Addis Ababa University

Department of Educational Planning and Management

EMPLOYEES PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL IN KOTEBE

UNIVERSITY COLLEGE: ASSESSMENT OF PRACTICES AND
CHALLENGES

By

Jedida Muhibu Seid

February, 2017
Addis Ababa
 EMPLOYEES PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL IN KOTEBE
UNIVERSITY COLLEGE: ASSESSMENT OF PRACTICES AND
CHALLENGES

By

Jedida Muhibu Seid

A Thesis Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Addis

Ababa University in Partials Fulfillment of the Requirements of the
Degree of Masters of Art in Human Resource and Organizational
Development in Education

ADDIS ABABA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF GRADUATE

STUDIES

February, 2017
Addis Ababa
 Employees Performance Appraisal in Kotebe University College:
Assessment of Practices and Challenges

By

Jedida Muhibu Seid

APPROVED BY: EXAMINING BOARD

______________________ ______________________ ___________

Chairperson, Department Signature Date
Graduate Committee

Dr. Hussein Kedir ______________________ ___________

Advisor Signature Date

______________________ ______________________ ___________

Internal Examiner Signature Date

___________________ ______________________ ___________

External Examiner Signature Date
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my advisor, Dr. Hussein Kedir for his continuous
support, guidance and helpful corrections in doing this study. Special thanks go to Kotebe
University College employees‟, Ato Matias, Ato Yosef and Dr. Sebsebe for their help in
distribution and collection of the questionnaires.

I also would like to acknowledge Kotebe University College employees for their cooperation in
filling the questionnaires and participating in the interviews.

Last but not least deep appreciation goes to all who supported me in various ways to complete
this research.

Jedida Muhibu

i
 Table of Contents
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................ i
Table of Contents .......................................................................................................... ii
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations ........................................................................... iv
List of Tables ................................................................................................................. v
Abstract ....................................................................................................................... vi
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................... 1
1.1. Background of the Study ................................................................................ 1
1.2. Statement of the Problem ............................................................................... 3
1.3. Objective of the Study .................................................................................... 5
1.3.1. General Objective ....................................................................................... 5
1.3.2. Specific Objectives ..................................................................................... 5
1.4. Significance of the Study................................................................................ 5
1.5. Delimitation of the Study ............................................................................... 6
1.6. Limitations of the Study ................................................................................. 6
1.7. Definition of Key Terms................................................................................. 6
1.8. Organization of the Study ............................................................................... 7
CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURES ........................................................ 8
2.1. The Concept of Performance Appraisal ......................................................... 8
2.2. Purpose of Performance Appraisal ................................................................ 9
2.3. Uses of Performance Appraisal .................................................................... 11
2.4. Identifying Key Performance Criteria .......................................................... 11
2.5. Employee Participation in the Appraisal System ......................................... 12
2.6. The Appraisal Process ................................................................................. 12
2.7. Who Conducts Appraisal .............................................................................. 14
2.8. Time to Conduct Performance Appraisal .................................................... 17
2.9. Methods of Performance Appraisal .............................................................. 18
2.9.1. Category Rating Methods ......................................................................... 18
2.9.2. Comparative Methods ............................................................................... 19

