Performance appraisal is viewed as a process through which organizations identify, measure, and improve the employees’ execution of roles (Augustine 2009). This implies that before initiating the process of improving the performance of the employees, the involved department must identify the various roles that will be considered. After that consideration, the present performance level should be measured in order to identify the afflictions as well as the strong points of the pertinent personnel.
Having measured the performance level, the organizations are capable of stipulating ways of developing the way in which employees execute their roles. In order to succeed in the entire process, it is crucial for the organization to engage in thorough data collection that helps to identify the critical, behavioural, and professional proficiencies. After determining these competencies, the organization can easily identify the capabilities that should be strengthened and the weaknesses which must be eliminated (Berg 2009).
Moreover, the evaluation is the basis of determining the people who should be rewarded and promoted to higher ranks in the organization due to their extemporary performance. However, it is very important to understand that performance appraisal is neither an impromptu nor a spontaneous undertaking which serves as a confrontational tool (Berg 2009). Instead, it is a continuous process or an ongoing activity that should be conducted on a real-time basis.
Although it is such an important activity, it is extremely sensitive since it is affected by inherent emotions, diverse views, and resistances that make it complex. This research seeks to identify the various aspects on appraisal performance, including the question of whether there is a correlation between employees’ performance and attitude, and whether the managers’ competence when conducting the appraisal affects the workers’ capability to executive roles. Additionally, it seeks to determine whether the accuracy of the methods employed during the process of rating affects the employees’ attitudes towards performance appraisal.
In essence, it cannot be disputed that performance appraisal is a crucial undertaking that both the private and public institutions cannot ignore if they have to succeed. It is viewed as an undertaking that does not have a win or lose situation since it cannot be considered as a test. This implies that the undertaking is meant to help the Human Resource manager to inform the employees about their performance levels and develop them. As such, it is viewed as a tool of instigating evaluation and improvement of performance.
This pursuit is achieved through two crucial components of the performance appraisal, including feedback and motivation. Moreover, the process is undertaken to act as the basis of determining the employees who should be promoted to higher ranks of performance (Collis 2009). In fact, promotion is considered as a motivational factor that changes the mentality of people towards performance appraisal. When an evaluation process results in promotion, the employees consider it a positive undertaking and improve performance in order to get similar benefits.
Whereas the positivity is realized, there are possibilities of getting negative perception, especially when an employee’s performance is poor (Collis 2009). This negativity emerges because poor performance leads to denial of promotion, salary decrement, and subjection to supervision in future. However, it is the mandate of the human resource managers to ensure that the presentation of employees’ evaluation is presented in a manner that motivates them towards improvement.
Otherwise, using the evaluation as the basis of punishing the employees can result in negative implications about performance appraisal and the ultimate improvement of skills. Understandably, the employees can have a positive attitude towards performance appraisal if their managers can be trusted to conduct the exercise. Additionally, this trust is, in fact, measured by the extent to which the supervisors can support the employees as they attempt to improve their working standards (Collis 2009). The manner in which the relay information about performance and convince the employees to pay for skill development session is crucial too.
The convincing capability is viewed as the core requirement when it comes to inspiring employees and urging them to take career development courses. As such, the employees need enough time to express their views that can be used to determine the level of their performance. In addition to this freedom of expression, the supervisor should provide a detailed explanation concerning the process of determining the performance level. The explanation ensures that the performance appraisal exercise is holistically transparent. In turn, transparency paves the way for the creation of trust and confidence so that the employees can consider the undertaking as a correct assessment.
Another crucial aspect that should be considered during performance appraisal is the perception envisaged by the employees concerning the usefulness of the exercise. There are various factors that affect the attitude of employees toward the importance of the undertaking. First, the effort of the managers to train employees about performance appraisal and its intention is very crucial. In this regard, managers get an opportunity to elaborate on how performance improvement leads to high salaries and promotions.
In addition, they get a platform whereby they emphasize the importance of having a good working relationship with the managers, supervisors, and colleague employees in order to attain a high level of effectiveness. Whereas this exercise presents this opportunity to the managers, the personnel must be very careful when introducing it. Importantly, they should ensure that the stated purpose of conducting the performance appraisal is consistent with the results obtained.
