You are on page 1of 74


According to Khan (2009) the essence of management system of an organization
lies in the system of performance appraisal adopted in that organization. This, in turn,
reflects the extent of the individual contributions and commitment of the employees in
different hierarchical levels towards the achievement of organizational goals. Generally, it
is admitted that an effective performance appraisal can lead an organization to take
strides towards marked success and growth. Conversely, an ineffective performance
appraisal system can seal the fate of an organization by creating chaos and confusion
from top to bottom in the administrative hierarchy. As a consequence, the chances of
success and growth of that organization are doomed.

Background of the study

Dechev (2010) explains that the evaluation of job performance have been called
by many different names throughout the years a tool of management, a control process,
a critical element in human resources allocation and many others. The first appraisal
systems were just methods for determining whether the salary of the employees in the
organizations was fair or not. Later, some empirical studies have shown that reduction or
future pay were not the main effects of the process. Performance appraisal was
recognized for a tool for motivation and development in the United States in the 1950s.
(Cardy & Dobbins 1994)

The practice to formally appraise workers has existed for centuries, but the
interest in the area has grown rapidly in the last forty years. The first recorded appraisal
system in industry was Robert Owens use of character books and blocks in New Lanark
mills in Scotland around 1800. The character book recorded each workers daily report.
The character blocks were colored differently on each side to represent an evaluation of
the worker ranging from bad to good and they were displayed in each employees
workplace. Owen was quite impressed by the way the blocks improve the behaviours of
workers (Cardy & Dobbins 1994).
Dechev (2010) contends that the social environment around organizations today
has changed considerably since Owen developed his system. Although most
organizations have standardized control systems for managing other types of resources
and monitor their use, the system for managing human resources has been typically
neither a standardized nor a generally accepted part of organizational life. This is a
residue of large scale economic shifts. When the economy was primarily based on
manufacturing the evaluation of performance was simple. A manager could evaluate a
worker by only counting the number of units produced.
In a service economy, however, output is not so easily measured and the
evaluation of performance is much more subjective and less clearly defined process.
Often then, there is a serious conflict not only over how evaluation should be conducted
but also over whether it should be conducted at all.
Many researchers and reputable sources criticize the importance of the process.
They have expressed debates about the authenticity of the process. Some of them, such as
Daniels (1999), even called it useless and evil. He couldnt see how the appraisal

improves performance and characterizes it as a step of firing process. He suggests that

the best performance appraisal is one that is done every day. Another critic, Derven
(1990), explains that if the manager or supervisor is unskilled or couldnt give accurate
feedback, then the appraisal process will have only a negative effect. Because of this
every organization has to make carefully structured process and have to develop
managers to focus activities and efforts and enhance business performance.
On the other side, some of the defenders, such as Lawrie (1990), describe the
process as the most crucial aspect of organizational life.

Statement of the problem

It is the view of the study that performance appraisal benefits both the company
and the individual that is appraisal. However, it is suddenly to note that the appraisal
process is not a well appreciated activity especially in the public sector and an institution
such as the police service for that matter.
Primarily, it is perceived as a means by which the superiors show where
powerless and in some cases the individuals being appraised may have to appease his
superior that he has annoyed before he can be confident that he would be appraised fairly.

.The question is: should that be the case? Should staff appraisal cause undue
punishment and discomfort among staff members of an organisation? This study would
seek to find answers to the questions.
Research Objectives

Generally speaking the study assesses the effect of performance appraisal on

officers performance at the Dansoman Police Station. More specifically, the research
attempts to establish the following objectives;
1. To assess employee perception of the appraisal process
2. To find out the effectiveness of the appraisal process
3. To assess the challenges associated with the appraisal process

Research Questions
1. How does the staff appraisal process affect the performance of the men and
woman of the Ghana Police Service-Dansoman Police Station?
2. How clearly do officers understand the purpose and outcome of the performance
appraisal process?
3. How effective is the performance appraisal of the Dansoman Police Unit of the
Ghana police service?
4. What are the challenges encountered during the performance appraisal process?

Significance of the study

A research on performance appraisal is significant to every employer be it the
government or the private sector. It is also very important to the one being appraised as in
it provides in some cases the bases for certain demands.

Performance appraisal study would help the employer know what the staff
members perceptions are regarding the appraisal process and how to improve upon it.
This study would demystify the appraisal process to help the employee appreciate the
essence of the process.

Scope of the study

The focus of this study is on the performance appraisal of the officers of the
Ghana police service. However this paper is a case study which assessed the views and
responses from officers of the Dansoman Police station which also doubles as the Greater
Accra West Division as a result of the constraints on finance and time.
In assessing the views of the staff and directors of the unit regarding how
performance appraisal impacts on their work the views of complainants, the general
public and visiting officers were not considered for this study. Thus the main respondents
to this research were the various officers such as Constable, Investigator, Detective,
Sergeant, Corporal, Clerk, District commander and officers from the MTTU unit of the
Also officers might provide inaccurate responses to the questionnaire out of fear
or lack of interest in the study. This may undermine the validity of the outcomes of the

Organisation of the study


This study is divided into five chapters, these includes;

1. The first chapter deals with the background, statement of the problem, objective of the
study, significance of the study. Scope and limitation of the study, definition of terms and
the organisation of the study.
2. The second chapter deals with the literature review of the study, which defines and
explain concepts used, including both the theoretical and empirical review.
3. The third chapter deals with the methodology of the study, which shows how data was
collected and analyzed.
4. The fourth chapter deals with data analysis and findings.
5. The final chapter deals with summary, conclusion and recommendations for the research.


The magnitude of research work done on performance appraisal across the world
and the quantum of data available on the topic on the Internet is phenomenal and is
outside the scope of this chapter to incorporate it all. However an effort has been made to
select a few closely related dissertations, reports and articles on the topic for review
purpose, the brief sketch of which is given in the following pages. This chapter is
discussed under the following sub-topics;
Definition of Performance Appraisal
Performance appraisals: an overview
Phases of performance management
Advantages of performance appraisal
Limitations of performance appraisal
Concerns and challenges of the performance appraisal
Steps in preparing and conducting a performance appraisal
Essence of employee participation in the performance appraisal process
Role of supervisors in delivering performance evaluations
Empirical review



Fey, Morgoulis-Jakoushev, Park and Bjrkman (2007) noted that a large body of
research has documented that the way in which a firms human resources are managed is
important for its competitiveness. This is especially important since it has been asserted
that collectively a firms employees can provide one of the most important sources of
competitive advantage. Hence it is vital that whatever tool is adopted to appraise their
performance, the bottom-line should be to help enhance their performance.
It is worthy to note that performance management is an important process that
provides the basis for improving and developing performance and is part of the reward
system in its most general sense. It must be clarified that for the purpose of conducting
review of relevant literature on the topic, the researchers were obliged to browse through
Internet and to find relevant material.
Hansen (1984) conducted a study know whether a company called Corporation,
has been using performance appraisal as a tool for organizational development, employee
career development or both. The study indicated that the performance appraisal has been
found to place a great deal of emphasis on the employee as an individual, although the
performance appraisal has been found to deal with only current job performance.

The appraisal has a development plan, but no reference to the employees career
development. The study further indicated that there was no reliable data to show that the
use of performance appraisal for developmental purposes enhanced the effectiveness
level of the employees at the Corporation. The Corporation based its developmental plans
on the subjective data collected from the internal surveys of employees attitude. The

Corporation's internal surveys showed that employees were more satisfied with an
appraisal that had a developmental plan.
In a related, Rajbhandari (1989) concentrated on the level of implantation of
performance appraisal criteria with regard to professional growth and development
criteria of the selected banks. He noted that performance appraisal criteria and
professional growth and development stimuli are multifaceted tool which focuses on
ability performance, motivation performance- intrinsic and extrinsic outcomes,
technical /functional competency and managerial competency- interpersonal, analytical
and emotional. The research investigated the profile of the respondents in terms of
position of banks employees into the evaluators and the evaluatees in terms of position of
bank employees and location of the banks.
According to Rajbhandari (1989) the findings of research revealed that the
performance appraisal criteria, ability performance and motivational performance and
professional growth and development stimuli, technical/ functional competence and
managerial competence-interpersonal, analytical and emotional are often implemented in
the selected banks in Banguio City and La Trinidad. The research further demonstrated
respondents grouped by position exhibited significant differences with regard to ability
performance, motivation performance intrinsic outcomes and managerial competenceinterpersonal. Differences in the respondents were noted in terms of motivation
performance- extrinsic outcomes, technical / functional competence and managerial
competence- analytical and emotional.
Winardi (2009) argues that conversely, grouping of the respondents by location
showed no marked differences in ability performance whereas respondents differed in







competencies-interpersonal, analytical and emotional. The crux of research findings