ii
 2.9.3. Narrative Methods .................................................................................... 21
2.9.4. Special Methods ........................................................................................ 22
2.10. Potential Problems in Performance Appraisal .............................................. 23
2.10.1. Human Errors ........................................................................................... 23
2.10.2. Problems of Criteria .................................................................................. 25
2.10.3. Problems of Confidentiality ...................................................................... 25
2.11. Techniques to Overcome Performance Appraisal Problems ........................ 26
2.12. Effective Performance Appraisal System .................................................... 28
CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY ...................................................... 31
3.1. The Research Design ................................................................................... 31
3.2. Sources of Data ............................................................................................. 31
3.3. Sample and Sampling Techniques ................................................................ 31
3.3.1. Sample.......................................................................................................... 31
3.3.2. Sampling Techniques ................................................................................... 32
3.4. Instruments and Procedures of Data Collection ........................................... 32
3.4.1. Instrument of Data Collection ...................................................................... 32
3.4.2. Procedures of Data Collection ..................................................................... 33
3.5. Methods of Data Analysis ............................................................................ 33
3.6. Ethical Consideration ................................................................................... 33
CHAPTER FOUR
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA ................. 34
4.1. Characteristics of Respondents ..................................................................... 34
4.2. Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data ........................................ 35
CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................. 49
5.1. Summary....................................................................................................... 49
5.2. Conclusions .................................................................................................. 52
5.3. Recommendations ........................................................................................ 53
References .................................................................................................................... 54
Appendices ...................................................................................................................... 58

iii
 LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

BARS Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales

BES Behaviorally Expectation Scales
BOS Behaviorally Observation Scales
HR Human Resource
HRM Human Resource Management
HSIU Haile Selassie I University
KUC Kotebe University College
MBO Management by Objectives
PA Performance Appraisal
SPSS Statistical Package for Social Sciences

iv
 LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Age and gender distribution of respondents ................................................ ..........34
Table 2: Qualification and experience of respondents ................................................ .........35
Table 3a: Purpose of performance appraisal.........................................................................36
Table 3b: Purpose of performance appraisal......................................... ...............................37
Table 4a: Process of performance appraisal...................................................... ...................39
Table 4b: Process of performance appraisal...................................................... ...................40
Table 5: Performance appraisal alignment with its objective............................................... 42
Table 6: Problems of performance appraisal system....................................................... .....43
Table 7: Performance appraisal standard/criteria..................................................................46
Table 8: Participation in appraising employee‟s performance..............................................47

v
 ABSTRACT

The study was conducted in Kotebe University College. The purpose of the study was to assess
the practice and challenges of employees’ performance appraisal. It was also aimed at
identifying the problem that encounter in the appraisal of employees’ performance. The study
was conducted by making use of both qualitative and quantitative research approach; the total
sample size of the study was 127. Sample respondents were selected by employing stratified
random sampling technique. Both, primary and secondary sources of data were used in the
study. Primary data was collected from the staff of KUC selected using a stratified random
sampling technique through questionnaires and interviews. Besides, relevant documents and
published materials were used as secondary sources of data. The data were analyzed both,
qualitatively and quantitatively depending upon the nature of data collected. The Data collected
from the questionnaire were analyzed through the help of IBM’s Software Package for Social
Science (IBMSPSS Statistic version 20). The study concludes that the KUC’s performance
appraisal system had not thoroughly met its intended objectives, absence of clearly established
ways of presenting compliant on performance appraisal results. Also, poor documentation of
employees’ appraisal results throughout the appraisal period was among the major challenges.
In addition, had no performance appraisal policy by which the appraisal process is governed
and to be strictly followed an individual’s appraisal. The study recommended that KUC need to
set the objectives of performance appraisal in such a way that it could be attainable by
employees, should make the development of evaluation criteria participatory. And, it needs to
design appropriate grievance mechanism for employees’ complaints. Besides, effective record
keeping and documentation system of employees’ appraisal results need to be established.
Moreover, KUC has to formulate its own performance appraisal policy which is strictly to be
followed and similarly applied on each employee’s appraisal.

vi
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

This chapter includes background of the study, statement of the problem, objective of the study,
significance of the study, delimitation of the study, limitation of the study, definition of key
terms and organization of the study.

1.1. Background of the Study

The human resource management (HRM) is a nervous system of any organization. It coordinates
and controls each and every activity either directly or indirectly for the purpose of organizational
development and growth. Among all the tools of HRM, performance management is a system
that ensures and maintains the proper flow of life blood in every section and unit of organization,
which is human capital. Performance Management does not only evaluate the employees‟
performances but achieve organizational goals through improving employee performance,
employee development, employee engagement and retaining them (Mansoor, 2010).

