EFFECT OF PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ON EMPLOYEE

PERFORMANCE: A CASE STUDY OF UN-HABITAT-SOMALIA PROGRAMME

BY

ASIA ADAM

UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY-AFRICA

SUMMER 2020
 EFFECT OF PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ON EMPLOYEE
PERFORMANCE: A CASE STUDY OF UN-HABITAT-SOMALIA PROGRAMME

BY

ASIA ADAM

A Research Project Report Submitted to the Chandaria School of Business in Partial

Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Organization
Development (MOD)

UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY – AFRICA

SUMMER 2020

ii
 STUDENT’S DECLARATION

I, the undersigned, declare that this is my original work and has not been submitted to any
other college, institution or university other than the United States International University in
Nairobi for academic credit.

Signed: Date: _________________________

Asia Adam (ID: 658914)

This research project has been presented for examination with my approval as the appointed
supervisor.

Signed: __________________________________ Date: ___________________________

Dr. James Karimi

Signed: Date: _________________________

Dean, Chandaria School of Business

iii
 COPYRIGHT
All rights reserved. Compliance with copyright restrictions requires that no part of this
document may be reproduced in any form or by any means without the publisher‟s prior
written permission except for brief quotations in critical reviews or articles.
Asia Adam © 2020

iv
 ABSTRACT
Performance Management System is influential in cascading a company‟s vision, mission and
goals from the administration to every worker. If executed properly, it provides a
commendable valuation of worker performance that revel how employees have each added
value to the company‟s general objectives. Relatively little studies, however, have been
carried out to back the interpretation that PMSs have any influence let only establishing a
positive influence on companies‟ functioning within the Somali economy. The studies
reviewed have also not concentrated on the PMS aspects of performance measurements,
performance standards, quality improvement, and progress reporting and their effect on
employee performance. The general objective of the study was to determine the effect of
performance management systems on employee performance at UN-Habitat, Somalia
Programme. The study additionally aimed on addressing the subsequent specific objective;
the effect of performance standards, performance measurements, quality improvement
process, and progress reporting on performance at UN-Habitat Somalia Programme.

This study adopted a descriptive research design. A quantitative approach was applied on the
effects of performance management systems on employee performance. The independent
variables comprised; performance standards, performance measurements, quality
improvement process, and progress reporting and the implications on employee performance
as the dependent variable. All employees in UN-Habitat Somalia Programme who are 50 in
number formed the study population. Since the population is relatively small, the study
carried out a census of all 50 employees. To analyze the respondents‟ demographic features,
percentages and frequencies were utilized. In establishing the relationship amongst the
dependent and independent variables, the researcher used inferential statistics which
comprised of regression and correlation analysis.

The study established that performance standards, performance measurement, and quality
improvement processes, had no significant association nor relationship with employee
performance. However, the study established that progress reporting had both a significant
positive association and relationship with employee performance. The correlation analysis r
(0.517) = 0.000, p < 0.5 exhibited significant positive association. The regression analysis
also exhibited that progress reporting has a significant positive influence on employee
performance B (0.474), t (3.820) = 0.000 < 0.05. The coefficient obtained, indicates that a

v
unit increase in progress reporting would translate to an increment in 0.474 units of employee
performance.

The study made recommendations to the policy makers at Institute of Human Resources,
other bodies, human resource practitioners, and consultants should not implement
performance standards, performance measurement, and quality improvement processes in
isolation, but rather implements all the aspects of a performance management system in order
to promote the performance of employees. Finally, recommendations were made to the
human resource sector to implement progress reporting so as to augment employee
performance. Thus, recommendations were made that the stakeholders should; give
employees fair feedback, discuss regularly about employees performance, engage in
providing positive feedback for good performers rather than condemning the poor ones, give
feedback to employees that agrees with what they have in reality attained, provide relevant
feedback on job performance, make sure how the organization gives feedback bring
satisfaction to employee that is fair and unbiased, establish an appeal process for employees
not satisfied with the progress reporting process, and utilize progress reporting as a decision
making tool for enhancing the performance of employees. This abstract is incomplete…the
findings should be organized based on the objectives. The same applies to conclusion and
recommendations

vi
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This research project success and outcomes needed much assistance and guidance from
different kinds of people, and I am very fortunate to have gotten it all though the project till
the completion. The great supervision and assistance enabled the completion of the project
which I am very grateful for.

I thank Dr. James Karimi, for his support and guidance through which I was able to duly
complete the project. I am extremely thankful to him for providing us the skills required to
complete this task.

I am grateful and privileged enough to have gotten endless support, guidance and
encouragement from all students in MOD A, which enabled timely completion of the project
despite competing priorities.

vii
 DEDICATION

This research project is dedicated to my dear husband, who has been my supporter until my
study was fully finished. He has encouraged me attentively with his fullest and truest
attention to accomplish my work with truthful self-confidence.

viii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

STUDENT’S DECLARATION...................................................................................................... iii

COPYRIGHT ................................................................................................................................. iv

ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................................... v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ............................................................................................................. vii

DEDICATION.............................................................................................................................. viii

CHAPTER ONE.............................................................................................................................. 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background of the Study ..................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Statement of the Problem..................................................................................................... 6
1.4 Purpose of the Study............................................................................................................ 8
1.5 Research Questions ............................................................................................................. 8
1.6 Significance of the Study ..................................................................................................... 9
1.7 Scope of the Study............................................................................................................... 9
1.8 Definition of Terms ............................................................................................................. 9
1.9 Chapter Summary.............................................................................................................. 11

CHAPTER TWO........................................................................................................................... 12

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW ...................................................................................................... 12

2.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................... 12
2.2 Performance Standards and Employee Performance ........................................................... 12
2.3 Effects of Performance Measurement on Employee Performance ....................................... 16
2.4 Effects of Quality Improvement Processes on Employee Performance ............................... 20
2.5 Progress Reporting and Employee Performance ................................................................. 24
2.6 Chapter Summary.............................................................................................................. 29

CHAPTER THREE....................................................................................................................... 31

3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................... 31

3.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................... 31
3.2 Research Design ................................................................................................................ 31
3.3 Population and Sampling Design ....................................................................................... 32
3.4 Data Collection ................................................................................................................. 32
3.5 Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 33
ix
 3.6 Research Procedures.......................................................................................................... 33
3.7 Chapter Summary.............................................................................................................. 36

CHAPTER FOUR ......................................................................................................................... 37

4.0 DATA ANALYSIS, RESULTS, AND FINDINGS ................................................................ 37

4.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................... 37
4.2 Response Rate and Background ......................................................................................... 37
4.3 Performance Standards and Employee Performance........................................................... 41
4.4 Performance Measurements and Employee Performance ................................................... 44
4.5 Quality Improvement Processes and Employee Performance ............................................. 47
4.6 Progress Reporting and Employee Performance ................................................................. 50
4.7 Chapter Summary.............................................................................................................. 53

CHAPTER FIVE ........................................................................................................................... 54

5.0 DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................... 54

5.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................... 54
5.2 Summary........................................................................................................................... 54
5.3 Discussion of Findings ...................................................................................................... 55
5.4 Conclusions....................................................................................................................... 64
5.5 Recommendations ............................................................................................................. 65
5.6 Recommendations for Further Study.................................................................................. 66

REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................. 68

APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................... 76

Appendix I: Letter of Introduction ............................................................................................... 76

Appendix II: Questionnaire ......................................................................................................... 77

Appendix III: NACOSTI Research Permit ................................................................................... 82

x
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1: Population Distribution ....................................................................................... 32

Table 3.2: Chronbach‟s Rule on Internal Consistency.......................................................... 35
Table 4.1: Study Response Rate .......................................................................................... 37
Table 4.2: Performance Standards Descriptive Statistics ...................................................... 42
Table 4.3: Correlation between Performance Standards and Employee Performance ........... 43
Table 4.4: Model Summary ................................................................................................. 43
Table 4.5: ANOVA ............................................................................................................. 44
Table 4.6: Performance Measurement Descriptive Statistics ................................................ 45
Table 4.7: Correlation between Performance Measurement and Employee Performance ..... 46
Table 4.8: Model Summary ................................................................................................. 46
Table 4.9: ANOVA ............................................................................................................. 46
Table 4.10: Quality Improvement Processes Descriptive Statistics ...................................... 48
Table 4.11: Correlation between Quality Improvement Processes and Employee Performance
........................................................................................................................................... 49
Table 4.12: Model Summary ............................................................................................... 49
Table 4.13: ANOVA ........................................................................................................... 49
Table 4.14: Progress Reporting Descriptive Statistics .......................................................... 51
Table 4.15: Correlation between Progress Reporting and Employee Performance ............... 52
Table 4.16: Model Summary ............................................................................................... 52
Table 4.17: ANOVA ........................................................................................................... 52
Table 4.18: Model Coefficients ........................................................................................... 53

xi
 LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4.1: Gender .............................................................................................................. 38
Figure 4.2: Education Qualifications ................................................................................... 39
Figure 4.3: Age ................................................................................................................... 40
Figure 4.4: Work Experience ............................................................................................... 41

xii
 CHAPTER ONE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Study
Performance Management (PM) in the field of management entails crucial developments that
reflect positivity comprising each and every organizational activity that guarantees that
company goals are continuously being accomplished in a resourceful and effective manner.
Fowler (2010) denotes performance management as organization of work to attain the best
probable outcomes. The Institute of Personnel Management (2012) in contrast state that
performance management is a strategy that relays to each activity of a company established in
the confine of its human resource guidelines, beliefs, style together with the communication
structures. As per Storey and Sission (2013), PM entails an interconnecting set of guidelines
and doings that are solely established for the improved accomplishment of organizational
objectives via a focus on each and every employee‟s performance. Fletcher (2011)
established PM as a method to generating a joint visualization of the purposes and goals of
the company, assisting every worker undertake and be aware of their portion in contributing
to them while managing and improving not only the employee‟s performance but also that of
the organization.

Performance Management System (PMS) as per Armstrong and Baron (2005) means a
process that contributes to the efficient managing of employees so as to achieve high
standards of administrative performance. It creates joint understanding regarding what ought
to be accomplished plus a method to organization, and leading employees that will warrant
that organizational objectives are realized. In addition, PM is a strategy that relates to each
activity of the company established in the framework of its policies regarding human
resource, values and communications. The nature of a performance management plan is
reliant on the organization's context and can differ from one company to another.

The fundamental objective of employee PMS is to institute values which employees and
teams take accountability for uninterrupted development of organizational procedures plus
for their individual expertise and contribution (Argyris & Schon, 2016). PMS is an all-
inclusive process, bringing together many of the components which make up the successful
practice of people management, entailing precisely learning and development

1
PMS addresses intangible assets, which include vital elements like the knowledge of the
employees and efforts to customize products and services. While consultants may be utilized
in designing the PMS, managers play a vital part as guides for the development process. The
system gives executives with guidance in moving the company towards the chosen direction
of the vision, mission and strategic plan of the company. According to Myres (2014),
workers' perception of PMS is very important since employees' attitudes to work system
impact their behavior.

According to Wu and Lee (2011), worker performance has continuously been a hindrance in
administrative management and implementing operative methods to encourage workers to
accomplish and convey higher work presentation in addition to increasing the organizational
competitiveness is one of the core objectives of every institution. Employee performance has
been defined as the value an organization can expect from discrete behaviour performed by
an employee over time. Employee performance is the art of completing a task within the
defined boundaries (Aliya & Maiya, 2015). Employee performance needs to be aligned to
company‟s goals that are relevant to roles assigned to employees (Slocum, 2014). Employee
performance is considered a crucial factor in determining an organization‟s performance this
is so because it assists the organization in achieving its strategic goals, leading to greater
competitive advantage (Lado & Wilson, 2014).

Armstrong (2009) noted that the key goal for coming up with PMSs includes rectifying
wanting work performance, upholding and improving good work performance. There ought
to be a predictable modification with regards to terms of performance amongst companies
that have established vigorous PMSs and those that don‟t have one. This solicits the query if
whether the being and usage of PMSs in a business inevitably makes its workers industrious.
Femi (2013) did a study on performance appraisal and employee performance of workers and
suggested the requirement for constant performance appraisal so as the PMS to produce the
outcomes that an organization had planned. The mere reason of one which entails an
organization having PMS in place, does not necessarily infer that it invariably transforms into
worker competence and efficacy.

According to Femi (2013), execution of performance appraisals is a positive approach in

boosting company presentation. There is though, the want for the appraisals to continually be
reviewed and remodeled for them to attain the shifting wants of the present world we live in.
2
Annual appraisals are inappropriate because businesses move very quickly for yearly
objectives to stay static, individuals wait very long to provide performance response,
traditional reviews do not assist workers to develop, and ranking in reality reduces
engagement and de-motivates workers. Including in addition elements of behavior and
outcomes would facilitate the worker to be the originator of the conduct and practice it in the
change of PMSs. According to Robert (2011), the human resource executive would
consequently require to take into thoughtfulness the conduct (input) of the employee and their
performance results as they handle the presentation of their organizational employees.

Sahu (2014) opine that human resource experts and many researchers have agreed that plans
of suitable guiding principle for the establishment of PMSs should ultimately lead to high
work presentation. PMSs were originally established for costs accounting. This approach of
monetary point of outlook of performance quota was viewed as unfitting to multi-
dimensional PMSs. In the 1970, the move from solely fiscal results to multidimensional
presentation took central stage when the use of the terminology PMS began to attain money.
From that date, PMSs concept has become an everyday pursuit for contemporary
organizations that are ardent to influence on the competences of their workers. PMSs
basically serve two critical purposes according to Arup (2008). They are to assist in attaining
informed judgments regarding organizational matters that entail facets like presenting
workers with gratuities, merit raises and/or promotion. Secondly, PMSs play a vital role in
the establishment of organizational developmental objectives like teaching of worker‟s and
generation of worker‟s feedback.

In the recent decade, this method of managing employees is becoming more specialized and
formalized absorbing olden performance appraisal ways into the idea of PM aiming to be
more extensive and comprehensive (Porter & Siegel, 2006). Other authors tend to differ
arguing that, the initial goal of PM was to track employee progress and continual
development, and to engage, motivate and reward employees according on their efforts
(Arvey & Murphy, 2008). Human resource managers adopt PM to track employee
performance, which was the sole objective of the old performance appraisal methods. Shores
(2015) states that the process jumped the tracks somewhere down the line and the madness to
the present method that is creating disengagement and turnover, opposite of what companies
hope to attain. This has resulted in complaints over years regarding the incompetence of the
annual performance appraisal and merit-pay-increase matrix.
3
Studies performed by Deloitte press reveal only 8% of organizations believe their PM process
is effective in driving organizational value, while 58% of organizations report PM as not
being an effective use of time (Nabaum, Barry, Garr, & Liakopoulus, 2014). Statistics
confirm high levels of worker dissatisfaction mainly associated to lack of career
development, pay and acknowledgement. MTD Training (2010) indicates that, there are
several problems associated with PM for instance; business quickly moves for yearly
objectives to stay static, individuals await long to provide performance response, traditional
reviews do not help workers grow and rating actually lessens engagement and de-motivates
workers. This has led to issues of employees looking for new jobs for growth opportunities
and jobs that pay better.

A survey conducted by Harris Poll in 2014 revealed that almost half of American employees
searching for new jobs are looking for growth prospects. 43% state unhappiness with their
current pay level. As part of the performance process, these are the issues that need to be
tackled. In spite of that, Quinn, Anderson and Finkelstein (2016) state that separation of
workers or talent management, consistent checking and survey and management by purposes
are a portion of the progressions that have formed PM in the recent years. This was enhanced
by the start of human asset management as the key driver coordinated as a way to deal with
the management together with progression of workers and the understanding that line
directors finalize the PM process during the year and not a one off yearly incident organized
by the human resource section.

Nielsen (2013) opines that organizations normally manage worker performance during a span
of 12-month time frame (official performance time frame in an organization). This outcome
of PM execution is used in worker growth development to choose the most appropriate
growth intervention to develop workers' behavior and knowledge abilities; as realistic basis
for payment and rewards in terms of pay raise and gratuities, and as an actual base in
thoughtfulness with other aspects for agility like transfers and advertisings as per Nielsen
(2013).

Kaplan (2001) opines that presentation measurement coupled with accountability has become
vital for nonprofit companies as they come upon aggregating rivalry from an increasing
number of organizations where each and every one of them is competing for limited donor
and regime funding. Nevertheless, the public presentation reports and numerous internal
4
PMSs of these companies emphasize only on monetary processes like aids, disbursements,
and operating expenditure ratios.

In the African scene, Esu and Inyang (2009) studied the setbacks that the Nigerian public
sector suffered, which they attributed to ineffective administration. They argued that PM is a
tool that could enhance of the communal service delivery in Nigeria. They pointed out that
the reason the organizations in the public sector failed was because of their PMSs that were
inefficient and ineffective. In that regard, the failure of the Nigerian public sector enterprise is
not just because they are owned and run by the government. This is because, currently, what
matters in business is not ownership but rather the quality of management. Esu and Inyang
(2009) therefore argue that adoption of PMS in the Nigerian public service would invariably
boost the efficiency of government agencies.

This PMS was implemented in Botswana‟s public service in the 90s based on the
recommendations from the previous evaluation of other performance improvement initiatives
in the public sector that had failed to produce desired results. This presentation management
scheme was therefore meant for improving the delivery of service to the public and in
specific terms it was aimed at improving performance, efficiency, communication,
productivity and accountability of the public servants. It was introduced on the premise that it
would come in handy in resolving problems in the various ministries in the government,
which included inadequate planning, resource wastage and the disregard of the needs of the
public (Boipono et al., 2014).

