summer internship report arun kabra

A report on

Process Optimization of Monitoring Activities at

NSDC

Submitted as a part of summer internship

UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF

DR. ANAND TELTUMBDE

PROFESSOR, VGSOM

IIT KHARAGPUR

BY

KABRA ARUN HARIPRASAD

11BM60046

VINOD GUPTA SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT

IIT KHARAGPUR

Summer Internship Report

2 Process Optimization of Monitoring Activities at NSDC

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

“Too often we are so preoccupied with the destination, we forget the guiding light.” – Anonymous

I take this opportunity to extend my sincere thanks to National Skill Development

Corporation (NSDC) and VGSoM - IIT Kharagpur for offering a unique platform to

earn exposure and garner knowledge in the field of Operations and Systems

Management.

First of all, I extend my heartfelt gratitude to my project guide Mr. Jaykant Singh,

Head, MIS and Monitoring at NSDC for having made my summer training a great

learning experience by his giving me his guidance, insights and encouragement

which acted as a continuous source of support for me during this entire period.

I am deeply indebted by Mr. Prashant Jha, Ms. Garima Singh and Mr. Neelabh

Sanghal for their invaluable inputs for my questions, queries, doubts, etc. and

constructive criticism from time to time during my summer internship period, without

which, the success of this project wouldn’t had been possible.

I would also like to express my profound gratitude to my faculty guide Dr. Anand

Teltumbde for his constructive support during the summer internship period which

lead to successful completion of my internship at NSDC.

Kabra Arun Hariprasad

11BM60046

MBA class of 2013

VGSoM, IIT Kharagpur



Table of Contents

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ............................................................................................................................. 2

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................ 6

2. PROJECT OBJECTIVES .......................................................................................................................... 7

3. LITERATURE SURVEY ........................................................................................................................... 8

3.1 Analysis of Monitoring and MIS process at NSDC ......................................................................... 8

3.2 Requirement Elicitation .............................................................................................................. 10

4. NSDC BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................... 15

5. MONITORING AT NSDC ..................................................................................................................... 20

5.1 Data Collection Objectives .......................................................................................................... 20

6. ANALYSIS OF MIS & MONITORING ACTIVITIES ................................................................................. 24

6.1 Information Needs of Monitoring Team ..................................................................................... 24

6.1.1 Revised Annual Plans ........................................................................................................... 24

6.1.2 Monthly Dashboards ............................................................................................................ 25

6.1.3 Skill Development Management System (SDMS) ................................................................ 25

6.1.4 Quarterly Funds Utilization Certificates (UC) ....................................................................... 27

6.2 Gap Analysis ................................................................................................................................ 28



6.2.3 Skill Development Management System (SDMS) ................................................................ 30

6.3 Propositions Made & Current Status .......................................................................................... 32



6.3.3 Skill Development Management System ............................................................................. 34

7. ANALYSIS OF BUSINESS MODELS AT PARTNER LEVEL ....................................................................... 37

7.1 Social parameters ....................................................................................................................... 38

7.2 Financial parameters ................................................................................................................... 40

7.3 Computing the final score for partner ........................................................................................ 42

7.4 Current Status ............................................................................................................................. 42

8. SKILLPEDIA WEB PORTAL .................................................................................................................. 44

8.1 Skillpedia stakeholders ............................................................................................................... 45

8.2 Skillpedia features ....................................................................................................................... 46

8.3 Recommendations for data format to be uploaded on Skillpedia web portal ........................... 47



8.3.1 Job Seeker data: ................................................................................................................... 47

8.3.2 Skill Provider/training partner data: .................................................................................... 48

8.3.3 Finalized Data tables for Skillpedia web portal .................................................................... 48

8.4 Recommendations for User Interface of Skillpedia web portal .................................................. 50

8.5 Current Status of Skillpedia website ........................................................................................... 51

9. REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................................... 53



1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

As a part of my summer training at National Skill Development Corporation (NSDC),

I worked with the MIS and monitoring team with research and analysis at partner

level. During the course of two months my focus area was the ongoing monitoring &

MIS consolidation activities. The objective of the project was to understand the

monitoring process at NSDC, analyze the data shared by partners to evaluate the

best business model based on performance and identify the gaps & issues to

streamline the ongoing monitoring process & activities. It was observed that the

since most of the partners were in their growth stage with some being in introduction

phase, the training numbers received from the partners were low. Considering the

growth shown by big partners who had been operational for over a year, the

numbers had increased substantially.

The other important projects in which I was involved were related to the development

of SDMS portal and skillpedia website. The SDMS project involved me analysing the

SOW of Talisma Corporation as against the RFP for building SDMS and finding the

gaps in proposed details in SOW versus requirements specified in RFP. For the

Skillpedia project I had to coordinate with the Sify team during the transition of

Skillpedia website from existing #.NET frame work to the new Drupal framework. The

website was rebuilt from scratch and the user interface was redesigned and made

more user friendly. Changes to the data format to be uploaded on the skillpedia

website were also recommended.



2. PROJECT OBJECTIVES

On the day of induction at NSDC, the HR manager had explained the objectives that

I was expected to meet, my role and responsibilities during the tenure and

deliverables to be shared at the end. This included:

Objectives:

1. Analyse the ongoing MIS & monitoring activities for spotting trends and

exceptions in data received from partners to identify gaps and risks.

2. Evaluate the performance of partners based on the monthly monitoring data

shared by them.

3. Analysis of the business proposals, contracts and data to identify the best

business model.



3. LITERATURE SURVEY

3.1 Analysis of Monitoring and MIS process at NSDC

Process innovation means performing business activities in a new way. Process

innovation is generally a discrete initiative and it also implies the use of specific

change tools and technology for enterprise engineering and transformation of

business processes (Davenport, 1993). Process benchmarking and business

process re-engineering (BPR) have become two main methodologies used to

implement business process improvement and have attracted much attention in a

current fast-changing environment. Leveraging best practice has become the

important factor of process benchmarking and BPR. Accurate knowledge of the gaps

between best practice processes and a company's business processes is essential

for the redesign of business processes (Juan & Yang 2004). In the existing BPR

methodologies there exists a big division in business analysis techniques due to the

black and white approach used in most cases. In some of them, cost is the central

issue, in others generic management or the successful use of IT. As a result

business analysis techniques are directed towards this central issue ignoring any

other means of analysis.