Performance management is a process of establishing shared understanding about what is too

achieved and how it is to be achieved, and an approach to managing and developing people
improves individual, team and organizational performance. Performance management is a
systematic process for improving organizational performance by developing the performance of
individuals and teams; it is a means of getting better results by understanding and managing
performance within an agreed framework of planned goals, standards and competency
requirements (Armstrong, 2009).

Performance appraisal has be defined as the process of identifying, evaluating and developing the
work performance of employees in the organization, so that the organizational goals and objectives
are more effectively achieved, while at the same time benefiting employees in terms of recognition,
receiving feedback, catering for work needs and offering career guidance (Armstrong, 1998).

1
All over the world, universities play a vital role for active participation in the knowledge societies
which ultimately leads towards faster economic growth. This is because; universities in any
country develop human capital (students) for not only better contribution in different professions
but, in society as whole. They are responsible for successful development of an open and
democratic civil society, by giving their students deep insight of specific subject knowledge;
provide the social norms of communication and interaction (Danial, 2011)

A quality education providing institute is always proves to be a model for modern civil society.
Therefore, to achieve world class standard, effective performance management of university
teachers/academic staffs is always major concern in any university. A sustainable and progressive
performance appraisal mechanism for teaching staffs of the universities ultimately benefits major
stakeholders who are students in terms of enhancement of employment opportunities, improvement
of education and training of upcoming human capital, flourishing the learning environment and
enriches academic and intellectual knowledge management of university as a whole.

The inception of Kotebe University College (KUC) came about within the Haile Selassie I
University (HSIU) in 1959 under the simple name „College‟. It left HSIU in 1969 and moved to
Mexico Square where it came to be known as Teacher Training College. Later the name was
changed to Addis Ababa College of Teacher Education. Finally in 1976, it was transferred to the
present site and acquired the name, Kotebe College of Teacher Education.

The college continued to upgrade and diversity its training programme from time to time. It began
degree programme in six fields of study in 1989. However, in 1996 the degree programme had
been discontinued in all but on department, health and Physical Education. In 2007/08 academic
year, the degree program was re-launched in ten fields of study. After a long and tireless effort; on
the 31st of January 2014 the Addis Ababa City Administration granted Kotebe the status of
University College.

Currently, KUC has one college, three faculties and one institute. These are college of teacher
education, faculty of Social Sciences, faculty of Natural and computational Sciences, faculty of
Language and humanities and Institute of Urban Development Studies. Moreover, the University
College is running preschool, diploma, undergraduate and graduate studies in its regular,
evening-extension and summer programs. The number of KUC staff accounts about 550 of
which 186 represents the academic staff.
2
To ensuring the realization of its vision, the university college believes that effective
performance management system is essential. As Longenecker and Fink (2001) explain that,
formal appraisals are required to justify a wide range of human resource decisions such as pay
raises, promotions, demotions, terminations, etc. It is also required to determine employees‟
training need. Therefore, performance appraisal is very important to manage employee‟s work
effectively. The underlying objective of the employee performance appraisal is to improve the
quality and quantity of an employee's job performance and thereby increase productivity and
efficiency.

In the university college the academic staff‟s performance appraisal fill by supervisors (30%),
colleague (15%), students (50%) and self (5%) through the given format at the end of each
semester. Consequently, the filled performance appraisal format collected and summarized by
the department head. Then the performance appraisal result communicated to the academic staff
through immediate department head.

1.2. Statement of the Problem

Performance appraisal in university had little impact on staff motivation, efficiency and
performance. One reason for this is, the ambiguity surrounding the intentions of staff appraisal in
universities: it is neither a management tool, nor is it wholly focused staff development. As a
result, the staffs believed that the exercise was time consuming and costly for universities with
little tangible benefits (Haslam et al., 1993).