portrayed demoralization of employees was basically caused by favouritism,
subjectiveness, low ratings, comparison among peers which lead to dissatisfaction.
Employees are ranked under forced level ranking, unquantifiable objectiveness, irrelevant
scales, and inflexibility in decision making. Performance appraisal does not recognize
career growth, promotion and monetary value, routine process, difficulty to choose
among alternatives and inflexibility in decision- making after the problems faced by its
users. The research study concluded that performance appraisal criteria which relates
with ability performance and motivation performance are the key determinants for
measuring the productivity results of employees.
It was emphasised by Winardi (2009) that the career growth of bank employees is
based on Professional Growth and Development Stimuli, technical/functional
competence, managerial competencies-interpersonal, analytical and emotional. There
were notable variations in the opinions of respondents in most of the components of the
performance appraisal criteria and dimensions of professional growth and development
stimuli when grouped by position and location. The researcher suggested a performance
appraisal program in the wake of which professional growth and development stimuli
will be boosted. The proposed performance appraisal scheme is subdivided into four
Winardi (2009) argued that these dimensions are employees Job Enhancement,
Performance Enhancement, Job Satisfaction Enhancement, Emotional Maturity
Enhancement and Coordinating Performance Appraisal. Job Enhancement is to expand

the scope of employees job. Job Satisfaction Enhancement is aimed at boosting the
employees motivation level. Performance Enhancement is to increase the employees
work performance. Emotional Maturity Enhancement relates with flourishing employees
emotional competence. Coordinating Performance Appraisal takes into account
improving the level of implementation of performance tool.
Burns (2003) in a different study attempted to assess employees satisfaction with
regard to performance appraisal system and to ensure perceptions of fairness to the main
ingredients of the system. Her results showed that employees overall reactions to the
performance appraisal system were favourable demonstrating that the system possessed
the potential as a viable management tool for use.
Haywards study (2005) indicated existence of a weak, mildly significant negative
linear relationship between employee performance and transformational leadership. This
was revealed when he conducted research on the topic of relation between employee
performance, leadership and emotional intelligence in a South African Parastatal
organization. The study found that there was a significant weak, negative linear
relationship between employee performance and transactional leadership. Furthermore, it
was found that there is a significant weak, negative linear relationship between employee
performance and emotional intelligence.
Johnson (2003) was cited by Khan (2009) as conducting a research to find as to
how employees perceptions regarding the fairness of their performance appraisal
systems (e.g., the performance ratings, the appraisal process, and interpersonal
interactions with raters had direct and interaction effects on work-related attitudes and
behaviours. The other purpose of the study was to find out as to what extent

organizational justice perceptions reflect its impact on these relationships. The findings of
the dissertation study revealed that employees perceptions of distributive justice,
procedural justice, and interactional justice facets pertaining to their performance
appraisals were positively related to perceptions of overall organizational justice and
overall team justice. Moreover, research further indicated that work related attitudes and
job performance behaviours were significantly influenced by the overall perceptions of
organizational justice and overall team justice.


Performance appraisal has been described as the process of identifying,
observing, measuring, and developing human performance in organization (Carrol &
Scheider, 1982). Dechev (2010) admits that this definition is very important, because it
comprises all important components needed for the well-performed appraisal process.
Identification criteria orientate the appraisal process to the determination of what has to
be examined performance related criteria and not so much performance irrelevant
Dechev (2010) suggest that the observation component means that the supervisors
need to frequently observe the identified characteristics. The measurement component
indicates that the superior has to translate the observations into a judgmental rating. They
have to be relevant, but also must be comparable across raters in the organization. By
development component, the definition shows that the performance appraisal should not
only be the evaluation of the past. The supervisor, who makes the appraisal, should focus
on the future and on the improvement of the results. The definition also suggests that

effective appraisal can improve the human performance in the organization, which also
means increased employee motivation. Performance appraisal can and should be linked to
performance improvement process and can also be used to identify training needs and
potential, agree future objectives, support a career development and solve existing
Dechev (2010) continue that performance appraisal process is part of the
performance management system. The term performance management was first used in
the 1970s, but it did not become a recognized process until the latter half of the 1980. The
most appropriate definition in the context of the research is that, performance
management represents a strategic and integrated approach to delivering organizational
success by improving the performance capabilities of both individuals and teams
(Armstrong and Baron, 1998).

Determinants of Performance

Seen from the figure-1,Willingness

the concomitants
of job performance are the capacity to
to Perform
perform, the opportunity to perform, and the willingness to perform.

Job Performance

Capacity to Perform

Opportunity to Perform

Capacity: The capacity relates to the degree to which and individual possesses
task relevant skills, abilities, knowledge and experiences.

Opportunity: The availability of opportunity to perform is also a critical

ingredient in the performance recipe sometimes; poor decisions and outdated
attitudes may prove to be potential hurdles for an employee to lack performance.

Willingness: The third factor, willingness, relates to the degree to which an

individual both desires and is willing to exert effort towards attaining job
performance. It is, in other words, motivation. No combination of capacity and
opportunity will result in high performance in the absence of some level of
motivation or willingness to perform.
Looking at performance from another dimension it may be said, performance is

the outcome of the interaction of two types of factors: individual and environmental
(Vecchio, Hearn and Southey, 1996).


In the words of Casio (2003) a manager who creates a performance definition

ensures that individual employees or teams know what is expected of them, and that they
stay focused on effective performance.
It was noted by Amstrong (2004) that:
Performance is a multi-dimensional construct, the measurement of which
varies depending on a variety of factors.
Khane (2009) argues that performance is something that the person leaves behind
and that exists apart from the purpose. . Khane (2009 says, Performance means both
behaviours and results Behaviours emanate from the performance and transform
performance from abstract to action. Not just the instruments for results, behaviours are
also outcomes in their own right the product of mental and physical effort applied to
tasks and can be judged apart from results. So performance can be regarded as simply the
results achieved. On an individual basis, it is a record of the persons accomplishments.
From the above definitions, it is apparent that performance reflects how well an
employee is fulfilling the requirements of a job. Often confused with effort, which refers
to energy expended, performance is measured in terms of results. For example, a student
may exert a great deal of effort in preparing for an examination and still make a poor
grade. In such a case the effort expended was high, yet the performance was low (Mir,
Job performance is the net effect of an employees effort as modified by abilities
and role (or task) perceptions. Thus, performance in a given situation can be viewed as


resulting from the interrelationship among effort, abilities and role perceptions (Khan,

Effort: Effort, which results from being motivated, refers to the amount of energy
(physical and / or mental) an individual uses in performing a task.

Abilities: Abilities are personal characteristics used in performing a job. Abilities

usually do not fluctuate widely over short periods of time.

Role: Role (task) perceptions refer to the direction (s) in which individuals
believe they should channel their efforts on their jobs. The activities and
behaviours, people believe are necessary in the performance of their jobs, define
their role perceptions. To attain an acceptable level of performance, a minimum
level of efficiency must exist in each of the performance components.


Generally, performance appraisal is used as a tool to identify, observe, measure
and develop human resources within the organisation (Gillen 2007). This is usually done
annually at the end of the year wherein employees are evaluated by their managers and
the latter are evaluated by the Chief Executive Officer (CEO). Performance appraisal is
frequently used synonymously with performance management (Fletcher 2004;









Scotland/Management Development Group, Edinburgh). It is commonly used as a device

to inform an employee about how he or she performed for the whole year and let the
employee know how such performance can be compared to the expectations of the
supervisor. The areas identified can be used to determine what areas need to be developed
and trained on (Boice and Kleiner 1997).
Boice and Kleiner (1997) further assert that, through performance appraisals,
unsatisfactory performance can be addressed by the supervisor to facilitate improvement.
If the performance is satisfactory, the appraisal may also be used by the supervisor to
motivate the employee to continue rendering good performance. In such case, it might
have a positive impact on the performance of the organisation (Harrison and Goulding
Scholtes (1993) contributes that typically, the skills, areas or aspects evaluated by
the performance appraisal are the following: communication, judgment, technical and
product knowledge, time management, forecasting, planning, budgeting, reporting,
administration, delegation (for team leaders, supervisors and managers), IT, machinery,
knowledge about equipment, meeting the deadlines, meeting the commitments, creativity,
decision-making, problem solving, team work, initiative, work determination, energy,
work-rate, ability to work under pressure, leadership, integrity adaptability, flexibility,
mobility, appearance and hygiene, image, social awareness and ethical considerations
(thesis, date retrieved 13/12/2013).