For process benchmarking, most of the participating companies use self-developed

methods rather than established methodologies to capture and compare process

data (Poulson 1996). By comparing and analysing the core processes in detail,

process benchmarking could provide an insider’s view of another company’s

operation in a way that identifies distinctions between the practices of the two

companies (Watson 1992).

Since there is no standard for business process model comparison, one possible

approach is first to clarify the semantic relationship between model objects and then

to analyse the gaps in processed data and process logic for compared process

models. Considering the wide variety of objects provided by the framework and the

different use and meaning of object names used by different project teams, the

semantic relationship between model objects of compared process models must be

studied closely. To this end, related semantic analysis methods for various model

objects should be developed (Juan & Yang 2004).



In BPR, tacit knowledge plays a very important role. In considering its implication for

BPR, three attributes of tacit knowledge merit particular emphasis. First, tacit

knowledge, by definition, is highly personal. It is created by and sourced within single

individuals. Thus, individuals can be expected to have highly personal perspectives

on BPR. Second, tacit knowledge doesn't happen accidentally: it emanates from and

evolves out of each individual's background, experiences and context. Third,

although it is essentially a personal phenomenon, substantial consistency and

concurrence is typically evident across the tacit knowledge of individuals who have

shared similar backgrounds, experiences and contexts. It is for this reason that it is

possible to talk of an organization's tacit knowledge, that is, a group of individuals

who share a broadly similar perspective on the world around them including the

merits and limitations of BPR. (Fahey 1998)

IT and Processes (Olalla, 2000)

Processes may be classified according to two dimensions: degree of mediation and

degree of collaboration (Teng, 1994). The degree of mediation refers to the

sequential flow of input and output among the participants' functions in a business

process. A process at a high degree of mediation involves a large number of

intermediate steps, performed in various functions that contribute indirectly to the

process outcome. A process at a low degree of mediation has several functions that

contribute directly to the process outcome without the mediation of sequential steps.

The degree of collaboration dimension is related to the degree of collaboration

between functions through information exchange. The frequency and intensity of

information exchange can range from none (process at the low degree of

collaboration) to extensive (process at the high degree of collaboration).

Today's environment is demanding firms to quickly develop and offer products that

will satisfy customers' needs. Companies may not be able to do this if they use

processes with many steps and scarce collaboration. Consequently, this

environment forces a change in business processes to feature reduced mediation

and increased collaboration.



The following architecture for business process redesign wherein Information system

acts as a facilitator (Kettinger, Teng & Guha. 1996):

3.2 Requirement Elicitation

Effective requirements elicitation is essential to the success of software development

projects. Requirements elicitation (RE) is a critical phase in information systems

development (ISD), having significant impacts on software quality and costs. While it

has remained a key topic of interest for IS researchers, a review of the existing

literature suggests that there are very few studies examining how the social process



associated with RE unfolds. Prior literature acknowledges that this process involves

collaboration between RE participants (e.g., user-reps and systems analysts) where

knowledge regarding the system requirements is shared, absorbed, and co-

constructed, such that shared mental models of the requirements can form.

However, collaboration and knowledge sharing within the RE process has been

characterized as tenuous in the literature, given that the groups of RE participants

bring very different kinds of knowledge into this activity, and trust among the two

parties cannot be guaranteed at any point. (Chakraborty, Sarker 2010)

Information system success is dependent upon the effectiveness of requirements

elicitation. Information requirements determination (IRD) is commonly considered the

most important activity in information systems development. Requirements elicitation

is subject to numerous challenges, however, including cognitive limitations of

analysts. Improving requirements determination is a critical goal in information

systems development. It is generally accepted that poor requirements determination

is a primary cause of system development failures. Elicitation of requirements from

key stakeholders is vital to system success, but unfortunately is a major stumbling

block in the systems development process. Users and other stakeholders often are

unsure about their needs and/or are unable to articulate them clearly, requirements

typically change during the course of a project, and analysts are often poorly trained

in information gathering techniques. (Pitts, Browne, 2007)

Cognitive challenges of requirements elicitation (Pitts, Browne, 2007)

Requirements elicitation is subject to three fundamental cognitive challenges: (1)

limitations of humans as information processors; (2) the complex nature of

requirements; and (3) the obstacles encountered in user and analyst interaction



Cognitive challenge Effect on IRD

Working memory

Capacity

People have limited capacity in

working memory.

Analysts may only consider a subset of

all possible alternatives.

Bounded rationality

Because of cognitive limitations,

people construct simplified models of

problems.

Analysts may utilize poorly constructed

or faulty models of the problem.

Long-term memory

Difficulty in recall

People are unable to accurately recall

everything from memory.

Analysts may rely too much on existing

processes rather than alternative

incidents in memory.

Reconstructive nature

People reconstruct events from

portions of memory.

Analysts may reconstruct an

inaccurate representation of the

situation.

Availability

Recency

People are influenced more by recent

events than by events of the past.

Analysts will be biased by more recent

IS development experiences.



Ease of recall

People are more likely to remember

events that are vivid.

Analysts may base the IRD task on a

vivid or highly successful IS

development project.

Anchor and adjustment

Insufficient adjustment

People often make judgements by

establishing an anchor and adjusting

from that point; the adjustments are

usually insufficient.

Analysts will tend to anchor on

currently available information and

may be unable to conceive of any

alternatives that would improve the

current situation.

Overconfidence

People consistently exhibit

overconfidence in their knowledge,

even when their level of knowledge is

poor.

Even with little substantive knowledge

of a domain, overconfidence may

cause an analyst to exhibit a false

understanding of the problem. As a

result, he is likely to overlook

alternative or contradictory information

Representativeness

Insensitivity to sample size

People do not consider the effects of

sample size and draw faulty

conclusions based on small samples.

Analysts may build or modify their

models of the requirements based on

low occurrences of information.



Other

Confirmation bias

People tend to seek only confirmatory

evidence and fail to consider

alternative hypotheses.

Once the analyst has developed a

model of the requirements

determination task, he may no longer

look for other alternative models.