Numerous researches have been carried out on performance measurement and worker
productivity in the Kenyan context. For instance, Muindi (2012) investigated the perception
of employees of effectiveness in PM practices and came to a conclusion that the employee is
capable of improving on their performance, attaining established goals, and providing valued
services by being creativity and innovation. This consequently leads the organization to
benefit via enhanced services to its clients showing that human resources are valuable
resources which require to be given all the PM practices, which are career planning, training,
goal setting, rewards, performance appraisal and succession management so as to enhance
their performance. Additionally, Omondi (2013) investigated talent management practices at
CFC Stanbic bank and established that the PM process is well defined however it has a main

5
weakness in that many employees perceive it as being subjective which is at times utilized by
some managers as a tool to settle scores.

The United Nations agency, UN- Habitat, is mandated with ensuring a better urban future by
upholding communally and ecologically maintainable human settlements growth and the
accomplishment of the Sustainable Development Goal. Though the mandate of UN-Habitat is
worldwide, it has placed exceptional prominence on working for the good of the host nation
via contributing to Somalia‟s growth priorities in varied ways. UN-Habitat Regional Office in
Africa is located in Nairobi, Kenya. From Kenya, it supports priorities of member states and
regimes to attain sustainable urban growth. Implementation of Somalia programmes is carried
out within the Regional Office in Africa. According to UN-Habitat (2019), the organization
envisages well-organized, proper-ruled, and well-organized towns and further human
settlements, with sufficient housing, infrastructure, and worldwide entrance to occupation
with rudimentary facilities like water, energy, and hygiene. To realize these objectives which
are consequential from the Habitat Agenda of 1996, UN-Habitat has established a medium-
term plan methodology for every six-years succeeding period.

At UN-Habitat, personnel with supervisory duties execute PM. Typically, the aim of handling
performance is to let each employee discover how good him/her has done in comparative to
presentation goals or core performance pointers all through a specified presentation time from
their managers. Employee PM at the organization entails scheduling jobs and setting
prospects, constantly observing presentation, emerging the ability to execute, yearly ranking
presentation in a comprehensive manner together with recompensing good performance
(Taylor & Pierce, 2015).

1.2 Statement of the Problem

Performance Management System is influential in cascading a company‟s vision, mission and
goals from the administration to every worker. If executed properly, it provides a
commendable valuation of worker performance that revel how employees have each added
value to the company‟s general objectives (Boipono et al., 2014). UN-Habitat Somalia
programme has a performance management system, which includes performance planning,
appraisal, scheduled quarterly, as well as training and development programs. Recently,
companies have incorporated undertakings that include for example results based managing,
balanced scorecard, managing by goals and total quality management in an effort to monitor
6
and quantify workers and organization‟s presentation (Kaplan, 2001). Nonetheless, every one
of the practices has had a share of its shortages. Organizations‟ lack of monitoring and
mitigating worker presentation in the service industry can inspire precarious behavior that
might activate losses such as increased reputation risk. Thus, a good PMS, one with a brief
cycle (quarterly cycle) can be a deterrent by frequently monitoring worker presentation and
actions diligently while executing corrective measures (Nielsen, 2013).

Present work environs are becoming multifaceted by the constantly aggregating worldwide
agility, presence of virtual companies, systematic professional re-engineering undertakings,
rise of a highly arduous millennial employee, and the wants for bendable work-life stability.
These has brought about a massive challenge on PMSs that have to be frequently refurbished
and tailor-made to capture dynamics that include client‟s perspective, controller‟s demands,
innovations capability, monetary position, monitoring of virtual personnel, company‟s
structural amendments among comparable viewpoints (Esu & Inyang, 2009). To acclimate to
the always changing industry dynamic forces and sustain strong and vigorous presentation,
companies don‟t need to wholly shift from traditional PM models but somewhat reinforce a
recurrently continued development work on the prevailing systems to take care of the
difficulties imposed by the prevalent industry surrounding at any time period (Arvey &
Murphy, 2008).

Globally, researches by Erdogan (2012), Fletcher (2011), and Broady and Steel (2012)
established that PMSs result to dedicated workers in the appraisal scheme. Research done by
Mone and London (2010) established that biased assessment of worker presentation makes
employees feel self-doubting or hopeless resulting to the growth of reduced association
amongst the boss and worker. Caruth and Humphreys (2008) suggest that presentation
response ought to be rational, opportune and precise in underlining the worker development
in carrying out their duties and the response ought to be regularly.

Locally, Omboi and Shadrack (2011) analyzed the effectiveness of performance appraisal in
the Kenya Tea Development Agency (KTDA), conducting a survey of selected tea factories
located in Meru County, Kenya. The study established that employee training, performance
based pay, and management by objectives had a significant effect on employee performance
in the select KTDA factories. Nyaoga, Kipchumba, and Magutu (2010) evaluated the
effectiveness of performance appraisal systems at Kenyan private universities by conducting
7
a case study of Kabarak University. The study investigated the aim of performance
management in private universities while pointing out relevant factors for achieving effective
performance management. The study established that a performance appraisal system is the
main tangible metric method through which an institution can realize the performance levels
of its diverse employees. The study further established that the effectiveness of performance
appraisal systems in the private universities is only augmented by trainings conducted on the
employees to be involved in the rating and appraising process and only multi-rating systems
are effective.

Relatively little studies, however, have been carried out to back the interpretation that PMSs
have any influence let only establishing a positive influence on companies‟ functioning
within the Somali economy. The studies reviewed have also not concentrated on the PMS
aspects of performance measurements, performance standards, quality improvement, and
progress reporting and their effect on employee performance. This study conducted an
empirical analysis to ascertain this fact. It is this gap that the current study aims to address by
focusing on a case of UN-Habitat-Somalia Programme. Also by way of examining the the
PMS aspects that entail performance measurements, performance standards, quality
improvement, and progress reporting, this research would go ahead and establish the PMS
aspects that affect the UN-Habitat-Somalia Programme employee performance.

1.4 Purpose of the Study

The aim of the study was to determine the effect of performance management systems on
employee performance at UN-Habitat, Somalia Programme.

1.5 Research Questions

The research aimed to answer the stated study questions;
1. To what extent do performance standards affect employee performance at UN-Habitat
Somalia Programme?
2. To what extent do performance measurements influence employee performance at
UN-Habitat Somalia Programme?
3. To what extent does the quality improvement process affect employee performance at
UN-Habitat Somalia Programme?
4. To what extent does progress reporting influence employee performance at UN-
Habitat Somalia Programme?
8
1.6 Significance of the Study
This study is important for top management of UN-Habitat and other practitioners as it
provided insights on the influence of PMS on their worker‟s presentation together with how
they can be sustained to enhance productivity and efficiency. The study is of importance to
policy creators and the government on PM factors that affects employee presentation. This
research will give information on the perceptions of employees on the influence of the three
dimensions of PMS and this information will be useful to make decisions and formulate
policies.

The study is of importance to scholars and intellectuals because it will contribute to the
existing information on PMS and employee presentation in organizations. This study will be
in addition of significance to researchers as it will be a source of reference and also suggest
topics for further research on PMS and employee performance in organizations.

1.7 Scope of the Study

The study was undertaken in the confine of the UN-Habitat Somalia Programme. Many
previous studies on effect of PMSs on employee performance have been conducted in
commercial firms as well as public institutions, but not on non-governmental organizations.
UN-Habitat Somalia Programme is a non-governmental organization, hence it was an ideal
unit of analysis to study the impact of PMSs on employee performance. The study was
limited to the employees of the organization and questionnaires used to collect information
from them for this study. The whole study took approximately five months. One of the main
limitations was the unwillingness for employees to give up some of their time to answer the
questionnaire. Additionally, due to the limited time period, the research was restricted to the
personnel based in Nairobi.

1.8 Definition of Terms

1.8.1 Performance Management
The crucial developments that reflect positivity comprising each and every organizational
activity that guarantees that company goals are continuously being accomplished in a
resourceful and effective manner. It denotes performance management as organization of
work to attain the best probable outcomes (Fowler, 2010).

9
1.8.2 Performance Management System
A process that contributes to the efficient managing of employees so as to achieve high
standards of administrative performance. It creates joint understanding regarding what ought
to be accomplished plus a method to organization, and leading employees that will warrant
that organizational objectives are realized (Armstrong & Baron, 2005).

1.8.3 Performance Standards

The initial step in the presentation administration system process cycle plus avails the ground
work for an operative procedure. It is an ongoing procedure in performance managing and it
is to implemented carefully (Schneier et al., 1987).

1.8.4 Performance Measurement

The information showing previous performance and outcomes provided by the manager to
the worker which needs a rater who has expertise in understanding to rate performance and
the capability to see and identify any performance loopholes amongst the workers (Berry.
2003).

1.8.5 Quality Improvement Process

Managers regard it as a hopeful way of coping with stagnating productivity. Workers Union
representatives view it as a way of cultivating working environment and production and as a
way of qualifying for greater payment. Regime agencies have been drawn to quality
improvement as a method of increasing productivity and lessening inflation, and enquiring
organizational and diminishing labor disagreements (Rosenberg, 1996).

1.8.6 Progress Reporting

This is the review of employees performance by monitoring their performance and keeping
records of their progress. IT distinguishes performance management as a procedure from
performance appraisal as an action. It entails bring up-to-date and revising original goals,
performance standards plus work capability regions as situations alteration, asking for
reaction and response from and to a superior respectively, proposing occupation growth
skills, plus workers and administrators working together, management the performance
administration procedure (Schneier et al., 1987),

10
1.8.7 Employee Performance
Employee performance is the value an organization can expect from discrete behaviour
performed by an employee over time. It is the art of completing a task within the defined
boundaries (Aliya & Maiya, 2015).

1.9 Chapter Summary

The section has focused on research background, research problem statement, study
objectives, scope, importance of the research and description of terminologies used in the
research. Chapter two of this researched looked at the literature evaluation of the research,
which will be discoursed in agreement with the study queries.

11
 CHAPTER TWO
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
This part gives details literature review on PMSs and its impact on worker performance. The
first section coves performance standards effects on worker presentation, the next section
covers the effects of performance measurement on employee presentation, the third covers
the extent to which quality improvement processes influence employee performance, the
fourth covers the impact of progress reporting on employee performance, and the final part
covers summary of chapter two.

2.2 Performance Standards and Employee Performance

Setting performance standards is the initial step in the presentation administration system
process cycle plus avails the ground work for an operative procedure. Setting performance
standards is an ongoing procedure in performance managing and it is to implemented
carefully as per Schneier et al. (1987). The PM assists in boosting assurance and
thoughtfulness by associating the worker's job with the aim and goals of the company. It
normally entails classifying key value drivers of shareholders like stockholders, customers
and staff of the company. Armstrong and Baron (2004) opine that aims or objectives entail
things to be achieved by persons, organization‟s sections and companies over a given time
span. The goals and objects are targets to be me like sales targets and jobs to be accomplished
before deadlines.

As indicated by Armstrong and Baron (2004), goals ought to be well-defined and decided on
because they relay to the over-all performance of the work. In addition, objectives outline
presentation areas and all the facets of the job that contribute to attaining its total resolve.
Then, every performance area is for a goal. As per Rogers and Hunter (1991) a critical facet
for a company is goal setting. The authors further opined that efficiency benefits will
associate with the level of top level administration backing for and employees' involvement
in the procedure of establishing goals. This process is encouraging as it provides the
employee the sensation of being included and provides a sense of possession. A section of the
scheduling phase that contains the contract on an official growth plan for the workers.

12
The setting of performance standards ought to be founded on requisite skills, mannerisms,
knowledge and main capabilities that would be needed in achieving the aims and goals. This
performance criterion can in addition, entail long-standing growth ingenuities that are
grounded on possible and worthy presentation (Nyembezi, 2009). During the planning step,
the bosses together with juniors engage in a joint participative procedure and establish
company goals, together with specified objectives for each worker. Aims, on the contrary, to
also create the atmosphere where every worker will be rated in accordance to their individual
presentation and output, with fixed values for assessment. The metrics for performance
standards entail Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) like; sales per worker, contribution per
employee, profit per worker among others. KPI‟s ought to be closely linked to the top-level
goals for the company as possible. The performance standards measures should be
quantifiable. If they cannot be quantifiable, there will occur a lot of scope for variation and
discrepancy if diverse individuals set the standards at different periods. The KPIs ought to
relay to aspects of the business environs in which the firm has some level of control.

Performances standards setting is an exercise where all employees have a shared

understanding pertaining the organizational goals and how to achieve the objectives (Weiss,
Nicholas & Daus, 1999). Organizational objectives are well aligned with the employees
agreed targets, skills and the delivery of results. The emphasis is on continual improvement,
learning and development in order to create a high-performance workforce while achieving
the overall organization strategy. When performance standard setting is implemented
accurately, linking specific objectives to the strategic and operational plans, institutional
performance outcomes will more likely increase very steadily. Standard setting aids in
breaking down extensive departmental strategic plans into clear achievable performance
milestones for each individual. This easily provides a basis for continual monitoring of
individual performance, the giving of feedback and the execution of measures to improve
performance (Armstrong, 2009).

Armstrong and Baron (2004) suggest the following action plan for effective performance
standard setting in development of the strategic plan, which is linked to an annual action plan,
ensuring all employees are involved in the whole process to increase buy-in, and regular on
job training. The organization must plan for a training program that ensures employees are
involved in decision making. In addition, managers must acknowledge that their effective
communication with staff is an effective tool for performance. Non-monetary incentive
13
system may also be introduced along monetary incentives to encourage improved employee
productivity. Performance standards are expected to improve the employees level of job
satisfaction with the hope that there will be increased work productivity due to the
satisfaction.

In England, the National Health Services made up of over 8,300 separate organizations and
hired staff numbering over 1.3 million utilizes Public Service Agreements, which are
incorporated into performance based agreements. It has been rated as the fairest and most
patient centered health system in the world having the highest global customer satisfaction
levels (Department of Health UK, 2016). Also, a survey was conducted by the Performance
Management Institute of Australia of Australian employees‟ concerning their attitudes
towards PMS, the survey sampled 450 employees. The survey established that slightly above
50 percent of the employees received performance reviews once a year and the rest were not
reviewed. The employees were not involved in target setting, consequently resulting in
dissatisfaction during reviews (Nankervis, 2006).

In the Sub-Saharan Africa region, Uganda experiences weak PMS in the health sector as
revealed by Lutwama, Janetta, and Bethabile (2013) who unearthed several gaps in the
implementation of PMS in the sector. The gaps included absence of setting targets and
planning, unclear indicators for measuring performance, irregular performance appraisal and
limited staff training and development. A study done by Dieleman (2006) indicated that PMS
had not been ideally implemented in Mali, as job descriptions were lacking or were
inappropriate, a very low percentage (13%) were appraised and training needs were not
analyzed. Paile (2012) established that employees at Father Smangaliso Mkhatswa center in
South Africa of different hierarchy view PMS differently. Those of lower hierarchy view
PMS as means of increasing their income, those of the higher hierarchy view PMS as an
instrument to control, and discipline subordinates. Halo effect is dominant where supervisors
show favoritism to certain subordinates. They are, however, aware that PMS is a tool to
improve service delivery by addressing poor performance through human resource
development programmes and rewarding good performance.

According to GoK (2007), the public sector had invariably fallen below expectations due to
several factors that include frequent political interferences, poor leadership and management,
and nonperforming employees, leading to poor employee productivity. Following the
14
adoption of a new constitution in August 2010 in Kenya, a new governance framework with a
national government and 47 counties was introduced. The former form of governance was
highly centralized and it led to political and economic disempowerment and unequal
distribution of resources. In the 2015 annual conference report for devolution of health care
services in Kenya, there were several challenges identified in Human Resources‟ for Health
(HRH) such as salary disparities, uncoordinated training, delay of promotions and limited
career progression. The delegates suggested that these challenges could be addressed by use
of PMSs (WHO, 2016).

Performance standards setting is the first most important component of the performance
management process since it‟s the basis of performance appraisals. It is during this time that
employees decide collectively on the targets and identify the key performance areas that can
be attained over a period of one year. This is usually within the performance budget and is
completed upon a common agreement amongst the employee and the reporting officer
(Markus, 2004). The performance agreements put in perspective expectations while at the
same time creates a common point of reference for senior management, staff, and their
supervisors in the entire PMS process. The performance agreements clearly state the
standards of performance, required of public officials, ministries, state owned or public
agencies to achieve within a specific time period (Hope, 2011). Olusanya et. al (2012) agrees
that effective planning in PMS positively contributes to improved employee productivity in
an institution.

In Kenya, institutions are required to set targets in which fall into the four categories in the
following descending order; financial indicators, non-financial indicators, operational
indicators and finally dynamics indicators. Most targets in public institutions are usually the
same in most categories for operational indicators which are specific in accordance to the
mandate of the institutions. Using a departmental plan, institutions should develop a work
plan, which indicates primary activities to be accomplished by the end of the financial year.
The work plans are used as the basis for evaluation at the end of every quarter (Performance
Contracts Steering Committee, 2004). Existing policy documents, that is, NHSSPs, Medium
Term Plan 2013-2017, Vision 2030 and institutions‟ strategic plan are used to prepare work
plans. The performance contracts are then signed as a sign of accountability and to show
ownership by the relevant senior management authority and the institutions accounting

15
officers. In the case of the ministry of health the cabinet to the secretary and the principal
secretary signs (Ndubai, 2011).