In the recent past, employees were evaluated by rating their behaviours and code of conduct. In the present evaluation system, organizations conduct the exercise in accordance with two crucial methods that include merit-pay and pay-for-performance. Although they have been identified as better methods than the latter, they do not show the difference between average and the best employees.
As a result, the lack of a clear distinction between these two levels of performance discouraged the employees because they tend to feel that their efforts have not been recognized satisfactorily. It triggers the feeling that organizational and personal goals are noteworthy. However, the underperformers were substantially encouraged because there was little disparity between them and the good performers when this criterion was used. Although this is viewed as encouragement, it is a false motivational factor since it does not seek to improve the employees’ performance in real sense.
In addition to the above aspects, the criterion was comparative in nature since it evaluates people hierarchically. This implies that some employees are considered as good performers, while others are poor. Further, it means that one employee is pitted in comparison with another, although their roles are not necessarily the same. When this comparison is conducted, it disparages the efforts of some employees whereby they take considerable time to recover from intimidation and humiliation.
As a result of this scenario, the Japanese organization and institutions have adopted a different approach to performance appraisal, whereby the evaluation is done in terms of groups rather than individual people. However, this is very complex because the method seeks to evaluate and train the employees collectively. Understandably, people have diverse problems, strengths, and levels of understanding that affect their perceptions.
Accordingly, they need individual consideration in order to talk openly. Although the method has these few afflictions, it is determined that they have substantial benefits to the members, especially when it comes to the elimination of any humiliation. In this criterion, the managers encourage a consultative approach to all issues that require decision-making. The collective and consultative approach requires the group members to adopt open communication, trust, and inclusive participation in an attempt to develop their performance levels.
Understandably, it cannot be disputed that an organization has a common objective. This objective informs all the policies, actions, and regulations of the organization because its success is compared to the institution’s aim. As a result, the performance appraisal must be conducted in accordance with the organizational objectives. In this regard, all employees must be trained in a manner that helps to achieve a common organizational aim.
Accordingly, the managers are equipped with tools that enable them to transform the conduct, behaviour and attitude of the employees. This transformation seeks to align the mentality of the employees with the goals of the organization and create a unified organization. For example, the managers must focus on behaviours such as dependability, teamwork, trust, and vibrancy, among others. In addition, they have other tools which conduct complex evaluations whereby the managers are able to determine suitable and ineffective behaviours. Consequently, the evaluation provides a basis of training employees concerning conducts that lead to high performance and those ones that cause detraction.
When embarking on the issue of the employees’ perception towards performance, it is emphasized that the managers and supervisors should listen to the subordinates in order to get useful results. Even if their opinions are not meant to play a role in the performance appraisal, the inclusivity can help to change their perceptions towards the exercise. In essence, this perception is considered as a critical aspect in the success of the organization bearing in mind that the mentality of employees towards the organization determines the level of commitment.
In fact, listening to them also enables the supervisors to measure performance levels because it cannot be disputed that people have the capability to express their actions through speech. This can be reinforced by conducting frequent evaluations to ensure that the progress of these employees is tracked continuously. In another prospect, frequent evaluation can be viewed as an aspect which helps the managers to obtain consistent and reliable result because performance appraisal is a continuous process (Augustine 2009).
Although performance appraisal is accepted widely, some managerial personnel believe that it brings more problems to the organization than solutions. This is based on the fact that the people who are entrusted to conduct performance appraisal do not get enough and satisfactory training that guarantee accuracy. As a result of the inaccurate evaluation, the employees and managers sustain a negative perception about the exercise (Augustine 2009).
They also argue that most employees do not prefer to receive messages that reflect incompetence. In fact, some of these evaluation results are not released by the manager because they might discourage the affected employees. Furthermore, the employers speculate that inaccurate ratings might end up misdirecting them when it comes to the allocation of roles.
For example, if an inaccurate performance appraisal is used to promote employees from one rank to another, the person might be incapacitated to serve the company effectively. If the appraisal results are negative, the employees might think that the manager has selected them deliberately in order to punish them. This can be very dangerous because it reduces trust and affects their relationship negatively (Augustine 2009). In the end, the managers refrain from informing the victims since they fear losing them. As a result, the appraisals do not achieve the required target.
