EFFECT OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL METHODS ON EMPLOYEE PRODUCTIVITY IN KENYA; A CASE OF COMMISSION ON REVENUE ALLOCATION OF KENYA
We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!
A RESEARCH ROPOSAL SUBMITTED TO THE COLLEGE OF HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF MASTER OF SCIENCE DEGREE IN HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT OF JOMO KENYATTA UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE AND TECHNOLOGY
This proposal is my original work and has not been presented for a degree in any other University.
HD:-312 /C003/ 6726 /2015
This proposal has been submitted for examination with my approval as the University supervisor.
DR. ASSUMPTAH KAGIRI (PhD)
To my parents, Mr. and Mrs. Nzuki who gave life to me and have taught me the importance of education.
My gratitude goes to our Almighty God for giving me strength, wisdom and the ability to start and complete this project successfully.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank my Supervisor, Dr. Assumptah Kagiri for her dedication, time and effort to guide me on proposal stage of my study course. Your comments, advice, criticism and suggestions are highly appreciated. My appreciation also goes to the JKUAT-Westland’s for admitting me to undertake Masters’ Degree in Human resource.
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
PA Performance Appraisal
CRA Commission on Revenue Allocation
SPA Staff Performance Appraisal
MBO Management by Objective
BS Balanced Scorecard
DEFINITIONS OF TERMS
360 degree appraisal is a type of employee performance review in which subordinates, co-workers, and managers all anonymously rate the employee. This information is then incorporated into that person’s performance review. (Mahapatra, 2004).
Management by Objectives is a personnel management technique where managers and employees work together to set, record and monitor goals for a specific period of time. Organizational goals and planning flow top-down through the organization and are translated into personal goals for organizational members. The technique was first championed by management expert Peter Drucker and became commonly used in the 1960s (Akdeniz, 2015).
Balanced Score. A balanced scorecard is a performance metric used in organizations to identify and improve various internal functions of a business and their resulting external outcomes. It is used to measure and provide feedback to organizations. (Niven , 2010).
Rating Scale Appraisal -The rating scale method offers a high degree of structure for appraisals. Each employee trait or characteristic is rated on a bipolar scale that usually has several points ranging from “poor” to “excellent” (or some similar arrangement). (MacLean, 2001).
Performance Appraisal System- is a standardized process of obtaining, analyzing and recording information about the relative worth of an employee. (Dennis ,2002)
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1 Conceptual Framework 15
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1: Sample Frame 31
Table 3.2: Sampling Technique 32
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS v
DEFINITIONS OF TERMS vi
LIST OF FIGURES vii
LIST OF TABLES viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ix
CHAPTER ONE 1
1.1 Background to the Study 1
1.1.1 Global Perspective on Performance Appraisal System 3
1.1.2 Performance appraisal in Kenya 5
1.1.4 Commission of Revenue Allocation of Kenya 7
1.2 Statement of the Problem 8
1.3 Objectives of the Study 10
1.3.1 General Objective 10
1.3.2 Specific Objectives 10
1.4 Research Questions 10
1.5 Significance of the Study 10
1.5.1 National Government 10
1.5.2 Commission on revenue Allocation of Kenya 11
1.5.3 Researchers and scholars 11
1.6 Scope of the Study 11
CHAPTER TWO 12
LITERATURE REVIEW 12
2.1 Introduction 12
2.2 Theoretical Framework 12
2.2.1 Goal Setting Theory of Motivation (Locke and Latham, 1979) 12
2.2.2 Victor Vroom’s Expectancy Theory ( Kreitner & Kinicki 2007) 13
2.2.3 Equity Approach Theory (Adams 1965) 13
2.2.4 Behavioral change theory (Prochaska 1992) 14
2.3 Conceptual Framework 14
2.3.1 360-Degree Feedback 15
2.3.2 Management by Objective 16
2.3.3 Balanced Scorecard Method 18
2.3.4 Rating scale method 22
2.3.5 Employee Productivity 23
2.4 Empirical Review 24
2.5 Critique of Existing Literature 27
2.6 Research Gap 28
CHAPTER THREE 30
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 30
3.1 Introduction 30
3.2 Research Design 30
3.3 Target Population 30
3.4. Sampling Frame 31
3.5.2 Sampling Technique 32
3.6 Data Collection Instruments 32
3.7 Data Collection Procedure 33
3.8 Pilot Testing 33
3.8.1 Validity of the Study 33
3.8.2 Reliability of the Study 34
3.9 Data Analysis and Presentation 34
3.9.1 Data Analysis 34
3.9.2 Data Presentation 35
LIST OF APPENDICES 40
APPENDIX I: LETTER OF INTRODUCTION 40
APPENDIX II: QUESTIONNAIRE 41
APPENDIX III: TIME FRAME 46
APPENDIX IV: RESEARCH BUDGET 47
The need for effective performance appraisal in many institutions has been emphasized in recent times. In order to ensure continued efficiency and effectiveness of members of staff each organization has to carry out employee performance appraisal from time to time so as to keep them in check and replace, motivate, retrain or take any other appropriate action. The study aims to examine effect of performance appraisal methods on employee productivity in Kenya, a case of commission on revenue allocation of Kenya. The will be guided by four objectives; to determine the effects of 360 degree appraisal method on employee productivity in the Public sector in Kenya. To evaluate the effects of management by objectives (MBO) appraisal method on employee productivity in the Public Sector in Kenya. To evaluate the effects of balanced score card method of appraisal on employee productivity in Kenya. To establish the effect of rating scale appraisal method on employee productivity in the Public sector in Kenya. The study will be guided by four theories namely; goal setting theory of motivation; victor vroom’s expectancy theory; equity approach theory; theoretical model of behavioral change theory. The study will adopt a descriptive research design and the researcher will target a population of 65 staff members who form the entire populations of the organization. This study will adopt Cluster sampling technique. Both descriptive and inferential statistics will be adopted for the study. The quantitative data will be analyzed by using descriptive statistics which includes frequency distribution tables and measures of central tendency (the mean), measures of variability (standard deviation) and measures of relative frequencies. The inferential statistics will include a regression model which establishes the relationship between variables. Data will be analyzed by the use of a statistical software SPSS version 20. Data will be presented in the form of tables and charts.
1.1 Background to the Study
Performance Appraisal is a formal management system by which the job performance of an employee is examined and evaluated, with the intent of identifying their strengths and weaknesses for improvement in future. The Draft Performance Appraisal System Policy for the Public Service in Kenya (2008), views Performance Appraisal as a process of assessing and recording staff performance for the purpose of making management decisions on the staff. A systematic appraisal of employees make it possible to achieve various benefits like: encouraging quality performance by rewarding those who do well, improve current performance by giving workers feedback, identify the training needs, initiate fair disciplinary proceedings and provide a channel of communication between managers and their subordinates (Hannah, P. , 2009).
The idea of performance appraisal dates back in the 1st world war and was then called “Merit Rating Program”. Before the early 1980s, majority o f the theoretical studies emphasized on revamping the rating system within the organization. The actions were a great thing to reduce the chaotic of employee’s performance appraisal (Feldman, 2001). The merit rating or efficiency rating in Federal Civil service has been in place, since at least 1887 (Petrie, 2000) and perhaps as early as 1842 (Lopez, 2008) although this thought has gone through many modifications through the years. Indeed, a quick review of performance appraisal system historical roots shows that early research on performance appraisal has focused on such issues as scale development, scale formats reducing test and later bias and the like (Villanova 2002, Edwards, 2007; Ginford, 2004, Landy, 2000).
Execution of performance appraisal means that underlying assumptions to performance appraisal exist. According to Reinke (2006), one of the most basic assumptions is that employees differ in their contribution to the organization because of individual performance, and that supervisors are actually able and willing to distinguish between employees. Performance appraisal involves an employee knowing what is expected of him and remain focused with the help of the supervisor, tells them how well they have done that motivates the employees toward the good performance, (Casio,2003). Performance appraisal enables an employee to produce positive results in his work.
The capacity to achieve these positive outcomes will be a function of the quality of the performance appraisal (PA) experience. Performance appraisal is a complex process and there is scope for variation, particularly when the supervisor is required to make subjective judgments of employee performance; principles of work planning, setting of agreed performance targets, feedback and reporting. It is linked to other human resource management systems and processes including staff development, career progression, recruitment, placement, incentives and sanctions Milkovich & Boudreau, (2004).
Performance appraisal should be conducted periodically to evaluate an employee’s performance measured against the job’s stated or presumed requirements. It is important that members of the organization know exactly what is expected of them, and the yard sticks by which their performance and results will be measured. Mullins, (2010) substantiated the necessity of an effective appraisal scheme by saying that it can identify an individual’s strengths and weaknesses and indicate how such strengths may best be utilized and weaknesses overcome.
Mooney, (2009) suggested that performance is not only related to results but it also relates with activities and behaviors of employees that they adopted to achieve their given goals. Dessler, (2005) defined performance appraisal as comparing the employee’s present and past performance to his/her performance standards”.(Grubb,2007)says performance appraisals is a procedure to evaluate how individual personnel are performing and how they can improve their performance and contribute to overall organizational performance, (Beach,2001) Performance appraisal is the systematic evacuation of employees according to their job and potential development.