Types of Appraisal

Bowes (2009) explain that companies adopt and employ different performance
appraisals depending on the needs and nature of the job, work, and of the company.
Bowes (2009) summarized the common types of a performance appraisals used in
different companies:
1. The 360-degree Appraisal In this method, employees are allowed to evaluate
their specific co-employees and illustrate their experiences with them. The
feedback gathered may be analysed by the managers and may be considered in
doing their own evaluations.
2. General Performance Appraisal





communication between the manager or supervisor and the subordinates. This

continues throughout the whole year and at the end thereof, the manager or
supervisor can determine whether the goals set at the beginning of the year are
met and feedback shall be provided therefrom and new goals are again set.
3. Technological or Administrative Performance Appraisal This type of appraisal
deals more with the technical performance of the ratees as they are assigned with
specialized tasks. As such, they are rated according to their specific skills and the
number of tasks they were able to complete.
4. Manager Performance Appraisal The raters also go through the same process.
The managers job skills and human resource skills are evaluated. This may
include feedback from his or her subordinates that are usually gathered
anonymously to ensure that managers would not reprise his subordinates who
might have given unpleasant feedback.
5. Employee Self-Assessment This is the appraisal type that many employees get
anxious over, because it is commonly matched up with the assessment or


evaluation made by their managers or supervisors. The difference between their

assessments is discussed by the manager and the employee involved.
6. Project Evaluation Review This is a good tool for project management. In this
type of appraisal, an employee or a team is evaluated or rated at the end of every
project, contrary to the usual annual end of the year evaluation. By doing so, the
employee or team involved can make appropriate adjustments for the next project.
7. Sales Performance Appraisal This is considered the easiest among the types of
appraisals but is also the most painstaking. Every sales person is evaluated based
on his actual sales performance versus his or her sales target or quota. A common
problem in such method is the unrealistic sales target or quota set by their
managers or top management (thesis, date retrieved 13/12/2013


Neely (1998) offers and gives a clear explanation of the phases of the
performance management. It involves five phases, namely planning, monitoring,
developing, rating, and rewarding. These are described in detail below:
1. Planning Successful organisations make plans in advance. This involves setting the
expectations in terms of performance as well as the goals for the individual employees
and group to further the objectives of the organisation. The involvement of the employees


in the planning stage will help them realise and understand the goals of the organisation
and how they may be achieved.
2. Monitoring In most successful organisations, the leaders and the members continuously
monitor their assignments and projects. It is necessary that there is a consistent measuring
of performance and constant giving of feedback to employees and groups while they are
in the process of achieving the goals of the organisation. This may involve progress
reviews with employees where their performance is compared with the standards set
during the planning stage.
3. Developing The developmental needs of employees are evaluated and addressed
accordingly by management. This includes giving training, introducing new tasks that
could develop new skills or giving higher responsibilities, improving the processes in
working and other methods. Employees are motivated when they see that they are given
training and developmental opportunities.
4. Rating Usually, rating is done at the end of the year to summarize the performance of
every employee. Comparisons between the previous and current performance of the
employees are made to determine whether there is an improvement and the respective
performances of employees are then compared at this stage. The evaluation should be
based on the standards and elements set for employees and their actual output during the
period evaluated upon. This may have an effect on their salary increase and other
5. Rewarding This is where recognition of the efforts exerted by the employees to achieve
the organisational objectives is done. Recognition may give to individual employees or
given as a group. Rewarding does not always entail monetary rewards but may also be
mere expressions of recognition, such as saying thank you for a job well done. These


could go a long way. However, formal rewards may still be the best form of reward for
employees (e.g. salary increase, bonus, promotions, etc.) (Neely 1998).


Winardi (2007) identified the following as the advantages of performance
1. SWOT Analysis: Performance Appraisal gives a complete idea of the employee's
strength, weaknesses and based on that their opportunities and threats.
2. Career Planning: On _ the basis of one's own SWOT analysis, an employee can
have his career plans.
3. Suitable Placement: Performance appraisal enables a company to give suitable
placement to an employee based on their talents and skills.
4. Self-Development: Performance Appraisal is very much a positive activity which
enables an employee to know his own weaknesses and also enables him to remove
their weaknesses and lead to self-development.
5. Effective Training Programme: Training programmes can be drawn out on the basis
of the needs of employees to remove their weaknesses.
6. Sound Personnel Policies: Personnel policies for promotions, transfer must be sound
and objective. Performance Appraisal provides valuable information and reliable data
for such decisions.
7. Employee Employer Relations will be healthy if performance Appraisal
information will be used for personnel management. This will minimise grievances
and improve confidence in the management.
8. Higher Employee Productivity: Employer morale will be high because there can be
a system of rewards for employees with higher performance. This will improve
organization productivity.
9. Performance Appraisal will help in potential human resource planning.

Benefits Performance Appraisal to the Employer

The annual meeting gives an opportunity to the manager to formally recognize
good performance and this would lead to more motivation from the workers (Derven
1990). Modern systems for performance appraisal depersonalize issues. Supervisors
focus on behaviors and results, rather than on personalities. Such systems support
ongoing communication, feedback and dialogue about organizational goals. Also they
support communication between an employee and a supervisor. Performance appraisal
provides a clear target of job standards and priorities and ensures more trust on the
relation managerworker (Derven 1990). Other management benefits of Performance
Appraisal are the identification of high performers and poor performers as well as the
identification of strengths and development areas (Jackson & Schuller 2002).


Winardi (2007) further identified the following as the advantages of performance
1. Personal Bias: The biggest limitation of performance Appraisal is subjectivity. Due
to human element in Appraisal, there is always a fear of one's own opinion coming in
the way of Appraisal.
2. Halo Effect: The tendency of _ an individual to rate an employee consistently high
due to some earlier good performance rather than his existing performance is called
as carrying a halo around oneself.


3. Horn Effect: The tendency of a superior to rate a subordinate lower than his
performance justifies due to some recent/earlier failures.
4. Lack of Uniform Standards: The standards used by different departments in the
organisation may not be the same, hence, rating becomes unscientific and employees
suffer. Some rates are too liberal while others are too strict causing lack of uniformity.
5. Appropriate Appraisal Technique: Selection of appropriate appraisal technique is
important to give the correct result. Some of the techniques are time-consuming and
costly and so avoided. If wrong techniques are applied performance appraisal results
may prove defective.
6. Wrong Appraisal by Superior : Superiors have continuous and daily relations with
the subordinates, giving accurate ratings may lead to spoiling relations with them
which the superiors may want to avoid, hence higher rating to the subordinates.
7. Stress on Individual and not on Performance: Performance Appraisal must lay
stress on the performance of the individual and not on his individual and not on his
personal characteristics. Many a times this is overlooked and the personnel
characteristics come in the way of his performance appraisal.
8. Central Tendency: Many a times to be on the safer side the rater would put the ratee
on average scores. This happens because of 2 reasons first of all if the rater does
not want low scores to the ratee. Secondly, if he himself is not competent and would
not like to show his incompetency.
9. Lack of Importance to Self-Development: Performance Appraisal is not for witch
hunting but for finding out strengths as well as weaknesses. The strengths can be
consolidated upon and the weaknesses too be removed through appropriate training.
However, this aspect is not given importance and so the main objective of
performance appraisal is neglected.
10. Lack of Communication and Participation with Employees: Performance
appraisal is not complete without communicating to the employee the results of the

appraisal and also give him a chance to give his opinion, otherwise it is a one-sided
affair without participation of employee and will not lead to their development.
11. Time-Consuming and Huge Paperwork: Performance appraisal is a continuous job
for the superiors. There is need to continuously observe the subordinates, keep
records, fill documents, write reports, hence time-consuming and costly.


Dechev (2010) remarked that performance Appraisal is being widely practiced in
the organization worldwide. Despite this fact there are a large number of managers,
human resource professionals, human resource consultants and researchers that
recommend companies to get rid of the performance appraisal systems. Dechev (2010)
further noted that the first and maybe be strongest argument is the existing discrepancy
between the theory and the practical implementation.
According to Dechev (2010), authors, like Bernardin & Klatt (1985); Hall,
Postner & Hardner (1989); Maroney & Buckley (1992), report there is a considerable gap
between theory and practice and that human resources specialists do not make full use of
the psychometric tools available. Counter argument maintained by line managers is that
the process needs to be simple and easy to use; otherwise it becomes time consuming and
cost ineffective. Another portion of criticism comes with the fact that performance
appraisal increases the dependency of the employees on their superiors. Where the
process is conducted by managers who are often not trained to be appraisers, the genuine
feedback is obstructed because it includes subjectivity and bias of the raters, which leads
to incorrect and unreliable data regarding the performance of the employee.