Employees need resources during their planning stage. Nielsen et al (2017) states that
resources are “anything perceived by the individual to help attain his or her goals”. Resources
are categorized into four levels in the work place, and they help employees achieve their
work task goals in four areas, which include; personal characteristics such as self-efficacy
which enable an individual to perform well, social context associated with interpersonal
relationships, leadership characteristics, and organizational resources (Xanthopoulou,
Demerouti & Schaufeli, 2007). Performance standards setting was associated with increased
employee performance in companies according to a study by Gibson et al (2005). Nassazi
(2013) stated that performance standards allow employees to get engaged in planning for the
company, and therefore participates by having an active role in the entire process, which
translates to increased productivity.

2.3 Effects of Performance Measurement on Employee Performance

According to Solmon and Podgursky (2010), direct communication amongst manager and
employees is a critical part in performance appraisal procedure. The information showing
previous performance and outcomes provided by the director to the worker is referred to as
measurement According to Berry (2003), performance measurement needs a ratter who has
expertise in understanding to rate presentation, the capability to see and identify any
performance loopholes amongst the workers. The first appraisal source is the capability of the
director to recognize what is anticipated from an employee and the manner in which to
conduct the performance appraisal procedure. The other appraisal source of performance is
the workmates who are in a better placed to notice how fellow employees are carrying out
their duties at the work place. As per Berry (2003), workmate form a vital source of
employee performance measurement than job managers who have minimal chances to
monitor the presentation of the workers at work.

The third performance appraisal source is the employees themselves. This is because the
employee can partake to what is established as a self-evaluation. Nevertheless, this type of
performance evaluation measurement may be impartial because mostly, the feedback is
positive as per Salau, Oludayo, and Omoniy (2014). As per Berry (2003), the employee poses
a fear of grading themselves negative in order to evade reprimand by their leaders. The
16
source of the measurement ought to be observed by the receiver as a dependable, trustworthy,
dependable, plus correctly inspired. According to Gupta and Upadhyay (2012), a couple of
difficulties that ratters encounter when carrying out presentation appraisal measurement
include the ratter hallo influence. This is where the workers are solely raked on the bases of
definite features. There exists the miscalculation of dissimilarity when the ranking of a
worker is dependent on further causes like another worker carrying out a comparable job. The
third issue is an error referred as central tendency error. It is a scenario where the boss
provides all the workers ratings that are above the normal level. Leniency ranking occurs
when the ratter allocates good ratings to the workers and when the ratter is stringent they get
low ratings. When rankings of staffs are grounded on the happening of latest happenings
rather than of previous employee presentation, recent effect error takes place. Proximity error
occurs when the ratter applies one ranking system to varied features of worker performance
as per Jackson and Schuller (2012).

The performance measurement plays a critical part in worker production. PMS allows a
chance for response on the previous presentation alongside objectives set previously in
addition to identifying any presentation gap. For administrators according to Jackson and
Schuller (2012) it is the procedure that recognises the present presentation level, deliberate
strong suit and shortcomings and future chances. The performance measurement facilitates a
dialogue which assists workers to comprehend how the employees is performing at work,
undertaking training and response; make clear opportunities regarding occupation growth as
per Brown and Benson (2013). Presentation measurement does an excellent task of making
employees conscious of the aims and consequences of the procedure of presentation. As per
Mone and London (2010), quite a number of employees believe that the measurement
stimulates their presentation and is done on a fair basis. In addition, a myth exists that
administrators and managers are managing comparatively okay the practise of measurement.

As per Caroll and Schneier (2002), one of the most significant situations for improving
employee efficiency is to facilitate employees with a clear performance based measurement
and has a workflow for tracking the measurement. Immediate remedial steps are taken when
a mistake is detected hence causes least possible loss to an organization. It is to be assessed
with regards to the extent to which the employee attains the presentation conditions
established by the administration in satisfying the company‟s objectives. Baruch (2006)
opined that giving a worker feedback is generally acknowledged as a vital undertaking that
17
could inspire self-growth and worker efficiency that are influential for the accomplishment of
the entire company. Consequently, the rate of response is essential and it can affect employee
forthcoming productivity (Denisi, 2006).

According to Caroll and Schneier (2002), there are four generic metrics of employee
performance measurement. They are; quantity quality, efficiency and organization skills.
Different weights are assigned to the four metrics. Quality and efficacy are weighted more
heavily for majority of employees. The metrics are handy when setting goal. The quantity
metric is about employee's output. The quality metric is diverse. In the production sector, it
may entail making a defect free product without any errors while in the service sector it may
involve enhancing the customer experience. The efficiency metric delves the resources
required needed to produce a specified output. For instance, a worker who does a total
number of sales calls but then again translates an insignificant total of those connections to
clients could require change of tact and focus mostly on the substance and depth of those
contacts. According to Caroll and Schneier (2002), the organizational skill metric measures a
worker's ability to; make and observe to programs plus targets, set together with meet
objectives, oversee arrangements, partake in timely choices, delegate when required, solve
problems, and manage projects and execute business strategies.

According to Mone and London (2010), the triumph of the measurement is dependable on its
reception of the PM process. Feedback responses are generally totally unlike. The
contentment with the presentation measurement is a sign of the level to which junior staff
are contented with the procedure together with the feedback established. It represents as a
report of precision and impartial assessments of performance. The result being contented
employees after the presentation measurement will progress more working associations with
their managers together with fellow employees as per Jackson and Schuller (2012).
Consequently, these measurements could bring about negative responses from workers
According to Dechey (2010), if viewed biased, the response can bring about behavioural
modifications like nonattendance, lack of collaboration, absence of focus on urgencies,
harmful rivalry and employee turnover.

Quite a number of ways of measuring employee performance exist however only a few of
them apply in most situations. Dechev (2010) stipulates three methods to measure the
performance of employees and they include absolute standards, relative standards and
18
objectives. As per Dessler (2000), absolute standards denote a situation whereby the
employees are assessed against a standard and their assessment is not reliant on any other
coworker in their level. Absolute standard is the oldest method of appraising the performance
of employees. This kind of method consist of the following techniques of appraisal; checklist,
critical incident appraisal, essay appraisal, forced choice, graphic rating scale and
behaviorally anchored rating scales.

Mondy and Mondy (2008) argues that the main aim of an essay appraisal is on the behaviors.
The important details are that appraisal concentrates on the critical characteristics that bring a
difference in performing a job efficiently. This approach is considered the most practical
since it relates to the job and it is based more on the performance of an individual than the
characteristics. The main purpose of this method is measuring the individual performance
based on happenings and special occurrence that transpire in job performance. These
incidents are referred to as critical incident. In this approach, the manager notes down on a
paper the negative and positive Individual performance behavior in evaluation term. Dechev
(2010) views the checklist method as one where the assessor takes a record of conditions and
statements and compares it with employees. The checklist comprises of all the details on
characteristics and performance of an individual. Mostly the responses of the checklist are
“Yes” or “No” and the outcomes may be quantitative and give weight to characteristics.

Performance measures ought to give a proof as to whether the expected outcome has been
attained or not and should go further to say which job holder has produced the results and this
will act as a means of obtaining feedback by both the manager and the individual on their
own performance (Mullin, 1999). Kaplan and Norton (1992) opined that what is measured is
what is obtained and they emphasized that no single measure can provide a clear performance
target. Consequently, they provided balanced score card, which is a set of measures that helps
manager to obtain a fast as well as a comprehensive view of an organization.

The scope of performance that an employee is appraised is referred to as the criteria of

evaluation. In order to assess the performance of an employee accurately, a wide ranging
criteria is required (Ivancevich, 1998). According to Mathis and Jackson (2003), there are
three types of information or data that is used in order to evaluate the employee ability to
effectively execute their work and they include; result based information, behavior based
information and trait based information. Opatha (2002) is of the opinion that in trait based

19
information only the subjective traits of an employee are identified for example initiative,
attitude or creativity.

A good performance appraisal approach ought to come up with a method for successful
performance, provide feedback on performance and allow for a better unbiased reward
system. Performance method lays down the foundation of assessing the performance of
employees and their impact on the goals of the organization. It consists of the desired outputs
anticipated of employees. Performance method ought to be in accordance with the goals,
applicable to given roles, specific and measurable, within the understanding and control of
employees and accepted by participants (Derven, 2010). Al-Ahmadi (2009) upholds that
performance improvement do not only depend on a system that is functioning wells but in
addition on successful human resource strategies that thrive in both hiring and appraising
performance.

Mallaiah (2009) conducted an investigation on the management of performance, expectations

and satisfaction of employees in University library. From the results, it was discovered that
the system adopted by the library on performance appraisal is based on jo performance and
the capability of employee to take responsibility. In addition, the study established realistic
recommendations offered by the respondents so as to better the performance appraisal system
that existed which consisted of changing the criteria utilized. Gortner et al (2007) noted that
one of the hindrance of employees‟ performance appraisal was that in most of the cases,
employees are assessed not based on the actual performance but on their ability to get along
with their supervisor. Singh et al (2010) in their study on the performance appraisal system
efficiency in Oil and natural Gas Commission (ONGC) in India established that organizations
relies upon the impression of managers and supervisors for rewarding and punishing
employees.

2.4 Effects of Quality Improvement Processes on Employee Performance

Managers regard quality improvement as a hopeful way of coping with stagnating
productivity. Workers Union representatives view it as a way of cultivating working
environment and production and as a way of qualifying for greater payment. Regime agencies
have been drawn to quality improvement as a method of increasing productivity and
lessening inflation, and enquiring organizational and diminishing labor disagreements
(Rosenberg, 1996).

20
Bergeron (2003), asserts that part of the work in the developing a loyal, dedicated work force
is to establish recognition and reward systems to encourage worker participation in
initiatives. Even those primarily motivated by money can be encouraged to provide more
value to the company by formally recognizing their contribution to the bottom line. There are
various kinds for quality development according to Lion (2001). They include cover product,
process and people based improvement. As per Bergeron (2003), proponents of every method
have sought to develop and implement them to enterprise types of initially targeted. For
example, six-sigma is intended for industrial but has spilled over to service enterprise. Ever
approach has encounter success and failures. Examples of similar differentiators amongst
success and failures are commitment, information and know-how to direct progress, range of
change and implementation to company‟s culture. According to Rosenberg (1996), the
quality cycles do not function well in each firm and are not opted for by a few administrators.

Execution of any improvements take time to gain approval and even out as acknowledged
practice development ought to allow pauses amid executing new changes in order for the
change to be stabilized and evaluated as an actual improvement before the subsequent
improvement is made. This is referred to as continual improve rather than continuous
improvement (Lion, 2001). As per Rosenberg (1996), improvements that modify culture take
a longer period as they have to overcome bigger resistance to change. It is effective and
efficient to work within the present cultural boundaries‟ and establish small improvements
(that is Kaizen) rather than undertaking major transformational variations. Kaizen is used in
Japan and provides a critical purpose for the creation of the Japanese industrial and fiscal
forte. Contrary, transformational modification works best when a business experiences a
catastrophe and wants to make key changes for the purpose of its survival. Rosenberg (1996)
spearheaded a transformational change at Nissan Motor Company that was in a fiscal and
operational predicament. When choosing the quality improvement, well-structured quality
development programs consider all these aspects.

All managerial roles achieve the bare minimum if leaders do not know how to lead
employees and to comprehend the human aspect in their operations in such a manner as to
provide outcomes (Koontz & Weihrich, 2004). As per Armstrong (2009), human resource
administration is a company‟s most cherished resources and the individuals working in the
company who solely and jointly participate in the attainment of the organization‟s objectives.
In this regard, human resource specialists are concerned about the individuals‟ contribution
21
and the terms that improve organizational performance. Managers and individual employees
alike adopt this entails ensuring that performance management process is an accepted and
rewarding part of the business. Individual performance should be in the line with agreed
framework of planned objectives, targets and standards.

Human issues are taken into considerations when it comes to recruitment and selection
practices. When it is conducted in an open and fair manner boosts the morale of employees.
The presence of quality cycles demand that there is continuous improvement (Wentland,
2005). The major importance of performance appraisal is because it is a contributor‟s process
that reflects typical administration doings of directing, observing and measuring presentation
and ultimately action taking. This is natural procedure that each and every good manager
should follow (Koontz & Weihrich, 2004). There are six quality improvement measures,
which include; return on Investments (ROI), product quality, timesavings, safety, customer
satisfaction, and employee satisfaction (Armstrong, 2009).

There a various approach for quality improvement which includes, process improvement,
product improvement, and people based improvement (Bergeron, 2003). Some of the usual
differentiators of failure and success comprise of expertise and knowledge to guide
improvement, commitment, scope of change and adoption to culture of the organization.
Quality cycles not always work well in all organizations and are mostly disapproved by some
managers (Rosenberg, 1996). It always takes time for an improvement to be implanted,
accepted and stabilize as an accepted practice. Improvements ought to permit for breaks
between implementing new changes to allow for stabilizing and assessment of change as an
actual improvement before a further improvement can be made, henceforth advocating for
continual improvement as opposed to a continuous improvement.

It takes a longer period to make improvements that will change the culture since those
improvements ought to overcome much change resistance. It is simpler and frequently more
effective in working within current cultural boundaries and making little improvement rather
than making major transformational changes (Bergeron, 2003). For instance, the main idea
behind developing of the Japanese industrial and economic strength is the use of Kaizen. On
the contrast transformational change is more effective in an insance where an organization is
encountering crisis and ought to come up with major changes so as to survive. Hess

22
Rosenberg in Japan led a transformational change at the Nissan motor company when it was
facing major operational and financial crisis through application of kaizen. In order to have a
well-organized quality improvement program, it is important to consider all this factors when
choosing the quality improvement (Rosenberg, 1996).

Joel (1999) argues that cost reduction is the tradition al and most widely used approach to
quality improvement and it is an appropriate route to improvement if implemented correctly.
Management by drive approach is an example of cost reduction where people are perceived
as cutting this expense as much as possible. However, this policy usually lead to employees‟
resentment and is frequent counter performance.

Managing growth is a better positive approach though growth without performance-

improvement is not optimal. The improvement may mean an additional investment or
additional cost, but the investment must generate more return that the cost incurred.
Therefore, increasing the ratio of capital and technology improvement, system design, and
training and development are among the numerous modes managers‟ can utilize to initiate
growth while improving quality and performance. This approach is termed as cost avoidance
(Joel, 1999). Additionally, Joel (1999) stated that working smarter imply additional output for
the same input, which enable increment in performance with the same gross input and lower
unit cost. More suitable ways of improving the ratios might include; generating additional
output through reduction of manufacturing costs via product design, improving process, or
producing more from the same raw materials level through improvement of the inventory
turnover.

According to Cronin and Taylor (1994), the beginning stage for quality improvement is to
decide the degree of quality that an organization ought to give. From a causal observation of
most service industry, it would show the variety of quality standards that are provided. The
proof of the variety of the quality standards happens in spite of Total Quality Management
(TQM) approach. Actually, the idea of TQM in the service sectors improves the performance
of an organization. According to Kotler (1999), business ought to come up with strategies to
ensure that offer continued and high quality services. Kotler (1999) sought to identify the
organizational factors, which are most commonly associated with successful quality
management and proposed the following requirements. Strategy concept, which is customer,
focused, is a history of top management that is customer focused, setting high standards and

23
communicating this standard to employees, instituting systems for monitoring performance,
and instituting systems for satisfying the employee because they are the internal customers.

In order to enable quality assurance, the quality management practices should be put in place.
Quality is the degree of excellence a product or service provides currently. Most of the
definitions on quality assurance are summarized as a strategy of building quality stemming
form organizations deep concern for survival, wanting to remain as a going concern. Senior
management of the company formulate an initiative intended to improve effectiveness and to
build quality into the service delivered (Kerlinger, 1993). Kerlinger (1993) further states that
quality assurance is a culture of sustained continuous improvement focusing on eliminating
waste in a system and processes in an organization. It begins with employees and the
involvement of leadership comes in guiding the employees to continuously improve their
ability to meet targets time therefore enhancing service delivery of an organization. This
means that quality is a never ending process and its best achieved when everybody is
involved.

According to Kerlinger (1993), quality has nine different dimensions, which include;
performance, features, added features, reliability, conformity, service revolution, durability,
response, aesthetic-sensory characteristics, and reputation. Theses are vital to an organization
that is able to keep up with the trends and which is rapidly changing thus being able to
provide the required service in the market. This can be referred to as quality by ongoing
employee centered quality improvement process. Kerlinger, (1993) further argued that
service delivery to the internal quality is attained through embedding, across the organization,
a fundamental approach which acts as a way of assuming quality from design to customer.
Considering all that, all people in the organization strives to satisfy the customer
requirements. Philip (1999) opines that quality assurance practices should not only be
conforming to customer requirements but the organizations needs to focus on continuous
improvements in order to delight customers.

2.5 Progress Reporting and Employee Performance

As per Schneier et al. (1987), progress reporting on employee performance distinguishes
presentation management as a procedure from presentation appraisal as an action. Workers
are answerable for managing their personal work and performance presentation. Work

24
performance encompasses maintaining a positive outlook to work, bring up-to-date and
revising original goals, performance standards plus work capability regions as situations
alteration, asking for reaction and response from and to a superior respectively, proposing
occupation growth skills, plus workers and administrators working together, management the
performance administration procedure. As per Fletcher (2011) improving communication in a
company is vital for workers to be conscious of goals and pertake to the forthcoming growth.