4. NSDC BACKGROUND

The National Skill Development Corporation (NSDC) has been instituted to address

the compelling need to strategize and operationalise a world-class skill development

solution pertinent to the Indian context, to effectively drive the speedy development

of skills essential to sustain the country’s growing economy.

NSDC is a first-of-its-kind Public-Private Partnership (PPP) model in India with a

focus toward skill development. It aims to promote skill development by catalyzing

creation of large, quality, for-profit vocational institutions. It provides funding to build

scalable, for-profit vocational training initiatives. Its mandate is also to enable support

systems such as quality assurance, information systems and train the trainer

academies either directly or through partnerships.

The objective of NSDC is to contribute significantly (about 30 per cent) to the overall

target of skilling / up-skilling 500 million people in India by 2022, mainly by fostering

private sector initiatives in skill development programmes and providing funding.

NSDC acts as a catalyst in skill development by providing funding to enterprises,

companies and organisations that provide skill training. It will also develop

appropriate models to enhance, support and coordinate private sector initiatives.

NSDC was set up as part of a national skill development mission to fulfil the growing

need in India for skilled manpower across sectors and narrow the existing gap

between the demand and supply of skills. A large part of its efforts are directed at

skill development programmes in the unorganised sector across India.

Organizational Overview

NSDC acts as a catalyst, enabling skill development initiatives to scale, by providing

viability gap funding to enterprises, companies and organisations that provide skill

training. NSDC may also develop appropriate PPP models to enhance, support and

coordinate private sector initiatives to achieve its objectives.

NSDC’s understanding of the need for skill development has spurred varied

approaches towards each of the 21 skill sectors under its purview, making each and

every sector attractive for privazte investment.



NSDC Structure

NSDC is a not-for-profit company set up by the Ministry of Finance, under Section 25

of the Companies Act. It has an equity base of 10 Crore, of which the Government of

India accounts for 49%, while the private sector has the balance 51%.

To ensure superior decision-making, NSDC requires a structure and governance

model that provides it with autonomy, stature and continuity. Thus, the organisation

has a tiered decision-making structure comprising:

Each has a clear-cut role in the NSDC’s operations, activities and strategy to

facilitate the organisation’s mandate of coordinating and stimulating private sector

skill development programmes with enhanced flexibility and effectiveness. The 12-

member board has four government nominees, one of whom is the chairman of the

corporation (from the private sector) and eight are private sector members. The

NSDF is a 100% government-owned trust that invests in the NSDC, and is run by

professional fund managers.

The Board of Directors Board Sub Committees

Executive Council National Skill

Development Fund (NSDF)

Decision Making



NSDC’s Role

The role of NSDC is to facilitate or catalyse initiatives which would have a multiplier

effect. In doing so, it will strive to involve the industry in all aspects of skill

development. The approach will be to develop partnerships with multiple

stakeholders and build on current efforts, rather than undertake too many initiatives,

directly or by duplicating efforts that are currently underway.

Objectives of NSDC

To scale up efforts that are necessary to achieve the objective of skilling and or up

skilling 150 million people, NSDC will strive to:

I. Develop ultra low cost, high-quality, innovative business models

II. Attract significant private investment

III. Ensure that its funds are largely “re-circulating”; i.e. loan or equity rather than

grant

IV. Create leverage for itself

V. Build a strong corpus

VI. Develop Labour Market Information System

Skill Development Funding

Till date Ministry of finance has sanctioned Rs.2500 Crore for NSDC funding. The

NSDC provides skill development funding either as loans or equity, and supports

financial incentives to select private sector initiatives to improve financial viability

through tax breaks etc. NSDC’s financing initiatives provide viability gap funding

through:

I. Loans

II. Equity

III. Grants

NSDC has committed for funding in tune of Rs.1205 Crore through combination of

above three.



Process of Funding

NSDC facilitates initiatives that can potentially have a multiplier effect as opposed to

being an actual operator in the skill space. In doing so, it strives to involve the

industry in all aspects of skill development. The approach is to develop partnerships

with multiple stakeholders and build on current efforts, rather than undertaking too

many initiatives directly or duplicating efforts currently underway.

Keeping this in mind, the NSDC plays three key roles:

I. Funding and incentivising: This involves providing financing either as loans

or equity, providing grants and supporting financial incentives to select private

sector initiatives to improve financial viability through tax breaks etc. The

exact nature of funding (equity, loan, and grant) depends on the viability or

attractiveness of the segment and, to some extent, the type of player (for-

profit private, non-profit industry association or non-profit NGO). Over time,

the NSDC aspires to create strong viable business models and reduce its

grant-making role.

II. Quality Assurance by enabling support services: A skills development

institute requires a number of inputs or support services such as curriculum,

faculty and their training, standards and quality assurance, technology

platforms, student placement mechanisms and so on. NSDC plays a

significant enabling role in some of these support services, most importantly

and in the near term, setting up standards and accreditation systems in

partnership with industry associations. NSDC has provided Quality guidelines

to its partners for centres, facilitators guide, trainers guide, coursework,

assessment, feedback and certificates.

III. Setting up Sector Skill Councils (SSC’s): NSDC has the mandate from

Govt of India to setup the Sector Skills Council for 20 identified Industry

Sector, who would be looking after the industry related skilling concept,

processes, certification, accreditation and quality framework

a. Conducting research develop competency standards, skill inventory

database, international trends, technology trends etc



b. Improving the delivery mechanism developing and improving

modules, developing training delivery mechanisms, training the

trainers, apprenticeship etc

c. Building quality assurance - certification and accreditation process,

other pedagogy.

The proposal evaluation, funding, tracking the operations of NSDC partners and

developing standards for NSDC are taken care by following teams:

I. Program Development (PD)

II. Investing and Incentivizing (I&I)

III. Standards and Quality Assurance (QA)

IV. MIS & Monitoring



5. MONITORING AT NSDC

Monitoring team comprises of Mr. Jaikant Singh who heads the Monitoring team at

NSDC and Mr. Neelabh Singhal who is the Monitoring Co-ordinator. NSDC has

outsourced team of consultants from Accenture for technical and financial monitoring

of all NSDC sponsored projects.