Performance Appraisal process can also be a bitter process which can create
emotional pressures, stress and sometimes can adversely affect the morale and lead to
Performance appraisals are often time consuming and use incorrect methods to
measure performances. They are generating false results and the decisions taken can be
politically influenced. An example to support the points mentioned above would be the
case of a call centre employee. The appraisal of a call center employee is based on the
amount of work they do, the number of calls they receive, the amount of revenue they
collect, the average time they spend on each call. But if analyzed, all these factors depend
on other factors like the response of the callers, the availability of the information asked
for, the nature of the calls etc. which are often not considered during appraisals. When an
employee is being aware of all these secondary factors that have not been considered
when they are assessed, the situation can create stress and dissatisfaction.
Walters (1995) as cited by Dechev (2010) outlined the main Performance
Appraisal challenges in the performance appraisal process:
1. Determining the evaluation criteria. Identification of the appraisal criteria is one of
the biggest problems faced by the top management. For the purpose of evaluation, the
criteria selected should be in quantifiable or measurable terms.
2. Lack of competence. Evaluators should have the required expertise and the
knowledge to decide the criteria accurately. They should have the experience and the
training necessary to carry out the appraisal process objectively.
3. Errors in rating and evaluation. Many errors based on the personal bias like
stereotyping, halo effect (i.e. one trait influencing the evaluators rating for all other


traits) etc. may creep in the appraisal process. Therefore the rater should exercise
objectivity and fairness in evaluating and rating the performance of the employees.
4. Resistance. The appraisal process may face resistance from the employees because of
the fear of negative ratings. Therefore, the employees should be communicated and
clearly explained the purpose as well the process of appraisal. The standards should
be clearly communicated and every employee should be made aware of what exactly
is expected from them
According to a white paper submitted by the New Media Learning Centre (2007)
performance evaluation is a process, not an event. Even the isolated incident normally
referred to as giving a performance evaluation should involve a number of steps.
Conducting performance evaluations in a timely and thorough manner is one of the most
underplayed but important duties of a supervisor. Often, late appraisals are often the
norm, not the exception. According to the paper late performance evaluations can reduce
the supervisors and organizations credibility in the employees eyes, especially if the
organizations policies and procedures specify evaluations will be conducted at specific
time intervals (once a year, or on the employees anniversary date).
Well in advance of actually writing up an employees performance evaluation, the
supervisor should determine what documentation he or she needs from other departments
and request that information. Some of the documents that might be necessary are
attendance and punctuality records, sick leave records, sales records, daily or weekly call
records, output reports, etc. The supervisor should not review the employees workers
compensation or medical files, because basing a performance evaluation on workers

compensation or private medical information is prohibited (New Media Learning Centre,

It is the view of the study that supervisors should review an employees job
description as a starting point for preparing a job evaluation. The job description states
what the organization wants an employee in a particular job to accomplish and how it
wants the employee to perform. Supervisors should start by determining whether the
employees official job description still accurately reflects his or her key responsibilities.
If not, the supervisor should work with the HR Department to bring the job description up
to date.
Also, it is important for supervisors to review their employees personnel file in
preparation for writing his or her performance evaluation. The supervisor does not have
to read each and every document in full, but he or she should review the file to note any
patterns of behaviour, continuing incidents of misconduct or poor performance.
Supervisors should also review the employees goals from the prior years evaluation. If
the supervisor has just recently begun supervising the employee, past supervisors
evaluations may also provide useful information.

Why is Careful Drafting of Performance Evaluations So Important?

The paper avers that careful drafting of performance evaluations as well as all
employee performance related documentation is essential, in todays litigious
workplace. It is essential that supervisors document the employees problematic
behaviour, not the reason why the supervisor believes the behaviour exists. Irrelevant
facts, such as single parenthood, divorce, financial problems, medical issues, etc. should

all be kept out of performance appraisals, and performance evaluation meetings. The
supervisor must focus only on the employees job performance clearly and objectively
outlining deficiencies as well as areas in which the employee excels. Following are some
specific tips for drafting better performance evaluations:

Be specific and avoid generalities. Phrases such as work harder, increase

production, have more enthusiasm, or be a better team player are not specific
enough for the employee to know what is expected. Further, they could be used
against the employer by implicating that the real reasons for deficiencies are agerelated; the employees age is the reason they are slowing down on the job. Specific
goals, such as increase sales by 20% in the next six months are measurable and
objective, and assist both the employee (who knows what is expected) and the
supervisor (who can now easily measure whether that goal is achieved).

Focus on what you want the employee to do, not what you want them to be. A
performance evaluation is not the time to detail all of the employees personality
flaws or weaknesses. A supervisor cannot change the employees basic personality
traits in a performance evaluation. Supervisors should objectively state exactly what
is expected of the employee. For example, instead of using the phrase be a friendlier
person, a much more constructive, useful phrase would be reduce customer
complaints by 50% in the next three months.

Use concrete details such as names, numbers and dates. Be specific regarding
exactly what is expected from the employee and the date it is expected. For
documenting performance issues, get as detailed as possible instead of merely using

phrases such as have a better attitude. Supervisors instead should document

incidents where the employees attitude was improper, stating the date, place,
incident, witnesses, behaviour(s), and the detrimental effect of the employees
conduct on those around them, as well as the specific organizational policies or
procedures the employees behaviour violated.

Use active verbs, not passive verbs. A statement such as deadlines will be met is
meaningless. Rather, the employee will meet 90% of his deadlines this quarter is
more action-oriented, concrete and measurable.

Be realistic. Set only a limited number of objectives. More than seven is excessive.
HR Professionals often use the term SMART when defining performance

Specific: Keep the goal specific, well defined and understood.

Measurable: There must be some way of determining whether the employee met the

Applicable: The goal must fit within the organizations strategic plan.

Relevant: The goal must be relevant to what the employee and the department are
trying to accomplish.

Time sensitive: There must be a time limit on how long the employee has to
accomplish the goal.


Employee collaboration is the key to successful goal setting. If the employee helps to
create the goals, chances are that she or he will genuinely want to meet them. As
supervisors evaluate and coach employees during the year, they should refer to the
performance evaluation regularly to ensure the employee is on track to meet the specified
standards. At the end of the year, the appraisal can also be instrumental in answering the
essential question for any evaluation: Did the employees performance live up to these
standards and goals?


Roberts (2003) proposes genuine employee participation in several aspects of the
appraisal process because it has the potential to mitigate may of the dysfunctions of
traditional performance appraisal systems as well as to engender a more human and
ethical human resource management decision-making process. The first participation
should according to him take place during the development of reliable, valid, fair and
useful performance standards. Second, there should be employee participation during
designing the rating format and measurement scales.
The results concerning participation are according to Roberts (2003) constantly
positive: Employee participation is a key element of intrinsic motivational strategies that
facilitate worker growth and development. Furthermore, employees attain ownership over
the performance appraisal process and employees` acceptance is enhanced that way.
Third, it generates an atmosphere of cooperation and employee support which reduces
appraisal related tension, defensive behaviour and rater-ratee conflict.

Cox (2000) adds that these positive effects are especially generalizable to the
design and implementation of pay systems. She suggests that systems implemented
following meaningful consultation with employees are more effective than those which
are implemented unilaterally by managers or with less employee involvement. Positive
impacts where found on a number of factors, including absence and labour turnover rates,
throughput and productivity.
Even more important she argues that some of these potential failure factors can be
diminished by consultation of employees. First, beside increasing the chance of resolving
problems of the current system, seeking information from employees may ensure that the
rewards offered are commensurate in timing and kind with the kind that of rewards
employees desire. Second, the consultation process may allow the opportunity to identify
any individuals or groups likely to be adversely and unfairly affected and to take action to
prevent this before the scheme is implemented. Third, involving as many parties as
possible in the development of a payment scheme makes them more committed to its
success and makes them more likely to accept the system.
The participation of employees functions most effectively in an atmosphere of
trust, open communication and equal employee treatment. Therefore, it requires
conceptual, affective and experiential education which can be reached by means of
training (Roberts 2003). But Roberts (2003) also points at the need to execute regular
employee attitude surveys and focus groups to systematic evaluate performance system
participation effectiveness.
In summary, it can be concluded that, given the appropriate atmosphere and
culture in an organisation, employee participation will enhance motivation, feelings of

fairness and overall acceptance of the performance appraisal process. Thus, to attain these
positive effects it must be determined if employees in a certain organisation would
actually perceive participation as an enriching factor.


A report by the New Media Learning (2011) suggest that many supervisors view
the performance appraisal meeting as merely another administrative chore; however, for
the employee, it might be the most important meeting of the year. Many significant issues
may be discussed in this meeting, including the employees future with the employer,
opportunities for advancement, increased compensation, training opportunities and other
benefits. For employees with deficiencies in their performance, the meeting is critical
for the employee, the supervisor and the organization.
According to New Media Learning (2011) effective performance appraisals are
not a lecture to the employee by the supervisor. The evaluation meeting should be a twoway conversation; supervisors can enhance the effectiveness of the meeting by employing
active listening skills and asking for clarification of employee input.
Of all performance appraisal discussion difficulties, dealing with defensive
subordinates is often the most challenging. When individuals are under pressure, they
generally adopt one of two coping mechanisms: Fight some defensive employees stand
their ground, raise their voice, pound desks, argue points that have clearly been refuted or
put blame on someone or something else. Flight other defensive employees may look
away, try to change the subject, speak softly or passively accept whatever is said.