A common failing of many teachers‟ performance appraisal is that; they make judgments about
teachers based on unrepresentative samples (usually isolated observations) of a teacher‟s work.
They do not evaluate the breadth of a teacher‟s activities, and other steps they may take to develop
professionally (George, 2000). However different literatures such as Murphy (1987) and Krug
(1992) indicated that university teachers are responsible for numerous activities out of which
teaching, research and community services are the major ones. That implies that the contents of
academic staff appraisal form should contain the above mentioned relevant performance dimension.

3
Strategic objective of Kotebe University College refers to improve the system for monitoring,
evaluation, and recognition for effective and efficient services of the university college. It also
focuses on designing policies, guidelines, and implementing performance measurement systems
to identify performance levels through monitoring and evaluation mechanism thereby launching
rewarding schemes to motivate staff.

In Kotebe University College there are a number of complaints presented by the academic staffs
while conducting preliminary study made to assess performance appraisal practice of the
university college. Even if the appraisal form has different criteria, the students biased to
appraise the academic staffs due to his/her personality, his/her approach with students and
difficulty of his/her exam and the university college does not participate the academic staffs on
development of performance measurement criteria.

By review of documents and preliminary study the researcher have not found previous studies
conducted on performance appraisal system at KUC. Hence this study may serve as spring board
for coming researchers; it will serve the University College to revise the strategy on performance
appraisal system and to ascertain whether KUC has a performance appraisal policy in place. The
existing studies in this relation (Meseret 2007; Dagmawit 2013; Samuel 2014) have studied
employees‟ performance practices only creating a gap on issues such as challenges of
performance practices. This study will contribute in minimizing this gap in the literature and
there by establish the basis to understanding of some aspects of employees‟ performance
practices and challenges in KUC. Therefore, this study was conducted to investigate the actual
performance appraisal practice of the university college, discover problems encountered and
forward possible recommendations helpful in improving the performance appraisal practice of
the institution.

Research Question

The study guided by the following basic questions.

1. Does Kotebe University College have policy on performance appraisal system?
2. What does the performance appraisal practices of Kotebe University College look like?
3. Is the performance appraisal system of the Kotebe University College meeting its
intended objectives?
4. What are the major challenges that affect the practices of performance appraisal at
Kotebe University College?

4
1.3. Objective of the Study

1.3.1. General Objective

The overall purpose of the study was to assess the practice and challenges of employee‟s
performance appraisal at Kotebe University College.

1.3.2. Specific Objective

The specific objectives of the study include:

 To find out the performance appraisal policy at Kotebe University College.

 To assess the practice of performance appraisal at Kotebe University College.
 To assess the performance appraisal practice in agreement with the Kotebe University
College objectives.
 To investigate challenges of performance appraisal at Kotebe University College.

1.4. Significance of the Study

The findings of the study will contribute to:

 Give possible recommendation to overcome the problems faced in performance appraisal

system.
 Provide inputs to the policy makers for further and progressive improvement to be done in
the area.
 Other researchers may be used as a reference document and to make further study in the area.
 Point out the important purposes of effective performance appraisal system, which have a
positive contribution to achievement of organizational goals.
 Benefit the researcher to have knowledge about the implementation of effective
performance appraisal system.

5
1.5. Delimitation of the Study

The study was delimited to Kotebe University College. It investigated the practice and
challenges of employee performance appraisal. More specifically, the study was confined to the
investigation of the research problem among the academic staff by excluding the other
supportive staff of the institute.

1.6. Limitations of the Study

The minor limitation of the study was time taking to get permission and distribute the
questionnaires due to the University College bureaucracy and unavailability of some faculty
deans. And the other limit in this study was the reluctance of staffs to fill out and turn back the
questionnaires in time. Though, the researcher managed these limitations with continuous follow
up and negotiations.