5.1 Data Collection Objectives

The key objectives of data collection by the monitoring team in line with NSDC

objective of skilling 150 million people are listed below:

I. Keep track of performance of partners against NSDC’s overall training goals.

II. Provide early view of risks (financial, operational, social) from the partners

end to enable early mitigation.

III. Use the knowledge gained to ensure informed decision-making for further

funding of training initiatives.

IV. Identify any course corrections needed, at the:

a. Partner/ Sector Skill Councils (SSCs) level (to improve business and

social performance)

b. Overall NSDC level (to inform future strategy and partner choices)

In order to achieve its objectives, the monitoring team of NSDC is working in tandem

with the skill development partners and Sector Skill Councils (SSC’s). The key

activities performed by the NSDC’s monitoring team are shown below:



Monitoring Activities

Currently the monitoring team is trying to build a robust and effective evaluation

framework in order to ensure that the partners meet their projected targets and

appropriate utilization of funds is achieved. Monitoring and Evaluation of

partners/SSCs is done on a periodic basis using following information:

Monitoring Activities

Contract Monitoring

Disbursment Process

Data Collection &

Consolidation

Quality Compliance

Data Analysis

Reporting



Consolidation of Data

Revised annual plans

Monthly Dashboard

Skill Development Management

System

Quarterly Funds

Utilization Certificate (UC)



6. ANALYSIS OF MIS & MONITORING ACTIVITIES

6.1 Information Needs of Monitoring Team

The information needed by the monitoring team is collected from the partners in the

form of:

6.1.1 Revised Annual Plans

Before the start of every financial year latest by Feb 10, all the active and operational

NSDC partners i.e. all the partners who had training programs going in the previous

financial year are required to submit their month wise annual plans for the upcoming

year. These annuals plans are than discussed with the respective partners to outline

the problems faced by partners and detail out the reasons for deviations in training

numbers along with the corrective actions that the partner needs to undertake.

This revised plan is used to monitor the performance of the partners on a monthly

basis. This also helps the monitoring team to review its partnership if a substantial

deviation is observed and help the partners with intervention and appropriate

interventions.

Template for annual plans is available on the NSDC website and captures following

main parameters:

Annual Plan

Number of

people to be

trained

Number of

people to be

placed

Number of new districts

to be covered

Number of new

states to be

covered

Number of new sectors to be

covered

New Centres

to be started

Annual Capacity

at centres

Number of

Batches planned

Number of

courses offered

Staffing details



6.1.2 Monthly Dashboards

All the active and operational partners of NSDC need to report their operational,

financial and social details with the monitoring team. The key parameter of these

details includes:

6.1.3 Skill Development Management System (SDMS)

The Skill development management system (SDMS) will cater to the requirements of

National skill council and NSDC. The National skill council will primarily use SDMS

for monitoring and viewing the reports and dashboards from NSDC and other entities

involved in skill development. NSDC will use SDMS to receive and track proposals

from potential partners, store and retrieve agreements with partners, funding

management, tracking repayments from the partners, monitoring and viewing reports

and dashboards.

The key functions of the SDMS tool are as listed below

Monthly Dashboards

Number of people

trained

Number of

trainees placed

Number of centres open and courses offered

Quality of courses

imparted to

trainees

Revenue generated

by the partner detailed

at the centre level

Fund utilization

by partner



6.1.3.1 Business Functions

I. Proposal Management – The proposals submitted by various organizations

for funding would be required to be updated in this module and will be

operated by NSDC to track the status of the proposals.

II. Agreement/Contract Management – All the organisations/entities funded by

NSDC and their agreement/contracts would be required to be updated in this

module and this module will be operated by NSDC to track deliverables of the

contracts it enters into with its funded organisations/entities.

III. Dashboard and Reporting – This function will primarily be used for

performance monitoring by National Skill Council and NSDC.

6.1.3.2 Support Functions

I. Administration Module – This function will take care of the activities like

setting up of users, roles, system data, workflow configuration and audit

control.

II. Infrastructure & Systems Management – This function will take care of

administration of infrastructure elements.

III. Document Management – This function will enable search & retrieval of

documents.

IV. Data Integration with external entities –

a. Partner Integration – Each NSDC Partner will upload the performance

data into SDMS.

b. All the entities involved in Skill Development initiatives in India will be

mandated to upload performance data into SDMS.

The process to build and develop SDMS was started in January 2012. An RFP was

floated and bid proposals were invited. Out of all the proposals received, based on

technical and financial evaluation done by an expert committee from industry,

academia and ministry, final contract to build, maintain and develop the SDMS was



awarded to Talisma Corporation. Talisma Corporation has committed to work with

NSDC on a zero cost model.

6.1.4 Quarterly Funds Utilization Certificates (UC)

With respect to monitoring financial data, each partner is expected to submit a

quarterly fund utilization certificate. A utilization certificate details out proposed

versus actual fund utilization status for the partner for previous quarter as on date

and hence includes details about the CAPEX (infrastructure, land, marketing etc)

and OPEX (rent, salaries, R&D etc) expenditures of partners.

A partner is expected to get his funds utilized verified by an authorized Chartered

Accountant and submit a copy of utilization certificate to NSDC duly signed by the

Chartered Accountant.

Recently based on the feedback that was received from the partners over the last

one year, an improved an error free UC sheet was shared with partners and data

was received from the partners in the expected format with precise details.



6.2 Gap Analysis


Based on the annual plan sheets shared by active partners for the financial year

2012-13, it is observed that most of the partners have shared variation only in

training and placement data. The number of centres, states covered and district

covered remaining same for the year as mentioned in contract.