In another approach, performance appraisal has been regarded as the instrument that can be used by managers to control and command employees in an organization. In this regard, employees might be used as scapegoats in the process of conducting the performance appraisals. This is intensified by the cases in which the appraisals are inaccurate and biased due to managerial reluctances.
In essence, some management use performance appraisal as weapons. They conduct the exercise to create competition among the employees rather than targeting improvement. To some extent, the appraisals create conflict among the employees and distort the organizational unity. In the worst-case scenario, performance appraisals are used by the managers to manipulate and intimidate the employees in a manner that help the superiors to dominate over the subordinates.
Whereas the managers’ efforts have been termed as the major determinants, there are other factors that affect the perceptions of the employees towards performance appraisals. Understandably, an organization experience political propagandas and struggle for power. In this regard, organizational politics have proved that most of the people who participate in these activities are self-serving (Collis 2009). Such characters can engage in irresponsible behaviors to disparage the reputation of others and cause deliberate problems that enable them to achieve the personal desires.
For example, a manager might use performance appraisal to disparage the professional reputation of a competent employee if the latter feels that the former is a threat to his position. Essentially, giving accurate ratings to the employees is a component of rational approach when it comes to performance appraisal (Collis 2009). When this objective evaluation is compromised by the political intentions, ambiguous measures are used in order to capitalize the discretion of the managers. In fact, it was established that performance appraisal is rarely conducted for the right intentions (Collis 2009).
In most institutions, it is carried out when the manager want to implement an overhaul. Accordingly, it is done with the view to remove some employees and employ others rather than seeking to improve their skills. Importantly, high rating can be awarded to an employee deliberately in order to pave way for their promotion especially if they are favorite workers. On the other hand, some employees can be granted the high ratings to avoid conflict in the organization (Collis 2009). This implies that most managers do not carry out the exercise in a realistic manner. Instead, they play safe by awarding satisfactory ratings in order to ensure that the employees maintain their trust towards the latter.
In light of these compromised standards, it is very important to highlight various guidelines concerning the performance appraisal. First, the managers should adopt rational, knowledgeable, and realistic approaches when conducting a performance appraisal. This implies that the managers should conduct the appraisal with the consideration of organizational objectives in mind. The personal desires and employees’ feelings should not be given a priority before the main of the organization (Berg 2009). Understandably, an organization is defined by its objective, but not the personnel who work in the various departments.
Although this is true, it does not mean that the employees’ perceptions are not important. Accordingly, the managers should ensure that the disclosure of performance appraisal results is conducted responsibly (Berg 2009). In fact, the managers should relay the messages directly and physically on order to motivate the employees. This approach keeps the employees working towards the organization’s goals. In regard to the political interests of the managers, it is crucial for them to understand that their relevance in an organization is determined by their performance (Berg 2009). As such, performance appraisals should not be used as weapons to fight other employees because it can result to failure of the organization and even lead to the loss of those positions.
Need/Rationale for the Research
Performance appraisal has been a crucial topic that researchers have studied in details. However, the past research studies dwelled on the importance of performance appraisal and how it affects the employees’ capability to achieve the organizational goals. Whereas this has been the central point of focus, the modern academicians, managers, and the employees are questioning the perception of various stakeholders towards performance appraisal.
They have realized that although the organizations have been considering the exercise as one of the most effective undertakings, different people have diverse attitudes towards the activity. Although there have been various studies that have researched on this subject matter, they are considerably few and unsatisfactory. As a result, this research seeks to study various aspects of performance appraisal in relation to the perception of employees and the managers.
It seeks to touch on the ways in which the managers can use performance appraisal to improve the skills of the employees. In addition, the study will study the reasons as to why the managers use performance appraisal as weapons and the negative implications that can emerge from such activities. In essence, it will enable the mangers to realize the extent to which performance appraisal should be applied. Having identified these limits, the performance appraisal will be used in a manner that purports development of employees. Otherwise, if the current trends are maintained, the employees will encounter difficulties that discourage them.
From the literature review that has been presented, it is clear that there are there research question which should be considered in this research study. These research questions are related to the attitude and perceptions of employees towards performance appraisal as shown in this list.