Whether an employees defensive reaction is manifesting itself as a "fight" or "flight"

response, using active listening techniques can assist a supervisor in this situation.
When the conversation becomes argumentative or unproductive, it is the
supervisors responsibility to direct the discussion in a more constructive direction or to
terminate the meeting and consult with the HR Department for guidance (New Media
Learning, 2011).
It is generally a good rule of thumb for supervisors to employ active listening
techniques, seeking to understand the employees perspective, restating the employees
statement to make sure clarity is achieved, and then for the supervisor to state their
perspective and requirements.
After the evaluation meeting, supervisors should document what both the
employee and supervisor said and what agreements were made or resolutions were
reached. Supervisors should document this meeting carefully, considering in mind that it
could later be used as evidence that the supervisor had discriminatory reasons for
evaluation ratings or comments. For example, a supervisor who feels he or she is being
supportive by saying that he or she knows the employee is having a hard time juggling
single parenthood or is going through a difficult divorce may unwittingly upset the
employee and create a claim or lawsuit for unlawful harassment or discrimination.


According to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the
Commission received over 7% more employment discrimination and unlawful
harassment charges in 2010 than it did the previous year an unprecedented 99,922 as
compared to 93,277 in 2009(New Media Learning,2011). According to the white Paper
by New Media Learning (2011) significantly, the number of charges filed increased in
every category. Such statistics likely reflect the large number of layoffs that occurred in
2010, coupled with the difficulties terminated employees had in finding new employment
in a down economy.
The paper admits that New Media Learning (2011) HR Professionals have many
tools in their arsenal to prevent, and, if necessary, defend legal charges, lawsuits,
government investigations, adverse findings, etc. Performance evaluations are one of the
most powerful weapons HR can use to demonstrate that the organization had legitimate,
non-discriminatory reasons for termination or other adverse action against an employee
or unsuccessful job applicant. In fact, most management side employment lawyers will
tell you that performance evaluations can make or break the attorneys successful defence
of an employer against employee claims, charges and lawsuits.
However, as most HR professionals know all too well, supervisors are loathe to
prepare and conduct performance appraisals, especially in a timely manner, often merely
from a lack of understanding of the critical nature of the performance appraisal process.
Supervisors need on-going instruction in how to prepare and present a performance
appraisal that is legally defensible as well as an effective management and coaching tool.



This chapter considers the methods adopted by this study in collecting and
analysing the data for this research. The research method describes the method and
techniques involved or the procedure to be followed to achieve the objectives of the
research. In writing the project, the researcher, the study is subdivided into the following
i. Research design
ii. Population size
iii. Sample and Sample procedures
iv. Types and sources of data
v. Data gathering instrument-Research Questionnaire
vi. Data collection procedure
vii. Data presentation and analysis

Research design is an overall framework of a research that explains the direction
and method to be used in the study to gather the information needed, either from primary
or secondary sources (Malhotra, 2007).According to Neuman (2006), quantitative
approach has the characteristic of measuring objective facts using variables where data is
separated from theory, statistically analyzed and emphasized with its reliability.

Due to adoption of quantitative approach, it is inevitably that the study will be

carrying out causal research where the objectives formulated in earlier chapter consisting
of all the variables will be empirically investigated using statistical technique such as
charts, tables and other statistical measurements to prove the cause and effect relationship
between employee retention and the independent factors, i.e. empowerment, training,
compensation and appraisal.

The population of the study describes the totality of the observations in which the
study is concerned (Asamoah, 2012). It is the researchers opinion that the population for
this study consist of the entire staff of the Ghana Police service in Accra. The Ghana
Police Service as it is now called has as its motto Service with Integrity has a
population of 32,684( date accessed 13/11/2013). The
functions of the Ghana Police Service as stated in the Police Service Act, 1970 [Act 350]
of Ghana are as follows;
i. Crime detection and prevention
ii. Apprehension (arrest) and prosecution of offenders
iii. Maintenance of law and order
iv. Due enforcement of the law



Ekwonwa (2007) defines sampling as a method of choosing the people to be
interviewed or to be offered the questionnaires. The sample size for this study includes 70
members of the Ghana Police service (Ablekuma West Divisional Headquarters,
Dansoman). Purposive sampling method was adopted for this study. A purposive sample
is a non-representative subset of some larger population, and is constructed to serve a
very specific need or purpose (Trochim 2005). Purposive sampling was useful in the
study because it consumes less time and it is less expensive. In relation to the research
conducted, purposive sampling helped the researcher to focus on selecting Police Officers
from the Dansoman Police Station purposively to respond to the questions.
Another reason for using purposive sampling is that it is best used with small
numbers of individuals/groups which may well be sufficient for understanding human
perceptions, problems, needs, behaviours and contexts, which are the main justification
for a qualitative audience research. This was useful because only a small number of
Police Officers were interviewed; hence it was easier to understand the operations and
how the single spine salary structure has affected them. The qualitative method of
purposive sampling was used to reach out to the Police. Other advantages of purposive
sampling is that the people who do not fit the requirements are eliminated, the results are
expected to be more accurate.


Profile of Ghana Police Service

The Ghana Police Service has, since its inception been in the frontline of the
criminal justice system of Ghana. It is clearly, the most visible arm of government as the
symbol of law and order, to the people. Ghana Police Service is mandated by Article 200
of the 1992 constitution of the Republic of Ghana, and the Police Service Act 1970 (ACT
350). The constitution mandates the Service to operate on democratic policing principles.
The Police Service Act 1970, Act350 spells out the core functions of the service as
1. To Protect life and Property,
2. To prevent and detect crime,
3. To apprehend and prosecute offenders,
4. To maintain public order,
5. To ensure a peaceful and safe environment to facilitate economic and social
activities as a pre-requisite for making Ghana a Gateway to West Africa
As per the new motto of the service , TO PROTECT AND SERVE WITH HONOUR
the GPS is committed to protect and serve all residents in their communities, using
democratic policing principles, and appropriate technology to protect life and property,
and personal dignity . The vision of the Ghana Police Service is to be a World Class
Police Service capable of delivering planned, democratic, protective, and peaceful
services up to standards of international best practice.

The Ghana Police Service is divided into twelve (12) administrative regions, namely,
Accra, Tema, Ashanti, Eastern , Brong Ahafo , Volta, Western , Central , Northern , Upper
East, upper West, and Rarilways , Ports and Harbour Regions.
As part of the Ghana Police Service functions, the current online service portal helps
citizen and non-citizen residents of Ghana to connect with each other at a simple point
and share information of the service available online. Currently the on line service allows
the citizen of Ghana to post and track their application for obtaining the finger print or
Nominal Vetting certificate. Apart from the online service the portal also allows the
general public to abstain information from the service available at the Ghana Police


Data source involves the use of primary and secondary data. The primary data
related to the information on the study was collected personally. It involved face to face
interviews with some Directors and officers of the unit. The secondary sources included
books of relevant importance to the research topic, journals and magazine among other
publications. The internet also proved a valuable source for the research work.



Though the designing of the questionnaire was a difficult task, the content was
elaborate enough to elicit the responses that the researcher was most interested in,
without much extraneous information.
Both open-ended and close-ended questions were used for the study. The openended questions allowed the respondents to provide their own answers using their own
words and also provide reasons for a particular choice. In the case of the close-ended
questions, the respondents were asked to select their answers from among a list or set of
alternatives provided by the researcher. These included Yes and No options.


The primary data related to the information on the study was collected from
respondents at the Ablekuma West Divisional Headquarters, Dansoman.. It involved face
to face interviews with some heads of department and the use of questionnaire for the rest
of the respondents. Secondary data consisted of a broad category of data ranging from
summary of numbers to written thesis. Examples are reference books, journals, working
papers, unpublished research works among others.
The data collection methods used for this studies includes personal distribution
and supervision of completion of questionnaire by respondents. Another approach was a
face-to-face interview with the Criminal Investigation Departments and Human Resource
to elicit their opinion on how performance appraisal process of the unit could be

The respondents in the latter case were reliably informed before the


questionnaires were administered. The researchers used seven (7) working days to
achieve this objective.