While computing the placement data, it is assumed that the most of the partners

have committed for placement of at least 70% of the trained candidates in their

contracts. As the committed placements numbers are percentage of the trained

candidates, the variation in two would remain same. The following table displays

details captured from the partner contracts and their respective annual plans:

We see major deviation (-47% overall) in the number of training data as committed in

agreement and in annual plans. This is seen mainly for partners who had earlier

Center Details Course Details

S. No. Active Partners

Trainings to

be done for

FY 2012-13

(as per

agreement)

Trainings to be

done for FY

2012-13 (as

revised by

partners)

Deviation as

per the new

plan

% Deviation

from

agreement

Placement to be

done for FY 2012-

13 as per

agreement (70%

of total trained)

Placement to be

done for FY 2012-

13 as revised by

partners (70% of

total trained)

States to

be

covered

till March

2013

Districts to

be covered

till March

2013

Number of

centers

projected till

March 2013

No. of Courses

being rolled out

till date

1 B-ABLE 20,000 18,150 -1,850 -9% 14000 12705 Pan India Pan India 155 54

2 IIGJ 1,700 438 -1,262 -74% 1190 307 1 1 1 28

3 Gram Trang 4,200 4,428 228 5% 2940 3100 2 7 13 19

4 I-Skill 28,603 10,500 -18,103 -63% 20022 7350 8 55 80 10

5 Pratham Institute 1,45,000 15,500 -1,29,500 -89% 101500 10850 NA NA 80 15

6 GRAS 75,500 12,000 -63,500 -84% 52850 8400 7 35 40 18

7 iSTAR 3,975 2,000 -1,975 -50% 2783 1400 2 8 10 3

8 Edubridge 16,000 7,050 -8,950 -56% 11200 4935 4 60 60 5

9 Empower 62,800 58,796 -4,004 -6% 43960 41157 10 25 92 5

10 Centum WSI 90,000 90,000 0 0% 63000 63000 10 110 110 4

11 IISD 4,554 5,660 1,106 24% 3188 3962 5 11 11 9

12 TMI e2E 28,822 23,858 -4,964 -17% 20175 16701 NA NA 11 8

13 TalentSprint 2,800 2,800 0 0% 1960 1960 1 1 5 8

14 ISDC 55,991 33,221 -22,770 -41% 39194 23255 21 34 28 38

15 Globsyn 19,800 10,214 -9,586 -48% 13860 7150 1 5 5 11

16 Everonn SDI 5,35,320 2,25,883 -3,09,437 -58% 374724 158118 12 42 285 37

17 JobSkills 17,802 7,975 -9,827 -55% 12461 5583 9 29 6 5

18 CREDAI 7,200 7,000 -200 -3% 5040 4900 1 NA 20 6

19 Laqsh 16,814 10,100 -6,714 -40% 11770 7070 5 37 35 6

20 Laurus 29,610 14,005 -15,605 -53% 20727 9804 20 48 67 45

21 IIJT 29,027 29,027 0 0% 20319 20319 Pan India Pan India 172 24

22 GTVE (GOLS) 6,000 6,000 0 0% 4200 4200 1 10 10 7

23 NIIT Yuva Jyoti Ltd. 10,750 12,184 1,434 13% 7525 8529 4 44 44 8

24 Britti Prosikshan 2,340 1,380 -960 -41% 1638 966 1 13 16 2

25 Future Sharp 25,000 15,800 -9,200 -37% 17500 11060 12 97 100 2

26 Providers 2,040 2,045 5 0% 1428 1432 1 2 2 1

27 Ants Consulting 10,000 10,150 150 2% 7000 7105 4 13 10 3

28 ASTM 5,009 5,009 0 0% 3506 3506 8 21 10 3

29 Pratham EFE 0 30,000 30,000 0% 0 21000 NA NA 1,450 0

12,56,657 6,71,173 -5,85,484 -47% 8,79,660 4,69,821 2,928 384Total

Geographical DetailsTraining and Placement Details as per annual plans`



committed big numbers. The main reasons as suggested by partners in annual plans

are:

I. Slower ramping up seen at new centres i.e. it’s taking more than anticipated

time for the partners to attract students for training programs.

II. Smaller than expected batch sizes enrolled for courses

Out of active 29 partners only 12 have shared details about upcoming planned

centres and course details. So it is difficult for monitoring team to track the

performance of remaining 17 partners for number of centres and courses.


A macro enabled excel based dashboard template has been designed by Accenture

to capture all the above detail parameters. This template has been shared with all

the partners and needs to be filled on monthly basis and shared back with NSDC.

During the last partners meet it was decided that the dashboard template needs to

be shared back by 5th of every month. In case of exigency or urgency the snapshot

of data could be asked prior to this date.

Once the dashboards are received, data from all the partners is consolidated to

prepare a summary of the above mentioned parameters. Health of partner is

determined based on the % targets achieved through a robust validation method. If a

partner’s number are not good enough and well below targets he is asked to explain

the reasons for the same along with corrective actions that would be taken by him to

meet the numbers in next month.

During the process of consolidating the data following data issues were observed:

I. MIS template was not thoroughly tested. Several errors were seen and

reported by the partners, which have been communicated to the Accenture

team.

II. Macros were removed by several partners in the sheet while entering the

data.



III. Some partners added/removed data columns as per their convenience

without giving any justification.

IV. Several partners opted to do a copy paste of data from some other excel

sheets. This removed several security checks, duplication checks present in

the dashboard template. Making the purpose of macro enabled dashboard

template redundant.

V. Several partners changed the data types in which the data was requested.

This included the data mainly about caste, gender, religion district and state.

Using such type of data is very difficult to analyse. Data cleaning needs to be

done each time before compiling data for all partners.

VI. The biggest concern with using the data from the partners was having

incomplete data. Several fields in the dashboard sheet were left blank.

6.2.3 Skill Development Management System (SDMS)

The general practice followed by NSDC is that the training certificates needs to

issued and managed by the training partner itself. But there is no provision with

NSDC of verifying how many certificates are actually issued.

Along with the ongoing SDMS development, Pitney Bowes has approached NSDC to

provide a unique secured solution for certificates issued by its partners. This solution

would involve using the pbSecure system developed by Pitney Bowes by partners in

generating certificates. The key features of the solution offerings are:

I. Securing data at the point of origination in both Online / Offline environment.

II. Enable setting up of a central registration pool capturing important elements

of the student and the course enrolled.

III. Updating student records pertaining to new course enrolled / higher level

certification achieved etc.