- Is there a relationship between the employee work experience and his/her attitudes toward performance appraisal?
- Does the manager’s competence in the performance appraisal system affect the employee attitudes toward performance appraisal?
- Does the accuracy of rating affect the employee attitudes toward performance appraisal?
The first research question is concerned with identifying whether the work experiences of the workers affect the perceptions towards performance appraisal. It is stipulated to allow a study that seeks to determine whether the employees’ working condition and their level of skills instill fear of performance appraisals. The second research question touches on the issue of manager’s competence. Essentially, this question studies the effect of managers’ capabilities when conducting performance appraisal.
In the literature review, some researchers argued that incapability of managers is a fundamental hindrance to the effectiveness of performance appraisals. If the appraisal is faulty, the ratings might lead to promotion of people who are unworthy. This is a dangerous undertaking that can hinder the success of the organization. As a result, it is important to discuss how the training and assessment capabilities affect the employees’ trust towards the supervisors. Accordingly, the finding will be used as the rationales of conducting truthful, realistic, reliable appraisals that are consistent to the organizational objectives rather than personal desires.
The third research question seeks information about the effect of accuracy on the employees’ perceptions towards performance appraisal. Since the performance appraisals are meant to inform the employees about their performance level, it is crucial for the supervisors to conduct an accurate assessment that is not biased. As such, this research question initiates a study that will help to determine how the aspects of biasness and false assessment can affect the trust of the employees and the dependability of the entire undertaking. In addition, it seeks to explore the importance of avoiding judgmental assessment or the use of incorrect parameters during evaluation.
Importance of Piloting
Piloting is conducted in order to obtain useful information concerning the research design. The piloting exercise includes the collection of data using the pilot questionnaire. After the data is collected, the researcher conducts analysis to determine whether the data can give viable results. Essentially, piloting is conducted in order to test the effectiveness of instruments that are used in the research study. This assessment is meant to test whether the research instruments and software, such as questionnaires, are appropriate for data collection and analysis.
In addition, the piloting exercise help to establish the sampling frame to ensure that the methods used in the selection are unbiased and effective. It ensures that the researcher’s protocol is valid and feasible for the survey. Further, the undertaking helps to identify the various logistical challenges that might emerge during the actual research. Having identified them, the researcher develops the ways of confronting those difficulties. The study enables the researcher to predetermine the variability of results. This variability enables the scholar to determine the most suitable size of the sample.
The determination is made by collecting preliminary data and analyzing it in order to determine its usability in the final research. Another importance of conducting the pilot study is defined by the determination of resources such as staff and finances. Besides, the proposed techniques of data analysis are evaluated carefully to determine whether they are viable. These analytical elements are used by researchers to justify the study when it comes to obtaining research aid. In this regard, a researcher must develop justification to show that the research is knowledgeable, competent and feasible. Jha (2008) stated that piloting can be conducted when the researcher is carrying out quantitative and massive studies.
Literature Review on Questionnaire Design
The questionnaire has been designed through an involving process of considerations. This process has involved the formulation of queries that will help to answer the three research questions that have been presented in the previous paragraph. Also, it has involved the consultation of previous literature concerning the appropriate aspects that should be included. These aspects include the arrangement of component such as personal data and the choice of the research approach from both the quantitative and qualitative designs.
Number of Questions
When it comes to the question of how many queries should be included in the questionnaire, there were various factors that are considered. First, the number of questions should cover the desired content according to the research questions. In other words, the number of questions should be sufficient to fulfill the objectives of the research study.
If the number of questions does not help to answer all the intended inquiries, the researcher cannot achieve the objectives. As a result, the overall validity and reliability of the research is compromised. Secondly, the researcher must take into consideration that the respondents need to answer the questions without difficulties. Otherwise, using very lengthy questionnaires can discourage the respondents and lead to unreliability.
Attributes of a Good Questionnaire
There are various characteristics that are considered as appropriates aspects of the questionnaires. In essence, the suitability of the questionnaire depends on the type of research that is conducted. Qualitative inquiries helps to obtain information that will be used to generate the hypothesis on the topic. On the other hand, the quantitative research requires a questionnaire that enables the researcher to conduct hypothesis test. As such, the exploratory questionnaires do not provide information that will be tested statistically.