PM is a tool that ensures that executives manage their employees‟ effectively. Armstrong
and Baron (2004) establish that PMS should warrant the supervisor of workers or teams to
apprehend what is anticipated of them and possess the capability to produce on the
opportunities. Managers need to be sustained by their company to grow the ability to attain
the outlooks that are provides response on their presentation while having the chance to
deliberate and add to their goals and objectives. Armstrong and Baron (2004) opined that, a
PMS is in addition regards to ensuring that bosses are conscious of the effect of them self-
conduct on the individuals they supervise, and therefore exhilarated to identify and show
confident behaviors. The definite presentation is equated to anticipated performance hence
the product is appraised and a growth strategy is customized in accordance to the difficulties
with orientation the plan. The consequence similarly gives a response mechanism to staffs.

In addition, organizations ought to pay attention to communication among employees and

amongst staffs and managers for them to develop the response, keep informed and deliberate
original goals. It is imperative for administrators to cultivate a wholly assimilated plan that
permits the numerous kind of communication to support to the achievement of a company‟s
vision and goals as per Marion (1998). Additionally, as per Welch and Jackson (2007) opine
that constant communication or switching info amongst an organization's managers and the
organization‟s interior shareholders, ought to be made in such a way as to encourage
commitment and aware of its dynamic environs together with understanding of its evolving
objectives.

Progress reporting includes the performance reviews viewed as learning happenings.

Workforces could be stimulated to reason with regards to how plus in what ways they desire
to grow. As per Ashford and Cummings (1983), research establishes that response has a
positive influence on the presentation of persons and teams, particularly via role explanation,
enhanced self-efficiency, the establishing of conduct incentive eventualities and improved
25
self-regulatory regulator procedures. Likewise, as per Armstrong and Baron (2004), this
definite performance can be associated to the wanted performance. Hence, the result is
assessed and a progress strategy is established grounded on these shortcomings. This relative
method similarly offers a response mechanism to staffs.

In progress reporting moreover, tutoring and teaching are essential tools in education and
growth. Training entails developing worker‟s abilities and understanding so as to develop
their work presentation and assist them to attain their organizational goals. Administrators
ought to recognize and execute training and other activities essential to progress employee
presentation as per Bevan and Thompson (1991).

Performance management is a planned and cohesive methodology to providing continued

achievement to companies by enhancing the presentation of employees that work in the
organization by increasing the competences of groups and sole providers as per Armstrong
and Baron (2004). According to Black and Lynch (1996), teaching courses which is
presented by businesses ought to be planned via taking into account the current and future
wants of workers and enable the education of the expertise. An excellent training program
ought to enhance the capacity and value of a company‟s output; rise the chances of
organizational accomplishment; lessening company‟s expenses and expenses. In addition,
coaching is more and more being recognized as a significant duty of bosses, and could be a
vital part in the working time span of an employee. Cunneen (2006) opine that training
should come naturally and it might take place in the time when conferences are reviewed or
ought to be done all through the year since it could be required to improve employee skills.

Metrics for progress reporting include training programs and achievement of individual goals.
After gauging participation in training programs, the outcomes of those training programs are
also considered. Individual work goals are measured during performance appraisals. The
management should meet with the employees in a casual, one-on-one setting perhaps on a
quarterly basis to set the employees individual goals (Baron, 2004).

Performance management promotes employee‟s identity and a sense of belonging delegating

responsibility providing feedback recognizing and valuing employee success. For a
performance management process to be considered successfully then the feedback has to
prompt and constructive and this should be in line with the set targets. When prompt and
26
constructive feedback is shared to employees concerning their progress towards the set goals,
the employee productivity will surely improve. Employees need to be informed promptly if
they are achieving their targets. Davis (2011) states that any performance feedback system
must furnish employees promptly to ensure they are satisfied with their process.

According to Obwaya (2010) feedback is able to rectify the mistakes and ensure that
employees continue being focused on what is needed of them. The investigation additionally
expressed that public service culture repressed free communication amongst the employees
and managers, and the bureaucratic procedures were a hindrance to communication, making
it hard to offer feedback to staff instantly as required. Feedback is a significant segment of
performance appraisal. Mostly positive feedback is usually accepted easily but mostly there is
resistance in accepting negative feedback unless it is objective based on a source that is
trusted and brought up in a way that is skillful (DeVoe and Iyengar, 2004). According to
Mathauer and Imhoff (2006), health care workers stated that they rarely receive any personal
feedback from their supervisors. The feedback they receive concentrates on few shortcomings
or technical aspects of service provision. It does not look at the perspective of the health
worker as a person. They also cited that personal feedback is more common in faith based
organizations and private facilities than in public facilities.

Armstrong and Baron (2004), indicated that tangible performance might possibly be
compared to the desired perforce, henceforth the result is assessed and strategy for expansion
is formulated founding it on the limitations. In this approach, a mechanism for providing
employees with feedback is also provided. Furthermore, in this stage, as a principal toll in
learning and development, both coaching and training are used. Coaching is developing and
individual‟s energy and understanding in order to improve the job performance of an
employee and assist them in attainment of the objectives of an organization. It is the
responsibility of managers to identify and ensuring there is training as well as other efforts
that are necessary for improvement of an individual performance (Bevan & Thompson,
2001).

HR managers seek to design reward structures based on progress reports that enables the
strategic goals of an organization and those of an individual employee. For any organization,
reward systems are important (Maund, 2001). Rewards includes the systems, practices and
programs which have the ability to influence actions of an individual. The idea of a reward
27
system is offering a systematic way of carrying out positive consequences. The most
significant purpose is giving positive impacts for the effort towards the desired performance
(Wilson, 2003). These rewards can consist of awards and other ways of recognition for
example reassignments, promotion and other non-financial bonuses such as paid trips or even
a simple thank-you. This motivates the employees in taking positive actions that will result in
them being rewarded. An organization ought to design its reward mechanism well so as to
nurture a good behavior that can result to improved performance (Torrington & Hall, 2006).

Ahmed and Ali (2008) undertook an investigation on the “impact of reward and recognition
programs on employee motivation and satisfaction”. An explanatory resign design was
adopted and a sample of 80 employees was delivered from employees of Unilever companies.
Primary data which was utilized was obtained via a questionnaire. In analyzing data and
establishing the level of relationship amongst the reward system, motivation and satisfaction,
correlation analysis was done. The results indicated that the reward were positively related
with job satisfaction and motivation also. The researcher went further and recommended that
further studies should be done on the influence of reward and recognition on both the
satisfaction and motivation of different grouping of employees for instance in aspects of
disability, age and race.

Duberg & Mollen (2010) conducted an investigation on reward systems within the health and
geriatric care sector. The study problem was how the reward systems in the health and
geriatric care are designed and whether the care quality is impacted by the prevailing reward
systems. The aim of the study was to enlarge the understanding and knowledge of reward
systems in health and geriatric care and additionally find out the way these systems are
designed and finally identify if these reward systems have an effect on the quality of health
and geriatric care. A sample of six leaders in the private and public organization was selected
and a qualitative approach was adopted. The study was anchored on the motivation and
reward systems theoretical framework. From the results it was established that, salary is a
quite significant aspect of the reward system; though other types of incentives such as shares
and bonuses were perceived to create an enjoyable workplace and happy employees which
gives motivation to employees to becoming much efficient. The researcher gave
recommendation that a further study ought to be undertaken for comparing reward systems
and investigating its influence on an organization in relation with one that do not have a
reward system.
28
2.6 Chapter Summary
In summary, derived from the literature assessment provided above, nowadays the PM, which
can be described as a management procedure for warranting workers are channeling their job
hard work in a manner that contributes to attaining a company‟s mission, is requisite for any
business. The PMS is obviously impacting on employee presentation evidently at the same
time. Additionally, every stage within PMS influences worker performance similarly.
Establishing specific and unambiguous objectives for the company together with for the
employees could guide and facilitate work to be done resourcefully during a specific period
of time. Moreover, such goals and objectives have the potential to develop employee's
resourcefulness and assurance in their work. Progress report gives response of worker
presentation, which could reveal the difficulties during the creation and also benefits for
employees. Organization ought to resolve those difficult problems that could be faced with
that are brought forth by conducting a progress report.

The continuous communication amongst executives and workers and between the workers
themselves could add to keep informed administrative and every employee‟s objectives plus
develop the short comings in the creation procedure so that presentation value could be
enhanced and assured. On the contrary, training emphasizes on employee enablement, growth
together with qualification via understanding and abilities in order for mistakes to be rectified
plus the accomplishment chance of the company to be improved. Employee performance via
these activities could be improved in various aspects. For the employee presentation
productivity, joint effort and messaging efficiency are aspects that could be inclined
positively.

Employee self- growth is in addition vital for enhancing worker presentation and it integrates
with the administrative backing and chances too. In the final phase of PMS, performance
assessment is used for evaluating presentation in the procedure and availing the info for
payment. Administration's response is needed for common sense purpose. In the event that
workers perform well at their work, they anticipate a positive response and a pat on ones back
from their supervisors. Contrary, if the employees who performed poorly do not get any
productive feedback that encourage them to develop their performance, they might believe
that the current level is accepted and the employees might not add additional efforts to
develop their performance. Performance appraisal together with pay-for- performance can be
used as an instrument to prize employees who have performed well and inspire employees to
29
perform better during the following performance appraisal. Chapter three describes the
research methodology which was utilized in this study

30
 CHAPTER THREE
3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
The section outlines the research methodology that was adopted for this study. It details the
study design, the target populace, sampling frame together with the sample size. This section
also outlines the data collection procedures that were used to gather information and data
analysis methods to be adopted.

3.2 Research Design

As per Cooper and Schindler (2008) research design is a blueprint or framework for data
collection, measurement and analysis and a plan or procedural outline that enables a
researcher obtain answers to research questions. Krishnaswami and Satyaprasad (2010) on
the other hand define a research design as a logical and systematic design prepared for
guiding a study. Research design specifies the goals of the research, the procedure and
techniques to be implemented for attaining the research objectives.

This study utilized a descriptive case study design. A descriptive study design entails an
explanation of all elements of a population. It permits estimates of a section of a populace
that has similar attributes. Pinpointing relationships between these variables is possible, to
establish if the variables are independent or dependent variables. As per Cooper and
Schindler (2008), case study procedures are carried out once and they represent a summary of
a company at a given time. This research design was chosen because of its relevance to this
research, more so because it could answer research questions in this study which described
behavior/attitudes and as well as answer the “what”, “who”, “when” and “where” questions
(Michell & Jolley, 2007).

The study was a formal study because it employed relevant theories and literature to guide it.
It will also an ex post facto study because the variables were not manipulated but simply
measured. It was a causal study and the time frame was cross-sectional. The study was a case
study conducted in a field setting. Its unit of analysis was the firm.

31
3.3 Population and Sampling Design
3.3.1 Population
As stated by Cooper and Schindler (2008), population is described as a group of individuals
or entities where the findings of the sample are to be generalized. A target populace refers to
a group of elements from which we need to make deductions (Cooper & Schindler, 2008).
The population for the current research was the 50 employees at UN-Habitat Somalia
Programme as at 31 December 2018. The population distribution that shows classification of
employees at the programme is presented in Table 3.1.

Table 3.1: Population Distribution

Department Population
Officer in Charge 1
Project Managers 4
Technical consultants 11
Field local staff 34
Total 50
Source: UN-Habitat Somalia Programme, 2019

After defining of the target population of 50, no sample was drawn for the study since the
population size was relatively small and could not be subject to time and financial
constraints. Thus, a census of all the 50 employees working at UN-Habitat Somalia
Programme was conducted.

3.4 Data Collection

The type of data to be gathered dictates the choice of research instruments. In this study
research, primary data was used, thus a questionnaire was used as the data collection tool.
This primary information was important in articulating the actual situation and the correlation
amongst the dependent variable and independent variables. A questionnaire being both
effective and effectual means of collecting data in a short span of time was also cheap and
this justified its use.

The data collection was done by means of a questionnaire utilizing likert scale as shown in
Appendix II. The researcher personally gave out the questionnaires to the respondents and the
questionnaire consisted of close-ended queries only. Close-ended questions gathered
structured replies to permit for the commendations that were more concrete. The ranking of
the attributes was tested using the close-ended questions. These questions aided in the
lessening of similar answers consequently resulting in diverse replies that was acquired. The

32
examiner of the study personally overseen by the study to ensure that the respective
respondents received all the questionnaires. Precaution and control was attained by keeping a
record of all the questions asked and their responses.

3.5 Data Analysis

Information was validated, coded and checked for mistakes and oversights. The data was
organized, tabulated and simplified to make it easier to analyze, interpret and understand.
Data was analyzed using Statistical Packages for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 25.
Descriptive investigation of data applied measures of central tendencies and standard
deviations. Further, the associations between the study variables and testing of the
hypothesis was executed using inferential statistics, which will include correlation
analysis and linear regression.

Correlation analysis was used to show whether and how strongly the elements of PMS are
associated with employee performance. The goodness of fit among the different models was
established using the coefficient of determination (R2). The Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
was used to test the predictive power of PMS on employee performance, The simple linear
regression analysis was used to test the effect of each PMS element and employee
performance. The level of significance utilized was 0.05 and the study was conducted at the
95% confidence interval.

3.6 Research Procedures

A pilot research study is a preliminary research performed in a trial to predict and improve
upon the research design before performance of the actual study with a focus on evaluating
cost, feasibility time, effect size and adverse events (Cooper & Schindler, 2014). The
researcher selected five respondents for the pilot test who will be employees of UN-Habitat
Somalia Programme, Nairobi office. The four participants were picked from varying
departments. During the pilot test, the research instruments clarity was assessed and collected
data was analyzed and reliability tested. The pilot study results were key in improving and
strengthening data collection instruments.

Validity and reliability of the research instrument utilized in the study was tested. Validity
involves the capability of the instrument to measure the construct as claimed. Construct
validity is put into use when measuring whether operational definition of variables truly
33
mirrors the true theoretical denotation of a notion (Cooper & Schindler, 2008). Instrument
validity is the capacity that an instrument has in order to measure the constructs as purported.
In this research, the questionnaire used was established founded on comparable previous
research studies with modifications designed to address the research objectives. Content
validity was assured via the advice from expert opinion including the overseers and the
respondents in the pilot test, whose inspection and expert opinions warranted that the
questionnaire had covered each and every research variables. The researcher in addition,
further crosschecked the instrument to make the theoretical scopes appear as conceptualized.
This researcher also performed KMO and Bartlett‟s tests of the variables emanating from the
responses of the participants of the pilot test to ensure criterion validity.

As per Cooper and Schindler (2008) reliability pertains to the degree to which the findings
free from error. In addition, it means the extent that a study instrument produces consistent
findings. The Cronbach alpha was used to ascertain the reliability of the research instruments.
A stable variable produces a stable response from a similar set of questions. According to
Valencia-GO (2015), Cronbach‟s Alpha shows reliability by providing a true score of the
„base‟ or „underlying‟ construct. According to Orodho (2003), a construct is a broad concept
or topic of research. Khan (2008) opined that a high score indicates es high reliability, while
0.7 value has been established as an sufficient coefficient of reliability or value for Alpha.

Reliability shows the degree at which outcomes are error free or extent at which an
instrument of research yields results that are consistent as per Cooper and Schindler (2014).
Reliability test is normally undertaken to verify that there is internal consistency of the
instrument of data measurement. The Cronbach alpha analysis aided to determine the
research instruments‟ reliability by showing data collection instrument internal consistency.
Cronbach‟s Alpha was vital for this research since we were able to know if the instrument
will provide consistent and reliable responses in spite of questions being substituted with
comparable ones. The Cronbach‟s Alpha depicts consistency by displaying a true „base‟
score. A true score similarly known as „Alpha‟ has values ranging from 0 to 1. Cronbach‟s
Alpha is crucial in ensuring consistency and reliability of the questionnaire even if the
questions are interchanged with related ones (Valencia-GO, 2015). It very well may be
utilized additionally to communicate consistency on questions in regards to two potential
answers (dichotomous questions) and questionnaires with rating scales. Thus, this study

34
employed Cronbach Alpha for testing for reliability. Cronbach‟s Alpha was established on
the formula indicated below.

α= rk/ (I + (K-I) r)

Where;
k is the number of variables in the analysis
r is the mean of the inter-item correlation.
Table 3.2 gives a rule of the thumb that applies in most situations . Usually, reliabilities of 0.7
range is regarded as acceptable and over 0.8 is considered as good.

Table 3.2: Chronbach’s Rule on Internal Consistency

Chronbach’s Alpha Internal Consistency
α ≥ 0.9 Excellent
0.9 > α ≥ 0.8 Good
0.8 > α ≥ 0.7 Acceptable
0.7 > α ≥ 0.6 Questionable
0.6 > α ≥ 0.5 Poor
0.5 > α Unacceptable
Source: Sekaran (2003)

Confidentiality and privacy was observed by keeping all the information gathered
confidential and strictly using it for the purpose of research. The participants were informed
that the information is for academic research findings and no undesirable person is to access
the questionnaire. This research abstained from inquiring uncomfortable questions or
communicating disgust, not using intimidating statements or persuading response along
certain lines, not causing fear or anxiety during information collection.