IV. Creation of single student records from Registrations , Certifications & up-to

employment that can be updated throughout the student’s journey through

NSDC affiliates

V. Secured Out-Put Format , covering issuance of certificates / mark sheets at

the end of the Skill development



VI. Provide options of Offline / Online Verification processes independent of the

Issuer

VII. Secured reliable & Authentic MIS system

6.2.3.1 Advantages as compared to SDMS system

Parameters Pitney Bowes Talisma SDMS

Issuing Certificates

Tracking Issued Certificates

In Centre Certificate Verification

Offline/Non Centre Certificate

Verification

Certificate Tracking

6.2.3.2 Disadvantages as compared to SDMS system

Parameters Pitney Bowes Talisma SDMS

Additional Maintenance cost

Additional Hardware requirement

Additional Software requirement

Additional cost for printing certificates

Analysis of the proposal for using this solution suggests that implementation of

secured certificate system through pbSecure would be helpful in avoiding:

I. Duplication of data

II. Certificate Tampering

III. Internal and External Data breach



6.3 Propositions Made & Current Status


In line with the objective of keeping track of performance of partners as against

NSDC goals, the annual plans act as the benchmark data to compare with the actual

performance of partners on a monthly basis. Following propositions were made

based on the observations of the annual plan sheets shared by the partners:

I. Upcoming proposals must be analysed for realistic and achievable target

numbers which would consider the factors of ramping up and batch size. This

is necessary in order to avoid the high deviation as seen by most partners this

year.

II. All the partners must be mandated to fill in centre details and share the course

list along with annual plans. This would help the monitoring team to track the

performance of partner more effectively.

Roadblocks ahead:

I. The annual plans would be asked only by next February. So it won’t be

possible to get the accurate and complete information from all the partners till

then.

II. The monitoring team has limited say in Proposal Evaluation Committee as it is

headed by Investing and Incentivizing team. A very strong case has to be

presented before the committee to get their approval.

Current Status:

a) The partners are asked to fill in term sheets and get it approved from the PEC

to be utilized for current financial year with the updated targets.


In order to meet the objectives of predicting risk, take informed decisions and track

performance of the partners, it is necessary that the monitoring data received is

accurate, complete and in expected format. While analysing the data sheet to find

out gaps, it was observed that following changes could be incorporated to improve

the quality of data received from partners through MIS template:



I. The MIS template can incorporate following details to make it more effective:

a. Date of employment in candidate details sheet can be changed to date

of joining.

b. Field to enter Staff strength is missing. Can include this field in centre

details sheet.

c. Centre contact person's name is missing against centre contact

number. Can include this field in centre details sheet.

d. Centre start date is missing in new template. Can include this field in

centre details sheet.

II. Through testing of the MIS template needs to be done to overcome the errors

and issues observed during consolidation.

III. Since all the partners share the consolidated data for the current financial

year, they append the data for current month after the data from previous

month. Several partners do not take the effort to update the details of

candidates who were undergoing training in previous month and have

completed training in this month or have got jobs this month. This results in

duplication of data and gives incorrect training and enrolment numbers. To

avoid this it can be recommended to use separate sheets for undergoing

training candidates, trained candidates and placed candidates in the same

dashboard template.

IV. For catering the issues with incomplete data from partners, dashboard

templates shared by partners should be rejected and sent back if it has more

than 8% incomplete data records. This would mandate the partners to fill in

details completely. The percentage of blank data can be reviewed based on

degree of compliance expected from the partner.

V. Several follow up calls needs to be made to partners for sharing the data.

Also the data shared is of poor quality. This results in monitoring team

requesting for snapshot of numbers from the partners. There is no way to

verify the numbers reported in snapshot against the poor data. Need to

identify a mechanism to avoid this.

VI. A lot of dependency is made on a single person who collects data and

consolidates it for reporting purpose. Need to remove this dependency by

making SDMS available as soon as possible.



Roadblocks ahead:

I. Partners are not comfortable with using the new template which was prepared

to capture all the details in same sheet as they were familar with the old

template and reluctant to transit to the new and improved sheet.

II. The developer who had developed the sheet is not available for

accommodating the necessary changes in the new sheet found while testing

the sheet as he is busy with other projects.

III. The new sheet was shared only at end of March and partners had reluctantly

accepted to share data in new sheet, it would not be good on face for NSDC

to ask the partners again accommodate to error free sheet.

IV. The entire monitoring activity is outsourced to Accenture based on fixed bid,

the dependency on the single person for collecting the data can’t be

eliminated or reduced till the time SDMS comes in place.

Current Status:

I. NSDC, after a thorough discussion, would be hiring three data operators to

correct the errors in the data received till date.

II. A new developer is being searched to make the suggested changes in the

MIS template.

III. On call training is being given to all the partners to enter details in the new

MIS template.

IV. Till the time MIS template is made error free, a snapshot of numbers along

with the data is asked from all the partners for building the master dashboard

of all the partner data together.

6.3.3 Skill Development Management System

Current Status:

I. Detailed discussions with Talisma in progress to fine tune the SOW and MSA

in order to avoid any additional future costs due to change requests.

II. Cognizant team has accepted to assist NSDC with project management on

Pro-Bono basis in SDMS development.



III. Cognizant team is currently reviewing the draft SOW and MSA shared by

Talisma for finding gaps between requirements from RFP and details covered

in SOW.

IV. SOW and MSA were expected to be finalized and signed by June end but it

has been postponed till mid July.



7. ANALYSIS OF BUSINESS MODELS AT PARTNER LEVEL

To analyze the business model of the partners a triangulation method was

recommended to NSDC. This project was jointly done with Accenture This method

involves:

I. Desktop based validation: Validation of data provided by selected partners

with respect to actual training and placement numbers as against targets.

Done by contacting the training centre or employer with whom the candidate

is placed. This validation helps in verifying the correctness of data and

avoiding duplication of numbers if any.

II. Field based validation: Validation of data provided by selected partners with

respect to geographic, sector and social segment coverage. Field visits to

partner centres are used to understand ground realities and difficulties faced

by partners. This validation helps in understanding reasons behind good or

poor performance by the partners.

III. Document based validation: Validation of the documents like annual

reports, P&L statements, Balance sheets and auditors reports for the selected

partners. This type of validation helps in identifying risks and issues

Partner Performance Rating

Document based

validation

Field based

validation

Desktop based

validation



associated with the operational model, training costs and revenues of

selected partners.

Based on this approach, a comprehensive scorecard is developed which would

evaluate the partners based on set of social and financial parameters. Through a

series of discussions, for the purpose of partner evaluation, it was finalized that the

social parameters would be given 60% weightage while the financial parameters

would carry remaining 40%. Parameters would be measured with the actual

numbers delivered as against the committed numbers in contracts and annual term

sheets.

