You are on page 1of 16

The impact of the 360 degree feedback system on Employee

Satisfaction in Higher Educational Institutes: An Analysis in
the Public and Private Sectors of Sindh, Pakistan
Abdul Subhan Kazi
Assistant Professor, Isra University, Hyderabad
subhan.kazi@isra.edu.pk
Abstract: This study focuses on the 360o feedback system which is a performance appraisal system. This
study also tries to see its impact on employee satisfaction. The 360 o feedback system has been a strong
factor in many countries in increasing performance of employees. Here the purpose is to see what impact
the 3600 feedback system has on employee satisfaction in Sindh, Pakistan with a sample size of higher
educational institutes teachers (N=200). Out of these 100 are from the public sector and 100 are from the
private sector. The private sector includes Isra University, Hyderabad, and Shaheed Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto
Institute of Science and Technology, Karachi. The public sector includes University of Sindh, Jamshoro
and Mehran University of Engineering and Technology, Jamshoro. The purpose is to see which sector has
more employee satisfaction and what will happen if the 360 0 feedback system is adopted. The results
show that the traditional systems used in organizations today are not liked and this hinders employees’
satisfaction. And employees have shown more interest in the 360 0 feedback system.
Key Words: 360o feedback system, employee satisfaction

Introduction
When talked about employee satisfaction, the 360 0 feedback system which is a performance
appraisal system can come into play. As the 360 0 feedback system is a procedure through which a
multiple number of sources may deliver an evaluation for the person being assessed. This process tends
to provide the employee with a comprehensive view of what people and can match it with his own
evaluation of himself/herself. Which later on helps an employee change his/her behavior or attitude
towards work and make it better. (Alexander, 2006) If looked at the success of the 360 0 feedback system,
in 1995 40% of American companies used the 360 0 feedback system which later on climbed to 65% in
2000 and then in 2002 90% of Fortune 500 companies were using the 360 0 feedback system. (Linman,
2006) It is important to note that where the culture of 360 0 feedback system is new and the employees do

not know what is expected of them, especially direct reports. To gain employee satisfaction the
element of trust is necessary, and that can be done through communication which is something that
is applied in the 3600 feedback system. Employee satisfaction is a trait that is relevant to the employees,
that verifies to be a prized asset for the growth of any sector.(Kiani, Ahsan, Khurshid & Sajid, 2008)
Objective
The main objective of research is to observe the level of employee satisfaction in the public and
private sectors of Sind, Pakistan. The point that is kept in view is to see role or impact the 360 0 feedback
system can have if adopted in both the sectors.
Literature review
Saqib, Khan, Ahmed & Ullah (2012) mentions the roots of the Performance Appraisal (PA) is in
the controlling function of management through which a manger makes sure whether his/her employees
performance is up to the desired level required by the organization or not. And PA is widely now known to
be a core function of HRM. One of reasons for not getting people to work to their maximum is due to lack
proper feedback which, tend to demoralize people. Due to this today the world is focusing performance
appraisals which are a source of feedback for the employee and it tends to be a factor which influences
the performance (usually) of our vital Human Resource.