The purpose of performance appraisal is to assess employees’ performance as objectively as possible. The results of the performance appraisal are used in setting the direction for the individual performance development by bringing out both performance strengths and weaknesses and subsequently developing action plan to facilitate the desired development (Education Insight Document, 2007).
Weiss,(2001) indicated that to be productive ,the performance appraisal process must contain three steps: evaluation and job analysis, appraisal interview, and post-appraisal interview During the first step, both the appraiser and the appraisee should prepare for the interview by considering job performance, job responsibilities and employee career goals, goals for improving performance, and problems and concerns about the job. Sometimes both the appraiser and the appraise will fill out forms with questions addressing the previously mentioned topics. Next, managers and employees meet to discuss what they have prepared and to establish goals for the period before then outperformance appraisal. It is important that the appraisal interview be an exchange, not a speech. Both parties must be able to share their perceptions of the appraisee’s performance. The third step, the post-appraisal interview, gives managers the opportunity to discuss salaries and promotions with employees. By not addressing this issue during the appraisal interview, both managers and employees can focus on performance and goal setting, instead of money. The post-appraisal meeting also can serve as a time for reiterating employee goals. After appraising the performance of employees, an organization must evaluate the system itself to determine if it is helping to achieve designated organizational objectives Ryan & Deci, (2000).
1.1.1 Global Perspective on Performance Appraisal System
One impetus to the development of performance appraisal in U.S industry (Patten, 2007) can be traced to the work of industrial psychologists at Carnegie – Mellon University and their early work in salesman selection and “man-to-man” rating forms based on trait psychology (Scott, Clothier and Spriegel, 1941). By 1962, performance appraisal was conducted in 61% of the organizations (Spriegel, 1960) and typically top management was exempt from such ratings. Several surveys of business organizations have indicated that between 74% and 89% of those surveyed have a formal performance appraisal system (Bretz and Milkovich, 2009).
Further surveys concerning the prevalence of formal appraisal systems indicated that approximately 76% of the city governments sampled had appraised systems. Large organizations were more likely to have performance appraisal than smaller organization (95% and 84% respectively) and lower (74% to middle 71%) management levels were more likely to have formal appraisal systems than top management (55%) (Wilkstrom, 2007).
In Singapore, performance appraisal in the public service is known as PRAISE (Promotion, Ranking and Appraisal System) (Singapore public service Division, 2009). In South Africa, performance appraisal has been used to help public servants know what is expected of them, increase motivation, identify poor performance, improve poor performance, recognize and reward outstanding performance. More so, in Great Britain performance appraisal is used to set objectives and improve performance (Erasmus, Schenk, Westhuizen and Wessels, 2005).
In Parkistan, performance appraisal is often regarded as the most critical function of human resource management (Selvarajan and Cloninger, 2008; Smither and London, 2009). Several prior studies have revealed and suggested that effective performance appraisal system is the sign of integral component of effectiveness of human resource management of an organization (Zapata-Phelan et al., 2009). Performance appraisal has been studied widely in several organizations in the western context. Moreover, the prior literature on this subject aims at observational aspects and little emphasis is made on the empirical findings of the effectiveness of performance appraisal and its influence on employee performance (Selvarajan and Cloninger¸ 2008). Clearly, there is need to derive empirical findings on evaluation on effectiveness of performance appraisal system and its influence on employee performance in the context of Pakistan.
DeNisi and Pritchard (2006) have also noted that extant research on performance appraisal has excessively emphasized on psychometric issues rather than focusing on rigorous and systematic approach to performance appraisal that is more likely to enhance motivation level of employees for improving their performance. Roberson and Stewart (2006) found that employees respond to performance appraisal system in three perspectives that are: perception of fairness, perception of accuracy, and performance appraisal satisfaction. On the other hand, Selvarajan and Cloninger (2009) were of the view that performance appraisal provides consistent feedback to employees that enables them to improve performance. Formal performance appraisal has become a widespread instrument of human resource management.
Surveys reported in the 1970s and 1980s already indicated that between seventy four percent and ninety six percent of U.S. organizations, and a comparable proportion of British firms had a formal performance appraisal system in place. Large, complex organizations are especially likely to conduct formal appraisals (Berry, 2003).According to Reinke (2006) one of the most basic assumptions is that employees differ in their contribution to the organization because of individual performance, and that supervisors are actually able and willing to distinguish between employees.
According to Tziner and Kopelman (2002) this is fostered through the following mechanisms: raters’ identification of employees’ strengths and weaknesses, the provision of feedback and the facilitation of communication with supervisors. But if employees are confident in the fairness of performance appraisal process, they are more likely to accept performance ratings, even adverse ones (Roberts, 2003).
In summary, it can be concluded that performance appraisal systems become useless if they do not elicit positive reactions among raters and ratees (Tziner and Kopelman, 2002).Generally, this mainly deals with the performance appraisal system being accepted because it is perceived as being distributional and procedural fair and being a valid measure for the position at hand. Thus, in recognition of the large amounts of time and money that need to be invested to develop and implement an appraisal system, an ineffective appraisal system would be a severe threat and loss of resources to an organization. On basis of these facts it seems important for each organization to regularly check if their performance appraisal is perceived as intended and if users still support system and process.
Moreover, for long time, media houses in Tanzania were operating in the traditional public administration system using more objective forms of evaluation. This system was inherited by many institutions due to the influx of many media houses in the country in the late 1990’s, which resulted into big competitions among them. This led to the need for a mechanism that will make workers work hard to meet the organization objectives and to serve the growing public expectations (MCT, 2010). Mihayo (2010) in his study indicates that over 68 percent of journalists in newsrooms are not full time employees. Most of them don’t have contracts with employers and work under very harsh conditions.
1.1.2 Performance appraisal in Kenya
In Kenya, the appraisal system is used in the civil service and was introduced in 2006 due to Ministerial rationalization. The process was a government initiative with the aim to enhance efficiency and effectiveness in public service delivery through review of systems, processes and structures in the ministries and departments (Guidelines on deepening rationalization, 2002). One of the guidelines of rationalization was the inception of performance appraisal system which would involve participation, work planning, performance discussions and performance evaluation. This was a deliberate effort aimed at linking staff appraisal to individual work plans. In addition, the vision 2030 goals include improved performance, quality service delivery and promotion of transformative leadership in the government of Kenya (GOK) to meet the expectations of the citizens among other clients (Kenya vision 2030, 2008).
However, the successful roll out of the new performance appraisal system has not yet achieved envisaged results (Opiyo, 2006). According to the Government of Kenya (2009) there are various common problems with performance appraisals which include; unclear job descriptions and targets, too many forms to complete, low utility value of appraisal information, poor link between appraisal and reward and sanction scheme as well as negative attitude towards performance appraisal (Republic of Kenya 2005). It is thus important to examine the influence of job performance appraisal on people and organizations’ output.
In the 2005 Annual Human Resources Survey launched, it is clear that Kenyan Companies continue to place a premium on staff performance management. In line with the current global trend, organizations are seeking to retain staffs who achieve set objectives and appraisals are the commonest basis for performance management. A significant number of respondents in the survey said they carry out the formal staff appraisals twice a year. Turning to the approach adopted to appraise staff performance, most if the surveyed organization indicated that they base their staff performance appraisals on pre-determined targets and objectives (Clear performance standards) that were agreed with the respective staff.
Kodo(2003) in her survey of performance based compensation schemes in companies listed at the stock exchange found out that there was a complete absence of share ownership schemes and stock options and therefore companies faced difficulties in aligning compensation with performance. Salary does not depend on performance. Most companies considered experience, of the employees as well as education background when setting compensation scheme.
1.1.3. Performance Appraisal Process
According to Hannah (2009), Performance Appraisal is a formal management system by which the job performance of an employee is examined and evaluated, with the intent of identifying their strength and weaknesses for improvement in future. She further recommends that it is the usual practice in most places that managers conduct appraisal just to justify pay increase or decrease, forgetting that the sole purpose of performance appraisal is not salary increase or decrease, but the development of employee skills and the improvement of work in the office.
Smither, 2008 pointed out that there are eight characteristics for a successful performance appraisal system; they make sure that the appraisal criteria are relevant to the job, make sure that appraisal criteria are clearly defined, train raters on the appraisal process and sensitize them about impression management, conduct appraisals frequently and allow enough time for raters to appraise ratees thoroughly, make sure that appraisals are appropriate for individual or team goals, avoid overall appraisals, use more than one rater if possible; and make raters accountable for their appraisals.
Levinson (2005) further identified five steps in an ideal performance appraisal processes as; individual discussion with the superior about the job description, establishment of short-term goals, meet to discuss progression, establish checkpoints to measure progress, discussion at the end of a defined period to assess the results.
Hall (2009) describes merit rating also called staff appraisal or staff reporting as a method of assessing an employee in regards to the manner in which he performs his work and the various qualities essential for carrying out of his task. He further pointed out that the main objective is to make a systematic record of the judgment made on employees, for the purpose of enabling the management to exercise control over and guide working force.
