CASE IIEMPLOYEE RELATIONSAUDIT 
Triveni Foods Pvt.Ltd., amultinational confectionarycompany,having itsbranches in more than 50 countriesand marketing itsproductsin about 135 countries,established one of itsproduction units in 1988atMathuranear Delhi.Ithad aworkforceof nearly320 employeesand sales turnover wasmore than Rs.150 crores.Being a confectionaryunit,hygienewas giventhe upper most priorityto the extent that no onewas allowed to enter the productionarea withouttaking bath andwearingsterilizedclothesprovided bythe company. The entire processwasautomatic and required onlyfoodspecialistsandlabor. In ordertomatchthe requiredstandards,emphasis wasgiven on trainingand welfareofemployeesonregular basis.Facilitieslike transportation were also provided sincedelayby tenminutescouldcauseproduction lossesatthetimeofshiftchanges. Over aperiod oftime due to startand workers'redundancy, it wasobservedthat problems like lethargy, absenteeism, violation ofwork practiceswereincreasing.Absenteeismratewentup to18percent.Employees visited canteen for drinkingwaterand startedgossiping duringworkinghours.Buses did notarrive on time due to which production suffered.Operatorscame late andleft shop floorearlywithout waiting forrelievers.Employeeswere foundhovering in administration buildingwithout anyreason.Itwasalso found that employeeswere violating personal hygiene standards.Malpractices were also reported with attendance processand records.Theseactivities werehavinganegative impact on managerialeffectiveness and performance of the unit. The management tried to take number of initiatives to overcomethese problems.However,these initiatives seemed ad hocsolutions and did notserve thepurposeinthelong run. In 1996,Alok Trivedi joined the companyas Head of the Department H.R.While facingthese problems,he realizedthatthe causes of these problems weredeep rooted andrequiredaproactive approach.Hestartedwithan approach called EmployeeRelationAudit,developed byhim, where everythingwasto be monitored,regulated andreported on regular intervals.He along with his team prepared anaction plan (Appendix1)and corrective measures were taken accordingly. Facilities of drinking water were arranged at 3 to 4 places in the production area which stopped employees from going to canteen for this purpose.Action was taken against the late arrivals of the buses.A proper time study was done and theywere given ten minutes margin so that they could report on time. Operators were frequently questioned and stringent vigilance was kept for amenities. Regular counseling was also arranged. A grievance register was also kept and effective grievance redressal was undertaken. Groups were formed called 'Pragati' groups for solving work related problems.Employees were frequently checked for ensuring their strictadherencetopersonal hygienestandards. For ensuring timelyprocessing and printing of attendance records, training was given to al! line officersand production of records was made mandatory on shift basis. Itwas further decided that based on this action plan an audit should be carried out at regular periods so that actual performance could be measured.For quantification, a 5 point.scale 0- poor, 2-below average, 3-average, 4-good, 5-v.good) audit report was prepared featuring practices, criteria for evaluation, standards,observations/comments and rating:Appendix 2). For example, in canteen criteria for evaluation there were food quality, menu, timings andunauthorizedpresence of the employees in the kitchen. The standards were strict adherence to the rulesdefined. For transportation, arrival, departure and punching of cards by drivers were the criteria for evaluation.Internal teams of auditors were asked to observe and comment against theset standards and givethe ratingaccordingly. Performance vasevaluated on the basis of percentage, the highest point being 215. For example, if the total points scored onvarious parameters in a audit report was one hundred andfifty five,hen percentage score would be seventy-two (l55/215xl00 =72percent). Thefirstaudit"as carried out in August 1999 and percentage of performance was sixty two. In the year 2000, the performance roseto sixty-five per cent.Proactive approach of solving le problems was adopted. For example,registers were maintained at different work areas, writedown thecomplaintsexperienced byemployeesand actionwas taken by the concerned person. A complaint of tap leaking in a bathroom was recorded in register by a workman. It was attended by a supervisor in charge and he got it repaired immediately. At times these were reviewed and signed by H.R. department and the higher management. Due to these practices, a lot of improvement was observed. Better working conditions, increased productivity, rise in employees' commitment towards their goals and better superior -subordinate relationship could beseen.In2001,the percentage of the performance rose to seventy two. While reviewing the Employee relation audit,Alok Trivedi was quite satisfied to note the steady though slowimprovement in thefigures of performance. 
QUESTIONS:

1. Had you been in placeof Alok Trivedi, what additional measures would you have taken?

2. Critically analyze the Employee Relations Audit in the light of its contribution to self motivation of employees.