Self-appraisal has the impact that the employee gets the chance to judge and understand his/her own performance and also for him/herself to understand the possible strengths and weaknesses including his/her own personal achievements. communication skills. not motivating. as it encourages open communication to take place between management and the workers. This is a method in which the performance is derived from all the sources that come in contact with the employees’ job. effectiveness can be enhanced. appraisal destroys human spirit and. as it opens the gateway towards. If looked at the ACR is a very old and redundant appraisal technique. peer appraisal and the superior’s appraisal. This isn’t just an opinion. managers (i. but these days in the social media world it can prove to be crucial to keeping a constructive image. The so called 3600 feedback (multi rater feedback). To move ahead in life today. Its lack of effectiveness does not help in employees’ learning and development. indifferent wallflower who reads want ads on the weekend.sieena. the resulting documentation isn’t useful for staffing decisions and often doesn’t hold up in court.e. http://www. Performance Appraisal helps in creating a friendlier environment.Coens and Jenkins (2000) have pointed out that performance appraisals impede genuine feedback. Telling them otherwise is deflating. Too often. appraisals fail because the very notion of rating people clashes with human nature. we are working for. It should be replaced with a better technique which has the potential to boost the employees and get the organization going effectively. These appraisals have high involvement of employees and have the strongest impact on performance and behavior both. The ACR has negative aspects some of which are lack of employees’ participation. and there’s no solid evidence that it motivates people or lead to meaningful improvement. Performance Appraisal is a type of measurement tool. where the employee is rated by the supervisor him/herself with regard to the responsibilities of the actual performance. communication gaps and personal bias.com/Pages/Sieena%20%20Best%20Practices%20in%20the%20Usage%20of %20360-degree%20Evaluations. effectiveness tends to be enhanced. O’Neill (2012) Mentions Having a happy work environment where you can keep your employees happy is always essential. In fact. highly committed employee into a demoralized. In fact it usually produces distorted and unreliable data about the contribution of employees. more than 90% of appraisal systems are not successful. The 360 0 respondents that an employee has to face for an employee has to face could be his/her peers. One technique that is famous these days is the 360-degree feedback appraisal system for managing employees and it has been proved by a number of researchers that this technique can give a comprehensive performance review as well as indulge transparency in the concerned system. Aslam. suppliers/ vendors (anyone who may come into contact with the employee and be capable of provide valuable insights and feedback regarding the “on-the-job” performance of the employee). Hundreds of other studies and surveys also support the gross inadequacies of performance appraisals. and this is why most are so reluctant to conduct appraisals. in the span of a 30 minutes meeting. The subordinate’s appraisal provides the employee with judgment of the parameters that include things like motivating abilities. Through PA. towards achieving the objectives. The appraisals provided by the supervisor form the so called traditional part of the 3600 appraisal. This appraisal system (360 0 degree) is a powerful development tool. we need to know what we are working for and have a system that is able to tell us. team members.pdf (2010). We may say that. In educational institutions. And as a result of outstanding performance. Likewise the teachers remain unaware of their high and low rated traits in the report. People see mediocre ratings as a lack of appreciation. can transform a vibrant. A survey by the Society for HRM found that. used to evaluate how close the employees are working towards the standards of the organization. delegation powers of the ability of the supervisor and leadership qualities. It was introduced in the 1940’s and is still in use today. Supervisors realize this. In large part. subordinates. A boring approach to a unified path for the team’s principles and goals can really muddy up that image and make your customers say good bye. They are a self appraisal. customers. Yousaf & Noor (2011) mention a traditional method the Annual Confidential Report. The social media can bring about a . This method is known to be one that is a very credible appraisal method. Rasheed. if we are on the correct direction. the ACR isn’t shared with the concerned teacher. recognizing outstanding performance. superior). subordinate’s appraisal. is appraisal method that is a deeply comprehensive one. 80% see themselves in the top quarter of all performers. This appraisal technique is inclusive of four components. Consequently. The overwhelming majority of people view themselves as excellent performers. When looked at the Self-assessment in the 360 0 assessment is indispensable.

from the workers side to bring about change. 3. Management needs to make sure that all its employees easily understand what is actually taking place. 50 teachers were selected from each institution. Having a pleasant working environment may be nice for employees on the other hand having a working environment that is. Management needs to guide its customers in the market towards its organization. Cronbach's alpha and the chi-square test with the help of the SPSS software. H. Having some organizational meetings or even some brainstorming is not enough. The questionnaire was analyzed putting in view the hypotheses that were made. The scale was from 1 to 5. Management should remember that the true key for a smooth change from old standards to new standards is proper transparency. The employees’ satisfaction in terms of mix of research. Karachi. Here management needs to hold on to the reigns. you will see a loss of motivation to move forward. and take proper control of the situation at hand. Feedbacks are important sources of help which can make management understand where things stand. so that the employees may feel at ease and have trust in the work they are doing. A questionnaire using the Likert scale method was distributed to the teachers working in both sectors. It is necessary to bring about change in the workplace when previous ideas become idle. The following are the nine hypotheses: H. but the problem is that they fear change if there in uncertainty or doubt. The employees’ satisfaction in terms of their intellectual stimulation is better in the private sector than the public sector universities in Pakistan. 2. namely. Overall nine hypotheses have been used to see the impact of employee satisfaction within both the sectors. Hyderabad. teaching and community service is better in the private sector than the public sector universities in Pakistan. 1 being strongly disagree to 5 being strongly agree. The employees’ satisfaction in terms of interaction with students is better in the private sector than . Methodology This study is based on primary data collected from four higher educational institutes. The problem lies with the issue of convincing people to change as many try to avoid it. H. Going an additional length is well worth it if it can bring about employee satisfaction. Management needs to certify each time that the standards don’t become idle again. Jamshoro and Mehran University of Engineering and Technology. The main reason being the ambiguity inside change regarding of what the authentic direction is. the Kruskal-Wallis. Isra University. As things become idle. But if this also does not work one has communicate with the employees in a way that they understand and can feel the way the management does. don’t let the old standards be gone. Even though management may have been able to make their employees feel about the new standards as they are feeling. it can be done through the process of giving. “People want things to stay fresh”. The new standards management makes need to be used carefully to get benefit from them. you need to show them for the purpose they were made for. eager and properly tackled will produce results. Management needs to “encourage insight from their employees” so as to be able to provide a sense of contribution in the employees regarding the developing nature. For management to achieve success. as it is only then that management can make feel relaxed with what is in line. and providing their employees with proper confidence in management’s ideas. as well as where things have not been up to the mark. and in this way if things go on success will always come about. Here management has to be careful not to lose its focus about its change and should concentrate on the customers’ needs. For management to stay on top of its new agenda is very important. Try and give change a fresh new look. from the private sector and University of Sindh. 1. Jamshoro from the public sector.negative image of your organization’s team (employees) which should not be unacceptable. and Shaheed Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto Institute of Science and Technology. One should try and communicate a new vision to make the employees stir up. The Analysis was done using the Mann-Whitney U Statistical test.

