CHAPTER II
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
2.1 Introduction
This chapter discusses the theoretical framework used in the study and studies that supplied
background information to the study of the researchers. In order to accomplish the objective of the
system the following concepts and theories were applied by the developers.
The theory of monitoring evaluation covers the terms of monitoring system, topics, definition of
terms used, developing a monitoring system of trainings. To better understand coaching and
performance management, both were studied individually at first. Theoretical framework is the
combine idea for the proponent to the stated system. It covers the problem statement, purpose
statement and the research questions. It also reviews the theory of The Effectiveness of Coaching
to employee’s productivity. This chapter outlines the aim of the study and covers an overview of
the research objective. The prevailing theories and hypotheses, questions which have been asked,
and methodologies and methods are appropriate and useful will be studied. As with any new field
of study, coaching draws upon existing established theory and knowledge.
The theories of coaching evolve over time as the individuals observe performance and its effects
throughout their careers.
2.2 Monitoring and Evaluation Definition
o Monitoring
According to Gage and Dunn (2009), the systematic process of collecting, analyzing
and using information to track a programme’s progress toward reaching its objectives and
management decisions. Monitoring is conducted after a programme has begun and continues
throughout the programme implementation period. Monitoring is sometimes referred to as
process, performance or formative evaluation.
According to Hartman & Bucci (1999) the type of monitoring system that is most
effective depends on the type of workplace it is to be implemented and has helped increase
efficiency, develop customer service and improve the evaluation process of the employees. In
effective organizations, assignments and projects are monitored continually.
o Evaluation
Frankel and Gage (2007), is the systematic assessment of an activity, project,
programme, strategy, policy, topic, theme, sector, operational area or institution’s
performance. Evaluation aims at determining the relevance, impact, effectiveness, efficiency
and sustainability of interventions and the contributions of the intervention to the results
achieved. Evaluations are also indirectly a means to report to the donor about the activities
implemented. It is a means to verify that the donated funds are being well managed and
transparently spent
According to Msila & Setlhako, (2013) Monitoring and evaluation tests and refines the
road map while communications helps in reaching the destination by helping to bring about
change.
Shah & Nair, (2012) stated that the most successful supervisors place a priority on developing their
staff. Monitoring employee performance is a managerial behavior that can have a significant
influence on productivity. By effectively coaching agents, supervisors can boost the performance
of the contact center.
Differences between Monitoring Evaluation
The common ground for monitoring and evaluation is that they are both management tools.
Monitoring, data and information collection for tracking progress according to the terms of
reference is gathered periodically which is not the case in evaluations for which the data and
information collection is happening during or in view of the evaluation.
2.3 Definition Performance Management Theory
According to Bach and Sisson (2000) performance management is about measuring,
monitoring, and enhancing the performance of staff, as a contributor to overall organizational
performance.
Increasing complexities in functions of business have led to the emergence of new and
comprehensive concepts in business management. Performance management is a concept in the
field of human resource management.
Aguinis, (2009) stated “It is a continuous process of identifying, measuring and
developing the performance of individuals and aligning performance with the strategic goals of
the organization”. Therefore, performance management has been identified as a system that
creates context for continuous monitoring and measuring activities of individual employees in a
firm. Hence, performance management has been identified as a system that creates context for
continuous monitoring and measuring activities of individual employees in a firm. However,
monitoring is done by performance management systems. Such systems enable employees to
guide and refine their performance. It further increases the efforts of employees to achieve these
goals.
According to Reynolds (2010) measuring how well frontline staffs meet qualitative
standards is done through quality monitoring. It provides an assurance that the call is not picked
behind the agents back and gives the agent opportunity to perform well, as they are aware of quality
control being in place. Monitoring well means consistently measuring performance and providing
ongoing feedback to employees and work groups on their progress toward reaching their goals.
2.3.1 Goal-setting Theory
A study conducted by Locke, Latham, & Edwin (2002) found out that providing direction
and a standard against which progress can be monitored, challenging goals can be achieved. It is
well documented in the scholarly literature by Latham & Locke (2006) that specific goals can
boost motivation and performance by leading employees to focus their attention on specific
objective. The goal-setting theory states that specific and challenging goals with appropriate
feedback contribute to improved performance. Goals direct the employee to perform their work.
Edwin Locke presented the Goal-setting theory of motivation in the 1960s (Locke &
Latham, 2006). According to the theory, goal setting and task performance share a direct
relation. The specific and challenging goals along with appropriate feedback contribute to higher
and better task performance. Thus, Goal-setting theory together with performance management
systems impacts employee performance.
2.3.2 Coaching/Mentoring/Feedback
Coaching Definition - “a development process whereby an individual meet on a regular
basis to clarify goals, deal with potential stumbling blocks, and improve their
performance.”
According to de Haan (2008, 5) the first coach appears to be a fictional one. In Homer’s
Odyssey, the goddess Pallas Athene assumes this role to guide mortals in their adventures. In
support of this, Bax, Negrutiu and Calotă (2011, 2) write that the roots of coaching can be
traced to early philosophers and religions.
Today the field of coaching is both wide and deep. In this thesis, coaching is mostly
viewed from the management and leadership perspective, focusing on the one-to-one coaching
rather than team or organizational coaching. Call center supervisors have multiple opportunities
in a variety of settings and situations to coach staff on their performance.
According to Sir John Whitmore, a leading figure in executive coaching, the definition of
coaching is “unlocking a person’s potential to maximize their own performance. It is helping
them to learn rather than teaching them.” When done right, coaching can also help with
employee engagement; it is often more motivating to bring your expertise to a situation than to
be told what to do. The survey found that, although leadership development is among the top two
reasons for using coaching, the desire to improve individual “performance/productivity “is
actually the most widely cited purpose.
Why coaching is important than ever before?
Call center supervisors have multiple opportunities in a variety of settings and
situations to coach staff on their performance.
We recognize that numerous other factors and variables impact the nature of a coaching
relationship, as well as the effectiveness of coaching for individual development. This unit
provides techniques for doing side-by-side coaching for improved performance, including tips
on providing both positive and negative feedback.
2.3.3 Performance Appraisal Theory
Performance appraisal system is the process of evaluating the performance of an employee
(Schermerhorn, Hunt, & Osborn, 2002). The information gathered from such evaluation is shared
with employees.