Even though questionnaires are known to have certain disadvantages such as low response rate
or inaccurate responses, restriction of freedom of responses, less opportunity for clarifications of
responses among others, the personal involvement of the researcher at every stage of the study
and the use of interview helped to obtained detailed information about the issues studied and also
helped achieved a high level of data consistency, reliability and accuracy.

1.7. Definition of Key Terms

In order to avoid any ambiguities, the researcher operationally defines some of the terms used
frequently in this study.

Human Resource Management (HRM) is a key ingredient affecting organizational

competitiveness and its ability to fulfill its mission. (Mathis & Jackson, 1997).

Performance Appraisal is the activity used to determine the extent to which an employee
performs work effectively (Ivancevich, 2006).

Rater is refers to employee who involved in appraising the performance of employee.

Ratee is refers to employees whose performance is subject to appraisal.

6
University is an institution of higher learning providing facilities for teaching and research and
authorized to grant academic degrees.

University College is an institution providing higher education but without full or independent
university status.

Faculty is a group of departments in a college that specialize in a particular subject or group of

subjects.

1.8. Organization of the Study

The study is organized in to five chapters. The first chapter contains introduction part of the study.
Related literature reviewed in the second chapter. The third chapter deals with research design
and methodology. The fourth chapter deals with presentation, analysis and interpretation of data.
The fifth chapter contains major findings, conclusions and recommendations of the study.

7
 CHAPTER TWO

REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURES

This chapter tries to deal with review of literature on performance appraisal. Attempts will be
made to briefly begin with concepts of performance appraisal such as purpose, methods,
problems and other related information presented in very precise manner.

2.1. The Concept of Performance Appraisal

Performance management is a systematic process for improving organizational performance by

developing the performance of individuals and teams. It is a means of getting better results by
understanding and managing performance within an agreed framework of planned goals,
standards and competency requirements. (Armstrong, 2009)

Performance Management is a process that enables employees to perform their roles to the best of
their abilities with the aim of achieving or exceeding established targets and standards that are
directly linked with the organizations objectives. It can be regarded as a strategic management
technique that supports the overall business goals of the firm through linking each individual‟s
work goals to the overall mission of the firm (Collings & Wood 2009).

According to Rao (2000), Performance appraisal is a method of evaluating the behavior of

employees in the work spot, normally including both the quantitative and qualitative aspects of
job performance. Performance here refers to the degree of accomplishment of the tasks that make
up an individual‟s job. Yong (1996), defines performance appraisal as “an evaluation and
grading exercise undertaken by an organization on all its employees either periodically or
annually, on the outcomes of performance based on the job content, job requirement and
personal behavior in the position”.

Performance appraisal systems are used for different purposes in which include Human resource
decisions, evaluation and feedback. Performance appraisal establishes reward system that will
combine the effort of leaders and the worker of organization to the common goals of their
organizations (Cleveland, Murphy & William, 1989).

8
2.2. Purpose of Performance Appraisal

Performance appraisal is an essential management technique. It is used in judgmental workforce

decisions, such as promotion, demotion, retention, transfer, and pay and for employee
development via feedback and training; it also serves the organization as a means for validating
selection and hiring procedures, promoting employee-supervisor understanding, and supporting
an organizations culture (Daley, 1992).

Performance appraisal serves a number of purposes in organizations. In general terms

performance appraisal has two roles in organization, which are often seen as potentially
conflicting. These are administrative and developmental roles. Performance appraisals can be
sometimes conducted for personnel research purposes (Mathis & Jackson, 1997). Those who
favor formal performance appraisal contend that it serves several purposes, which are essentially
extensions of the above two major roles (Ivancevich & Glueck, 1989; Robbins, 1996). The
following are some of them:

Developmental Purposes: PA can determine which employees need more training and helps
evaluate the results of training programs. It helps the subordinate-supervisor counseling
relationship, and encourages supervisors to observe subordinate behavior to help employees.
They pinpoint employee skills and competencies that are currently inadequate but for which
programs can be developed to remedy. Similarly, the effectiveness of training and development
programs can be determined by assessing how well those employees who have participated do on
their performance evaluation.