The employees’ satisfaction in terms of salary and compensation package provided by the organization is weak but is a bit better in the private sector than the public sector universities in Pakistan. The employees’ satisfaction in terms of the amount they have for their family is better in the public sector than the private sector universities in Pakistan. . The overall mean value of this factor is 3. The ranking shows employees are more satisfied with these multiple activities with the 360 0 evaluation method in comparison where only supervisors’ evaluation takes place. According to Hypothesis H. The rankings show that in the private sector universities. The result of the Mann-Whitney U statistical test shows the mean rankings are significantly different from each other (at the significance level of 0.39 and for the 360 0 evaluation it is 138. The employees’ satisfaction in terms of clarity about faculty promotion is overall weak but is better in the private sector than the public sector universities in Pakistan.000). The mean ranking for the supervisor as evaluator is 84.55. The result of the Kruskal-Wallis H statistical test shows that difference of this factor is highly significant (at the significance level of 0. H.1 The universities are moving beyond teaching towards research and further towards offering services to communities.46 and for the private sector universities it is 123. H. The employees’ satisfaction in terms of support from administration of the department is better in the private sector than in the public sector universities in Pakistan. 9. in order to find the impact of the 360 0 evaluation on the employees’ satisfaction. the null hypothesis is rejected with the conclusion that employees are more satisfied in the private sector universities than the public sector universities in terms of multiple activities related to teaching. However. 7. research and community services. H. H. 6. Therefore. The employees’ satisfaction in terms of job security and stability at the organization is better in the private sector than the public sector universities in Pakistan.63. H. H. 5. the Kruskal-Wallis H test is applied. research and community service is better than in the public sector universities.000). 4. The mean ranking for the public sector universities is 77.04 which show a good commitment to these multiple activities. The employees’ satisfaction in terms of cooperation received from employees of the organization is better in the private sector than the public sector universities in Pakistan. 8. employees’ satisfaction objectives in terms of teaching.the public sector universities in Pakistan.