According to Bamber et al, (2004) there is a variety of techniques used to carry out performance appraisals, from the simplest of ranking methods to complex ability and/or behavioural secured ratings systems as shown in Table 2.1:
1.1.4 Commission of Revenue Allocation of Kenya
The Commission on Revenue Allocation (CRA) is an independent Commission setup under Article 215of the Constitution of Kenya 2010. The principal function of the Commission on Revenue Allocation is to make recommendations concerning the basis for the equitable sharing of revenue raised by the national government between national and county governments; and among county governments. The Commission further makes recommendations on matters concerning the financing of and financial management by county governments, among other recommendations.
The Commission on Revenue Allocation is mandated in Article 216 (2) to make recommendations on matters concerning the financing of, and financial management by county governments as required by the Constitution and national legislation.The role of the Commission on Revenue Allocation towards the achievement of the aspirations of Vision 20130 and to promote equity in society through equitable sharing of revenue. The Commission also plays a vital role in enactment and enforcement of supportive legislations, creation of strong governance institution and enhance of human and technical capacity in all county governments.
The responsibility of the Commission is to advocate for adequate resources to be devolved and utilized in public service delivery. In addition, the Commission is an independent mediator between the two levels of government on equitable resource allocation while consistently promoting fiscal responsibility in public finance matters.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
Employee performance appraisals experience some shortfalls in the process which can result to the exercise adding little or no value to HRM activities. The purpose of employee performance appraisal has been misunderstood by some workers, everyone yearns to be rated as an excellent performer. It is misunderstood that being rated poor can point out to training needs in the area of challenge or better still lead to placement to rightful roles. Additionally the appraisals have even been used as punitive measures by colleague workers (Mondy ; Noel, 2005). For example if the relationship between the appraisee and the appraiser is sour, the performance appraisal will not be objective but rather subjective. On the other hand if the relationship of the appraiser and the appraisee is cordial the appraiser will seek to please the appraisee and even go to an extent of revealing the details.
At an organizational level, the performance appraisal system impacts other HR systems as well as organizational strategy. Latham and Wexley, (2001) asserted that the effectiveness of an organization’s performance appraisal system is a prerequisite for ensuring the success of its selection, training, and employee motivation practices. At a strategic level, the need for rapid and effective organizational change in today’s dynamic social, economic, and political environment requires that employees continually re-align their performance with the evolving goals and objectives of the organization (O’Donnell & Shields, 2002).
Various scholars have asserted on the findings surrounding performance appraisal Ouko (2008) assessed the extent of adoption of 360-degree employee performance appraisal process in private secondary schools in Nairobi.The research findings revealed that 360-degree employee performance appraisal has been widely adopted in private secondary schools in Nairobi.
The study also showed that employee job satisfaction is influenced positively by this appraisal method that allows for an all round gauge of an employee’s performance. 360-degree performance appraisal is used in the private schools to enhance individual teachers’ work performance thus bringing about improvement in quality and accuracy of work, job knowledge, ability to work as team members and quantity in output. Ochoti et al. (2012) investigated the multifaceted factors influencing employee Performance Appraisal System in the Ministry of State for Provincial Administration, Nyamira District. They found that implementation process, interpersonal relationships, rater accuracy, informational factors, and employee attitudes have a significant positive relationship with the performance appraisal system.
Nzuve and Ng’ang’a (2010) assessed employee percept ion of performance appraisal in the Department of Immigration in the Nairobi Region and found that though performance appraisal was built on solid principles, its implementation was related to the scope of application, highlights of the old performance appraisal system, implementation of the new system, training as a direct result of performance appraisal, advantages and shortcomings of appraisal in the department, appraisal interviews, feedback process and quality and the relationship between appraisal and performance, motivation, reward and sanction. Nzuve and Ng’ang’a (2010) concluded that management to a large extent fell short of full implementation of performance appraisal system.
Many studies have focused on performance appraisal methods. It’s in this light that the study seeks to fill this knowledge gap by determining the effect of performance appraisal methods on employee productivity in Kenya.
1.3 Objectives of the Study
The study will be guided by both general and specific objectives:
1.3.1 General Objective
The general objective of the study is to examine effect of performance appraisal methods on employee productivity at Commission on Revenue Allocation in Kenya.
1.3.2 Specific Objectives
The specific objectives of the study are;
1. To determine the effects of 360 degree appraisal method on employee productivity in the Public sector in Kenya.
2. To evaluate the effects of management by objectives (MBO) appraisal method on employee productivity in the Public Sector in Kenya.
3. To evaluate the effects of balanced score card method of appraisal on employee productivity in Kenya.
4. To establish the effect of rating scale appraisal method on employee productivity in the Public sector in Kenya
1.4 Research Questions
1. What is the effect of 360 degree appraisal method on employee productivity in Kenya?
2. Does MBO have effect on employee productivity in Kenya?
3. What are the effects of balanced scorecards appraisal method on employee productivity in Kenya
4. How does rating scale appraisal method affect employee productivity in Kenya?
1.5 Significance of the Study
1.5.1 National Government
This study would provide useful information to the national government in order come up with better tool on job appraisal and for them to develop useful strategies on effective and efficient on staff appraisal system.
1.5.2 Commission on revenue Allocation of Kenya
The researcher believes that the findings of this study will be of use to the management of CRA in understanding the successes and challenges of the appraisal process and its effect on staff performance. This will contribute to improvement in the staff appraisal process.
1.5.3 Researchers and scholars
The study will also contribute knowledge to the field of staff appraisal and other academicians and future researchers may carry out further research on various aspects of the study findings. This will further the understanding of performance appraisal and job performance.
1.6 Scope of the Study
The study will be limited to Commission on Revenue Allocation (CRA). The respondents of the study will be Commissioners, Chief executive officer, directors, managers and senior staff, and support staff in the Commission totaling to a target population of 65 staffs. The study will adopt descriptive research design using primary and secondary data to give comprehensive information for purposes of drawing conclusions.
This chapter summarizes the information from other researchers who have carried out their research in the same field of study. The specific areas to be covered here are theoretical; which discusses the theories that support and are related to the study. The next area of discussion is the empirical review where variables in the research objectives will be discussed. Lastly, a summary of the chapter will be provided.
2.2 Theoretical Framework
This section reviews theoretical proposition that have relevance to the understanding of the subject matter under study. Theoretical frameworks are important tools in research as they help researchers focus and ground their research questions (Murphy, 2009). Bacharach (2009) defined a theory as a statement of relations among concepts within a boundary assumptions and constraints.
2.2.1 Goal Setting Theory of Motivation (Locke and Latham, 1979)
Goal-setting theory states that motivation and performance are higher when individuals are giving specific goals, when goals are difficult but accepted and when there is feedback on performance. Motivation and performance will improve if people have challenging but agreed goals and receive feedback (Armstrong, 2003). The theory of Emotional Intelligence deals with how individuals respond to felt emotions with behavioral responses like those emotions evoked by receiving corrective feedback, it describes how a trigger or situation can evoke an emotional response, which leads to a behavioral response.
This theory explains the reaction a 360 degree review process provokes in learners. Individuals possess differing levels of Emotional Intelligence Skills which allow them to deal with their own emotions as well as with the emotions of others. Some individuals have the motivation or ability to control behavioral effects of negative emotions such as anger, fear and anxiety, and still perform in a positive way even when their emotional state is negative. Individuals high in this skill are likely to react to negative or disconfirming feedback by attempting to diagnose the causes of low performance and actually increase their effort directed at improving performance. These types of individuals react to 360 degree reviews as organizational leaders’ hope, motivated to change behavior and improve performance. Others with low skill development in this area are likely to quit at the first sign of failure or invalidation, negatively impacting productivity and the organization (Scott, 2001).
2.2.2 Victor Vroom’s Expectancy Theory ( Kreitner ; Kinicki 2007)
Expectancy theory is an idea that was introduced by Victor Vroom. The theory as explained by Kreitner ; Kinicki, (2007) is based on the assumption that people are motivated to act in ways that will be followed by valued and desired outcomes. The theory says that an employee might be motivated when there is a belief that a better performance will result in a good performance appraisal which will help in the realization of personal goals. The theory focuses on motivation as the combination of valence, instrumentality and expectancy. Valence is the value of the alleged result. Instrumentality is the point of view of an individual whether he or she will really obtain what they want. It shows that successful act will eventually lead to the desired result. Expectancy refers to the different level of expectations as well as confidence regarding one’s capability. Employees believe that these create a motivational force and this force can be represented by the formula: Motivation = Valence x Expectancy. The theory focuses on three things namely, efforts and performance relationship, Performance and reward relationship and rewards and personal goal relationship.
2.2.3 Equity Approach Theory (Adams 1965)
Adams (1965) formulated the equity approach as an appropriate way to effective supervision. Equity simply means fairness. Workers are motivated when they discover that they are treated fairly in compensation, promotion and that there is transparency in their evaluations. Workers reduce their efforts if they feel that they are treated inequitably (Fulk et al. 1985; Hyde, 2005). According to equity theory, an employee’s perception of the fairness of his work’s input and outcome influences his motivation (Guerrero et al., 2007). Effective performance management systems enable a manager to clarify job responsibilities and expectations, develop an employee’s capabilities, and align an employee’s behavior to the company’s strategic goals and values. An employee typically feels satisfied with the outcome of his effort, including his pay, when the compensation matches what he feels he puts into the job. If an employee perceives that others get more for doing less, he typically becomes less motivated to work hard. Managers create a productive work environment by communicating job requirements clearly and establishing fair and consistent performance objectives for all employees.