Reward and Compensation Purposes: PA helps the organization decide who should receive
pay raise and promotions. It can determine who will be laid off. It reinforces the employee‟s
motivation to perform more effectively. PA also provides information that can be used to
determine what to pay and what will serve as an equitable monetary package. Decisions as to
who gets merit pay increases and other rewards are frequently determined by performance
evaluations.

9
Motivational Purposes: The presence of an evaluation program has a motivational effect: it
encourages initiative, develops a sense of responsibility, and stimulates effort to perform better.
What defines performance in the expectancy model of motivation is the individual‟s performance
evaluation. To maximize motivation, people need to perceive that the effort they exert leads to a
favorable performance evaluation and that the favorable evaluation will lead to the rewards they
value.

Following the expectancy model of motivation, if the objectives that employees are expected to
achieve are unclear, if the criteria for measuring those objectives are vague, and if the employees
lack confidence their efforts will lead to a satisfactory appraisal of their performance or believe
there will be unsatisfactory payoff by the organization when their performance objectives are
achieved, one can expect individuals to work considerably below their potential.

Legal Compliance: It serves as a legally defensible reason for making promotion, transfer,
reward, and discharge decisions.

Personnel and Employment Planning Purposes: PA serves a valuable input to skills

inventories and personnel planning. Performance evaluations can be used as criterion against
which selection and development programs are validated. Newly hired employees who perform
poorly can be identified through performance appraisal.

Communications Purposes: Evaluation is a basis for an ongoing discussion between superior

and subordinate about job-related matters. Through interaction, the parties get to know each
other better. Evaluations fulfill the purpose of providing feedback to employees on how the
organization views their performance.

10
2.3. Uses of Performance Appraisal

According to Mullins (1996), the use of Performance appraisal is explained as formalized and
systematic appraisal scheme can also form the basis of a review of financial rewards and planned
career progression. Performance appraisal is therefore, a crucial activity of the personnel
function and the management of human resources. Performance appraisal is a vital component of
a broader set of human resource practices; it is the mechanism for evaluating the extent to which
each employee's day-to-day performance is linked to the goals established by the organization
(Coutts & Sandler, 2004).

According to Armstrong (2009), a PA function is a continuous and evolutionary process in

which performance improves over time. It provides the basis for regular and frequent dialogues
between managers and individuals about performance and development needs based on feedback
and self-assessment. It is mainly concerned with individual performance but it can also be
applied to teams.

2.4. Identifying Key Performance Criteria

The most challenging aspect when setting performance appraisal is what to assess. The main
dimensions of performance to be assessed by performance appraisal are: Competencies,
Behaviors, Results or outcomes and Organizational citizenship behaviors‟ (Muhammad, 2013).
To make performance appraisal criteria‟s relevant to the work place practice and acceptable to
appraiser and employee: performance criteria should be based on an up to date job description
and developed by consultation with appraiser and employee.

The participation of employees in the development of appraisal criteria and measures makes the
employee to accept and being satisfied with the appraisal system. Some of the strategies to
participate employees are: making formal and informal meeting and discussions with supervisor,
including self-appraisals in the appraisal process, give opportunities for employees to contribute
to the performance appraisal of coworkers and managers/supervisors and creating good
employees‟ perception about the equitability and fairness of the appraisal system.

11
2.5. Employee Participation in the Appraisal System

In any case, if the employees perceive the appraisal system as biased, unfair and lacks
consistency, then it is unlikely that they will accept the outcomes of the system. Participation
gives an opportunity to the employees to raise their voice into the appraisal process. Performance
standards, criteria for evaluation and the evaluation form itself all can be developed with the help
of employees. Greater employee participation generates an atmosphere of cooperation and
support, which facilitates the development of a coaching or counseling relationship, thereby
reducing appraisal related tension and rater-ratee conflict (Jordan, 1992).