The goal of the study was disclosed on factual truths. Respondents‟ requests for anonymity
were adhered to. The identity of the respondents was concealed and kept confidential as their
names were not be indicated in the questionnaires. The subjects were requested to participate
in the research voluntarily through a research introduction letter and informed consent sought
through filling the information consent form. The findings were disseminated based on true
findings, free of any bias. Ethical clearance and research approval was obtained from the
National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovations (NACOSTI).

35
3.7 Chapter Summary
The chapter focused on the study research design, population and sampling design, data
gathering procedures, data analysis, study quality that includes validity and reliability, plus
the ethical issues considered in this study. The researcher has outlined the methodology that
was used and the purposes for choosing the designs that were implemented in the research.
Chapter four will cover the analysis of the data collected and the interpretation of the findings
obtained.

36
 CHAPTER FOUR
4.0 DATA ANALYSIS, RESULTS, AND FINDINGS
4.1 Introduction
This chapter entails of the data analysis, interpretation and the discussions of the outcomes.
The section hence is fragmented to five sub sections, which entail the origin of study, the
response rate, the comprehensive respondents‟ characteristics, descriptive statistics,
inferential statistics, and interpretation and the arguments regarding the outcomes. Precisely
this chapter summarizes the platform for data presentations, analysis, and interpretations.

4.2 Response Rate and Background

4.2.1 Response Rate
In survey research, a response rate is percentage of the responses received compared to the
total number of target responses. The response rate is also denoted as the completion
rate or return rate and it is usually expressed percentage form. Information on the rate of
response for this research is displayed in Table 4.1. bring the findings here

Table 4.1: Study Response Rate

Response Frequency Percentage
Returned 42 84%
Unreturned 8 16%
Total 50 100%

Table 4.1 showcases that fifty questionnaires were issued to the entire staff of UN-Habitat
Somalia Programme. The study findings exhibit that out of the 50 total number of issued
questionnaires to the target respondents, only 42 responses were made with adequate
information and returned which translated to an overall 84% study response rate. This is in
line with Mugenda and Mugenda (2010), who stated that a study with a minimum 70%
response rate is sufficient for analysis and drawing conclusions.

4.2.2 Background and Respondent Characteristics

The research set out to determine the background and respondent characteristics of all the 70
respondents enlisted for the study who were employees at UN-Habitat Somalia Programme.
Highlighted are the background and respondent characteristics derived from the Part A of this
study‟s questionnaire, which included; gender, education level, age, and work experience.

37
4.2.2.1 Gender
The target respondents were requested to specify their gender. This was to determine if
gender has any bearing on the perception of the performance management systems and
employee performance. The findings are displayed in Figure 4.1. The study established that
40% of respondents were male whereas 60% were female. From the results it is clear that
majority of those that responded were female respondents. The even spread in the number of
respondents in accordance to gender is an indication of lack of bias.

Male Female

40%

60%

Figure 4.1: Gender

4.2.2.2 Education Level

The target respondents were requested to specify their education level. This was to determine
if education level has any bearing on the perception of the performance management systems
and employee performance. The findings are displayed in Figure 4.2.

Figure 4.2 shows the various educational qualifications of the respondents. The highest
proportion of the respondents that constitutes 64.3% had attained a masters degree.
Respondents that had postgraduate qualifications constituted 28.6%, while the least
proportion of the respondents that constituted 1.8% had attained bachelors degree
qualifications. The uneven spread of educational qualification maybe an indication of bias
although the respondents were randomly distributed. It is expected that employees with
higher qualifications are more likely to have more information and knowledge on
performance management systems and employee performance as they are more likely to be

38
engaged in decision-making roles. Thus, the results implied that most of the respondents were
qualified to understand the nature of the study problem.

64.30%

28.60%

7.10%

Bachelors Degree Masters Degree Doctorate Degree

Figure 4.2: Education Qualifications

4.2.2.3 Age
The target respondents were requested to specify their age. This was to determine if age has
any connection with the perception of the performance management system and employee
performance. The findings are displayed in Figure 4.3. Figure 4.3 exhibits that the highest
proportion of the respondents that constitutes 54.8% are of the ages between 31 - 40.
Respondents whose ages range from 41 to 50 constituted 28.6%, proportion of those aged
between less than 30 years was 14.3%, while the least proportion of the respondents that
constituted 2.4% were aged above 50 years. The uneven spread of age maybe an indication of
bias although the respondents were randomly distributed. Age is an indication of experience
and older employees are more likely to have more information and knowledge on
performance management systems and employee performance.

39
 54.80%

28.60%

14.30%

2.40%

Less than 31 - 40years 41 - 50years Above 50 years

30years

Figure 4.3: Age

4.2.2.4 Work Experience

The target respondents were implored to specify their work experience with UN-Habitat
Somalia Programme. This was to determine if duration of working under one employer has
any bearing on the perception of the performance management system and employee
performance. The findings are displayed in Figure 4.4. Figure 4.4 shows the various years the
respondents had worked for UN-Habitat Somalia Programme. The highest proportion of the
respondents that constitutes 47.6% had worked for UN-Habitat Somalia Programme for ten
years and below. The proportion of respondents who had worked for UN-Habitat Somalia
Programme for 11 to 20 years was 26.2% and those who worked for periods ranging from 21
to 35 and over 30 years constituted 19% and 7.1% respectively. The uneven spread of work
experience maybe an indication of bias although the respondents were randomly distributed.
Employees who have worked longer for one employer are more likely to have more
information and knowledge on the performance management system and employee
performance, as they are more likely to be engaged in decision-making roles.

40
 47.60%

26.20%

19%

7.10%

Less than 11 to 20years 21 to 30years Over 30years

10years

Figure 4.4: Work Experience

4.3 Performance Standards and Employee Performance

The respondents of the study were asked several questions in order to ascertain if
performance standards had any effect on employee performance at UN-Habitat Somalia
Programme.

4.3.1 Perfomance Standards Descriptive Statistics

The respondents were requested to rate the attributes of performance standards in UN-Habitat
Somalia Programme. Consequently, performance standards descriptive statistics were derived
and the outcomes exhibited in Table 4.2.

Table 4.2 exhibits that the attribute “UN-Habitat Somalia Programme uses each individual
employee‟s job description in setting performance standards” has a mean of 4.5 (SD =
0.77302), implying that it is applied to a very high extent in the organization. The attribute
“the organization employees are “involved in setting performance standards” has a mean of
4.6905 (SD = 0.60438), meaning that it is applied to a very high extent in the organization.
The attribute “the organization communicates clearly performance standards in the
workplace” has a mean of 4.3810 (SD = 0.62283), implying that it is applied to a very high
extent in the organization. The attribute “the organization‟s performance standards includes
long-term development initiatives which are usually based on potential and good
performance usually includes identifying key value drivers of stakeholders” has a mean of

41
4.2619 (SD = 0.85709), meaning that it is applied to a very high extent in the organization.
The attribute “the organization agrees with employees on a formal performance standards
development plan” has a mean of 4.6667 (SD = 0.57027). This implies that the attribute is
applied to a very high extent in the organization.

Further, the attribute “performance standards setting in UN-Habitat Somalia Programme

usually includes identifying key value drivers of stakeholders” has a mean of 4.4286 (SD =
0.59028), implying that it is applied to a very high extent in the organization. Finally, the
attribute “performance standards setting in the organization usually involves linking the
employees' work with the organization's goals and objectives” has a mean of 4.1707 (SD =
0.94611). The overall attributes had an average mean of 4.4428 (SD = 0.70914). This gives
an implication that UN-Habitat Somalia Programme exhibits to a very high extent
performance standards setting as one of the performance management system aspects.

Table 4.2: Performance Standards Descriptive Statistics

N Mean Std. Deviation
The organization uses each individual
employee‟s job description in setting42 4.5000 .77302
performance standards.
The organization employees are involved
42 4.6905 .60438
in setting performance standards
The organization communicate clearly
42 4.3810 .62283
performance standards in the workplace
The organization‟s performance standards
includes long-term development
initiatives which are usually based on
42 4.2619 .85709
potential and good performance usually
consist of recognizing primary value
drivers of stakeholders
The organization agrees with employees
on a formal performance standards42 4.6667 .57027
development plan
Performance standards setting in the
organization usually includes identifying42 4.4286 .59028
key value drivers of stakeholders
Performance standards setting in the
organization usually involves joining the
41 4.1707 .94611
work of employees with the objectives
and goals of the organization
Average 4.4428 .70914
Valid N (listwise) 41

42
4.3.2 Correlation between Performance Standards and Employee Performance
Correlation analysis establishes whether there exists an association among two variables. The
association falls between a perfect positive and a strong negative correlation. The study used
Pearson Correlation. This study employed a Confidence Interval of 95% and a two tail test.
The correlation test was done to ascertain the association between performance standards and
employee performance. The attributes constituting the two variables were summarized to
create a each variable. This was achieved by estimating the median value of all the attributes.
The findings indicate an insignificant association r (-0.005) = 0.974, p > 0.5. This implies a
negative insignificant correlation.

Table 4.3: Correlation between Performance Standards and Employee Performance

Emp_Perf Perf_Standards
Pearson Correlation 1 -.005
Emp_Perf Sig. (2-tailed) .974
N 42 42
Pearson Correlation -.005 1
Perf_Standards Sig. (2-tailed) .974
N 42 42

4.3.3 Linear Regression Analysis

Performance standards and employee performance were analyzed using the simple linear
regression model to determine the strength and magnitude of their relationship. The
regression analysis was assumed at the 5% significance level. The findings revealed an R2
which, is a coefficient of determination, of 0.000. This implies that performance standards
does not entirely describe the deviations in employee performance.

Table 4.4: Model Summary

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the
Estimate
1 .005a .000 -.025 .81576
a. Predictors: (Constant), Perf_Standards

An analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to test the goodness of fit of the data using
the F and significance value tests. The findings reveal an insignificant predictive power of
performance standards over employee performance F (1, 40) = 0.974, p > 0.05. This implies
that there is no statistically significant effect of performance standards on employee

43
performance at UN-Habitat Somalia Programme since the p value is greater than the critical
value of 0.05 as displayed in Table 4.5

Table 4.5: ANOVA

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Regression .001 1 .001 .001 .974b
1 Residual 26.618 40 .665
Total 26.619 41
a. Dependent Variable: Emp_Perf
b. Predictors: (Constant), Perf_Standards

4.4 Performance Measurements and Employee Performance

The respondents of the study were asked several questions in order to ascertain if
performance measurement had any effect on employee performance at UN-Habitat Somalia
Programme.

4.4.1 Performance Measurement Descriptive Statistics

The respondents were implored to rate the attributes of performance measurements in UN-
Habitat Somalia Programme. Consequently, performance measurement descriptive statistics
were derived and the outcomes displayed in Table 4.6.

Table 4.6 exhibits that the attribute “UN-Habitat Somalia Programme evaluates stakeholders‟
satisfaction through market” has a mean of 4.0476 (SD = 1.05812), implying that it is applied
to a very high extent in the organization. The attribute “the organization monitors the
proportion of stakeholders concerns settled” has a mean of 4.3171 (SD = 0.81973), meaning
that it is applied to a very high extent in the organization. The attribute “the organization
monitors the implementation of its goals and objectives” exhibited a mean of 4.8810 (SD =
0.32777), implying that it is applied to a very high extent in the organization. The attribute
“the organization is keen on the new engagements it has periodically” displayed a mean of
3.7561 (SD = 0.91598), this implies that the attribute is applied to a high extent in the
organization. The attribute “the organization provides performance incentives and/or
consequences for non-performance” had a mean of 3.7619 (SD = 0.87818), meaning that it is
applied to a high extent in the organization.

44
Further, the attribute “UN-Habitat Somalia Programme has innovative service improvement
teams or committees” showcased a mean of 4.3171 (SD = 0.68699), meaning that it is applied
to a very high extent in the organization. Finally, the attribute “the organization measures the
time taken to settle a stakeholder‟s concern” displayed a mean of 3.9500 (SD = 0.93233).
This implies that the attribute is applied to a high extent in the organization. The overall
attributes had an average mean of 4.1473 (SD = 0.80273). This gives an implication that UN-
Habitat Somalia Programme exhibits to a very high extent performance measurement as one
of the performance management system aspects.

Table 4.6: Performance Measurement Descriptive Statistics

N Mean Std. Deviation
The organization evaluate stakeholders‟
42 4.0476 1.05812
satisfaction through market
The organization monitor the proportion
41 4.3171 .81973
of stakeholders concerns settled
The organization monitors the
42 4.8810 .32777
implementation of its goals and objectives
The organization is keen on the new
41 3.7561 .91598
engagements it has periodically.
The organization provides performance
incentives and/or consequences for non- 42 3.7619 .87818
performance.
The organization has innovative service
41 4.3171 .68699
improvement teams or committees.
The organization measures the time taken
40 3.9500 .93233
to settle a stakeholder‟s concern.
Average 4.1473 .80273
Valid N (listwise) 40

4.4.2 Correlation between Performance Measurement and Employee Performance

Correlation analysis establishes whether there exists an association among two variables. The
association falls between a perfect positive and a strong negative correlation. The study used
Pearson Correlation. This study employed a Confidence Interval of 95% and a two tail test.
The correlation test was done to ascertain the association between performance measurement
and employee performance. The attributes constituting the two variables were summarized to
create a each variable. This was achieved by estimating the median value of all the attributes.
The findings indicate an insignificant association r (0.038) = 0.811, p > 0.5. This implies a
positive insignificant correlation.

45
Table 4.7: Correlation between Performance Measurement and Employee Performance
Emp_Perf Perf_Meas
Pearson Correlation 1 .038
Emp_Perf Sig. (2-tailed) .811
N 42 42
Pearson Correlation .038 1
Perf_Meas Sig. (2-tailed) .811
N 42 42

4.4.3 Linear Regression Analysis

Performance measurement and employee performance were analyzed using the simple linear
regression model to determine the strength and magnitude of their relationship. The
regression analysis was assumed at the 5% significance level. The findings revealed an R2
which, is a coefficient of determination, of 0.001. This implies that performance
measurement explains only 0.1% of the variations in employee performance.

Table 4.8: Model Summary

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the
Estimate
1 .038a .001 -.024 .81518
a. Predictors: (Constant), Perf_Meas

An analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to test the goodness of fit of the data using
the F and significance value tests. The findings reveal an insignificant predictive power of
performance measurement over employee performance F (1, 40) = 0.811, p > 0.05. This
implies that there is no statistically significant effect of performance measurement on
employee performance at UN-Habitat Somalia Programme since the p value is greater than
the critical value of 0.05 as displayed in Table 4.9

Table 4.9: ANOVA

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Regression .039 1 .039 .058 .811b
1 Residual 26.581 40 .665
Total 26.619 41
a. Dependent Variable: Emp_Perf
b. Predictors: (Constant), Perf_Meas

46
4.5 Quality Improvement Processes and Employee Performance
The respondents of the study were asked several questions in order to ascertain if qua;ity
improvement processes had any effect on employee performance at UN-Habitat Somalia
Programme.

4.4.3 Quality Improvement Processes Descriptive Statistics

The respondents were requested to rate the attributes of quality improvement processes at
UN-Habitat Somalia Programme. Consequently, quality improvement processes descriptive
statistics were derived and the outcomes displayed in Table 4.10.

Table 4.10 exhibits that the attribute “UN-Habitat Somalia Programme provides quality
services” displayed a mean of 3.6667 (SD = 1.00406), implying that it is applied to a high
extent in the organization. The attribute “there is improved responsibility of the employees in
the organization towards quality improvements” exhibited a mean of 4.6667 (SD = 0.57027)
implying that it is applied to a very high extent in the organization. The attribute “the
organization spends time and resources on quality improvement” has a mean of 3.4634 (SD =
1.16399), implying that it is applied to a high extent in the organization. The attribute
“quality improvement in the organization involves changing processes” displayed a mean of
4.0732 (SD = 0.98464). This implies that the attribute is exhibited to a very high extent in the
organization. The attribute “quality improvement in the organization involves data” has a
mean of 3.9756 (SD = 0.96145), indicating that it is applied to a high extent in the
organization. The attribute “quality improvement in the organization involves all employees”
showcased a mean of 4.0732 (SD = 0.84824), this implies that the attribute is applied to a
very high extent in the organization. The attribute “quality improvement in the organization
also considers information from clients or customers” has a mean of 4.3095 (SD=0.60438),
indicating that is applied to a very high extent in the organization.

Further, the attribute “UN-Habitat Somalia Programme provides training in quality

improvement methods” has a mean of 3.8571 (SD = 0.92582), implying that it is applied to a
high extent in the organization. The attribute “the management are receptive to new ideas for
improving agency programs, services, and outcomes” has a mean of 3.5714 (SD = 1.12927),
indicating that it is applied to a high extent in the organization. Finally, the attribute “the
organization utilizes various quality improvement methods” exhibited a mean of 3.3415 (SD
= 0.99020), which indicates that it is applied to a high extent in the organization. The overall
47
attributes had an average mean of 3.8998 (SD = 0.91823). This gives an implication that UN-
Habitat Somalia Programme exhibits to a high extent quality improvement processes as one
of the performance management system aspects.

