Paper II — Q6
(a) "Tests are useful in predicting the failure rather than success of the candidate on the job." Comment. (20 marks) (b) Explain…
(a) "Tests are useful in predicting the failure rather than success of the candidate on the job." Comment. (20 marks) (b) Explain the rationale of workers' participation in management. Suggest measures to make it more effective. (20 marks) (c) "Multiplicity of unions has retarded the effective working of trade unions in India." Discuss. (10 marks)
हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें
(a) "परीक्षण, उम्मीदवार के कार्य पर सफलता की अपेक्षा असफलता की भविष्यवाणी करने में उपयोगी होते हैं।" टिप्पणी कीजिए। (20 अंक) (b) प्रबंध में श्रमिकों की सहभागिता के औचित्य को समझाइए। इसको अधिक प्रभावी बनाने के लिए सुझाव दीजिए। (20 अंक) (c) "भारत में संघों की बहुलता ने श्रम संघों के प्रभावी कार्यों को मंद कर दिया है।" विवेचना कीजिए। (10 अंक)
Directive word: Comment
This question asks you to comment. The directive word signals the depth of analysis expected, the structure of your answer, and the weight of evidence you must bring.
See our UPSC directive words guide for a full breakdown of how to respond to each command word.
How this answer will be evaluated
Approach
The primary directive is 'comment' for part (a), requiring a balanced critical appraisal of the predictive validity of selection tests. Allocate approximately 40% of time/words to part (a) (20 marks), 40% to part (b) (20 marks) requiring explanation and suggestion, and 20% to part (c) (10 marks) requiring discussion. Structure: Introduction acknowledging the debate on psychometric testing → Body addressing each part sequentially with clear sub-headings → Conclusion synthesizing insights on HRM effectiveness in Indian context.
Key points expected
- Part (a): Critical analysis of predictive validity—tests as better screens for disqualifying traits (dishonesty, instability) than predicting high performance; reference to Taylor's scientific management limitations and modern psychometric critique
- Part (a): Distinguish between validity coefficients for failure prediction (higher base rates, clearer cut-offs) versus success prediction (ceiling effects, situational variables); cite Guion & Gottfried research
- Part (b): Rationale for workers' participation—human relations theory (Mayo), democratic ethos, industrial peace, productivity gains; reference to Constitution's Article 43A and 5th/6th Schedule provisions
- Part (b): Measures for effectiveness—strengthening bipartite forums, mandatory recognition of sole bargaining agent, training for worker representatives, financial participation schemes (ESOPs, cooperatives); cite successful Indian experiments (TISCO, BHEL, Amul model)
- Part (c): Analysis of union multiplicity—politicization, inter-union rivalry, fragmented bargaining power, verification difficulties under Trade Unions Act 1926; impact on collective bargaining and industrial disputes
- Part (c): Remedial measures—amending TUA for mandatory secret ballot, promoting union federation, exclusive recognition criteria; reference to NCL recommendations and Code on Industrial Relations 2020 provisions
Evaluation rubric
| Dimension | Weight | Max marks | Excellent | Average | Poor |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Demand-directive understanding | 20% | 10 | For (a), offers nuanced 'comment' with balanced critique rather than agreement/disagreement alone; for (b), clearly separates 'explain rationale' from 'suggest measures' as distinct tasks; for (c), 'discuss' covers both causes and consequences of multiplicity with evaluative stance | Addresses directives superficially—treats (a) as simple agree/disagree, conflates explanation and suggestion in (b), or provides only descriptive account in (c) without critical discussion | Misidentifies directives—explains when asked to comment, describes without suggesting measures, or merely lists points without discussion where required |
| Content depth & accuracy | 20% | 10 | Demonstrates command across all three domains: psychometric theory (validity, reliability, base rate problems) for (a); constitutional-legal framework and management theories for (b); trade union legislation and labour economics for (c); accurate citations of statutes and concepts | Covers basic concepts adequately but lacks theoretical depth—mentions tests without validity discussion, lists WPM forms without rationale, or describes union problems without legal-institutional analysis | Significant factual errors—confuses reliability with validity, equates WPM with trade unionism, or misstates legal provisions; superficial treatment across parts |
| Structure & flow | 20% | 10 | Clear tripartite structure with visible demarcation between (a), (b), (c); logical internal progression within each—e.g., (a) thesis-antithesis-synthesis, (b) rationale-then-measures, (c) problem-analysis-solution; effective transitions maintaining overall coherence | Identifiable parts but uneven development—one part disproportionately lengthy, or internal logic weak (measures precede rationale in b, or description substitutes for analysis in c) | Poorly organized—parts run together without headings, random point arrangement, or severe imbalance (e.g., 70% on one part, neglecting others); no discernible argument flow |
| Examples / case-law / data | 20% | 10 | Rich Indian contextualization: for (a) cites NTPC or SAIL selection experience; for (b) references specific WPM institutions (Works Committees, Joint Management Councils, Bipartite Forums) with cases like TISCO's Jamshedpur model or Kamani Tubes revival; for (c) cites verification statistics from state labour departments or specific industry experiences (Dhanbad coal, Mumbai textiles) | Generic or limited examples—mentions WPM without Indian cases, refers to 'some companies' vaguely, or provides only textbook examples without contemporary relevance | No examples, or inappropriate ones—foreign cases dominating where Indian context expected, or factually incorrect citations; complete absence of legal references where statute-based analysis required |
| Conclusion & analytical edge | 20% | 10 | Synthesizes across parts to advance coherent HRM thesis—e.g., linking selection validity concerns to need for participative management as complementary systems, or connecting union weakness to state of industrial democracy; offers forward-looking policy recommendations grounded in analysis | Summarizes parts separately without integration; conclusion merely restates points made, or offers generic recommendations without analytical foundation | No conclusion, or abrupt ending; alternatively, introduces entirely new arguments in conclusion; purely descriptive closure without evaluative or prescriptive element |
Practice this exact question
Write your answer, then get a detailed evaluation from our AI trained on UPSC's answer-writing standards. Free first evaluation — no signup needed to start.
Evaluate my answer →More from Commerce & Accountancy 2024 Paper II
- Q3 (a) What are the major criticisms levelled against Herzberg's two-factor theory of motiva…
- Q4 (a) Why does organizational politics emerge? What are its consequences? Suggest measures…
- Q5 Answer each of the following questions in about 150 words: (a) Discuss the problems faced…
- Q6 (a) "Tests are useful in predicting the failure rather than success of the candidate on t…
- Q7 (a) What do you mean by a model employer? Critically examine the role of public enterpris…
- Q8 (a) "There are two approaches of managing industrial disputes in an organization—preventi…