2.2.4 Behavioral change theory (Prochaska 1992)
The Theoretical Model of Behavioral Change, developed by Prochaska et al (1992), point out the criticality of understanding and identifying the stage an individual is in before successful change intervention can be designed and applied. One of the model’s major contributions is the recognition that behavioral change unfolds in a series of stages (Prochaska et al., 1992). Prior to the 360 degree process, employees are usually in what Prochaska et al (1992) term the Pre-contemplation stage, at which there is no intention to change behavior in the foreseeable future. This is when employees are unaware of problems or that there is a need for change. Once the 360 degree process is adopted and implemented and the employee begins to receive feedback, they move into the Contemplation stage, in which individuals have identified a problem. It is during this stage that employees are deciding whether or not there is a need to take action to correct the problem. An employee enters the Preparation stage once that individual decides there is a need to take some action. In the 360 degree process, the employee discusses the trends of the feedback with their supervisors and identifies common themes. Specific plans of action are developed as the employee chooses among potential solutions.
The action stage is where the employees actually put their plan to work and begins to change behavioral patterns. The months following the 360 review process compose the maintenance stage where the employee works to prevent relapse. They have become cognizant of the gains attained, and are motivated to sustain progress.
2.3 Conceptual Framework
Conceptual framework represents the relationship between the dependent and independent variables in a schematic manner. The independents variables are management by objectives, benefits of performance appraisal and 360 degree feedback. The dependent variable is the employee productivity. This is presented in figure 2.1:
Figure 2.1: Conceptual Framework
Independent Variables Dependent Variable
2.3.1 360-Degree Feedback
Armstrong (2006) outlined 360-degree feedback as a relatively new feature of performance management whereby interest is slowly growing among organizations to use the method. The Institute of Personnel and Development 2003 survey (Armstrong & Baron, 2004) found that only 11 per cent of the organizations covered used it hence the need to carry out this study. Organizations use the 360 degree feedback performance appraisal process to evaluate the individual employees. This comprehensive performance appraisal system provides feedback on a manager’s performance collected from a variety of people with whom he interacts regularly. 360-degree feedback requires the employer to survey co-workers, supervisors, subordinates and even customers about each employee’s performance. The multiple feedback channels offer objective perspectives of behavioral traits and actions. “From 360-degree feedback, the worker is able to set goals for self-development, which will advance their career and benefit the organization,” according to Terri Linmann, author of “360-degree Feedback: Weighing the Pros and Cons.”
The 360-degree feedback process is directly related to a set of competencies that the literature, Research and organization identify as critical to leadership and management effectiveness (Cacioppe and Albrecht, 2000). As Pernick, (2001) proposes, the competencies defined should be Correlated with organizational effectiveness. Furthermore Hayes, Rose-Quirie and Allinson (2000) explained that while the major aim of leadership development is to ensure that leaders will be able to perform effectively in the future, studies have shown that the leadership competency framework developed for use in 360-degree feedback generally focuses on what managers do in the present. A more promising approach is therefore to ensure that organisations focus 360-degree feedback on the competencies that are likely to make the most significant difference in the future (Kur & Bunning, (2002).
Newbold, (2008) says that 360 degree appraisals are classics. 360 degree appraisals are a powerful addition to the performance management system. It should be in alignment with the strategic aim of the organization. The author also focuses on the success of the 360 degree feedback. It is a success only because of few factors like the purpose being clear, organization readiness, employee preparation, the way it has to be run, and finally effective delivery of the feedback.
2.3.2 Management by Objective
Management by Objectives (MBO) is a process of agreeing upon objectives within an organization so that management and employees agree to the objectives and understand what they are in the organization. The term “management by objectives” was first popularized by Peter Drucker in his 1954 book ‘The Practice of Management’. The essence of MBO is participative goal setting, choosing course of actions and decision making. An important part of the MBO is the measurement and the comparison of the employee’s actual performance with the standards set. Ideally, when employees themselves have been involved with the goal setting and the choosing the course of action to be followed by them, they are more likely to fulfill their responsibilities.
According to Drucker managers should avoid ‘the activity trap’, getting so involved in their day to day activities that they forget their main purpose or objective. One of the concepts of MBO was that instead of just a few top-managers, all managers of a firm should participate in the strategic planning process, in order to improve the implementability of the plan (Drucker, 1954;2004). Another concept of MBO was that managers should implement a range of performance systems, designed to help the organization stay on the right track (Drucker, 1954;2004). Clearly, Management by Objectives can thus be seen as a predecessor of Value Based Management!
MBO principles are: Cascading of organizational goals and objectives, Specific objectives for each member, Participative decision making, explicit time period, and performance evaluation and feedback. Management by objectives also introduced the SMART method for checking the validity of the Objectives, which should be ‘SMART’ (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Time-related). In the 90s, Peter Drucker put the significance of this organization management method into perspective, when he said: “It’s just another tool. It is not the great cure for management inefficiency.MBO works if you know the objectives, 90% of the time you don’t.” The principle behind Management by Objectives (MBO) is to create empowered employees who have clarity of the roles and responsibilities expected from them, understand their objectives to be achieved and thus help in the achievement of organizational as well as personal goals.
MBO has some important features and advantages. One of them is motivation – Involving employees in the whole process of goal setting and increasing employee empowerment increases employee job satisfaction and commitment. The other feature is better communication and Coordination – Frequent reviews and interactions between superiors and subordinates helps to maintain harmonious relationships within the enterprise and also solve many problems faced during the period. The other one is clarity of goals. Well to be supposed if yet this management by objectives has certain advantages as well as disadvantages, it is a virtual technique for effective management and it takes around 5 years to get MBO yielding results.
There are several limitations to the assumptive base underlying the impact of managing by objectives. One of them is that it over-emphasizes the setting of goals over the working of a plan as a driver of outcomes. It underemphasizes the importance of the environment or context in which the goals are set. That context includes everything from the availability and quality of resources, to relative buy-in by leadership and stake-holders. As an example of the influence of management buy-in as a contextual influencer, in a 1991 comprehensive review of thirty years of research on the impact of Management by Objectives, Robert Rodgers and John Hunter concluded that companies whose CEOs demonstrated high commitment to MBO showed, on average, a 56% gain in productivity. Companies with CEOs who showed low commitment only saw a 6% gain in productivity.
Companies evaluated their employees by comparing them with the “ideal” employee. Trait appraisal only looks at what employees should be, not at what they should do (Cannie, 2009). It also did not address the importance of successfully responding to obstacles and constraints as essential to reaching a goal. The model didn’t adequately cope with the obstacles of defects in resources, planning and methodology. It also did not address the increasing burden of managing the information organization challenge and the impact of a rapidly changing environment, which could alter the landscape enough to make yesterday’s goals and action plans irrelevant to the present.
When this approach is not properly set, agreed and managed by organizations, in self-centered thinking employees, it may trigger an unethical behavior of distorting the system of results and financial figures to falsely achieve targets that were set in a short-term, narrow, bottom-line fashion (Castellanol, 2004). The use of MBO needs to be carefully aligned with the culture of the organization. While MBO is not as fashionable as it was before the ’empowerment’ fad, it still has its place in management today. The key difference is that rather than ‘set’ objectives from a cascade process, objectives are discussed and agreed, based upon a more strategic picture being available to employees. Engagement of employees in the objective setting process is seen as a strategic advantage by many. A saying around MBO and CSF’s – “What gets measured gets done”(Behn, 2003) – is perhaps the most famous aphorism of performance measurement; therefore, to avoid potential problems SMART and SMARTER objectives need to be agreed upon in the true sense rather than set.
2.3.3 Balanced Scorecard Method
Kaplan and Norton 1992 introduced balanced scorecard as a performance measurement tool for the first time. Till now many changes have been made to the physical design, application and the design processes used to implement the tool, that have enhanced the utility of balanced scorecard as a strategic management tool Norton ( 2001). The ending purpose of BSC is to provide the key success factors for the managers and aligning the performance with the overall strategy of the organization. Kaplan and Norton (2001) claim that BSC could provide the managers, an organization leading tool for achievement in future competitiveness Baldry (2000).
Some scholars knew BSC as strategic performance management system that translates the strategic goals of organization to its related performance measures White (2000). The purpose of BSC is to implement organization goals and vision in practice. This model assumes the goals and strategies by translating the organizational goals to key success factors in the BSC four perspectives, as a center of organizational performance control system Kaplan (2006).The BSC according to Kaplan and Norton has four measurement perspectives, which are summarized as follows (Figure 1). They include financial perspective, customer perspective, internal process perspective and learning and growth perspective.
Organizations which use this model, customize it with their own processes and environment, therefore there is no necessity in applying the four perspective of BSC or they could affix another perspective to BSC, according to their needs Kaplan ( 2006).
Figure 2.2: Perspectives of the balanced scorecard.