Statistical tables were used to ascertain the frequency of responses and the
corresponding percentages to issues raised in the questionnaire. The data gathered from
the sources (i.e. primary and secondary) were analyzed and interpreted to know the
employee career planning and its impact on employee development. It was done with
Microsoft Word and Excel. The research was further analyzed alongside the research
questions and areas earmarked for discussion to arrive at a generalized conclusion and



The purpose of this chapter is to present the results of the findings of the field work
carried out by the researchers in an attempt to achieve the aims set for this study

Gender Distribution of Respondents

Respondents were initially required to indicate their gender to help establish if there was
any form of anomaly in the male: female ratio among the staff members. The details if
the responses shows that the males dominated by 14 respondents.
Table 1.0: Gender Distribution of Respondents
Source: Field Survey 2014


Percentage (%)

Table 1 displays the gender analysis of the officers of the police station who
participated in the study. The result shows that males form the majority of the
respondents; having a representation of 60% whilst the females represented 40%. The
implication is that majority of officers in the Ghana Police service were males. This ratio
is rather unusual in a country fairly dominated by the females in terms of statistics
(National Population Census, 2000)


Figure 1.0: Gender Distribution of Respondents

Gender Distribution of Respondents

Frequency 30



Source: Field Survey 2014

Age Distribution of Respondents

With regards to the age of the respondents, the results obtained from the survey has been
displayed in the table 2.0 below;

Table 2.0: Age Distribution of Respondents

20 25
26 30
31 35
36 35
Above 40
Source: Field Survey 2014


Percentage (%)

Table 2 measures the ages of respondents. According to the result, most of the
respondents (31%) fall between the ages of 26-35 years followed by those between the
ages of 31-35 (23%) and 21% were between 20-25 years. There were 11 respondents who
indicated their ages as being between 36-45 years whilst the oldest age range of above
40years formed just 9% of the total number of respondents who participated in the

Figure 2.0: Age Distribution of Respondents


Age Distribution of Respondents



20 25

26 30

31 35

Source: Field Survey 2014

Educational Status of Respondents


36 35 Above 40

The educational background of the respondents was of great interest and

advantage to this study. This was because apart from the fact that they can all read and
write they also understood the relevance of project work and hence it made it easier
collecting data from them as well as providing responses that helped the researcher
obtained relevant information which helped in achieving the objective of the study.
Table 3.0: Educational Status of Respondents
Educational Status
Source: Field Survey 2014


Percentage (%)

Figure 3.0: Educational Status of Respondents

Educational Status of Respondents

Axis Title

No education J.H.S




Educational Status

Source: Field Survey 2014

The data distribution above shows the distribution of respondent by their
educational qualification. From the data, 48 respondents out of the total population
representing 69% the valid percent are holders of First Degree and 22 respondent

representing 31% are holders of other educational backgrounds such as diplomas and
professional certificates combination of more than one educational training.
The educational level depicts that the police service requires people who have
received more than basic education to join the service. This in way does not only boost
the image of the service but also aids them in being vocal when they attend courts with
victims or culprits.

Rank Level of Respondents

The researcher was interested in the rank of the participants who took part in the
survey. This in a way helped to assess their opinions with regards to the questions that is
posed by the researcher.
Table 4.0: Rank Level of Respondents


Percentage (%)

Source: Field Survey 2014



With regards to the rank of the officers who took part in the survey, it was
revealed that a majority of 33 formed 47% of the total number of respondents. Next were
21 middle officers who formed 30% of the respondents. Finally the senior officers who
were 16 respondents formed 23% of the total number of respondents. This is not unusual
since as the hierarchy goes up the number of people reduces. Whilst the junior officers
are the first line of contacts when civilians come to report the middle one are those who
these junior officers report the cases to or daily operations. The middle officers also take
effect an arrest and process culprits to court. Meanwhile the senior officers are those who
plan operations and approve strategies and set targets as well.

Figure 4.0: Rank Level of Respondents

Rank Level of Respondents
Axis Title




Source: Field Survey 2014



Perception of Occupation
Sujoya and Mazumdar (2012) note that researchers are constantly striving to
investigate causal relationships between performance appraisal practices and desirable
employee outcomes such as job satisfaction, organizational commitment and enhanced
productivity. Thus this section attempted to assess the perception of officers with regards
to how they consider their work.
Table 5.0: Perception of Respondents
Source: Field Survey 2014



Percentage (%)

It was found that only 17% considered their job as being satisfying whilst a
whopping 23% affirmed that their job was tedious with an equal number of 23%
satisfying that their jobs were challenging. The table above further shows that 37% of the
officers consider their jobs as being normal.
This findings support the assessment of Sujoya and Mazumdar (2012) the
perception of staff members with regards to their jobs does not only reflect in their output
but also they were they considered both their employers and the significance of their jobs.
Adding that the culmination of this attitudes formed the image of the public with regards
to the business or entity. Hence, it is thus not surprising that the police service is not held
much in high regards by the Ghanaian public in general.
Figure 5.0: Current Occupation of Respondents
Perception of Nature of Job





Frequency 15




Satisfying Challenging

Source: Field Survey 2014



Rating of Performance Appraisal of Respondents

The respondents were asked to rate the performance appraisal system of the unit.
This was to determine if they considered it as being relevant or not in their duty
Table 6.0: Rating of Performance Appraisal of Respondents
Very important
Source: Field Survey 2014


Percentage (%)

The table depict the views of 20 respondents as saying that performance appraisal
was important in their line of work. This may largely be due to their experience with the
performance appraisal process at the unit. Closely following these respondents were 19
officers who claimed that performance appraisal was very important.
A critical observation by the researchers showed that all 16 out of the 19
respondents were senior officers with the rest being middle officers. 17 of the
respondents decided to remain neutral whilst a significant 14 considered it as being
unimportant. Dipboye and Pontbriand (1981) found that employees were more satisfied
and had greater acceptance of the performance appraisal when employee development
and performance improvement were emphasized in it.

Figure 7.0: Rating of Performance Appraisal of Respondents

Rating of Performance Appraisal of Respondents
Axis Title


Very important Important



Source: Field Survey 2014

Motivation from Appraisal Awareness to Work Hard



The study further sought to know from the respondents if the appraisal encourages
them to work. This was to know if the appraisal process influenced the officers of the unit
to work hard as a result of being aware that they will be appraised before being promoted
or rewarded.
Table 7.0: Motivation from Appraisal Awareness to Work Hard
Very well
Does not
Do not know
Source: Field Survey 2014


Percentage (%)

The study indicated that 22 (31%) of the respondent asserted that the appraisal
dose not motivate them to work any harder than they are currently doing. According to
the respondents whether appraisal or not they go and discharge their duties as they have
been charged by law. However, 18 (26%) respondents affirmed that the notion of being
appraised motivates them to work very well. It was the view of 17 (24%) respondents that
they did not know if the appraisal process motivates them or not hence this group may be
considered as being neutral to the above question.
The failure of appraisal to motivate staff members to give their best alone suggest
dissatisfaction with both the appraisal system and the employer (Sujoya and Mazumdar,
2012). Banjoko (1982) asserts that there is probably no program in the arsenal of
personnel management that is difficult to effectively implement and yet so fundamental
to individual and organizational growth than performance appraisal.
Mikkelsen (2005) suggested that employees have higher job motivation when
they perceived their performance appraisal as fair and trustworthy. An organizations
performance appraisal system can be a practical tool for employee motivation and

development when employees perceive their performance appraisal as accurate and fair
(Paul & Laurel 2009). Lawler (1994) have asserted that appraisal reactions likely play a
key role in the development of favorable job and organizational attitudes and enhance
motivation to increase performance. Rusli and Azman (2004) defined performance
appraisal is also being seen as having direct influence on job satisfaction and motivation
of workers.
Figure 7.0: Motivation from Appraisal Awareness to Work Hard
Motivation from Appraisal Awareness to Work Hard
Axis Title

Very well

Does not

Somewhat Do not know


Source: Field Survey 2014

Respondents Description of the Appraisal Process
Respondents were required to assess the appraisal process in terms of its fairness
and openness. Generally the responses indicated that the appraisal process was not fair.
This is however not surprising since initial responses showed that officers were generally
unimpressed. The details of the responses provided has been shown in the table below;
Table 8.0: Respondent Description of the Appraisal Process
Very fair


Percentage (%)

Source: Field Survey 2014



Responses in the table showed that 32 (46%) of the respondents considered the
appraisal process as being bias. They were distantly followed by 14 (20%) respondents
who affirmed that it was very fair with an equal number of 14(20%) respondents
asserting that it was fair. Again, 10(14%) of the respondents remained neutral to the
Jawahar (2006) is cited as reporting that satisfaction with appraisal feedback was
positively related to job satisfaction and organizational commitment and negatively
related to turnover intentions. If employees feel that the system provides developmental
support and enables correct evaluation of performance, it can be assumed that they will
accept the system and harbor a general feeling of satisfaction towards it.
Figure 8.0: Respondent Description of the Appraisal Process
Respondent Description of the Appraisal Process


Very fair






Source: Field Survey 2014

Rating Officers Skill and Experience to Effectively Evaluate Performance

The respondents were asked to indicate the extent to which they agree or disagree
to the notion that the reporting officers possess the required skill and experience to
effectively evaluate any performance. The responses have been detailed in the table
Table 9.0: Rating Officers Skill and Experience to Effectively Evaluate
Strongly agree
Strongly disagree
Source: Field Survey 2014



There were 20 (29%) respondents who strongly disagreed to the notion that
reporting officers possess the required skill and experience to effectively evaluate any
performance. They were closely marked by 18 (26%) respondents who further disagreed

to the notion. It was the view of 16 (23%) respondent that their reporting officers had the
required skill and experience to effectively evaluate any performance. Meanwhile 8
(11%) respondents strongly agreed to it whilst 8 respondents decided to remain neutral.