The mean ranking for the public sector universities is 93.03).2: Satisfaction of employees in terms of their intellectual stimulation of work.31. The result of the MannWhitney U statistical test shows the mean rankings are significantly different from each other (at the significance level of 0. employees’ satisfaction in terms of interaction with students is better than in the public sector universities. the Kruskal-Wallis H test is applied. research and communication services between both the public and private sector universities According to Hypothesis H .000). The ranking shows employees are more satisfied in terms of students’ interaction with the 360 0 evaluation method in comparison where only supervisors’ evaluation takes place.2 the faculty members of universities receive intellectual stimulation from their teaching and research. The rankings show that in the private sector universities. . the null hypothesis is rejected with the conclusion that employees’ satisfaction in terms of interaction with students is better in the private sector than the public sector universities.000). the Kruskal-Wallis H test is applied.46 and for the private sector universities it is 125. Therefore.000). The overall mean value of this factor is 4.3 the faculty members of universities need to interact regularly with students for teaching and research. those employees who are evaluated under supervisors only are less satisfied than those evaluated under the 360 0 system. in order to find the impact of the 360 0 evaluation on the employees’ satisfaction.34 and for the 3600 evaluation it is 155.3 and for the private sector universities is 107. The overall mean value of this factor is 3.Figure 1. employees’ satisfaction in terms of intellectual stimulation is better than in the public sector universities.7.08 which show the good level of agreement. Figure 1. The mean ranking for the public sector universities is 75. The result of the Kruskal-Wallis H statistical test shows that difference of this factor is highly significant (at the significance level of 0. However. However. A comparison of the public and private sector universities According to Hypothesis H . The ranking shows employees are more satisfied in terms of intellectual stimulation with the 360 0 evaluation method in comparison to where only supervisors’ evaluation takes place.1: Employee satisfaction in terms of multiple activities related to teaching.55. The rankings show that in the private sector universities. the null hypothesis is rejected with the conclusion that employees’ satisfaction in terms of their intellectual stimulation is better in the private sector than the public sector universities.04 which show a neutral response. However. The result of the MannWhitney U statistical test shows the mean rankings are significantly different from each other (at the significance level of 0. The result of the Kruskal-Wallis H statistical test shows that difference of this factor is highly significant (at the significance level of 0. in order to find the impact of the 360 0 evaluation on the employees’ satisfaction. Therefore. The mean ranking for the supervisor as evaluator is 85.50. The mean ranking for the supervisor as evaluator is 84.88 and for the 3600 evaluation it is 137.

The mean ranking for the supervisor as an evaluator is 84.20 which show a little level of agreement.33.29 which show a little level of agreement.3: Employee satisfaction in terms of interaction with students. The rankings show that in the private sector universities.68 and for the private sector universities it is 126. The mean ranking for the public sector universities is 74.5 the faculty members of universities need the administrative support from time to time to accomplish their teaching and research activities. employees’ satisfaction in terms of administrative support is better than in the public sector universities. The result of the Mann-Whitney U statistical test shows the mean rankings are significantly different from each other (at the significance level of 0. the Kruskal-Wallis H test is applied.000).03 and for the 360 0 evaluation it is 147.38 and for the private sector universities it is 126.4: A comparison between the public and private sector universities on employees’ satisfaction in terms of cooperation received from other employees of the organization According to Hypothesis H . Therefore. in order to find the impact of the . A comparison between the public and private sector universities According to Hypothesis H .00).000). The ranking shows employees are more satisfied in terms of cooperation from other employees with the 360 0 evaluation method in comparison to where only supervisors’ evaluation takes place. The mean ranking for the public sector universities is 74.Figure 1.4 the faculty members of universities work in teams to achieve certain tasks and therefore they need to co-operate with each other. The rankings show that in the private sector universities. However. the null hypothesis is rejected with the conclusion that employees’ satisfaction in terms of cooperation from other employees of the organization is better in the private sector than the public sector universities.61. The result of the Mann-Whitney U statistical test shows the mean rankings are significantly different from each other (at the significance level of 0. employees’ satisfaction in terms of cooperation with other employees is better than in the public sector universities.63. The overall mean value of this factor is 3. However. Figure 1. in order to find the impact of the 3600 evaluation on the employees’ satisfaction. The overall mean value of this factor is 3. The result of the Kruskal-Wallis H statistical test shows that difference of this factor is highly significant (at the significance level of 0.