7.1 Social parameters

The parameters included for quarterly scorecard based evaluation of social

excellence are:

Whereas while preparing the annual score card following parameters are considered

for social excellence evaluation:

Social Parameters

for Quarterly Evaluation

% Trainees completing training vs.

target

% Trainees placed

No. of centers

operational vs proposed

Presence of quality

manuals for training



To find the scores for evaluating the partner on social excellence, the actual

numbers are pulled from the MIS dashboard submitted by the partners on the

monthly basis combined together for the quarter under analysis, while the expected

numbers are taken from the expected or committed numbers are taken from the

contracts and annual plans.

The following figure depicts the scoring process for social excellence

Social Parameters for Annual Evaluation

% trainees completing training vs.

target Broad sectoral

alignment with

proposed

Employer Satisfaction

Score

Trainee Satisfaction

Score

% trainees placed

No. of centers

operational vs proposed

Geographical spread

Presence of quality

manuals for training



Higher the score better for the partner. The score is computed on a scale of 0-100

points.

7.2 Financial parameters

The parameters included for quarterly scorecard based evaluation of financial

excellence are:

Whereas while preparing the annual score card following parameters are considered

for financial excellence evaluation:

Actual Scores of individual parameter

Color coding based on actual

scores

Derived score calculation based

on weightage

Total of individual derived score for output and input

parameters

Total score of social excellence

Financial Parameters

for Quarterly Evaluation

Earned revenue

over target ratio

Total fund utilization

Social Excellence score evaluation



To find the scores for evaluating the partner on financial excellence, the actual

numbers are pulled from the Utilization certificate and annual report submitted by the

partners, while the expected numbers are taken from the committed numbers in the

partner contracts.

The following figure depicts the scoring process for financial excellence

Financial Parameters for Annual Evaluation

Earned revenue

over target ratio

EBITDA over target

ratio

Interest service

coverage ratio

Debt to equity ratio

Total fund utilization

(Loan + Equity)

Deviation in fund

utilization (for grants)

Actual Scores of individual parameter

Derived score calculation based on risk point assignment

Total score for financial excellece based on sum of risk points assigned

to individual parameters

Financial Excellence score evaluation



Lower the score better for the organization. The scores are computed on a scale of

0-110 points.

7.3 Computing the final score for partner

While computing the overall excellence of a partner, the scores are normalized as

following:

I. For social excellence score, points are converted from range 0-100 to 0-60 by

directly multiplying the total by a factor of 0.6

II. For financial excellence score, points are converted from range of 0-110 to

40-0. This being implied from the fact that lower the financial score better it is

for the partner.

III. Finally the sum of above two normalized score is added together to get the

final performance excellence score for the partner.

7.4 Current Status

This evaluation framework was presented to the NSDC CEO and board members for

their approval to be used for evaluation of partners and their business models on a

regular basis. To demonstrate its usability and benefits, this method was used for

evaluation of partners for the recent partners meet to give the awards for the best

business model in different categories.



8. SKILLPEDIA WEB PORTAL

Skillpedia is an one of its kind initiative undertaken by NSDC. It is different from the

other job portal or skill websites, as it primarily aims to bridge the gap of demand and

supply of skilled personnel. It provides an opportunity for various categories of skill

providers, with respect to infrastructure, resources, training and assessment to

optimally pool in their resources through a common platform. It provides a simple

and easy to use common platform to skilled candidates and recruiting companies.

Skillpedia is an effort towards an open to all and free to use online platform for

promoting skill development initiatives undertaken by National Skill Development

Corporation (NSDC). It’s an inclusive tool for Skill Development in India. It aids

entrepreneurs with all possible information on Skill Development by identifying the

opportunities and also provides avenues for capability and capacity enhancement of

existing professionals in the field of Skill Development by facilitating a common

platform for knowledge sharing.

At the beginning of my summer internship, the development, maintenance and

hosting of skillpedia was handed over to Sify on a Pro-bono basis. So the

discussions with sify were mainly focused on requirements for Skillpedia website,

new look & feel and the development technique to be adopted for the website.



8.1 Skillpedia stakeholders

I. NSDC : To contribute significantly (about 30 percent ) to the overall target of

skilling/up skilling 500 million people in India by 2022, mainly by fostering

private sector initiatives in skill development programmes and providing

viability gap funding. NSDC would use skillpedia portal to bridge the gap

between demand and supply of skilled personnel.

II. Training Partners: To train and certify technical skills of the candidates.

Training & Skill Development organizations, Vocational Training Institute like

ITI / Polytechnic / NISI, NGO’s, Private organization, etc.

III. Employers: Organization both public and private requiring skilled manpower

in various domains with specific skills would get will get a rich database of

skilled resources.

Skillpedia

NSDC

Training Partners

Employers

Candidates

Assessment Agencies

Certification Agencies

Consultants

Infrastructure Providers

Instructors



IV. Candidates: Acquire in-demand skills after completing vocational training

from the Training institute and get employment opportunities as per skills

acquired.

V. Assessment Agencies: To evaluate the effectiveness of courses delivered to

the candidates at the training institutes, assessment agencies would access

skill assessment portal based on assessment tools and assessment modules

as defined by NSDC.

VI. Certification Agencies: On completion of training program candidate can

generate and print certificate by requesting the same to certifying agencies

which would validate candidate credentials and generate certificate with a

unique ID.

VII. Consultants: Consultants as approved by NSDC for different roles like

monitoring ongoing projects, marketing, skill gap mapping, competency

mapping, etc. would be viewed and contacted on skillpedia portal.

VIII. Infrastructure providers: All parties interested in providing their space on

lease for training programs approved by NSDC would share their details on

the skillpedia portal.

IX. Instructors/Trainers: Instructors interested in training candidates for

particular skill along with NSDC approved training partner would register and

submit their CV on skillpedia portal.

8.2 Skillpedia features

I. NSDC :

a. Create awareness on the importance of skill development & certification

with the ability to share information and best practices.

b. Roping in recognized assessment agencies for betterment of the employer

and the job seeker.

c. Provide regional level language support.