Table 4.10: Quality Improvement Processes Descriptive Statistics

N Mean Std. Deviation
There is provision of quality services in
42 3.6667 1.00406
the organization
There is improved responsibility of the
employees in the organization towards 42 4.6667 .57027
quality improvements.
The organization spends time and
41 3.4634 1.16399
resources on quality improvement.
Quality improvement in the organization
41 4.0732 .98464
involves changing processes.
Quality improvement in the organization
41 3.9756 .96145
involves data.
Quality improvement in the organization
41 4.0732 .84824
involves all employees.
Quality improvement in the organization
also considers information from clients or 42 4.3095 .60438
customers
The organization provides training in
42 3.8571 .92582
quality improvement methods.
The management are receptive to new
ideas for improving agency programs, 42 3.5714 1.12927
services, and outcomes.
The organization utilizes various quality
41 3.3415 .99020
improvement methods
Average 3.8998 .91823
Valid N (listwise) 40

4.5.2 Correlation between Quality Improvement Processes and Employee Performance

Correlation analysis establishes whether there exists an association among two variables. The
association falls between a perfect positive and a strong negative correlation. The study used
Pearson Correlation. This study employed a Confidence Interval of 95% and a two tail test.
The correlation test was done to ascertain the association between quality improvement
processes and employee performance. The attributes constituting the two variables were
summarized to create a each variable. This was achieved by estimating the median value of
all the attributes. The findings indicate an insignificant association r (0.104) = 0.512, p > 0.5.
This implies a positive insignificant correlation.

48
Table 4.11: Correlation between Quality Improvement Processes and Employee Performance
Emp_Perf Qual_Imp_Proc
Pearson Correlation 1 .104
Emp_Perf Sig. (2-tailed) .512
N 42 42
Pearson Correlation .104 1
Qual_Imp_Proc Sig. (2-tailed) .512
N 42 42

4.5.3 Linear Regression Analysis

Quality improvement processes and employee performance were analyzed using the simple
linear regression model to determine the strength and magnitude of their relationship. The
regression analysis was assumed at the 5% significance level. The findings revealed an R2
which, is a coefficient of determination, of 0.011. This implies that performance
measurement explains only 1.1% of the variations in employee performance.

Table 4.12: Model Summary

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the
Estimate
1 .104a .011 -.014 .81134
a. Predictors: (Constant), Qual_Imp_Proc

An analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to test the goodness of fit of the data using
the F and significance value tests. The findings reveal an insignificant predictive power of
quality improvement processes over employee performance F (1, 40) = 0.512, p > 0.05. This
implies that there is no statistically significant effect of quality improvement processes on
employee performance at UN-Habitat Somalia Programme since the p value is greater than
the critical value of 0.05 as displayed in Table 4.13

Table 4.13: ANOVA

Model Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.
Regression .288 1 .288 .438 .512b
1 Residual 26.331 40 .658
Total 26.619 41
a. Dependent Variable: Emp_Perf
b. Predictors: (Constant), Qual_Imp_Proc

49
4.6 Progress Reporting and Employee Performance
The respondents of the study were asked several questions in order to ascertain if progress
reporting had any effect on employee performance at UN-Habitat Somalia Programme.

4.6.1 Progress Reporting

The respondents were implored to rate the attributes of progress reporting at UN-Habitat
Somalia Programme. Consequently, progress reporting descriptive statistics were derived and
the outcomes exhibited in Table 4.14.

Table 4.14 displays that the attribute “UN-Habitat Somalia Programme management gives
employees fair feedback” displayed a mean of 3.6190 (SD = 1.16770), indicating that it is
applied to a high extent in the organization. The attribute “the management discusses
regularly to employees about their job performance” indicated a mean of 3.6905 (SD =
1.02382), implying that it is applied to a high extent in the organization. The attribute “the
organization seems more engaged in providing positive feedback for good performers than
criticizing the poor ones” highlighted a mean of 3.7143 (SD = 0.99476), this indicated that it
is applied to a high extent in the organization. The attribute “the feedback received by
employees agrees with what they have actually achieved” has a mean of 3.8333 (SD =
0.96061), implying that it is applied to a high extent in the organization. The attribute “the
feedback received by employees on job performance is highly relevant” has a mean of 3.8333
(SD = 0.85302). This implies that the attribute is applied to a high extent in the organization.
The attribute “employees are satisfied with the way the organization provides feedback”,
displays a mean of 4.4524 (SD = 0.67000), indicating that it is applied to a very high extent
in the organization. The attribute “the current performance feedback in the organization is fair
and unbiased” has a mean of 3.2857 (SD = 1.15369), implying that it is applied to a high
extent in the organization.

Further, the attribute “if the employees of UN-Habitat Somalia Programme do not agree with
progress reporting score, there is appeal process” displays a mean of 3.5952 (SD = 0.96423),
indicating that it is applied to a high extent in the organization. The attribute “progress
reporting is used as a decision making tool for the increasing employees performance” has a
mean of 3.6429 (SD = 0.90585), implying that it is applied to a high extent in the
organization. Finally, the attribute “progress reporting makes employees in the organization
to work harder than expected” exhibited a mean of 3.3095 (SD = 1.02382). This implies that
50
the attribute is applied to a high extent in the organization. The overall attributes had an
average mean of 3.6976 (SD = 0.97175). This gives an implication that UN-Habitat Somalia
Programme exhibits to a high extent progress reporting as one of the performance
management system aspects.

Table 4.14: Progress Reporting Descriptive Statistics

N Mean Std. Deviation
The management gives employees fair
42 3.6190 1.16770
feedback.
The management discusses regularly to
42 3.6905 1.02382
employees about their job performance.
The organization seems more engaged in
providing positive feedback for good42 3.7143 .99476
performers than criticizing the poor ones.
The feedback received by employees
agrees with what they have actually42 3.8333 .96061
achieved.
The feedback received by employees on
42 3.8333 .85302
job performance is highly relevant.
Employees are satisfied with the way the
42 4.4524 .67000
organization provides feedback
The current performance feedback in the
42 3.2857 1.15369
organization is fair and unbiased.
If the employees do not agree with
progress reporting score, there is appeal42 3.5952 .96423
process
Progress reporting is used as a decision
making tool for the increasing employees 42 3.6429 .90585
performance.
Progress reporting makes employees in
the organization to work harder than42 3.3095 1.02382
expected.
Average 3.6976 .97175
Valid N (listwise) 42

4.6.2 Correlation between Progress Reporting and Employee Performance

Correlation analysis establishes whether there exists an association among two variables. The
association falls between a perfect positive and a strong negative correlation. The study used
Pearson Correlation. This study employed a Confidence Interval of 95% and a two tail test.
The correlation test was done to ascertain the association between quality improvement
processes and employee performance. The attributes constituting the two variables were
summarized to create a each variable. This was achieved by estimating the median value of
all the attributes. The findings indicate an insignificant association r (0.517) = 0.000, p < 0.5.
This implies a positive significant correlation.

51
Table 4.15: Correlation between Progress Reporting and Employee Performance
Emp_Perf Prog_Rep
Pearson Correlation 1 .517**
Emp_Perf Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 42 42
Pearson Correlation .517** 1
Prog_Rep Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 42 42
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

4.5.3 Linear Regression Analysis

Progress reporting and employee performance were analyzed using the simple linear
regression model to determine the strength and magnitude of their relationship. The
regression analysis was assumed at the 5% significance level. The findings revealed an R2
which, is a coefficient of determination, of 0.267. This implies that performance
measurement explains 26.7% of the variations in employee performance.

Table 4.16: Model Summary

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the
Estimate
1 .517a .267 .249 .69829
a. Predictors: (Constant), Prog_Rep

An analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to test the goodness of fit of the data using
the F and significance value tests. The findings reveal an significant predictive power of
progress reporting over employee performance F (1, 40) = 0.000, p < 0.05. This implies that
there is a statistically significant effect of progress reporting on employee performance at
UN-Habitat Somalia Programme since the p value is less than the critical value of 0.05 as
displayed in Table 4.17

Table 4.17: ANOVA

Model Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.
Regression 7.115 1 7.115 14.591 .000b
1 Residual 19.504 40 .488
Total 26.619 41
a. Dependent Variable: Emp_Perf
b. Predictors: (Constant), Prog_Rep

52
Consequently, a model coefficients table was obtained in order to ascertain the magnitude
and direction of the relationship between progress reporting and employee performance.
Table 4,18 displays a positive significant relationship between progress reporting and
employee performance B (0.474), t (3.820) = 0.000 < 0.05. The coefficient implies that when
progress reporting increases by 1 unit, employee performance increases by 0.474 units.

Table 4.18: Model Coefficients

Model Unstandardized Standardized t Sig.
Coefficients Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta
(Constant) 1.959 .478 4.100 .000
1
Prog_Rep .474 .124 .517 3.820 .000
a. Dependent Variable: Emp_Perf

4.7 Chapter Summary

This chapter expounds the response rate of the study together with the study background and
demographic characteristics. The chapter also displays the study findings systematically
guided by the research objectives. There is further interpretation of the study findings. .
Chapter five presents the discussion and conclusion of study findings and the
recommendations.

53
 CHAPTER FIVE
5.0 DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Introduction
This section presents the summary of the study‟s findings, discussions of the study findings,
offered conclusions, and recommendations on the effect of the performance management
system on employee performance at UN-Habitat Somalia Programme. Additionally, further
research suggestions are also outlined.

5.2 Summary
This study purposed to establish how performance standards influence performance at UN-
Habitat Somalia Programme. The study specifically aimed at; examining the magnitude to
which performance measurement impacts employee performance at UN-Habitat Somalia
Programme, establishing how quality improvement processes affect employee performance at
UN-Habitat Somalia Programme, and to find out how progress reporting influences employee
performance at UN-Habitat Somalia Programme. Thus, the data analysis, presentation,
interpretation, and discussion of findings of the study were based on the aforementioned
specific objectives. The study employed the use of descriptive, correlation, and regression
analysis.

5.2.1 Effect of Performance Standards on Employee Performance

Descriptive statistics indicate that performance standards are implemented to a very high
extent at UN-Habitat Somalia Programme. The correlation analysis findings showcased that
performance standards setting do not have a significant association with employee
performance. The regression analysis also exhibited that performance standards do not have a
significant effect on employee performance.

5.2.2 Effect of Performance Measurement on Employee Performance

Descriptive statistics indicate that performance measurement is exhibited to a very high
extent at UN-Habitat Somalia Programme. The correlation analysis findings showcased that
performance measurement does not have a significant association with employee
performance. The regression analysis also exhibited that performance measurement does not
have a significant effect on employee performance.

54
5.2.3 Effect of Quality Improvement Processes on Employee Performance
Descriptive statistics indicate that quality improvement processes is exhibited to a high extent
at UN-Habitat Somalia Programme. The correlation analysis findings showcased that quality
improvement processes do not have a significant association with employee performance.
The regression analysis also exhibited that quality improvement processes do not have a
significant effect on employee performance.

5.2.4 Effect of Progress Reporting on Employee Performance

Descriptive statistics indicate that progress reporting is implemented to a high extent at UN-
Habitat Somalia Programme. The correlation analysis findings showcased that progress
reporting exhibits a positive significant association with employee performance r (0.517) =
0.000, p < 0.5. The regression analysis also exhibited that progress reporting has a significant
influence on employee performance B (0.474), t (3.820) = 0.000 < 0.05. The coefficient
obtained, indicates that a unit increase in progress reporting would translate to an increment
in 0.474 units of employee performance.

5.3 Discussion of Findings

5.3.1 Effect of Performance Standards on Employee Performance
The study established that performance standards setting does not have neither a significant
association nor a significant effect on employee performance. As per Rogers and Hunter
(1991), goal setting is the important facet for a company, this goes against the current study
findings. The study further opined that productivity gains will associate with the level of top
administration backing for and employees' involvement in the process of setting objectives
and that this process is motivational as it gives the employee the sensation of being involved
and provides a sense of ownership.

The study findings are not in tandem with study findings by the Department of Health UK,
(2016) In England that the National Health Services made up of over 8,300 separate
organizations and hired staff numbering over 1.3 million utilizes Public Service Agreements,
which are incorporated into performance based agreements. It has been rated as the fairest
and most patient centered health system in the world having the highest global customer
satisfaction levels. It is also not congruen tto a survey was conducted by the Performance
Management Institute of Australia of Australian employees‟ concerning their attitudes
towards PMS, the survey sampled 450 employees. The survey established that slightly above
55
50 percent of the employees received performance reviews once a year and the rest were not
reviewed. The employees were not involved in target setting, consequently resulting in
dissatisfaction during reviews (Nankervis, 2006).

The study is not parallel to the study conducted by Armstrong and Baron (2004), that
established that goals ought to be well-defined and decided on because they relay to the over-
all performance of the work. In addition, objectives outline presentation areas and all the
facets of the job that contribute to attaining its total resolve. Then, every performance area is
for a goal. It is also not congruent to Rogers and Hunter‟s (1991) study that stated that a
critical facet for a company is goal setting. The authors further opined that efficiency benefits
will associate with the level of top level administration backing for and employees'
involvement in the procedure of establishing goals. This process is encouraging as it provides
the employee the sensation of being included and provides a sense of possession. A section of
the scheduling phase that contains the contract on an official growth plan for the workers.

The study is not in tandem with Schneier et al. (1987) who opined that setting performance
standards is the initial step in the presentation administration system process cycle plus avails
the ground work for an operative procedure. Setting performance standards is an ongoing
procedure in performance managing and it is to implemented carefully. The PM assists in
boosting assurance and thoughtfulness by associating the worker's job with the aim and goals
of the company. It normally entails classifying key value drivers of shareholders like
stockholders, customers and staff of the company.

The findings are against those Markus (2004) that performance standards setting is the first
most important component of the performance management process since it is is the basis of
performance appraisals. It is during this time that employees decide collectively on the targets
and identify the key performance areas that can be attained over a period of one year. This is
usually within the performance budget and is completed upon a common agreement amongst
the employee and the reporting officer. The performance agreements put in perspective
expectations while at the same time creates a common point of reference for senior
management, staff, and their supervisors in the entire PMS process. The performance
agreements clearly state the standards of performance, required of public officials, ministries,
state owned or public agencies to achieve within a specific time period (Hope, 2011).

56
Olusanya et. al (2012) agrees that effective planning in PMS positively contributes to
improved employee productivity in an institution.

The study findings are not in tandem with Gibson et al (2005) and Nassazi (2013) studies
which stated that performance standards setting was associated with increased employee
performance in companies according to a study by stated that performance standards allow
employees to get engaged in planning for the company, and therefore participates by having
an active role in the entire process, which translates to increased productivity.

5.3.2 Effect of Performance Measurement on Employee Performance

The study established that performance measurement does not have neither a significant
association nor a significant impact on performance of employee. The current study findings
goes against a study by Jackson and Schuller (2012), which stated that performance
measurement perform an important role in employee production, it allows a chance for
response on the previous performance alongside objectives set previously in addition to
identifying any performance gap. The study further stated that for managers and
administrators, performance management according to it is the procedure that recognises the
present performance level, deliberate strengths and weaknesses and future opportunities.

Brown and Benson (2013) established that performance measurement facilitates a discussion
that assists workers to comprehend how they are performing at work, receive training and
feedback; make clear expectations regarding career development. Performance measurement
does an excellent task of making employees aware of the aims and outcomes of the procedure
of performance. As per Mone and London (2010), a good number of employees believe that
the measurement stimulates their performance and is done on a fair basis. In addition, there is
a belief that administrators and supervisors are managing relatively well the practise of
measurement.

As per Caroll and Schneier (2002), one of the most significant situations for improving
employee efficiency is to facilitate employees with a clear performance based measurement
and has a workflow for tracking the measurement. Immediate remedial steps are taken when
a mistake is detected hence causes least possible loss to an organization. It is to be assessed
with regards to the extent to which the employee attains the presentation conditions
established by the administration in satisfying the company‟s objectives. Baruch (2006) also
57
opined that giving a worker feedback is generally acknowledged as a vital undertaking that
could inspire self-growth and worker efficiency that are influential for the accomplishment of
the entire company. Consequently, the rate of response is essential and it can affect employee
forthcoming productivity (Denisi, 2006). This is congruent to the current study findings.

According to Mone and London (2010), the triumph of the measurement is dependable on its
reception of the PM process. Feedback responses are commonly totally unlike. The
contentment with the presentation measurement is a sign of the level to which junior staff
are contented with the procedure together with the feedback established. It represents as a
report of precision and impartial assessments of performance. The result being contented
employees after the presentation measurement will progress more working associations with
their managers together with fellow employees as per Jackson and Schuller (2012).
Consequently, these measurements could bring about negative responses from workers
According to Dechey (2010), if viewed biased, the response can bring about behavioural
modifications like nonattendance, lack of collaboration, absence of focus on urgencies,
harmful rivalry, and employee turnover. This is similar to the current study findings.

As per Caroll and Schneier (2002), one of the most significant situations for improving
employee efficiency is to facilitate employees with a clear performance based measurement
and has a workflow for tracking the measurement. Immediate remedial steps are taken when
a mistake is detected hence causes least possible loss to an organization. It is to be assessed
with regards to the extent to which the employee attains the presentation conditions
established by the administration in satisfying the company‟s objectives. Baruch (2006)
opined that giving a worker feedback is generally acknowledged as a vital undertaking that
could inspire self-growth and worker efficiency that are influential for the accomplishment of
the entire company. Consequently, the rate of response is essential and it can affect employee
forthcoming productivity (Denisi, 2006).