BSC is effectively used in manufacturing, service and governmental organizations. In spite of BSC usages in industry sector being well documented, very little research has been reported regarding the adaptation or application of the BSC in the education sector Karathanos (2005). Amaratunga and Baldry used BSC in measurement of higher education sector, performance, then they confirmed the relation between performance measurement and performance quality based on BSC model Amaratunga (2000). Delker (2003) developed a BSC model for the California State University in his thesis in order to get the Master of Business Administration Degree. In this thesis the BSC measures for university appraisal were evolved and implemented Delker ( 2003).
Cullen et al. (2003) proposed the use of BSC in support to underscore the essence of performance management instead of performance measurement. Sutherland (2000) reported that the Rossier School of Education at the University of Southern California adopted the balanced scorecard approach to assess its academic program and planning process Karathanos ( 2005).
Chen et al.(2006) in their study, have focused on the use of the BSC to establish an evaluation system for the performance of Chin-Min Institute of Technology (CMIT).They have developed BSC as strategic management tool for HEIs in Taiwan.
Umashankar (2007) used the balanced scorecard concept and discuss in what way it should be applied to higher education programs/institutions in the Indian context Dutta,( 2007). Papenhausen (2006) used the BSC in Management faculty of the University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth. The purpose of the survey was to show how the Balanced Scorecard approach, a performance management system, could be implemented at a college of business. Cullen (2003) developed the BSC model for management and business administration faculty of Mid Ranking UK University Kettunen (2006).
The balanced scorecard has been heralded as one of the most significant developments in management accounting Atkinson (2007). A recent study by Bain & Company indicates that 57 percent of firms worldwide use the balanced scorecard, including 75 percent of large firms and 64 percent of firms in North America Bilodeau (2005). Further, greater scorecard usage is associated with improved performance, regardless of firm size and product life cycle Hoque (2000).
Early writings on the balanced scorecard focused on the ability of multiple measures to provide a more balanced perspective of firms’ performance Norton (2002). Under this view, the four scorecard categories (financial, customer, internal processes, and learning and growth) keep managers from focusing solely on financial performance measures. Norton (2002) also emphasizes balance between internal and external measures, between outcome measures and drivers of success, and between objective and subjective measures of performance.
More recently, scorecard proponents have shifted their emphasis from balance to the strategy, arguing that the scorecard serves as a tool for defining strategic objectives and communicating them throughout the organization, identifying initiatives to achieve those objectives, and evaluating whether those objectives have been achieved (Kaplan ; Norton 2000, 2001; Niven 2002; Buytendijk et al. 2004). Scorecards are tied to strategy through the “strategy map” (Kaplan and Norton 2000), also called a “value driver map” (Ittner and Larcker 2003). Strategy maps translate expected results into testable hypotheses to enhance “strategic learning,” the process of using the strategically aligned scorecard measures as a way of measuring the success of strategy (Kaplan and Norton 2001). If linkages in the hypothesized causal chain of performance prove spurious, the scorecard, or the strategy that drives it, can be adjusted.
Balanced-scorecard implementation issues have also received increased emphasis in recent years (Niven (2002) and Kaplan and Norton (2006)). Viewed narrowly, scorecard implementation involves (among other things) the selection of measures, the collection of scorecard-related data, the formatting of scorecard reports, and the dissemination of scorecard information. When the scorecard is viewed as a tool for defining, executing, and measuring strategy, scorecard implementation also involves the allocation of decision rights regarding strategy selection and plans for achieving those strategic objectives. Kaplan and Norton (2006) recommend that scorecard development be a joint effort of unit managers and upper management. Cokins (2005) suggest that manager involvement in scorecard implementation generates “buy-in and ownership of the scorecard and key performance indicators.”
David (2007) identified a number of challenges associated with Strategy Evaluation. One of the challenges is the increase in environment’s complexity thus making it difficult to keep in pace with the changes in the business environment. The other challenge is the inability to predict the future with accuracy, thus it is possible to make incorrect predictions, which may result in altering otherwise sound strategies. Increasing number of variables is also a challenge since every time there are new measurements that have to be done and everytime data collection tools have to be re-modified. The other challenge is the rate of obsolescence of plans. Plans become obsolete with passage of time. Domestic and global events also affect the implementation of the balanced scorecard. The other challenge is the decreasing time span for planning certainty.
2.3.4 Rating scale method
There are various methods of performance appraisal. Whatever the method of performance appraisal an organization uses, it must be job related. Therefore, to selecting a performance appraisal method, an organization must conduct job analyses and have to develop job descriptions. Mathis, (2005). Although there are different types of methods under category rating, in graphic rating scale method, the rater assesses an employee or factors such as quantity of work, dependability, job knowledge, attendance, accuracy of work and cooperativeness.
The graphic rating scale method is subject to some serious weaknesses; one potential weakness is that evaluators are unlikely to interpret writhen descriptions in the same manner due to difference in background, experience and personality. According to Dessler (2011), Graphic Rating Scale is a scale that lists a number of traits and a range of performance for each. The employee is then rated by identifying the score that best describes his or her level of performance for each trait. The graphic rating scale allows the rater to mark an employee’s job performance on a five-point or seven-point scale. This method identifies certain subjective character traits, such as ‘pleasant personality’, ‘initiative’ or ‘creativity’ to be used as basic job performance criteria Mondy ( 2008).
Hacket (2006) states that performance appraisal ratings provide yet more structure for judgment, by requiring that the appraisee be scored against the checklist. Ratings can be numerical, alphabetical or behavioral anchored- that is, a description of different types of behavior which the job-holder could be expected to exhibit. Simple descriptive scales are used: for example ‘far exceeds required standard’, below required standard’ or well below required standard’
Performance appraisal practices require that the organization observes and records employees’ performance. That is, the appraisers should observe, and record their or someone’s behavior or performance. For making an effective performance appraisal, it is important to understand who assesses performance. This can be done by supervisors, peers, subordinates, self-appraisal and customers Griffin (2005).
Ali (2008) says rating scale is an aid to disciplined dialogue. It’s precisely defined format focuses the conversation between the respondent and the questionnaire on the relevant areas. Rating is a commonly used traditional method of performance appraisal. Under this approach, an employee is numerically rated from 1 to 10 on various job performance criterions like attendance, attitude, performance, output, sincerity, dependability, initiative, etc. The employee may be rated by his/her superiors, colleagues or even customers, depending upon the nature of job. Scores of all criterions are finally calculated, and results are withdrawn
Also Decktop (2006) looked Rating scales method on a different eye view and says that been used on a performance management systems is to indicate an employee’s level of performance or achievement. These scales are commonly used because they provide quantitative assessments, are relatively easy to administer and assist in differentiating between employees
2.3.5 Employee Productivity
Employee productivity (sometimes referred to as workforce productivity) is an assessment of the efficiency of a worker or group of workers. Productivity may be evaluated in terms of the output of an employee in a specific period of time. Typically, the productivity of a given worker will be assessed relative to an average for employees doing similar work. Because much of the success of any organization relies upon the productivity of its workforce, employee productivity is an important consideration for businesses Opatha (2008)
Employee performance can be measured in terms of responsiveness, morale, quality and quantity of production, and customer satisfaction, Ali (2008). Performance appraisal helps to identify areas of strong performance across all employees, by department or by demographics. Standardized performance assessments allow companies to aggregate, calculate and analyze results to show where performance is strong. These areas of strength then can serve as benchmarks and opportunities for sharing of best practices for other areas of the organization. Evaluating the results of performance appraisals can provide Human Resource managers and organizations with an indication of where additional training and development may be necessary. For instance, results may indicate that employees collectively are scoring low on items related to use of technology or customer service as stated by Kinicki ( 2002).
Employee performance appraisal drives employees in a firm to produce excellent standards of performance and even beyond the expectations. Employee performance can be measured in terms of responsiveness, morale, quality and quantity of production, customer satisfactions as narrated by Wanzare (2012). As Kovach (2007) put it any successful business knows much of its success is due to diligent workers with excellent productivity. Employees who put forth extra effort often make a big difference in company profits. The employees who do only what the job duties require, and no more, can stymie the progress of a company. It is important to motivate all employees to reach their full potential and maximal level of productivity. Companies that recognize and encourage increased productivity are likely to be more successful than their counterparts that don’t.
2.4 Empirical Review
2.4.1 360 degree feedback
3D group consulting company (2013) carried out a study on practices in 360 Degree feedback in North America, and found that nearly half of companies report using 360 in some portion of their performance management process. That 63 percent of organizations in the United States and Canada use 360 feedback results for some type of decision making, development and personnel. The types of talent management decisions include succession planning, high potential identification and training and curriculum planning. Furthermore, a startling 47 percent of companies report using their 360 degree feedback results for some part of performance management. ETS consulting Limited (2011) in a study carried out in the private sector in London, reported that 25% of companies used 360 for performance management. Research of senior human resource professionals representing 2.3 million private-sector employees showed that a quarter of medium and large companies were already using 360 for performance management and this figure continues to rise.
Edwards and Ewen (2006) thoroughly discuss the potential of 360-degree feedback and suggest that outcomes can include improved employee satisfaction, behavior changes that are aligned with organizational objectives, and better team performance. They caution about the significant challenge of converting the potential of 360-degree feedback into a sustainable system; however they conclude that the program does have a measurable impact on the fairness of the assessment process, and that it is a useful development tool for an organization.