000).09 and for the private sector universities it is 122.42 and for the 360 0 evaluation it is 142.92. The mean ranking for the supervisor as an evaluator is 85. in order to find the impact of the 360 0 evaluation on the employees’ satisfaction. The ranking shows employees are more satisfied in terms of administrative support with the 360 0 evaluation method in comparison to where only supervisors’ evaluation takes place. the Kruskal-Wallis H test is applied. employees’ satisfaction in terms of clarity about the faculty promotion is still better than in the public sector universities. Figure 1. The result of the Mann-Whitney U statistical test shows the mean rankings are significantly different from each other (at the significance level of 0. The ranking shows employees are more satisfied in terms of clarity in the faculty promotion process with the 360 0 evaluation method in comparison to where only supervisors’ evaluation takes place. However. Figure 1. those employees who are evaluated under supervisors only are less satisfied than those who are evaluated under the 3600 system. the null hypothesis is rejected with the conclusion that employees’ satisfaction in terms of administrative support from the department is better in the private sector than the public sector universities. the null hypothesis is rejected with the conclusion that employees’ satisfaction in terms of clarity in the faculty promotion is still better in the private sector than the public sector universities.5: A comparison between the public and private sector universities on employee satisfaction in terms of support from administration of the department According to Hypothesis H . The mean ranking for the public sector universities is 78.66. Therefore.000). The overall mean value of this factor is 1. those employees who are evaluated under supervisors only are less satisfied than those evaluated by the 3600 system. The rankings show that in the private sector universities.358 which shows the level of disagreement. The result of the Kruskal-Wallis H statistical test shows that difference of this factor is highly significant (at the significance level of 0.27. The mean ranking for the supervisor as an evaluator is 82.3600 evaluation on the employees’ satisfaction. the Kruskal-Wallis H test is applied.6: A comparison between both the public and private sector universities with regard to employee satisfaction in terms of clarity about the faculty promotion process . However.93 and for the 360 0 evaluation it is 164. Therefore. However.000).6 the employees of universities feel more motivated if their promotion process becomes more transparent. The result of the Kruskal-Wallis H statistical test shows that difference of this factor is highly significant (at the significance level of 0.

the null hypothesis is rejected with the conclusion that employees’ satisfaction in terms of job security and stability at the organization is better in the private sector than the public sector universities. Therefore.18 and for the private sector universities it is 112.33 and for the 360 0 evaluation it is 155. in the form of salary and compensation. Figure 1. those employees who are evaluated under supervisors only are less satisfied than those evaluated under the 3600 system.According to Hypothesis H . The mean ranking for the public sector universities is 93. in order to find the impact of the 360 0 evaluation on the employees’ satisfaction.000). the Kruskal-Wallis H test is applied.7: A comparison between both the public and private sector universities with regard to salary and compensation packages provided by the organization According to Hypothesis H . The result of the Kruskal-Wallis H statistical test shows that difference of this factor is highly significant (at the significance level of 0. the null hypothesis is rejected with the conclusion that employees’ satisfaction in terms of salary and compensation package is still better in the private sector than the public sector universities.65. The ranking shows employees are more satisfied in terms of job security and stability with the 360 0 evaluation method in comparison to where only supervisors’ evaluation takes place.8 the employees of universities feel more comfortable working where their jobs are more secure and stable.03. However.17 and for the private sector universities it is 107.62 and for the 3600 evaluation it is 166. The result of the Kruskal-Wallis H statistical test shows that difference of this factor is highly significant (at the significance level of 0.83. the Kruskal-Wallis H test is applied.20 which show a little level of disagreement. The mean ranking for the public sector universities is 88. The result of the Mann-Whitney U statistical test shows the mean rankings are significantly different from each other (at the significance level of 0. those employees who are evaluated under supervisors only are less satisfied than those evaluated under the 360 0 system. The overall mean value of this factor is 3. The ranking shows employees are more satisfied in terms of salary and compensation with the 360 0 evaluation method in comparison where only supervisors’ evaluation takes place. meet their requirements. The mean ranking for the supervisor as an evaluator is 78. employees’ satisfaction in terms of job security and stability is better than in the public sector universities. The mean ranking for the supervisor as an evaluator is 80. Therefore.001).15 which show the little level of agreement.03).7 the employees of universities feel more motivated if rewards to them. However. employees’ satisfaction in terms of salary and compensation is still better than in the public sector universities. The result of the MannWhitney U statistical test shows the mean rankings are significantly different from each other (at the significance level of 0. in order to find the impact of the 3600 evaluation on the employees’ satisfaction. The overall mean value of this factor is 2. The rankings show that in the private sector universities. . However.000). The rankings show that in the private sector universities. However.83.