Caroll and Schneier (2002) further stated that there are four generic metrics of employee
performance measurement. They are; quantity quality, efficiency and organization skills.
Different weights are assigned to the four metrics. Quality and efficacy are weighted more
heavily for majority of employees. The metrics are handy when setting goal. The quantity
metric is about employee's output. The quality metric is diverse. In the production sector, it
may entail making a defect free product without any errors while in the service sector it may
58
involve enhancing the customer experience. The efficiency metric delves the resources
required needed to produce a specified output. For instance, a worker who does a total
number of sales calls but then again translates an insignificant total of those connections to
clients could require change of tact and focus mostly on the substance and depth of those
contacts. According to Caroll and Schneier (2002), the organizational skill metric measures a
worker's ability to; make and observe to programs plus targets, set together with meet
objectives, oversee arrangements, partake in timely choices, delegate when required, solve
problems, and manage projects and execute business strategies. This is not congruent to the
current study findings.

5.3.3 Effect of Quality Improvement Processes on Employee Performance

The study established that quality improvement processes do not have neither a significant
association nor a significant effect on employee performance. According to Rosenberg
(1996), managers regard quality improvement as a hopeful way of coping with stagnating
productivity. Workers Union representatives view it as a way of cultivating working
environment and production and as a way of qualifying for greater payment. Regime agencies
have been drawn to quality improvement as a method of increasing productivity and
lessening inflation, and enquiring organizational and diminishing labor disagreements.
Wentland (2005) further stated that the presence of quality cycles demand that there is
continuous improvement. The studies are not in agreement with the current study findings.

Managers regard quality improvement as a hopeful way of coping with stagnating

productivity. Workers Union representatives view it as a way of cultivating working
environment and production and as a way of qualifying for greater payment. Regime agencies
have been drawn to quality improvement as a method of increasing productivity and
lessening inflation, and enquiring organizational and diminishing labor disagreements
(Rosenberg, 1996). Thiis study is not congruent to the current study findings.

Bergeron (2003), asserts that part of the work in the developing a loyal, dedicated work force
is to establish recognition and reward systems to encourage worker participation in
initiatives. Even those primarily motivated by money can be encouraged to provide more
value to the company by formally recognizing their contribution to the bottom line. There are
various kinds for quality development according to Lion (2001). They include cover product,
process and people based improvement. As per Bergeron (2003), proponents of every method
59
have sought to develop and implement them to enterprise types of initially targeted. For
example, six-sigma is intended for industrial but has spilled over to service enterprise. Ever
approach has encounter success and failures. Examples of similar differentiators amongst
success and failures are commitment, information and know-how to direct progress, range of
change and implementation to company‟s culture. According to Rosenberg (1996), the
quality cycles do not function well in each firm and are not opted for by a few administrators.
This study is not in agreement with the current study findings.

Execution of any improvements take time to gain approval and even out as acknowledged
practice development ought to allow pauses amid executing new changes in order for the
change to be stabilized and evaluated as an actual improvement before the subsequent
improvement is made. This is referred to as continual improve rather than continuous
improvement (Lion, 2001). As per Rosenberg (1996), improvements that modify culture take
a longer period as they have to overcome bigger resistance to change. It is effective and
efficient to work within the present cultural boundaries‟ and establish small improvements
(that is Kaizen) rather than undertaking major transformational variations. Kaizen is used in
Japan and provides a critical purpose for the creation of the Japanese industrial and fiscal
forte. Contrary, transformational modification works best when a business experiences a
catastrophe and wants to make key changes for the purpose of its survival. Rosenberg (1996)
spearheaded a transformational change at Nissan Motor Company that was in a fiscal and
operational predicament. When choosing the quality improvement, well-structured quality
development programs consider all these aspects. This is not parallel to the current study
findings.

All managerial roles achieve the bare minimum if leaders do not know how to lead
employees and to comprehend the human aspect in their operations in such a manner as to
provide outcomes (Koontz & Weihrich, 2004). As per Armstrong (2009), human resource
administration is a company‟s most cherished resources and the individuals working in the
company who solely and jointly participate in the attainment of the organization‟s objectives.
In this regard, human resource specialists are concerned about the individuals‟ contribution
and the terms that improve organizational performance. Managers and individual employees
alike adopt this entails ensuring that performance management process is an accepted and
rewarding part of the business. Individual performance should be in the line with agreed

60
framework of planned objectives, targets and standards. This finding is not in tandem with
current study findings.

5.3.4 Effect of Progress Reporting on Employee Performance

The study revealed that there was a positive significant association and relationship between
progress reporting and employee performance. This is according to Koontz & Weihrich
(2004), the major importance of performance appraisal is that it is a contributor‟s process,
which reveals normal management practices of directing, monitoring and measuring
performance and ultimately taking action.

According to the view of Fletcher (2011), improving communication in a company is vital for
workers to be conscious of goals and partake to the forthcoming growth. Marion (1998)
further reiterated Organization ought to in addition pay attention on communication amongst
employees and amongst staffs and managers for them to develop the response, keep informed
and deliberate original goals. It is imperative for administrators to cultivate a wholly
assimilated plan that permits the numerous kind of communication to support to the
achievement of a company‟s vision and goals. Moreover, Welch and Jackson (2007) stated
that constant communication or switching info amongst an organization's managers and the
organization‟s interior shareholders, ought to be made in such a way as to encourage
commitment and aware of its dynamic environs together with understanding of its evolving
objectives. This concurs with the current study findings.

An investigation by Ashford and Cummings (1983) established that response has a positive
influence on the presentation of persons and teams, particularly via role explanation,
enhanced self- efficiency, the establishing of conduct incentive eventualities and improved
self-regulatory regulator procedures. Similarly, Armstrong and Baron (2004) opined that
definite performance could be associated to the wanted performance. Hence, the result is
assessed and a progress strategy is established grounded on this shortcomings and this
relative method similarly offers a response mechanism to employees.

Additionally, Bevan and Thompson (1991) opined that in progress reporting; tutoring and
teaching are essential tools in education and growth. Training entails developing worker‟s
abilities and understanding so as to develop their work presentation and assist them to attain
their organizational goals. Administrators ought to recognize and execute training and other
61
activities essential to progress employee presentation. Similarly, Black and Lynch (1996)
suggested that the teaching courses, which are presented by businesses, ought to be planned
via taking into account the current and future wants of workers and enable the education of
the expertise. An excellent training program ought to enhance the capacity and value of a
company‟s output; increase the chances of organizational accomplishment; lessening
company‟s expenses and expenses. In addition, coaching is more and more being
acknowledged as a significant duty of bosses, and could be a vital part in the working time
span of an employee. Moreover, Cunneen (2006) stated that that training should come
naturally, and additionally, it might take place in the time when conferences are reviewed or
ought to be done all through the year since it could be required to improve employee skills.
This is congruent to the current study findings

Baron (2004) stated that metrics for progress reporting include training programs and
achievement of individual goals. After gauging participation in training programs, the
outcomes of those training programs are also considered and individual work goals are
measured during performance appraisals. The management should meet with the employees
in a casual, one-on-one setting perhaps on a quarterly basis to set the employees individual
goals. This is expounds the current study findings.

Performance management promotes employee‟s identity and a sense of belonging delegating

responsibility providing feedback recognizing and valuing employee success. For a
performance management process to be considered successfully then the feedback has to
prompt and constructive and this should be in line with the set targets. When prompt and
constructive feedback is shared to employees concerning their progress towards the set goals,
the employee productivity will surely improve. Employees need to be informed promptly if
they are achieving their targets. Davis (2011) states that any performance feedback system
must furnish employees promptly to ensure they are satisfied with their process.

According to Obwaya (2010) feedback is able to rectify the mistakes and ensure that
employees continue being focused on what is needed of them. The investigation additionally
expressed that public service culture repressed free communication amongst the employees
and managers, and the bureaucratic procedures were a hindrance to communication, making
it hard to offer feedback to staff instantly as required. Feedback is a significant segment of
performance appraisal. Mostly positive feedback is usually accepted easily but mostly there is
62
resistance in accepting negative feedback unless it is objective based on a source that is
trusted and brought up in a way that is skillful (DeVoe and Iyengar, 2004). According to
Mathauer and Imhoff (2006), health care workers stated that they rarely receive any personal
feedback from their supervisors. The feedback they receive concentrates on few shortcomings
or technical aspects of service provision. It does not look at the perspective of the health
worker as a person. They also cited that personal feedback is more common in faith based
organizations and private facilities than in public facilities.

Armstrong and Baron (2004), indicated that tangible performance might possibly be
compared to the desired perforce, henceforth the result is assessed and strategy for expansion
is formulated founding it on the limitations. In this approach, a mechanism for providing
employees with feedback is also provided. Furthermore, in this stage, as a principal toll in
learning and development, both coaching and training are used. Coaching is developing and
individual‟s energy and understanding in order to improve the job performance of an
employee and assist them in attainment of the objectives of an organization. It is the
responsibility of managers to identify and ensuring there is training as well as other efforts
that are necessary for improvement of an individual performance (Bevan & Thompson,
2001).

HR managers seek to design reward structures based on progress reports that enables the
strategic goals of an organization and those of an individual employee. For any organization,
reward systems are important (Maund, 2001). Rewards includes the systems, practices and
programs which have the ability to influence actions of an individual. The idea of a reward
system is offering a systematic way of carrying out positive consequences. The most
significant purpose is giving positive impacts for the effort towards the desired performance
(Wilson, 2003). These rewards can consist of awards and other ways of recognition for
example reassignments, promotion and other non-financial bonuses such as paid trips or even
a simple thank-you. This motivates the employees in taking positive actions that will result in
them being rewarded. An organization ought to design its reward mechanism well so as to
nurture a good behavior that can result to improved performance (Torrington & Hall, 2006).
These studies are not in tandem with current study findings.

63
5.4 Conclusions
5.4.1 Effect of Performance Standards on Employee Performance
The study concluded that performance standards setting does not have neither a significant
association nor a significant effect on employee performance. This is despite the fact most of
the respondents opined that the UN-Habitat Somalia Programme uses each individual
employee‟s job description in setting performance standards and employees are involved in
setting performance standards. This is also despite Performance standards setting in UN-
Habitat Somalia usually involving connecting work of the employees with the goals and
objectives of the organization.

5.4.2 Effect of Performance Measurement on Employee Performance

The study concluded that performance measurement does not have neither a significant
association nor a significant effect on employee performance. This is regardless of majority
of the respondents stating that UN-Habitat Somalia monitoring the implementation of its
goals and objectives and providing performance incentives and/or consequences for non-
performance.

5.4.3 Effect of Quality Improvement Processes on Employee Performance

The study concluded that quality improvement processes do not have neither a significant
association nor a significant effect on employee performance. This is regardless of the fact
that most of the respondents opined that there is provision of quality services in UN-Habitat
Somalia, it spending time and resources on quality improvement, and quality improvement in
the organization involves data.

5.4.4 Effect of Progress Reporting on Employee Performance

The study came to a conclusion of existence of a positive significant association and
relationship between progress reporting and employee performance. This can be attributed by
most of the employees at UN-Habitat Somalia agreeing that management gives employees
fair feedback, regularly discussing the job performance of employees, employees are satisfied
with the way UN-Habitat Somalia provides feedback with the feedback being fair and
unbiased. This is also despite the fact that less than half of the respondents stating that if the
employees at UN-Habitat Somalia do not agree with progress reporting score, there is appeal
process and that Progress reporting is applied a way of making decision for improving the
performance of employees.
64
5.5 Recommendations
The recommendations of the study were conducted in accordance to the study objectives, the
recommendations are enumerated in this section. The study established that the performance
management system has a significant impact on employee performance, thus it can
significantly predict employee performance. Therefore, the study recommends to the policy
makers at Institute of Human Resources, other bodies, human resource practitioners, and
consultants to implement a performance management system so as to augment lean employee
performance.

5.5.1 Effect of Performance Standards on Employee Performance

The study established that performance standards setting does not have neither a significant
association nor a significant impact on the performance of employees. Thus, the study
recommends that the stakeholders in the human resource sector should not to implement
performance standards in isolation, but rather implement all the aspects of a performance
management system in so as to enhance the performance of employee.

5.5.2 Effect of Performance Measurement on Employee Performance

The study established that performance standards measurement does not have neither a
significant association nor a significant impact on the performance of employees. Thus, the
study recommends that the stakeholders in the human resource sector should not to
implement performance measurement in isolation, but rather implement all the aspects of a
performance management system in order improve the performance of employee..

5.5.3 Effect of Quality Improvement Processes on Employee Performance

The study established that quality improvement processes do not have neither a significant
association nor a significant impact on the performance of employees. Thus, the study
recommends that the stakeholders in the human resource sector should not to implement
quality improvement processes in isolation, but rather implement all the aspects of a
performance management system in order to improve the performance of employee..

5.5.4 Effect of Progress Reporting on Employee Performance

The study established that progress reporting has both a significant association and a
significant effect on employee performance. Thus, the study recommends that the
65
stakeholders in the human resource sector could implement progress reporting in isolation so
as to augment employee performance. Thus, they can; gives employees fair feedback,
discusses regularly about employees performance, engage in availing positive feedback for
good performers rather than condemning the poor ones, and give feedback to employees that
agrees with what they have in reality attained. Additionally, they can also; provide relevant
feedback on job performance, ensure employees are satisfied with the way the organization
provides feedback that is fair and unbiased, establish an appeal process for employees not
satisfied with the progress reporting process, and utilize progress reporting as a decision
making tool increasing employees performance. The study also recommends that the
stakeholders in the human resource sector should implement all the aspects of a performance
management system in order to further significant impact on the performance of employees

5.6 Recommendations for Further Study

Exploring the influence of the performance management system on lean production
implementation is of great importance the policy makers at Institute of Human Resources,
other bodies, human resource practitioners, and consultants. However, the current study was
carried out in UN-Habitat Somalia, and the same study could be carried out across other
institutions in the non-governmental organizations sector and across other sectors to establish
if the study findings will hold. The study was only carried out in Kenya, further studies can
be conducted out of Kenyan context, they can be conducted in the African or global
jurisdictions to establish whether the study findings would hold.

The study only considered the performance management system aspects of performance
measurement, performance standards, progress reporting, and quality improvement processes
a study can be conducted to ascertain it there are other performance management system
aspects. Further studies can be conducted to ascertain if there are factors that moderating the
relationship between performance management systems and employee performance. Several
attributes were determined in the study as constituting the performance management aspects
and employee performance; further studies can be conducted to ascertain if other attributes
can represent them.

This study only used primary data source, a subsequent research should be undertaken
applying secondary data can be used for the various health facilities. This can either
complement or criticize the finding of this study. Multiple linear regression and correlation
66
analysis were applied in the study; Other analysis technique for example cluster analysis,
discriminant analysis, granger causality and factors should be incorporated in the subsequent
research.

67
 REFERENCES
Al-Ahmadi, (2009). Factors affecting performance. Riyadh Region, Saudi Arabia.

Ali, R. & Ahmad, M. S. (2008). The impact of reward and recognition programs on
employee's motivation and satisfaction: A co relational study. International Review of
Business Research Papers, 5.

Aliya, I., & Maiya, I. (2015). Factors affecting the employee‟s performance: A case study of
banking sector in Pakistan. European Journal of Business and Social Sciences, 4(8),
309-318

Argyris, C., & Schon, K. (2016). Understanding Organizational Behaviour. London, UK:
Tavistock Publications.

Armstrong, (2009). Employee productivity. Prentice Hall, London.

Armstrong, M. & Baron, A. (2004). Managing performance: Performance management

action. London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.

Armstrong, M. & Baron, A. (2004). Out of the box. People Management, 23 (1), 38–41.

Armstrong, M. (2009). A handbook of personnel Management Practice. London, UK: Kogan

Page.

Armstrong, M. (2009). Armstrong’s handbook of performance management an evidence

based guide to delivering high performance (4th ed.). London; Philadelphia.

Armstrong, M., & Baron, N., (2007). Psychology applied to work (8th ed). Belmont, CA:
Thomson Wadsworth.

Armstrong, M., (2012). Armstrong's handbook of reward management practice. London:

Kogan Page.

Arvey, R. D., & Murphy, K. R. (1998). Performance evaluation in work settings. Annual
Review of Psychology (49), 141-168.

Ashford, S. J., & Cummings, L. L., (1983). Feedback as an individual resource: personnel
strategies of creating information. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance
(32), 370-98.

Ball, C., Gortner, H. & Nichols, K. (2007). Organization theory: A public and nonprofit
perspective. Wadsworth/Thomson Learning, Belmont, CA.

Baruch, Y., (2006). Self performance appraisal vs direct-management appraisal: A case of

congruence. Journal of Psychology 2 (10), 7-14.

Bergeron, B. (2003). Essentials of knowledge management. John Wiley and sons, USA.

Berry, D. (2003). Creating a performance culture. Thousand Oaks: CA Sage.

68
Bevan, S. & Thompson, M. (2001). Performance management at the crossroads. Personnel
Management.

Bevan, S., & Thompson, M., (1991). Performance management at the crossroads. Personnel

Black, S. E., & Lynch, L. M., (1996). Association human-capital investments and
productivity. The American Economic Review, 86, 263-267.

Boipono, M., Goitseone, T., & Mogadime, R., (2015). Implementation of performance
management system (PMS) in schools: Success factors. International Journal of
Research in Applied, Natural and Social Sciences (IMPACT: IJRANSS). 2(5): 189-
194.

Broady-Preston, C. & Steel, M. (2012). Can performance appraisals motivate employees to

improve performance? A Mexican study. The International Journal of Human
Resource Management 1 (22), 1-22.