2.4.3 Balanced Score Methods
Kommche and Birehanu (2017) did a study on the Practice and challenges of balanced scorecard implementation in Ethio Telecom. The study result showed that the major challenges that the organization faced are lack of knowledge on how to cascade corporate strategy, lack of IT support, the template that used to measure the performance is difficult to use, some measures are couldn’t be measured qualitatively, poor commitment of higher level management and the manual nature of BSc makes difficult to control its implementation. In the contrary, Ethio telecom got benefits from the implementation of BSC that most of employees starting doing their tasks based on plan and target and resources are utilized cost effectively.
Marin (2012) studied strategic planning and BSC and their effect on management performance in the Canadian Defence Sector. A questionnaire was used to collect data. Strategic planning and the BSC were well implemented in the Canadian Defence Sector. A positive impact was established between strategic planning and the BSC, and managerial competencies and performance.
Sharma and Gadenne (2011) studied challenges of BSC implementation in Australia. 13 senior managers in Local Government Authority (LGA) were interviewed. It was found that planning was the main challenge. Top management was found to be supportive in BSC implementation by some while others indicated authoritative leadership existed. Most indicated that communication was adequate with inadequate resources and high workload creating a major challenge to BSC implementation.
Hiwot, (2015) did a study on the practice and challenge of balanced scorecard implementation in Commercial Bank of Ethiopia. In her findings, different factors were identified as responsible challenges after balanced scorecard implementation in the bank. The study showed that after BSC implementation the impact is negative on the performance evaluation system in the bank as well as the key performance indicators are not measured the performance of the individual and the bank progress; Concerning the target given to the individual workers was not considered the internal capacity of the bank consequently the target was unattainable and unrealistic and the existing communication system was poor as a result it does not facilitate interactive way of communication.
2.4.4 Rating Scale method
Accordingly, formal appraisal is a systematic way of evaluating an employee normally done before the end of the term. It begins with self appraisals where appraisees evaluate themselves based on their performance, after which they record their achievements, areas of weaknesses, factors that influenced their performance and measures they thought could be done to address the situation. The two authors added that, formal method of evaluation depended on getting information about the appraisee from different sources (students, peers, direct superior, indirect superiors—such as deans and H.O.Ds). On the other hand, an informal appraisal did not have a systematic way of evaluating an employee (it did not have a start or end point). In addition one found difficulties in identifying the appraisers and appraises (Khoury and Analoui, 2004).
Khoury and Analoui study’s objective was to examine teachers’ perceptions of the effectiveness of the appraisal as conducted in the institution. Data was gathered through the use of various tools such as personal observation, literature review, survey and semi- structured interviews. The study found out that the whole faculty members ‘perceptions of the effectiveness of the appraisals process in the five Palestinian public Universities were described as not effective and members were dissatisfied in how it was conducted.
Based on staffs’ dissatisfaction, the study suggested that formal and informal appraisal system be adopted in order to improve performance appraisal process. The study agrees that an appraisal could be conducted in a formal or informal way. One of the strengths in Khourys and Analoui study is the use of observation as a way of collecting data. This enabled them to view what was really happening on the ground hence getting a more valid data. My study however did not use observation in data collection; this is because the researcher was not sure if evaluations will be conducted at the time of research.
2.4.5 Employee Productivity
According to Khan (2011), at organization level, trade unions can participate in the organization’s productivity improvement efforts by helping to create the organization policies and structures that will guide and facilitate productivity improvement, and helping their members directly to participate in the productivity improvement programs of the organization. Khan (2011) states that in Poland in the last three years more than 600 firms have undertaken productivity improvement programs through the joint efforts of trade unions and management, achieved growth 2 to 5 times the growth rate of the whole Polish economy. Productivity raised by 78 % (in one year) compared to 8 % in the total economy.
According to Maina (2014), teacher productivity, can be conceptualized in terms of students? academic achievement. He measured this in terms of students? scores ranked as excellent (80% and above), very good (70-79), good (60-69), fairly good (50-59), poor (40-49) and very poor (below 40). Most students in the sampled schools performed poorly. This indicates to the fact that the level of teacher productivity in terms of student academic achievement was poor Maina ( 2014).
According to the Republic of Singapore (2011), cited by (Mihail, Links, & Sarvanidis, 2013) productivity can be measured by a) measures of Output: Output can be in the form of goods produced or services rendered. Output may be expressed in physical quantity, financial value, and physical quantity. At the operational level, where products or services are homogeneous, output can be measured in physical units (for example, number of customers served, books printed, lessons, examination papers marked, trips that a lecturer takes students out). Such measures reflect the physical effectiveness and efficiency of a process.
According to the Ministry of Science and Technology, the teachers performance appraisal and development tool (TSC/TPDAD/01), indicates the following as indicators of employees productivity: Curriculum implementation, curriculum evaluation (Evaluation and monitoring of students academic performance), performance of administrative and supervisory responsibilities, managing student’s discipline, organizing and supervising student’s co- curricular activities, time management and setting targets (Government of Kenya, 2015).
2.5 Critique of Existing Literature
Appraisals are expected to meet too many and conflicting objectives. In particular the evaluative uses of appraisal drive out real conversation and thereby reduce its potential developmental and motivational impact. IES research Strebler, (2001) points to the problem with performance appraisals with their multiple objectives of setting targets, giving performance feedback, assessing potential, discussing development needs and determining performance-related pay increases. These schemes, therefore, often require resources to be implemented. Murphy (2004) equally recognizes that in many organizations appraisals are expected to fulfil numerous functions including: feedback, coaching, goal setting, skill development, pay determination, legal documentation, employee comparison and layoff selection and ‘no performance appraisal system can meet all these ends'(Murphy, 2004). The process is also considered to be too complex, time consuming and bureaucratic.
According to Leon (2007) many performance appraisal systems are helping to produce dysfunctional organisations, according to a workplace ethics expert. Michele “Micki” Kacmar, a management professor at the University of Alabama, says performance appraisals that just put ticks in boxes result in bad workplaces, bullying and high turnover. She says most workers are motivated more by respect than money. The trouble is most performance management systems fail to pick this up.
Moreover, Gabris and Mitchell in the 1980s found a disturbing bias in the appraisal process called the Matthew Effect. It is said to take place in cases where employees keep on receiving the same evaluation each year. This denotes that there is the belief that if an employee has worked well, he or she will continue on that pace. The Matthew Effect advocates that even if employees struggle to do well, their past appraisal reports will discriminate their future progress.
Accuracy is important in appraisals. However for raters to appraise employees accurately, they should give unbiased results. Unfortunately accurate ratings are quite impossible as researchers affirm that personal liking, look, former impressions, gender and race will certainly manipulate appraisals, that is, there will always be some kind of biasness.
2.6 Research Gap
The review of previous research reveals that research on performance appraisal methods has not been widely done especially in the public sector. Most of the previous study had focus on employee motivation and staff appraisal in the government. Oluoch (2007), conducted A Survey of the Relationship between Performance Appraisal Practices, Motivation and Job Satisfaction of Commercial Banks in Nairobi; Mwema and Gachunga (2014), conducted a study on The influence of performance appraisal on employee productivity in organizations a case of WHO offices in East Africa. With the practice of performance contracting between the government and all the government owned entities, performance appraisal becomes a key activity in these institutions to monitor their performance and service delivery. A study by Coens and Jenkins (2000) based on their experience in North America recommended ‘abolishing performance appraisals'(2000), citing regular failings in development planning, objective setting and 360 degree feedback. There is no known study that has focused on effects of performance appraisal on employee’s productivity in the Public sector basing specifically on the methods of performance appraisal. It is in the light of this that the study therefore seeks to fill this knowledge gap by determining the Effects of performance appraisal methods on employee productivity in the public sector.
2.7 Summary of Literature Reviewed
The Study has reviewed that Employee performance appraisal (EPAs) is a process for evaluating employee performance based on pre-set standards. EPAs help managers use human resources to improve productivity. They help employees improve their performance as well as help managers to assess staff effectiveness and take actions related to hiring, promotions, demotions, training, compensation, deployment as well as terminations. Performance appraisal is the systematic evacuation for employees according to their job and potential development.
This chapter describes the research design and methodology that was employed in the study. This includes the study design, target population, sampling for the study, data collection instruments and procedures and data analysis.
3.2 Research Design
According to Mcmillan and Schumaker (2001) a research design is a plan for selecting subjects, research sites and data collection procedures to answer the research questions. It is the conceptual framework within which research is conducted and constitutes the blueprint for the collection of data and the analysis thereof of the collected data. Primarily a descriptive study is concerned with determining the frequency with which something occurs or the relationship between variables. The study will adopt a descriptive research design.
According to Cooper (2003), a descriptive study finds out, who, what, where, and how of a phenomenon which is the aim of this study. In addition a descriptive study is concerned with finding out the what, where and how of a phenomenon (Ngechu, 2004), thus, this approach is appropriate for this study, since the researcher intends to collect detailed information through descriptions and this will also be useful for identifying variables and hypothetical constructs.
3.3 Target Population
Cooper and Emory (2005) defined population as the total collection of elements about which the researcher wishes to make some inferences. An element is the subject on which the measurement is being taken and is the unit of the study. The study targets employees in the commission of Resource allocation and more specifically the employees in the various department of the Organization.