II. Training Partner :

a. Integrated Learning Management Portal which is Tutoring Delivery

Platform and Course Delivery Management System. Facilitates the

creation of collaborative knowledge.



b. Aid to training partners to fine-tune their course curriculum and introduce

new courses as and when required by industry.

c. Search facility on the parameters such as employers, infrastructure,

consultants etc.

III. Employers:

a. List of candidates available countrywide with Drill-Down search on

category/skill, state, city.

b. Single point to access candidate registered and certified by NSDC to tap in

training partners for bulk hiring.

c. Integrated and advance search capabilities to search right people for right

opportunity.

IV. Candidate:

a. List of agencies with details on different skills provided.

b. Details of available training programs on various skills certified by NSDC

and conducted by training partners on a pan India basis.

c. Complete list of openings for various categories are posted onto the site

and the employee in the respective city selects his choice and applies.

d. Details of employers open for recruitment.

e. Career assessment tool to choose the right career/job that suits the

candidates.

8.3 Recommendations for data format to be uploaded on Skillpedia

web portal

8.3.1 Job Seeker data:

I. The field of competencies is similar to courses undertaken by candidate and

current/preferred industry determines the sector. But there is no place to

determine the certification/training information. One column to include

certification details like ISTQB, Sun certified or NIIT needs to be added in

sheet.

II. Column for uploading experience details not present in current data format.

Need to include field for years of experience.



III. One more column for preferred job location (preference can be given for a

specific state or Pan-India) can be included. This would provide a facility to

employers to hire trained candidates for an option with preferred job location.

8.3.2 Skill Provider/training partner data:

I. Include details about the location where the course would be provided. New

column needs to be added

II. Column to provide contact details for training providers not present. This

would be useful for the candidates to contact the training partner for further

information and details.

III. Column for fee details is a deterring factor. Several students would refrain

from enquiring about or taking up the course after seeing the fee details. Can

be removed.

8.3.3 Finalized Data tables for Skillpedia web portal

After a thorough discussion with Accenture and Sify, following data tables were

finalized for the Skillpedia web portal

Employer Table:

I. Employer name

II. Job title

III. Job reference code

IV. Job roles & responsibilities

V. Sector

VI. Academic qualification required

VII. Competencies / certifications required

VIII. Years of experience required

IX. State

X. District

XI. Employer address

XII. Employer phone number and email

XIII. Full-time / Part-time



Jobseeker Table:

I. Resume title

II. Summary

III. First name

IV. Middle name

V. Last name

VI. Contact details

VII. Current location

VIII. Gender

IX. Academic qualification

X. Competencies / certifications

XI. Proficiency level

XII. Years of experience

XIII. Current / preferred industry

XIV. Function

XV. Detailed resume (word doc)

XVI. Preferred job location

Skills training table:

I. Course/Training Provider

II. Course Name

III. Course Description

IV. Course type- Classroom Training/ILT, WBT, Virtual Tutoring, Mobile Learning

V. Sector

VI. Eligibility criteria for enrolment

VII. Location where the course is conducted

VIII. Contact details of training provider

IX. Duration

X. Accreditation / certifying body

XI. Fee structure

XII. Financial assistance availability.

XIII. Collaboration with State/Central government agency



8.4 Recommendations for User Interface of Skillpedia web portal

Based on the discussions with Sify, it was finalized that the new user interface for the

skillpedia website would be developed on Drupal platform. The following images

display the changes made in the user interface for the skillpedia site:

Old Website



New Website

8.5 Current Status of Skillpedia website

I. Development of Skillpedia website completed on Drupal platform.

II. Performance testing of website in progress.

III. Existing data is being cleaned to be uploaded on the website at the earliest.

IV. User guide document for various user types (Candidates, Training providers,

and Employers) are under development. User guide document would indicate

the necessary details on skills training to be provided by training partners and

information on the skill requirements to be provided by employers



V. Partners have been instructed to upload the trained candidate details on the

website to upload the data manually till the time SDMS comes in place and

feeds the data shared by the partners automatically.

VI. Partners have also been instructed to manually upload details from their

annual plans about training programs for candidates.

VII. Monster is currently being consulted to improve the usage of the job portal on

skillpedia website.

VIII. Learning Management System (LMS) for skillpedia website under

development.

IX. Exploration of the necessary requirements for Voice-web technology and its

integration in Skillpedia to enable registration from vocational audience under

study.



9. REFERENCES [1] Juan, Y. C., & Ou-Yang, C. C. (2004). Systematic approach for the gap analysis

of business processes. International Journal Of Production Research, 42(7), 1325-

1364.

[2] POULSON, B., (1996), Process benchmarking in retail financial services.

Management Services,June, 1996, 12–14.

[3] WATSON, G. H., 1992, The Benchmarking Workbook: Adapting Best Practices

for Performance Improvement (Oregon: Productivity).

[4] Fahey, L. (1998). Business Process Redesign: The Implications of Tacit

Knowledge. Knowledge & Process Management, 5(2), 110-117.

[5] Abdi, N., Zarei, B., Vaisya, J., & Parvin, B. (2011). Innovation Models and

Business Process Redesign. International Business & Management, 3(2), 147-152.

[6] Davenport, T.H. (1993). Process Innovation: Reengineering Work Through

Information Technology. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

[7] Kettinger, W. J., Teng, J. C., & Guha, S. (1996). Information architectural design

in business process reengineering. Journal Of Information Technology (Routledge,

Ltd.), 11(1), 27-37. doi:10.1080/026839696345405

[8] Teng, J. T. C.; Grover, V.; Fiedler, K. D. (1994), "Business Process

Reengineering: Charting a Strategic Path for the Information Age," California

Management Review, 36, 3, pp. 9-31.

[9] Olalla, M. (2000). Information Technology in Business Process Reengineering.

International Advances In Economic Research, 6(3), 581.

[10] Chakraborty, S., Sarker, S., & Sarker, S. (2010). An Exploration into the Process

of Requirements Elicitation: A Grounded Approach. Journal Of The Association For

Information Systems, 11(4), 212-249.

[11] Pitts, M. G., & Browne, G. J. (2007). Improving requirements elicitation: an

empirical investigation of procedural prompts. Information Systems Journal, 17(1),

89-110. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2575.2006.00240.x

summer internship report arun kabra

Documents