Brown, M., & Benson, J., (2013). Rated to exhaustion? Reactions to performance appraisal
processes. Industrial Relations Journal 34(1), 67-81.

Carroll, S. J., & Schneier, C. E., (2002). Performance appraisal and review systems: The
identification, measurement and development of performance in organizations.
Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.

Caruth, C. & Humphreys, D. (2008). Perfect phrases for performance reviews: hundreds of
ready-to-use phrases that describe your employees’ performance (from unacceptable
to outstanding). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Cooper, C. R., & Schindler, P. S. (2008). Business research methods (10th ed.). Boston:
correction

Cronbach, L. J., (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika,
16, 297-334.

Cronin Jr, J., & Taylor, S. (1994). SERVPERF versus SERVQUAL: Reconciling
performance-based and perceptions-minus-expectations measurement of service
quality. Journal of Marketing, 58: 125-131.

Cunneen, P., (2006). How to improve performance management. People Management, 12

(1), 42-43.

Dechev, Z. (2010). Effective performance appraisal- a study into the relation between
employer satisfaction and optimizing business results. Faculty of Economics,
Business Department.

Dechev, Z., (2010). Effective performance appraisal: A study into the relation between
employer satisfaction and optimizing business results. A Master‟s Thesis Submitted to
Erasmus University Rotterd at the Faculty of Economics of Business Department of
Economics.

69
Denisi, (2006). The social context of performance appraisal: A review and framework. New
York, NY: Longman Publishers

Department of Health UK, (2016). The government‟s mandate to NHS England 2016-2017.
https //www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-of-health.

Derven, M. (2010). The paradox of performance appraisal. Personnel Journal, 69(2): 12-17.

Dessler, G., 2000. Human Resource Management. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

DeVoe, S. E. & Iyengar, S. S. ( 2004). Managers‟ theories of subordinates: A cross-cultural

examination of manager perceptions of motivation and appraisal of performance.
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 93: 47-61.

Dieleman, M., Toonen J., Toure, H. & Martineau, T. (2006). The match between motivation
and performance management of health sector workers in Mali.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1402315/

Duberg, C., &Mollen, M. (2010). Reward systems within the health and geriatric care sector.
Accounting and Controlling Bachelors Thesis, School of Business, Economics, and
Law, University of Gothenberg.

Erdogan, B. (2012). Antecedents and consequences of justice perceptions in performance

appraisals. Human Resource Management Review, 12 (4), 555- 578.

Esu, B. B., & Inyang, B. J., (2009). A case for performance managementin the public sector
in Nigeria. International Journal of Business Management, 4 (4): 98 105.

Femi, T.T. (2013). A description of whether the objectives of the performance management
system of the Botswana department of tribal administration are being realized. Master
Thesis Submitted at the University of Stellenbosch.

Fletcher, C. (2011). Performance appraisal: How to improve its effectiveness. A Master‟s

Thesis Submitted to the University of Twente, Enschede.

Fowler (2010). Human Resource Management. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Gibson, B. & Cassar, G. (2005). Longitudinal analysis of relationships between planning and
performance in small firms. Small Business Economics, 25 (3): 207-222.

GoK, (2007). Kenya vision 2030. The National Economic and Social Council of Kenya,
Nairobi, Kenya.

Golafshani, N.,. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The
Qualitative Report, 8(4), 597-606.

Gupta, C. & Upadhyay, V. (2012). The impact of human resource practices on business unit
operating and financial performance. Human Resource Management Journal, 13 (2),
21-36.

70
Gupta, C., & Upadhyay, V., (2012). The impact of human resource practices on business unit
operating and financial performance. Human Resource Management Journal 13 (2),
21-36.

Hope, K. (2011). The new public management context and practice in Africa. International
Public Management Journal.

Ivancevich. J. M. (1998). Job analysis and job design: Human resource management (7th
ed.). Irwin McGrow-Hill.

Jackson, S., & Schuller, R., (2012). Managing human resources through strategic
partnership (8th ed.). Toronto, Canada: Thompson.

Joel, E. R. (1999). Total Quality Management. New York‟s St Lucy Press.

Kaplan, C. (2001). Continuous quality improvement of staff productivity: Matching profiling,

contracting and portfolios. Unpublished paper presented at the, Teach Your Very
Best conference, Windhoek.

Kaplan, R, S. & Norton, D. (1992). The balance scorecard measure that drive performance.
Harvard Business Review, New prentice Hall, New York.

Kerlinger, A. (1993). Research Methodology (3rd ed.). London: Oxford Publishers,

Khan, J. A. (2008). Research Methodology. New Delhi. APH Publishing Corporation

Koontz, H., & Weihrich, H., (2004). Essentials of Management. Mcgraw Hill Int. ed., 6th
edition.

Kothari, C. R., (2003). Research methodology, methods, and techniques. Wisha Prakashan,
New Delhi.

Kotler, P. (1999). Marketing management: Analysis, planning, implementation and control

(9th ed.). Prentice Hall College Inc.

Lado, A. A. & Wilson, C. M. (1994). Human resource systems and sustained competitive
advantage: A competency based perspective. Academy of Management Review, 19(4),
699-727.

Lee, H. (2005). Training management in South Africa (2nd ed.). Cape Town, SA: Oxford
University Press.

Lion, T., (2001). Avent Capital View on Human Resource Management. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Lutwama, G. W., Janetta H. R. & Bethabile L.D. (2013) Assessing the implementation of
performance management of health care workers in Uganda. BMC Health Services
Research.

71
Lysons, (2003). Purchasing and supply chain management (2nd ed.). London: Oxford
Publishers.

Mallaiah, T. Y. (2009). Management of employee expectations, performance, and satisfaction

in university library: An empirical study. Annals of Library and Information Studies,
56.

Marion, G., (1998). Corporate communications managers in large firms: New challenges.
European Management Journal, (16) 660–671.

Markus, L. (2004). Performance management: Problems and potential 12 key steps to ensure
top performance from your staff. Centranum.

Mathis, R. L., & Jackson, J. H. (2003). Human resource management: Essential perspectives.
Cincinnati, Ohio: South-Western College Pub.

Maund, L. (2001). An introduction to human resource management theory and practice.

Palgrave, Macmillan.

Mondy, R. W., & Mondy, J. B. (2008). Human resource management. Upper Saddle River,
N.J: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Mone, E. M., & London, M. (2010). Employee engagement through effective performance
management: A practical guide for managers. New York, NY: Routledge.

Muindi, M., (2012). Employees‟ perception of the effectiveness of performance management

practices at Harambee Sacco Limited.

Myres, F. (2004). Powerful performance appraisals: How to set expectations and work
together to improve performance. New Jersey: National Press Publications: Franklin
Lakes.

Nabaum, A., Barry, L., Garr, S., & Liakopoulus, A. (2014, March 4). Deloitte University
Press.

Nankervis, (2006). Performance management in the workplace. Performance Management

Institute.

Nassazi, A. (2013). The Effect of Training on Employee Performance. European Journal of

Business and Management, 5(4).

Ndubai, R.E. (2011). Performance contacts in the management of the public service in
Kenya. Unpublished Doctorate Thesis, University of Nairobi.

Nielsen, K., Nielsen, M. B., Ogbonnaya, C., Känsälä, M., Saari, E. & Isaksson,
K. (2017). Workplace resources to improve both employee well-being and
performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Work and Stress: An
International Journal of Work, Health and Organisations, 31(2): 101-120.

72
Nielsen, P. (2013, June 2). Performance Management, Managerial Authority, and Public
Service Performance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 5(2), 9-
12.

Nyaoga, R., Kipchumba, S. & Magutu, P. (2010). The effectiveness of performance appraisal
systems in private universities in Kenya: An assessment of Kabarak University
performance appraisal systems. African Journal of Business Management, 1: 123-134.

Nyembezi, V., (2009). Development of a performance management system. An unpublished

Masters degree in Business Administration thesis, the University of North Carolina at
Chapel Hill.

Olusanya, S. O. & Suleiman, A. (2012). Effective planning and organisational productivity.

A case study of Sterling Bank Nigeria Plc. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social
Science (JHSS).

Omboi, B. M. & Shadrack, M. K. (2011). The effect of performance appraisal systems on

employees in Kenya Tea Development Agency: A survey of selected tea factories in
Meru County-Kenya. Research Journal of Finance and Accounting, 2(3): 16-34.

Opatha, H. H. D. N. P., (2002). Performance evaluation of human resource. Colombo,

SriLanka: The Author publication.

Paile, N. W. (2012). Staff perceptions of the implementation of a performance management

and development systems: Father Smangaliso Mkhatswa case study. Unpublished
Masters Thesis, University of South Africa.

Performance Contracts Steering Committee Kenya, (2004). Sensitization/training manual on

performance contracts in the public service.

Porter, L., & Siegel, J. (2006). Relationships of Tall and Flat Organization Structures to the
satisfaction of Foreign Managers. Personnel Psychology, 18(4), 380-392.

Quinn, J. B., Anderson, P., & Finkelstein, S. (2016). Managing professional intellect.
Washington: Havard Business Review.

Richardson, J. T. E., (1999). The concepts and methods of phenomenographic research.

Review of Educational Research, 69 (1), 53-82.

Robert, D. J. (2011). Strategy follows structure. Strategic Management Journal, 77(4), 370-
382.

Rogers, R., & Hunter, J. E., (1991). Impact of management by objectives on organizational
productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(2), 325-371.

Rosenberg, H. (1996). Quality incremental (2nd ed.). London: Oxford Publishers.

Rosenberg, H., (1996). Quality incremental (2nd Edition). London.

73
Sahu, T. H. (2014). Human Resource Department (3rd edition). United States: Thompson
South Western.

Salau, O. P., Oludayo, F. O., & Omoniy, O. C., (2014). Modelling the relationship between
performance appraisal and organizational productivity in Nigerian public sector.
Economic Management Innovation Journal 6 (2), 2-16.

Samson, D., & Daft, R.L., (2012). Management. South Melbourne, Vic. :Cengage Learning.

Sanderson, M., Harshak, A., & Blain, L., (2009). Elevating employee performance. Booz and
Company

Schneier, C. E., Beatty, R. W., & Baird, L. S., (1987). Performance appraisal sourcebook.
Human Resources Development Press, Amberst.

Shores, R. (2015, January 27). Saba. Retrieved from saba.com:

https://www.saba.com/us/press-releases/go/2015/us-workforce-expected-
toexperience-massive-shift-in-2015/

Singh, V. K., Kochar, B. and Yüksel, S. (2010). An Empirical Study on the Efficiency of
Performance Appraisal System in Oil and Natural Gas Commission (ONGC), India.
İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi 2(2): 65-78.

Slocum, J. W. (2004). Organizational Behaviour. Texas, TX: Thomson Publishers.

Solmon, D., & Podgursky, C., (2010). Employee performance appraisal practices of world
vision: Ghana rural water project (GRWP). A Thesis Submitted to the University of
Cape Coast.

Storey, E., & Sission, J. (2013). A framework for assessing incentives in results-based
management. Public Administration Review (65) 592–602.

Taylor, P. J., & Pierce, J. L. (2015). Effects of introducing a performance management

system on employees' subsequent attitudes and efforts. Public Personnel
Management, 23(3), 423-452.

Torrington, D., Hall, L., & Stephen, T. (2008). Human resource management (7th ed.).
Edinburg: Pearson.

Weiss, H. M., Nicholas, J. P., & Daus, C. S. (1999). An examination of the joint effects of
affective experiences and job beliefs on job satisfaction and variations in affective
experiences over time. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 78:
1–24.

Welch, M., & Jackson, P. R. (2007). Rethinking internal communication: A stakeholder

approach. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 12(2), 177–198.

WHO, (2016). Global strategy on human resources for health workforce. 2030 WHO
Switzerland.

74
Wilson, B. T. (2003). Innovative reward systems for the changing work place. NewYork:
McGraw Hill.

Wu, C., & Lee, G. (2011). Perceived purposes of performance appraisal: Correlates of
individual and position focused purposes on attitudinal outcomes. Human Resource
Development Quarterly. 4(2) 29-51.

Xanthopoulou, B., Demerouti, & Schaufeli (2007). The role of personal resources in the job
demands resources model. International journal of stress management, 14(2): 121.

75
 APPENDICES
Appendix I: Letter of Introduction

October 2019

Dear Respondent,

RE: REQUEST FOR RESEARCH DATA

I am a student at United States International University – Africa where I am undertaking a

degree in Master of Science in Organization Development. As part of my course work
assessment I am required to make a submission of, a research on “THE IMPACT OF
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ON EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE:
CASE STUDY OF UN-HABITAT-SOMALIA PROGRAMME”.

To accomplish this, your organization is chosen for generating the needed data for this study.
The data will be applied only for academic work and there will be no mention of your name
anywhere in the report. In case you may need the findings of this study, they will be vailed
upon request.
Your help and collaboration will be profoundly valued.
Thank you in advance.
.

ASIA ADAM
MASTERS STUDENT
UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY – AFRICA

76
Appendix II: Questionnaire

Section A: Demographic Information

. 1. Please indicate your gender:

(a) Male ( ) (b) Female ( )

2. What is your highest level of education?

(a) Bachelor‟s degree ( ) (b) Master‟s degree ( )

(c) PhD ( )

3. Please indicate your age bracket:

(a) Less than 30years ( ) (b) 31 - 40years ( )

(c) 41 – 50years ( ) (d) Above 50 years ( )

5. How long have you worked in your position in this organization?

(a) Less than 10years ( )

(b) 11 to 20years ( )

(c) 21 to 30years ( )

(d) Over 30years ( )

Section B: Performance Management System

Performance Standards

Indicate your level of agreement with the following statements by ticking at the appropriate
box. Use the rating criteria: 1. Strongly Disagree (SD), 2. Disagree (D), 3. Uncertain (U), 4.
Agree (A), 5. Strongly Agree (SA)

Statements 1 2 3 4 5

The organization uses each individual

employee‟s job description in setting
performance standards.

77
The organization employees are involved in
setting performance standards
The organization communicate clearly
performance standards in the workplace
The organization‟s performance standards
includes long-term development initiatives
which are usually based on potential and good
performance usually includes identifying key
value drivers of stakeholders,
The organization agrees with employees on a
formal performance standards development
plan
Performance standards setting in the
organization usually includes identifying key
value drivers of stakeholders,
Performance standards setting in the
organization usually involves linking the
employees' work with the organization's goals
and objectives

Performance Measurement

Indicate your level of agreement with the following statements by ticking at the appropriate
box. Use the rating criteria: 1. Strongly Disagree (SD), 2. Disagree (D), 3. Uncertain (U), 4.
Agree (A), 5. Strongly Agree (SA)

Statements 1 2 3 4 5

The organization evaluate stakeholders‟

satisfaction through market
The organization monitor the
proportion of stakeholders concerns
settled.
The organization monitors the
implementation of its goals and
objectives

78
The organization is keen on the new
engagements it has periodically.
The organization provides performance
incentives and/or consequences for
non-performance.
The organization has innovative service
improvement teams or committees.
The organization measures the time
taken to settle a stakeholder‟s concern.

Quality Improvement Processes

Indicate your level of agreement with the following statements by ticking at the appropriate
box. Use the rating criteria: 1. Strongly Disagree (SD), 2. Disagree (D), 3. Uncertain (U), 4.
Agree (A), 5. Strongly Agree (SA)

Statements 1 2 3 4 5

There is provision of quality services in the

organization
There is improving responsibility of the
employees in the organization towards
quality improvements.
The organization spends time and resources
on quality improvement.
Quality improvement in the organization
involves changing processes.
Quality improvement in the organization
involves data.
Quality improvement in the organization
involves all employees.
Quality improvement in the organization
also considers information from clients or
customers
The organization provides training in quality
improvement methods.
The management are receptive to new ideas

79
for improving agency programs, services,
and outcomes.
The organization utilizes various quality
improvement methods

Progress Reporting

Indicate your level of agreement with the following statements by ticking at the appropriate
box. Use the rating criteria: 1. Strongly Disagree (SD), 2. Disagree (D), 3. Uncertain (U), 4.
Agree (A), 5. Strongly Agree (SA)

Statements 1 2 3 4 5

The management gives employees fair

feedback.
The management discusses regularly to
employees about their job performance.
The organization seems more engaged in
providing positive feedback for good
performers than criticizing the poor ones.
The feedback received by employees agrees
with what they have actually achieved.
The feedback received by employees on job
performance is highly relevant.
Employees are satisfied with the way the
organization provides feedback
The current performance feedback in the
organization is fair and unbiased.
If the employees do not agree with progress
reporting score, there is appeal process
Progress reporting is used as a decision
making tool for the increasing employees
performance.
Progress reporting makes employees in the
organization to work harder than expected.

80
Section C: Employee Performance

Indicate your level of agreement with the following statements by ticking at the appropriate
box. Use the rating criteria: 1. Strongly Disagree (SD), 2. Disagree (D), 3. Uncertain (U), 4.
Agree (A), 5. Strongly Agree (SA)

Statements 1 2 3 4 5

The level of employee productivity in the

organization is high as compared to the
beginning
The current level of employee productivity
is high
The current level of the decision making
process in the organization is highly formal
The quality of the services in the
organization is high
The ability of the employees to be
innovative is high
The set target goals of the organization are
met successfully

THANK YOU VERY MUCH

81
Appendix III: NACOSTI Research Permit

82