3.4. Sampling Frame
Denscombe (2007) defines a sampling frame as an objective list of the population from which the researcher can make a selection. The study targets employees in the organization. The sample will be collected from the directorates and departments since these are the people involved in the day to day managing of the institutions thus, are well conversant with the subject matter of the study. In this case the entire population of the organizations will be used since the commission is a small organization and the population is less than 70.
Commissioners ; CEO 9
Corporate Services 30
Fiscal Affairs 7
Research and Knowledge management 10
Internal Audit 3
Table 3.1: Sample Frame
3.5 Sample and Sampling Techniques
Denscombe (2008) poised that, the sample must be carefully selected to be representative of the population and the researcher also needs to ensure that the subdivisions entailed in the analysis are accurately catered for. The sample will be selected from the Directorates and departments since these are the people involved in the day to day activities in the organization.
3.5.1 Sample Size
A statistical technique provided by Mugenda and Mugenda (2008) suggest that a sample of 10% is sufficient to represent a population and recommends a criteria for selecting a sample size. The target population in this study is less than 10,000, thus the sample of 65 will be used which covers the entire organization.
Table 3.2: Sample Size
Commissioners ; CEO 9
Corporate Services 30
Fiscal Affairs 7
Research and Knowledge management 10
Internal Audit 3
3.5.2 Sampling Technique
This study will adopt Cluster sampling technique. This is because there is evidence of “natural” but relatively homogeneous groupings in the statistical population under study and the population will easily be divided into relevant and significant clusters based on the different directorates. Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (2003) argue that dividing the population into a series of relevant clusters means that the sample is more likely to be representative. Moreover, cluster sampling technique is chosen for this study as it will increase a sample’s statistical efficiency, provide adequate data for analyzing the various subpopulations or cluster and also enable different research methods and procedures to be used in different clusters (Coopers and Schindler, 2011).
3.6 Data Collection Instruments
Primary data will be collected by administering open and close-ended questionnaires to the respondents. Questionnaires provide a high degree of data standardization and adoption of generalized information amongst any population. They are useful in a descriptive study where there is need to quickly and easily get information from people in a non-threatening way. Flick (2008) holds that questionnaires are useful in establishing the number of people who hold certain beliefs and hence possible to gauge public opinion on an issue.
In developing the questionnaire items, the closed ended and open-ended formats of the item will be used. This format will be used in all categories of the questionnaires. However the close ended choice items usually have limitations in that it involved ‘putting words’ in the respondents’ mouth, especially when providing acceptable answers and there is temptation to avoid serious thinking on the part of the respondents. In such situations the respondent end up choosing the easiest alternative and provide fewer opportunities for self-expression. It is because of these reasons that it was necessary to combine this format of items with a few open ended questions.
3.7 Data Collection Procedure
Data collection is the process of gathering information about a phenomenon using data collection instruments (Sekaran, 2000).The questionnaire will be administered through drop and picks method and is intended to be self-administered to reduce interviewer bias. The questionnaire will be delivered to the managers and employees in the various departments of the organization. The responses are gathered in a standardized way, so questionnaires are considered more objective, certainly more so than interviews. Moreover, it is relatively quick to collect information using questionnaires.
According to Dillman (2000) the use of questionnaires will make each respondent respond to the same set of questions and provide an efficient way of collecting responses from a large sample prior to quantitative analysis.
3.8 Pilot Testing
A pilot study also known as a feasibility study will be done to assess the feasibility of the study, its validity and reliability. Procedures will be used in pre-testing the questionnaire that are identical to those that will be used during the actual study or data collection.(1% of 100 ) of the entire sample size will be used. Pre-testing helps detect deficiencies like unclear directions, insufficient space to write response, wrong phrasing of questions, vague questions etc. The pilot will reveal if the anticipated analytical techniques are appropriate.
3.8.1 Validity of the Study
Validity is the accuracy and meaningfulness of inferences, which are based on the research results (Mugenda ; Mugenda, 2003). It is the degree to which results obtained from the analysis of the data actually represents the phenomena under study or the degree to which a test measures what it purports to measure. According to Borg and Gall (1989) content validity of an instrument is improved through expert judgment. As such, the researcher will seek the assistance of supervisors, who, as experts in research, will help to improve content validity of the instruments.
3.8.2 Reliability of the Study
Mugenda and Mugenda (2003) defined reliability as a measure of the degree to which a research instrument yields consistent results. Reliability is the degree to which an instrument measures accurately what it claims to measure. According to Powell, (2004) reliability is always contingent on the degree of uniformity of the given characteristics in the population. This implies that the more heterogeneous the population is in regard to the variable in question, the more reliable the instrument is likely to be. In assessing reliability of the data, internal consistency method using Cronbach’s alpha will be used whose alpha values obtained indicated a coefficient of approximately 0.7 and which is considered acceptable.
3.9 Data Analysis and Presentation
This part will focus on interpreting the collected information or data to give some meaning. This will be illustrated in the form of charts and graphs.
3.9.1 Data Analysis
According to Bryman and Bell (2003) data analysis refers to a technique used to make inferences from data collected by means of a systematic and objective identification of specific characteristics. Both descriptive and inferential statistics will be adopted for the study. The quantitative data will be analyzed by using descriptive statistics which includes frequency distribution tables and measures of central tendency (the mean), measures of variability (standard deviation) and measures of relative frequencies. The inferential statistics will include a regression model which will establish the relationship between variables. Data will be analysed by the use of a statistical software SPSS version 20.
To measure the effect of performance appraisal methods on employee productivity in Kenya; the study will adopt the linear regression model and Pearson correlation. The Pearson correlation will test the strength of the relationship while the regression analysis will establish the form of relationship between the independent and dependent variable. The regression will take the following form:
Y= ?0 + ?1 ?1 + ?2 ?2 + ?3 ?3 + ?
Where: Y = Employee Productivity
?1 = 360 Degree feedback
?2 = Management by Objective
?3 = Balance Score card
?0 = the constant
?1-n = the regression coefficient or change included in Y by each ?,
? = error term
3.9.2 Data Presentation
The information will be displayed by use of tables and graphs. Tables and other graphical presentations as appropriate will be used to present the data collected for ease of understanding and analysis. Qualitative data will be summarized in short paragraphs.
Adams, J. S. (1965), Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), advances in experimental psychology pp. 267-299. New York: Academic Press.
Allen, N.J. and Meyer, J.P. (1990), The Measurement and the Antecedents of Affective,
Continuance and Normative Commitments to Organization, Journal of
Occupational Psychology, 63 (2): 1-8.
Armstrong, M and Baron, A (2002), Strategic HRM: The key to improved business
performance, CIPD, London.
Armstrong, M and Baron, A. (2005), Managing Performance: Performance
Management in Action, London, CIPD.
Armstrong, M. (2003), A Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice,
London: Kogan Page.
Armstrong, M. (2009). Armstrong’s Handbook of Performance
Management: An Evidence-based Guide to Delivering High Performance.UK: Kogan Page
Ashford, S. J., and Cummings, L. L. (1983). Feedback as an Individual Resource: Personal
Strategies of Creating Information. Organizational Behavior and Human
Performance, 32: 370- 398.
Atkins, P., ; Wood, R. (2002), Self-versus others’ ratings as predictors of.
assessment center ratings: Validation evidence for 360-degree feedback programs. Personnel Psychology, 55(4), 871–904
Babbie, E. R. (2008), The Basics of Social Research (4 ed.): Thomson/Wadsworth.
Banu, V. C. and Umamaheswari, P. (2009), A Study on 360 Degree Performance Appraisal
Systems in Reliance Life Insurance, Udumalpet, The Icfaian Journal of
Management Research, 8 (7): 65-78.
Boxall P and Purcell, J. (2003), Strategy and Human Resource Management, Palgrave
Macmillan, Houndsmill, New York.
Bracken, D.W., Dalton, M.A., Jako, R.A., McCauley, C.D., and Pollman, V.A. (1997).
Should 360-Degree Feedback Be Used Only For Developmental Purposes?
Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership.
Bracken, D.W., Rose, D.S. (2011), When Does 360-Degree Feedback Create Behavior
Change? And How Would We Know When It Does?, Greensboro, NC: Center for
Bracken, D.W., Summers, L., and Fleenor, J.W. (1998), High tech 360. Training &
Brett, J.F. & Atwater, L.E.(2001), 360 Degree Feedback: Accuracy, Reactions and
Perceptions of Usefulness. Journal of Applied Psychology.Vol.86 N0. 5, pp.930
Brutus, S., Fleenor, J. W., and London, M. (1998), Elements of Effective 360-degree
feedback. In W. W. Tornow, M. London, & CCL associates, maximizing the value of
360 degree feedback: A process for successful individual and organizational
development (1st ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Carlson M.S. (1998), 360-Degree Feedback: The Power of Multiple Perspectives New
Dessler, G. (2003), Human Resources Management, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.
Dessler, G. (2011), Human Resource Management, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
3D Group Consulting Limited (2013), Future of 360 Degree Feedback: New Study Finds
Increased HR Influence; Online article at http://www.3dgroup.net/January-2013
future -of 360-degree-feedback-new-study-find-increased-hr-influence.html
Edwards, M. R., & Ewen, A. J. (1996), 360° Feedback: The powerful new model for
Employee Assessment & performance improvement. New York: AMACOM
American Management Association.