Since this research follows a quantitative design, it is crucial to discuss the attributes of this questionnaire. When approaching the research quantitatively, the researcher used formal standardized questionnaires in order to quantify hypothesis. First, the questionnaire should have standardized wording to ensure that all respondents get the same stimuli and message. Second, the questionnaire should have well-defined parameters to ensure that the interviewers treat the questions in a consistent manner and respond to any clarification correctly. Moreover, the questionnaires should have a prescribed format of responding to facilitate rapid and effective completion.
Further, the suitability of the questionnaires is evaluated by the question of whether it meets the research objectives. Although meeting the research objectives may seem obvious, Jha (2008) suggested that poor understanding and unsatisfactory preparation may lead to deficiency. Whereas Jha (2008) suggested that the research questionnaire should answer the questions adequately, he also argues that the research is not meant to answer all the questions.
Understandably, it should leave some queries unanswered in order to form the basis of future research. However, it should ensure that the unanswered questions are as limited as possible. Moreover, the research questionnaires should have questions that facilitate the collection of accurate information. They should be organized in manner that facilitates interpretation and reliable analysis. Whereas the issues of accuracy and content are critical components of the research study, it is crucial to design brief, but clear questionnaires in order to capture the interests of the interviewee.
It cannot be disputed that the first step of developing the questionnaire is not formulating the queries. Instead, the questionnaire development should start with the making a decision about the information sought. Having determined the type of information required, the researcher should review past research to determine the previous studies and then identify gaps. These gaps identify the areas that have not been examined in order to include questions that focus on those fields. As a result, the researcher ensures that the study is not a duplication of past researches.
Defining the Target Respondents
Designing a questionnaire requires the researcher to determine the sample population. The characteristics of the respondents, such as the age and level of education, can affect the types of questions included in the questionnaires (Descombe 2009). As a result, it becomes a critical step when it comes to designing the questionnaires.
Choosing the Methods of Contacting Respondents
It is seemingly inappropriate to suggest that the methods of contacting the respondents should be considered when designing a research questionnaire. However, a considerable reflection is satisfactory to realize that the methods of communicating to the participants do not only affect the type of questions that can be asked, but also the way in which they are phrased. In essence, there are kinds of communication channels, including personal, focus, mailed and telephone interviews.
Developing the Wording of Questions
When wording the questions it is important to bear in mind that there are various types of questions, including closed, open, and optional response questions. In this research, closed questions have been used widely because they are effective to quantitative research especially when using the Likert Scale. They ease the process of answering the research questions because the respondents are required to choose from choices that have been provided.
In addition, they ensure that the respondents rely on little memory when answering these questions. When it comes to the data analysis, the closed questions ensure that the undertaking is direct bearing in mind that the responses are already classified. However, they have various disadvantages that render them unsuitable for research. Importantly, this unsuitability is evoked by the fact that respondents are not allowed to give more information concerning the subject matter rather than the issues inquired.
Meaningful Order of Questions
In regard to the order of questions, it is preferred that the opening questions can be answered easily. This allows time for participants to familiarize with answering the questions (Descombe 2009). This aspect necessitates the idea of putting the personal data in the first part of the questionnaire. If the personal data is at the end, there is a possibility of having difficult queries at the start of the questionnaires.
This discourages the respondents and affects the subsequent manner in which the questions are answered. Liamputtong (2009) suggested that questions should follow a psychological order whereby the preceding question lead to the succeeding one. In addition, it is important to use a variety of questions in order to capture the attention of the respondents. In this regard, a respondent can get bored if the questions are similar.
Physical Appearance of Questionnaires
The questionnaires should have an appealing outlook that encourages the respondents to participate positively and completely. In this regard, the questionnaire should be filed in a booklet to ensure that there are no loose sheets. This makes it easy for the participant to peruse over the questionnaire while answering the questions (Jha 2008). It is also crucial to use simple and clear format that applies the correct color coding.
Impact of order and direction of the Likert scale
Descombe (2009) suggested that the Likert Scale has an impact on the responses given by the respondents. He suggested that the arrangement of the scale has an influence on the respondents’ perceptions. In this case, if the Likert Scale starts with (strongly agree), the order might prompt the participant to choose the positive aspects rather than the realistic opinion.