Asamu (2013) argues that Organizational performance and its resultant efficiency
and effectiveness can only be achieved when individuals are continuously appraised and
evaluated. The inability of organization to install an effective performance appraisal
strategy has hindered them from achieving competitive advantage which they require
more now than ever before. Banjoko (1982) asserts that there is probably no program in
the arsenal of personnel management that is difficult to effectively implement and yet so
fundamental to individual and organizational growth than performance appraisal.
Figure 10.0: Rating Officers Skill and Experience to Effectively Evaluate
Rating of respondents Officers Skill and Experience to Effectively Evaluate Performance

Strongly agree; 11%

Strongly disagree ; 29%
Agree ; 23%

Disagree ; 26%

Source: Field Survey 2014


Neutral ; 11%

Ability of Supervisor to remain Generous and Neutral

The researchers enquired the respondents to indicate how they assess the ability of
their supervisors to remain generous and neutral. The details in the table suggest that
officers do no really see eye-to-eye with their supervisors.
Table 11.0: Ability of Supervisor to remain Generous and Neutral
Strongly agree
Strongly disagree
Source: Field Survey 2014
The table shows that



21 (30%) respondents agreed and 6 (8.5 %) strongly agreed

to the assertion. However, 20(29%) respondents strongly disagreed, in addition there

were 13 (18.2%) respondents further disagreed. Again 10 (14%) respondents remained
A recent study by Atwater et al. (2000) (Jawahar, 2006) revealed that supervisors
who received low ratings from their subordinates reduced their level of loyalty and
commitment to their subordinates after receiving feedback. Because lower evaluations
are likely to result in dissatisfaction with appraisal feedback, their findings could be
interpreted as supporting the proposed relationship between satisfaction with feedback
and commitment. In an earlier study, Pearce and Porter (1986) (Jawahar, 2006) reported
that organizational commitment of people receiving negative feedback dropped
significantly across the duration of the study, but commitment of those receiving positive
feedback remained the same. They used the level of ratings to arbitrarily characterize

subjects as receiving positive or negative feedback and did not measure satisfaction with

Figure 11.0: Ability of Supervisor to remain Generous and Neutral

Ability of Supervisor to remain Generous and Neutral

Strongly agree; 9%
Strongly disagree ; 29%
Agree ; 30%
Disagree ; 19%

Neutral ; 14%

Source: Field Survey 2014

Penalizing by Supervisor for Poor Ratings

This study sought to examine if the supervisors could penalize provided the
officers had poor ratings during the appraisal process. The responses obtained has been
tabulated below;
Table 11.0: Penalizing by Supervisor for Poor Ratings



Strongly agree
Strongly disagree
Source: Field Survey 2014



Twenty (20) respondents representing 29% of the respondents strongly disagreed

to the statement whilst 19 (27%) further disagreed to the notion. Those who agreed to the
notion were 13 respondents who formed (18.5%) of the respondents. There were 6 (8.5%)
among the respondents who strongly agreed to the conception. However, 12 (17%)
respondents remained neutral. It is argued by some authors that supervisors should be
given a certain amount of room to penalize staff members who perform below
expectation after appraisal (Asamu, 2013).
In some organizations appraisal results may be used to determine relative rewards
in the firm who should get merit pay increases, bonuses, or promotions (Grubb, 2007).
Similarly, appraisal results can be used to identify the poorer performers who may require
some form of counselling, demotion, dismissal or decreases in pay.
Figure 11.0: Penalizing by Supervisor for Poor Ratings


Penalizing by Supervisor for Poor Ratings

Strongly agree; 9%
Strongly disagree ; 29%
Agree ; 19%

Neutral ; 17%

Disagree ; 27%

Source: Field Survey 2014

Invasiveness of Appraisal Process

The details of the views of the respondents with regards to whether the appraisal
process was invasive or not has been detailed in the table.
Table 12.0: Invasiveness of Appraisal Process
Strongly agree



Strongly disagree
Source: Field Survey 2014



A majority of 35(50%) affirmed that the appraisal process was not invasive. These
respondents who supported by 15 (14) other respondent who also disagreed that it was
invasive. Six (6) (9%) respondents however strongly averred that it was invasive with an
additional 4 agreeing to the same statement.
There were 10 (14%) respondents who again maintained neutrality. A critical
observation showed that these group of respondents were actually junior officers.

Figure 12.0: Invasiveness of Appraisal Process

Invasiveness of Appraisal Process

Strongly agree; 9%
Agree ; 6%
Neutral ; 14%

Strongly disagree ; 50%

Disagree ; 21%

Source: Field Survey 2014


Problems and Potential Problems on Job Which Negatively Affects Performance

When respondents were asked if superiors takes into account problems and
potential problems on job which negatively affects their performance, the following
detailed responses were obtained
Table 13.0: Superiors takes into account problems which negatively affects
Strongly agree
Strongly disagree
Source: Field Survey 2014


Percentage (%)

According to the responses obtained from the survey, 27 (39%0 respondents

strongly disagreed that superiors takes into account problems and potential problems on
job which negatively affects their performance in the unit. Another large group of 23

(33%) added their views that their supervisors do not consider their working conditions
and restraints before finally appraising their work. Only 6 (8.5%) respondents strongly
agreed with an equal number of 6 (8.5%) agreeing to the notion as well.
Those who decided to remain neutral were 8 (11%) respondents who were even
more than those who strongly agreed. It was argued by Asamu (2013) that appraisal
processes are not systematic and regular and often characterized by personal influences
occasioned by organizations preoccupation to use confidential appraisal system which
hinders objectivity and fairness. It was added that failure to recognize the limitation of
staff in appraisal limits the ability of the appraisal to achieve a universal objective and
that is directly impact on productivity.
Asamu (2013) continues that often organizations ignore management by
objectives, critical incidents to personal prejudices. This is retrogressive as it affects the
overall performance of the individuals.
Figure 13.0: Superiors takes into Account Problems and Potential Problems on Job
Which Negatively Affects my Performance
Superiors takes into Account Problems and Potential Problems on Job Which Negatively Affects my Performance

Strongly agree; 8%
Agree ; 8%

Strongly disagree ; 33%

Neutral ; 11%

Disagree ; 39%


Source: Field Survey 2014

The purpose of this chapter is to present the summary of major findings in the
previous chapter. In addition the study makes recommendations as to how appraisal can
be improved to impact on productivity and then finally this chapter draws conclusion.
Summary of Major Findings
The findings indicated that males dominated the police force, in addition there
were more young people in the force now than it was generally assumed. Also, the police
unit has well educated officers who among their tasks to effect an arrest and process a
culprit to court, provide security for both individuals and the community among other
unstated functions.
The findings further indicated the respondents in general considered their jobs to
be tedious (23%) and challenging (23%) with only 17% affirming that it was satisfying.
The officers in general further exhibited their knowledge of appraisal by stating that it
was very important(27%) or simply important (29%) that everyone is appraised for either
the betterment of the firm or reward for the individual for a good work done.
The study showed 31% however did not see being appraised as being a
motivational factor to work hard. However 26% indicated that it serves as a motivational
factor plus 19% adding that it somewhat encourages them to do so. Even though they
were positive towards the appraisal process 46% of the total number of respondents

claimed that the process was bias with 14% remaining neutral as to whether it was bias or
The findings also revealed that 45 %( strongly disagree 29% and disagree 26%) of
the respondents did not believe that their supervisors possess the requisite skill to
effectively evaluate them. This was however in contradiction to the views of 34% who
asserted that their supervisors possessed all it takes to effectively evaluate them.
The discussions suggested that 47.5% did not consider their supervisor as being
generous and being able to remain neutral during the appraisal. Only 6% strongly agreed
with 30% of the remaining further agreeing.
It was also discovered in the previous chapter that 29% and 27% of the officers
strongly disagreed and disagreed to the notion that their supervisors may penalize them if
their rating were poor. Nineteen (19) (27%) however believed that their supervisors may
do so.
About 50% strongly agreed that the appraisal process was invasive even though
56% considered the appraisal as being imperative in question 6 above. Additional 21%
also considered it as being invasive. A marginal 15% however contended that it was not
It was the view of 39% that their supervisors did not take into account their work
limitation and challenges before appraising. 33% of the rest of the respondents strongly
supported the assertion of the previous 30%. 17% however strongly agreed and agreed
equally that their supervisors considered all their limitations before proceeding to
evaluate them.
In conclusion the study has identified that staff appraisal is significant and has the
ability to positively influence productivity. However, the manner in which it is carried out
may defeat this function if it is presented as if the purpose is to hunt down non-