ETS Consulting Limited (2011), Surge in use of 360-degree Feedback for Appraisal.
Online article at http://www.etsplc.com/News/Press-release-360-appraisal
Fleenor, J. W., and Prince, J. M. (1997), Using 360-Degree Feedback In Organizations: An Annotated Bibliography. Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership.
Fletcher, C. (1993), Managing Performance Systems, Blackwell.
Fulk, J., Brief, A. P. and Barr, S.H., (1985), Trust-in-Supervisor and Perceived Fairness
and Accuracy of Performance Evaluations, Journal of Business Research, 13:
Gallagher, T. (2008), 360-Degree Performance Reviews Offer Valuable Perspectives,
Financial Execute, December 2008, 61.
Guerrero, T. H., Andersen, K and Afifi, J. A. (2007), Close Encounters: Communication
in Relationships, (2nd edition). Sage Publications, Inc.
Hackman, J. R., and Oldham, G. R. (1980), Work Redesign. Reading, MA: Addison-
Holland, P., De Cieri, H., Teicher, J. and Gough (2005), The Issues In Human Resource
Management, Pearson Education, Australia.
Hyde, A. C., (2005), The New Environment for Compensation and Performance Evaluation in the Public Sector, Public Personnel Management, 17: 351-358.
Kellough, J. E. and Nigro, L. G., (2002), Pay for Performance in Georgia State Government: Employee Perspectives on Georgia Gain after 5 Years, Review of Public Personnel Administration, 22(2), 146-166.
Locke, E. A, and Latham, G. P, (1979), Goal Setting: A Motivational Technique That Works, Organizational Dynamics, 8(2), 68-80.
Longenecker, C. O. (1997), Why Managerial Performance Appraisals are Ineffective: Causes and Lessons, Journal of Career Development International, 2 (5) 212-218.
Magutu O. P., Richard O. N, and Haron M, (2009), Modeling the Effects of E-Commerce Adoption on Business Process Management: Case Study of Commercial Banks in Kenya: Communications of the IBIMA. Vol 8, 2009 ISSN: 1943-7765 pg. 175.
Maylett, T. (2009), 360-Degree Feedback Revisited: The Transition from Development to Appraisal. Compensation and Benefits Review, September/October 41(5), 52–59.
Monga M.L. (1983), Management of Performance Appraisal, Bombay: Himalaya Publishing house
Nzuve, S. N. M and Ng`ang`a N. M (2010), An Assessment of Employees Perception of
Performance Appraisal: A Case Study of the Department of Immigration
Nairobi, School of Business, University of Nairobi.
Obong’o, S. O. (2009), Implementation of Performance Contracting in Kenya, International Public Management Review, 10 (2), 66-84.
Ochoti, et al. (2012), Factors Influencing Employee Performance Appraisal System: A
Case of the Ministry of State for Provincial Administration ; Internal Security,
Kenya, International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3 (20): 37 – 46.
Ouko J. C. (2008), Extent of adoption of 360 degree employee performance appraisal
process in private secondary schools in Nairobi, School of Business, University of
Perry, J. L., (2003), Compensation, Merit Pay and Motivation, Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prochaska, J. O. and C. C. DiClemente (1992), Stages of Change in the Modification of
Problem Behaviors. Newbury Park, CA, Sage.
Risher, S., (2002), Pay-for-Performance: The Keys to making it Work, Public
Personnel Management, 31(3), 317-332.
Scott, D. (2001), The Performance Appraisal: What Employers Should Know, N.H
Smither, et al. (1995), An Examination of the Effects of an Upward Feedback Program over Time, Personnel Psychology 48
Taylor, M.S., Tracy, K.B., Renard, M.K., and Carroll, S.J. (1995), Procedural Justice
in Performance Appraisal: A Field Test of the due Process Metaphor for Performance Appraisal Systems, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 40, pp. 495 – 523.
Torrington, H and Hall, F (2005), Personnel Management: A New Approach, Prentice Hall International.
Vroom, V. H., (1964), Work and Motivation, New York: John Wiley.
Waldman, A. D., Atwater, L. E., ; Antonioni, D. (1998), Has 360-Degree Feedback Gone Amok? The Academy of Management Executive, 12(2), 86–94.
Ward, P. (1995), A 360-degree turn for the better, People Management, February pp 20-22.
Wimer, S and Nowack, K. M. (1998), 13 Common Mistakes Using 360-Degree Feedback, Training and Development, 52: 69.
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX I: LETTER OF INTRODUCTION
Re: Request for Research Data
I am a Postgraduate student in MSc in HRM program at the Jomo Kenyatta University Agriculture and Technology. My research project topic is
“EFFECT OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL METHODS ON EMPLOYEE PRODUCTIVITY IN KENYA; A CASE OF COMMISSION ON REVENUE ALLOCATION OF KENYA”.
In order to carry out the research, you have been selected to form part of those to provide the necessary data. The data will be gathered through the attached questionnaire. You are therefore kindly requested to fill out the same. The information you provide will be treated in strict confidence and is purely for academic purpose. In no way will your name appear in the final research report.
Your assistance and cooperation will be highly appreciated.
APPENDIX II: QUESTIONNAIRE
This questionnaire seeks to collect data meant for academic purposes only. All information collected from respondents will be treated with strict confidentiality. Kindly fill the answer appropriately and DO NOT WRITE YOUR NAME ANYWHERE ON THIS QUESTIONNAIRE.
SECTION A: DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
Kindly tick ( ) the appropriate answer for you to the questions below:
2. Age of the respondents
Below 29yrs 30-39 yrs
40-49yrs 50 yrs and Above
3. Level of Education
4.What is your position in this Organization
5. Years of experience
16yrs and above
SECTION B: – 360 DEGREE FEEDBACK
1.Does your Human Resource Policy recommend use of 360- degree performance appraisal?
Yes ( ) No ( )
2. To what extent is the 360-degree performance appraisal system used in your bank?
i) Not at All ( )
ii) Small extent ( )
iii) Moderate extent ( )
iv) Great extent ( )
v) VeryGreatextent ( )
3. Please indicate your level of agreement with each of the following statements by ticking (ticking ( ) where appropriate.
STATEMENT Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
Self-appraisal performance feedback increases my productivity at work
Peer appraisal performance feedback increases my productivity at work
Supervisor performance appraisal feedback increases my productivity at work
Subordinates performance appraisal feedback increases my productivity at work.
4. Do you think 360 degree feedback performance appraisal improves motivation and job Satisfaction?
Explain your answer
SECTION C: – MANAGEMENT BY OBJECTIVES
1. In the scale given below, please tick the one that best describes your opinion on the statement
STATEMENT Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
Performance Reviews provide me with the opportunity to set personal goals
Performance management should be focused on development of employees
My supervisor communicates the actions necessary for me to take to achieve organizational objectives
Objectives need to be set at the beginning of the year in alignment to the organization strategy
Individual performance should be aligned to organizational mission and objectives
Performance Goals are clearly defined in the appraisal process.
2. Explain how suitable management by objectives performance appraisal method is appropriate in measuring employees’ productivity.
SECTION D:- BALANCED SCORECARD
1. In the scale given below, please tick the one that best describes your opinion on the statement
Statement Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
My supervisor discusses the principles and need of a BSC with me
BSC measures of performance are directly linked to the organization strategy
I do have a formal one on one performance discussion with my supervisor
I do get feedback on the final BSC points allocated to me
My BSC reflects the effort I put at my workplace
Performance incentives are clearly linked to standards and goals
I receive specific and accurate feedback from
my manager on my past performance.
SECTION E:- RATING SCALE
2. In the scale given below, please tick the one that best describes your opinion on the statement.
STATEMENT Extremely satisfied Moderately satisfied Neutral Slightly dissatisfied Dissatisfied
How satisfied are you with the Processes put in place
How satisfied are you with the relationship between you and your supervisor
Performance improvement training
3. Explain how suitable rating scale performance appraisal method is appropriate in appraising employees’ productivity.
SECTION F: EMPLOYEE PRODUCTIVITY
Please indicate your level of agreement with each of the following statements by ticking (ticking ( ) where appropriate.
Statements Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
Customers are happy with the service we give to them
The company clearly communicates its goals and strategies to me.
I receive adequate opportunity to interact with other employees on a formal level.
I have a clear path for career advancement.
When employees are well motivated after the appraisal period the organizations incurs Low production costs
4. What do you think is the most appropriate performance appraisal method to be used for employees to be more productive?
(a) Management by Objectives
(b) Rating method
(c) Balanced scorecard
(d) 360 degree feedback
5. Explain your answer above
APPENDIX III: TIME FRAME
Activity/ Month October-2017-JULY 2018 JULY-SEPT 2018 OCT-NOV 2018
Presentation of proposal
Correction and amendments
Preparation of data collection instruments and collection of data
Presentation of Report
APPENDIX IV: RESEARCH BUDGET
ACTIVITY COST (KES)
Proposal Development 15,000
Data collection 25,000
Data compilation and analysis 30,000
Research report writing
Journal Publication 50,000
APPENDIX V: NAME OF THE INSTITUTION