Choice of Quantitative Design
Having designed research questions and formulated the pilot questionnaire, it was evident that this research follows a mixed design because it incorporates both qualitative and quantitative aspects. As a result, the research design is a mixed method that allows the collection of both qualitative and quantitative data. In addition, the mixed method enables the researcher to adopt quantitative and qualitative analysis techniques. Specifically, there are a number of questions that require mathematical calculations in order to make determinations. For example, the question of whether the relationship between employees and supervisors affect the perceptions towards performance appraisal is a quantitative aspect. Evidently, the responses to this question are sought through a Likert scale that has various measures as shown.
In the common way of collecting data using a Likert Scale, the various points are given a finite number from 0 to 4. As a result, the responses will bear numbers within this range as shown in this list.
- Strongly Disagree 0
- Disagree 1
- Neutral 2
- Agree 3
- Strongly Agree 4
This implies that the answers provided by the respondents can be represented in the quantitative forms in order to allow analysis. The analysis incorporates the calculation of mean, standard deviation, and variance. These variables indicate the magnitude of the responses in order to determine whether the claim is valid or not. For example, when the mean of the responses to the 14th question is 3, it can be concluded that a good relationship between employees and supervisors can lead to positive perception towards performance appraisal.
The quantitative approach has been used in this research in order to use the strengths envisaged by the philosophy of positivism. Under this research philosophy, it is stated that reliable conclusion can be made from quantifiable variable only (Creswell 2009). In order to conduct a valid study, there must be quantifiable aspects that should be identified (Yin 2009).
Further, the philosophy argues that reliable results can emerge from mathematical deductions only (Sachdeva 2009). As such, it does not give space for value-laden information that come from respondents (McBurney 2010). Moreover, it ignores the use of intuitive knowledge that a researcher can use to make conclusions from respondents’ opinions (Denscombe 2009).
Having considered these sentiments, it was crucial to include the quantitative approach to the research study in order to attain a high level of reliability. Although the philosophy of positivism support the resolute use of quantitative methods, it is difficult to quantify all aspect in scientific terms (Flick 2009). Understandably, there are sociological aspects, such as human interaction and leadership that do not fit in the quantitative realm (Marshall 2011).However, this research include quantitative aspects that requires the appropriate design.
Analysis of Piloting Comments
After designing the first draft of the questionnaire, the copy was distributed to colleagues. They gave crucial feedback that should be acknowledged and presented for further considerations.
Before piloting, personal data had been included in the last part of the questionnaire. Liamputtong (2009) stated that personal data should come after other questions to avoid discouraging the respondents bearing in mind that most people do not like sharing personal information with strangers. However, the piloting exercise changed this decision because many people regarded the personal data as the facilitator of the entire process of answering the questions. As a result, it was included in the first part of the questionnaire.
In addition to this, the first draft did not include the Job Title. However, the piloting indicated that this question is very important because personnel who occupy different ranks might have different perceptions towards performance appraisal. For example, a manager will have a different perception from the employee due to their positions in the company. After the second part of piloting, it was indicated that the job title should be changed to category. Further, the job category was divided into both administrative and faculty. In regard to the question of respondents’ country of residence, the first questionnaire had used citizenship.
After the piloting, it was discovered that citizenship and nationality are completely different. According to Liamputtong (2009), nationality is the country in which the person was born. However, citizenship is defined by the country in which the respondent resides legally. As a result, nationality is obtained through origination while citizenship is determined by a personal choice and legal residence. In relation to the years of experience, the pilot study indicated that the ranges should be extended to include 10-15, 15-20, and beyond 20. Liamputtong (2009) suggested that when designing a questionnaire, the researcher should include options that tap all the possible scenarios. This is viewed as a way of tapping all the possible years of experience.
Performance Appraisal Goals
Various suggestions were given in this area of the questionnaire. In the first question, the word (given) was changed into (conducted). In essence, this was appropriate because the first word implies that the appraisals are administered rather than conducted. The second question, the 2nd response was changed to salary increment. The piloting commentators suggested that salary is ambiguous.