9: A comparison between the public and private sector universities on the basis of employee satisfaction with regard to the amount of time they have for their families . employees’ satisfaction in terms of amount of time for them and for their family is better than in the private sector universities.8: A comparison between the public and private sector universities with regard to job security and stability According to Hypothesis H . the null hypothesis is rejected with the conclusion that employees’ satisfaction in terms of amount of time for them and their family is better in the public sector than the private sector universities. The overall mean value of this factor is 3.85 and for the private sector universities it is 88. The result of the Mann-Whitney U statistical test shows the mean rankings are significantly different from each other (at the significance level of 0. the Kruskal-Wallis H test is applied. in order to find the impact of the 360 0 evaluation on the employees’ satisfaction. The mean ranking for the supervisor as an evaluator is 80.15 which show the little level of agreement. The ranking shows employees are more satisfied in terms of amount of time for them and for their family with the 360 0 evaluation method in comparison to where only supervisors’ evaluation takes place. However.000).24 and for the 360 0 evaluation it is 163.16.9 the employees of universities feel more comfortable working where their jobs are more secure and stable. those employees who are evaluated under supervisors only are less satisfied than those evaluated under the 3600 system.73. The rankings show that in the public sector universities.Figure 1. The mean ranking for the public sector universities is 112. However. Figure 1.001). Therefore. The result of the Kruskal-Wallis H statistical test shows that difference of this factor is highly significant (at the significance level of 0.

341 1 5 You are satisfied from the clarity about the faculty’s promotion process.354 1 5 You are satisfied from the overall environment of the department.07 1.Table 1. 200 3.305 1 5 You are satisfied from the amount of time you have for yourself and your family.15 1. 200 3.32 1.70 1.220 1 5 You are satisfied from the interaction you have with your students.29 1. 200 3.395 1 5 You are satisfied from Administrative support from the department. teaching and community service in your organization.08 1.02 1. 200 3.113 1 5 You are satisfied from cooperation you receive from other employees of the organization.235 1 5 You are satisfied from the salary you get and your compensation package provided to you by the organization. 200 3.266 1 5 You are currently satisfied from the type of research /teaching you do.317 1 5 You are satisfied from the mentoring provided to you.20 1.04 1.255 1 5 Source: 2010-2011 .15 1. 200 2. 200 4.84 1. Descriptive Statistics of variables assessing the employees’ satisfaction in the public and private sector universities N Mean Std. 200 3.293 1 5 You are satisfied from the intellectual stimulation of your work. 200 3.79 1.358 1 5 You are satisfied from prospects for advancement and progress in the organization. 200 2. 200 3.50 1. 200 3.408 1 5 You are satisfied from the job security and stability at the organization. 200 2. Deviation Min Max You are satisfied from the mix of your research.

Private Sector You are currently satisfied from the type of research /teaching you do.5 You are satisfied from the mentoring Public Sector provided to you. N Total 200 Public Sector 100 89.50 Private Sector 100 112.5 You are satisfied from the intellectual Public Sector stimulation of your work.00 100 107.5 You are satisfied from the amount of Public Sector time you have for yourself and your 200 200 100 .70 10770. Private Sector Total 200 You are satisfied from cooperation Public Sector you receive from other employees of Private Sector the organization.46 7545.92 12291.00 100 128.Table 2.46 7745.63 12662.0 You are satisfied from the salary you Public Sector get and your compensation package Private Sector provided to you by the organization.5 Total 200 You are satisfied from prospects for Public Sector advancement and progress in the Private Sector organization.85 11284. Total 100 93.50 Private Sector 100 123.30 9330.51 12851.55 12354.50 Private Sector 100 122.49 7249.00 100 107.50 100 126.83 11282.5 Total 200 100 75.00 100 122.55 12554.0 You are satisfied from the job security and stability at the organization. Mean Rank Sum of Ranks Public Sector 100 77.38 7437.5 Total You are satisfied from Administrative Public Sector support from the department.83 10783. Private Sector 100 72.18 8817.32 11131. Private Sector You are satisfied from the clarity about the faculty’s promotion process. teaching and community service in your organization.33 12632. Total 100 78. Mean Ranks on the basis of public and private sector universities Which sector does it belong to You are satisfied from the mix of your research. 200 200 Total 200 Public Sector 100 78. Public Sector 100 88.50 100 125.68 7467.69 8968.17 9317.0 You are satisfied from the interaction Public Sector you have with your students.5 Total 200 112.56 12256.09 7808.5 Total 200 100 93.0 100 74.50 100 126.44 7844.50 Private Sector 100 111. Total 100 74.