performing staff. Attention should be paid to both the staff and the working condition as
before such an endeavor is embarked on.
Based on the forgone discussions the researchers present the following
First of all, staff appraisal should be integrated into the culture of the police
service. Specific time should be devoted to it whilst at the same time being aware of the
work and political challenges that the force encounter in discharging their duties.
According to the certain challenges which are significant are ignored by supervisors.
Further reasons or source of ratings should be made open to for all concerned
Secondly, working conditions has to be improved to help enhance delivery of the
service. In doing so, the concerns of the officers should be sought to know the issues that
hinders their ability to perform. Whether it is logistics, technical, administration of
finance wise.
A third implication which is relatively easy to implement should be that raters
receive more or better training in the development of objective and relevant objectives.
What the exact reasons for this problem are must be analyzed by further research. The
training material and-task should be investigated as well as the amount of time which is
spent with training. At the moment, this part of the performance appraisal process is only
one of three learning objectives for the first training day.
The fourth idea for improvement concerns the frequency of feedback. Informal,
each rater can also easily implement more feedback. A solution could be that raters

integrate so called achievement updates on a weekly basis which then touch upon good
and bad issues, while so called achievement assessments take place bi-monthly, are more
formal and aim at getting a more clear depiction of issues troubling both sides. More
formally, it could be decided if quarterly a short performance review with objective
updating is integrated into the performance appraisal process.
Finally an avenue should be set for officers who have enough believe that they
were poorly rated to report their ratings or supervisors to an appropriate authority without
fear of being isolated or made a scorn of. The identity of the one who reports should be
kept as confidential as possible. Meanwhile all supervision should be devoid of personal
or political conflicts to help officers have faith in it in order to give their best.

Asamoah, M. (2012) Research Made Easy. Dela Publications
Armstrong, M. (2004): A Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice, Kogan
Page Lt. New Delhi, Ed: 9th 2004. P- 478
Armstrong, M & Baron, A (1998) Performance management: The new realities
London: Institute of Personnel and Development
Bernardin, H & Klatt, L (1985) Managerial Appraisal systems: Has practice caughtup with the state of the art? Personnel Administrator, 1985, 30-79-86

Bowes, B (2009), 'Improving performance management systems', CMA Management,

Boice, D.F and Kleiner, B. H. (1997) "Designing effective performance appraisal
systems", Work Study, Vol. 46 Iss: 6, pp.197 - 201
Burns, M. W. (2003). Perceived Fairness Of and Satisfaction with Employee Performance
Appraisal. A dissertation presented to The School of Human Resource Education
and Workforce Development
Cardy, R & Dobbins, G. (1994), Performance appraisal: Alternate perspectives, SouthWestern Publishing company, Cincinnati
Carrol, S & Schneir, C (1982) Performance appraisal and review systems: The
identification, measurement, and development of performance in organizations.
Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman
Cox, A. (2000). The importance of employee participation in determining pay system
effectiveness. International Journal of Management Reviews, 2 (4), 357-375
Casio, WF. (2003). Managing Human Resources productivity, quality of life and profits,
4thedition. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
Dechev. Z. (2010). Effective Performance Appraisal a study into the relation between
employer satisfaction and optimizing business results. Faculty of Economics of
Business. Erasmus University
Daniels, A (1999) Bringing out the best in people McGraw- Hill companies

Derven, M (1990) The paradox of performance appraisal Personnel Journal volume 69

Ekwonwa E.M. (2007). A guide to education research and social research writing for
students Print Easy concepts publishers.
Fey. F. C., Jakoushev. M. S., Park. H. J., & Bjrkman. I. (2007)., Opening the black box
of the relationship between HRM Practices and firm performance: A comparison
of U.S.A, Finland, and Russia.
Fletcher, C 2004, Appraisal and feedback: Making performance review work. 3rd ed.
Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, London.
Gillen, T 2007, Performance management and appraisal. 2nd ed. CIPD toolkit. Chartered
Institute of Personnel and Development, London
Harrison, K and Goulding, A 1997, Performance appraisal in public libraries. New
Library World, vol. 98, no. 7, pp. 275-280
Johnson (2003) G. E. (2003). Employee performance appraisal system participation: a
technique that works. Public Personnel Management, 32(1), 89-98
Jackson, S & Schuler, R (2002). Managing Human Resources through Strategic
Partnership (8th edn). Canada: Thompson.
Khan. A., (2009). Performance appraisal system: Its effectiveness and impact on
performance and Job satisfaction of technical education and Manpower training
departments faculty, Department Of Management Sciences. Qurtuba University
Of Science & Information Technology, Pakistan.

Lawrie, J (1990) Prepare for a performance appraisal Personnel Journal Vol. 69 pp.
(132- 136
Maroney, B & Buckley, M (1992) Does research in performance appraisal influence the
practice of performance appraisal: Regretfully Not! Public Personnel
Management vol.21
Mir Muhammad Ali (1980), Technical Education in Pakistan, A Study of Issue and
Strategies, National Book Foundation Karachi, 1980, P-7
Neely, A (1998), Measurement of business performance why, what and how, The
Economist, London
New Media Learning Centre (2007
New Media Learning (2011): Performance Evaluations: More Important than Ever in
2011 in white paper.
Newman, K.L. (2006) Culture and congruence: the fit between management practices
and culture, Journal of International Business Studies 27 (4): 753-779 Available at: Accessed [1
Roberts, G.E. (2003). Employee Performance Appraisal System Participation: A
Technique that Works. Public Personnel Management, 30 (1), 89-98


Scholtes, PR 1993, 'Total quality or performance appraisal: Choose one', National

Productivity Review, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 349-63
Vecchio. P. R., Greg. H., Southey. G. (1996). Organizational Behavior, Harcourt and
Brace Australia, Ed. 2nd 1996. 569
Walters, M (1995) The Performance Management Handbook (Developing Practice)
Chartered Institute of Personnel

PURPOSE: This is purely an academic work in partial fulfillment for a degree in Bachelor of
Business Administration (Human Resource Management Option). We will appreciate if you
could kindly take some time off your busy schedule to fill this questionnaire.


1. Gender

a. Male [

b. Female [

2. Age of Respondents a. 20-25 [

e. Above 40 [

b. 26-30 [


c. 31-35 [ ]

d. 36-40 [

3. Marital status: a. Single


b. Married [

c. Divorce [

d. Spinster/Widow [

e .Others (Please Specify)..

4. Educational Background a. No education {

d. Tertiary {

} b. J.H.S {

} e. Others(specify)_________________

5. Please indicate your rank Level a. Junior Staff

c. Senior Staff

] b Middle Staff

6. How would you describe your current occupation? a. Tedious [

c. Challenging [

} c. S.H.S {

d. Normal [

b. Satisfying[

7. How would you describe the importance of performance appraisal to your work?
8. Very important [

b. Important [ ]

c. Neutral [

d. Unimportant [ ]

9. Does being aware that you will be appraisal motivate you to work hard?
10. Very Well [

b. Does not [

c. Somewhat [ ]

d. Do not know [

11. How would you describe the appraisal process? a. Very fair [
Bias [ ]

d. Neutral [

b. Fair [



Please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree otherwise to the following
statement (10-15)
12. I believe my reporting officers posses the required skill and experience to effectively
evaluate any performance.
Strongly agree [
disagree [

b. Agree [

c. Neutral [

d. Disagree [

e. Strongly

13. My supervisor is able to remain generous and neutral through the appraisal process.
Strongly agree [
disagree [

b. Agree [

c. Neutral [


d. Disagree [

e. Strongly

14. My Supervisor may penalize me if my ratings are poor.

Strongly agree [
disagree [

b. Agree [

c. Neutral [

d. Disagree [

e. Strongly

c. Neutral [

d. Disagree [

e. Strongly

15. The appraisal process is invasive?

Strongly agree [
disagree [

b. Agree [

16. My supervisor takes into account the problems and potential problems on the job which
negatively affect my performance during the evaluation.
Strongly agree [
disagree [

b. Agree [

c. Neutral [

d. Disagree [

e. Strongly

16. Please recommend how performance how performance appraisal can be effectively
conducted in your unit?