In the third question, the comments indicated that the respondents should provide answers as the least important to the most important instead of putting numbers besides the responses. In addition, the commentators suggested that the questionnaires should include (others) in the choices. In relation to this addition, Liamputtong (2009) suggested that the number of choices included in a question should consider all the possible responses.
In regard to the third question, the pilot study indicated that a question should not include two separate variables that are treated differently. In fact, Jha (2008) argued that questions that incorporate more than one variable that have equal importance are confusing. As a result, the question was split into two different inquiries to address knowledge and expertise differently. Further, the study showed that the word (knowledge) should be changed to (work-related knowledge) so that the question is not general and ambiguous. This decision is in line with Jha (2008) because he argued that specific answers are very crucial when it come to designing questionnaires.
The commentaries applauded the inclusion of this question since the supervisors should embrace transparency and support communication. In regard to the second question, they suggested that the question should include the word (true) to ensure that is more specific. Similarly, the ambiguity of the 7th question was questioned during the pilot study. In this case, the clause (having a good relationship) was changed to (being good friends). This ensured that the questions specified the good relationship portrayed by the employees and supervisors.
For the question regarding the extent to which employees can dismiss performance appraisal, some suggestions indicated that the likert scale should include the neutral point and have five points. However, Jha (2008) stated that the use of 4 points is more appropriate since it ensures that all the respondents portray their level of preference in all question. In fact, he stated that the neutral point might tempt the respondents to go for the choice without considering the responses in a better way. As a result, it was decided that the scale will include 4 points.
Overall Satisfaction with Performance Appraisal
In relation to the question of improving performance through appraisals, the commentaries suggested that the word (believe) and (thinks) should be deleted completely. Lastly, the question inquiring about the threat raised by performance appraisal was applauded because the wording was strong. Lastly, it was suggested that the last question sought to collect qualitative data which is essentially difficult to interpret. Liamputtong (2009) suggested that qualitative data is difficult to interpret satisfactorily. With all the comments, it was evident that the questionnaires had been criticized substantially and objectively to ensure that the research aims were achieved.
In regard to the analysis of the comments made during the pilot study, it is crucial to note that the involved personnel did not indicate deficiency of content. This implies that the questions inquired about the aspects that were relevant to the research. Although there were some suggestions concerning the addition of choices, it is evident that the commentators, sought to ensures that the scope of choices fitted the possible responses. As a result, it can be concluded that the number of questions included in the questionnaire are satisfactory. In addition, the coverage of content can be viewed as a guarantee of validity and reliability.
When the content has been tackled substantially, it is guaranteed that the objectives of the research are fulfilled. Further, the validity of this questionnaire was facilitated by the focus of the questions in terms of the content. Clearly, the questions inquired about issues that related to the aspects of performance appraisal such as the expected rewards and the working relationship. As a result of covering the pertinent issues relating performance appraisal, the questionnaire can be considered as a reliable tool. Lastly, the questionnaire was designed to collect quantitative design that was chosen by the researcher. This consistency implies that the collected data will help to achieve the research objectives.
Augustine, C 2009, Employees Perceptions about Performance Appraisal, RAND Publishers, Santa Monica.
Berg, B 2009, The Effect of Manager’s Performance Appraisal Techniques on Workers, Allyn & Bacon Publishers, Boston.
Collis, J 2009, Accuracy in Perfomance Appraisal, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Creswell, J 2009, Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches, Sage, Los Angeles.
Denscombe, M 2009, Ground Rules for Social Research Guidelines for Good Practice, McGraw-Hill International, Maidenhead.
Flick, U 2009, An introduction to qualitative research, Sage Publications, Los Angeles.
Jha, N 2008, Research methodology, Abhishek Publications, Chandigarh.
Liamputtong, P 2009, Qualitative research methods, Oxford University Press, South Melbourne.
Marshall, C 2011, Designing qualitative research, Sage, Los Angeles.
McBurney, D 2010, Research methods, Wadsworth Cengage Learning, Belmont.
Sachdeva, J 2009, Business research methodology, Himalaya Pub. House, Mumbai.
Yin, R 2009, Case study research: design and methods, Sage Publications, Los Angeles.