5 0.000 4267 0.5 0.000 You are currently satisfied from the type of research /teaching you do. other employees and administration. 2117. 3039. 2695.000 You are satisfied from the clarity about the faculty’s promotion process. Source: 2010-2011 Conclusion: The assessment of the nine hypotheses revealed that employees in the private sector universities are overall more satisfied than in the public sector universities. .5 0.001 You are satisfied from the overall environment of the department. 2495. However one has to be very careful how to implement the system.94. the employees’ satisfaction has mainly been found in terms of their job timings. It should be according to our culture and the employees should be told about how it will be beneficial to them if it is to truly succeed. 2758.003 42. 27. Therefore.000 You are satisfied from Administrative support from the department. However.0 0.5 0. Therefore 360 0 feedback system should be used to bring about positive change if put in place for every organization. In the case of public sector universities. the impact of the 3600 evaluation has been found impacting the employees’ performance in all hypotheses. 2199. teaching and community service in your organization.000 You are satisfied from the mentoring provided to you. findings collectively show where the method of supervisors as evaluators of performance is in practice causes less satisfaction of employees in the public and private sector universities in Pakistan. Their overall satisfaction has been observed in terms of their intellectual stimulation and coordination amongst students.5 0.03 You are satisfied from the job security and stability at the organization. 3765. Test Statistics for the public and private sector universities MannWhitney U Exact Sig. 3918.80 0.5 0. 3767. And this system if used correctly will increase employee satisfaction which is beneficial for every organization today.5 0. (1-tailed) You are satisfied from the mix of your research.Source: 2010-2011 Table 3.0 0.000 You are satisfied from prospects for advancement and progress in the organization.000 You are satisfied from the interaction you have with your students. Recommendation: As the overall conclusion shows the impact of the hypotheses and portrays that the360 0 feedback system is found to have an impact on every aspect of the hypotheses.0 0.000 You are satisfied from the intellectual stimulation of your work. You are satisfied from the salary you get and your compensation package provided to you by the organization.001 You are satisfied from the amount of time you have for yourself and your family.03 You are satisfied from cooperation you receive from other employees of the organization. 2387.5 0.

Cons Muhammad Imran Rasheed.http://www.References: Coens T.sdsu.academicjournals. Khan . Hassan Danial Aslam*. 2011: Available online at http://www. Abolishing Performance Appraisals and What to Do Instead.M. 2006. Omama Kurhshid and Ali Sajid (2008) Exploring ‘Employees Satisfaction’ as a Quality and Productivity Enhancement Tool for IT Sector of Pakistan.sieena. 360-degree Feedback: Weighing the Pros and http://edweb. EFFECTIVENESS AND PERFORMANCE? Hina Sorab Kiani.edu/people/ARossett/pie/Interventions/360_1. Interdisplinary Journal Of Contemporary Research In Business.A.M & Ullah . & Jerkins M (2000). Alexander (2006). A Brief Performance Appraisal Practices and its Implementation at Government Offices in Pakistan. HOW DO 360 DEGREE PERFORMANCE REVIEWS AFFECT EMPLOYEE ATTITUTES.htm accessed April 15th. Start A Revolution – How Employee Satisfaction Determines Your Company’s Success Saqib . Ali Ahsan.org/AJBM Rhys O’Neill (2012). pp. 5(9).com/Pages/Sieena%20%20Best%20Practices%20in%20the%20Usage%20of %20360-degree%20Evaluations. Berrett-Koehler Diane M.I (2012). A critical analysis of performance appraisal system for teachers in public sector universities of Pakistan: A case study of the Islamia University of Bahawalpur (IUB). Ahmed . Saira Yousaf and Amna Noor (2011). Vol 3 No 10 What is 360 DEGREE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PROCESS? (2010). Terri. 4 May. Linman.pdf . African Journal of Business Management Vol.M. 3735-3744.

Appendix Employee Satisfaction .

4 You are satisfied from cooperation you receive from other employees of the organization. 2 3 Strongly Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Agree 4 5 Strongly . 3 You are satisfied from the interaction you have with your students. 6 You are satisfied from Administrative support from the department. 9 You are satisfied from the salary you get and your compensation package provided to you by the organization.Strongly Disagree 1 1 You are satisfied from the intellectual stimulation of your work. 5 You are satisfied from the mentoring provided to you. 2 You are currently satisfied from the type of research /teaching you do in the organization. 7 You are satisfied from the clarity about the faculty promotion process. 8 You are satisfied from prospects for advancement and progress in the organization.