The Theory Y has been able to bridge the personal goals and organizational goals, which has been possible because of the 'employee's own quest for fulfillment as the motivator', McGregor is of the opinion that the Theory Y 'does not imply…