According to Somerick (1993), suggested having a dialogue session between the manager and
the employees. Concerning to the appraisal system, if any problem occurs, that can be discussed
in the dialogue session immediately not months later when the employee‟s performance has been
rated and documented in his/her personal file.

2.6. The Appraisal Process

According to DeCenzo (2007), the main purpose of performance appraisal is to make sure that
employees are doing his/her jobs effectively. In order to realize the purpose of performance
appraisal, organizations should carefully plan appraisal systems and the appraisal process
requires a sequence of steps as illustrated below:

Establishing Performance Standard with Employees: Performance standards established in

accordance with the organization‟s strategic goals. These should evolve out of the company‟s
strategic direction and, more specifically, the job analysis and the job description. These
performance standards also shall be clear and objective enough to be understood and measured.

Communicate the Measurement Criteria: Employees should not have to guess, what is expected
from them. The supervisor and employee discuss about measurement criteria. As Werth and Davis
(1996), stated to hold employees accountable, a written record of the standards should exist and
employees should advised of those standards before the evaluation occurs. Providing the
opportunity for employees clearly to understand the performance standards will enhance their
motivation and commitment towards their jobs.

12
Measure Actual Performance: Four common sources of information frequently used by
managers address how to measure actual performance: personal observation, statically report, oral
report, and written reports.

Comparison of Actual Performance with Standard: After evaluating and measuring employee‟s
job performance, it is necessary to compare it with the set standard to know whether there is
deviation or no. Is their deviation between actual performances with standards? And discuss the
matter with the employees.

Discuss the Appraisal with Employee: Feedback employees receive about their assessment has a
strong influence on their self-esteem and importantly, on their subsequent performance. After the
evaluation, the rater must describe work-related progress in a manner that is mutually
understandable.

Correction Action: The final step in the appraisal is the identification of corrective action where
necessary. Corrective action can be of two types: one is immediate and deals predominantly with
symptoms, and the other is basic and investigates into causes. Immediate action corrects problems
right now and gets us back on track. Basic corrective action asks how and why performance
deviated. Good supervisors recognize that taking a little time to analyze the problem today may
prevent the problem from worsening tomorrow-training needs.

The above discussed performance appraisal steps can be shown in the following diagram.
Established Performance Standard with Employees

Mutual Set Measurement Goals

Measure Actual Performance

Compare Actual Performance with Standards

Discuss the Appraisal with the Employee

If necessary initiate Corrective Action

Figure 1: Performance Appraisal Steps.

Source: DeCenzo, (2007)

13
2.7. Who Conducts Appraisals

A rating program should help by ensuring that raters have an opportunity to observe the
performance they rate, have ability to make sound judgments, and use appropriate standards
against which to rate (Barret, 1966).

Observation: Observation is obviously the first step in any rating procedure. The rater must
collect some information about the persons rated, whether it is by direct observation, study of
records, or interviews with others who have direct knowledge of performance. What he/she
needs is sufficient observation of pertinent data to carry through the succeeding steps of the
rating process.

Judgment: Once the observations have been complete, the rater must evaluate what he/she has
seen and record his/her impressions. The rater must have a clear picture of what is required of the
job and the standards of satisfactory performance. He/she must understand the purpose of the
rating and what is expected to do. All these tasks call for intelligence and experience. The less
able supervisor tends to honor the conservative, cooperative subordinate who doesn‟t threaten
him/her.

Point of View: The rater who had adequate opportunity to observe, and who possesses the
equipment for making an adequate judgment, is not yet in a position to make a rating, because he
must fit what he/she has observed into his/her own value system, which provides him/her with
the standards against which to judge what he/she has seen. He/she must select from the countless
incidents he/she observed those which are pertinent to the rating task at hand. He/she must then
decide whether what he/she observed is good or poor, satisfactory or undesirable. It is at this
point that his/her own personality, experience, and personal values enter the rating.

Position: The position of the rater relative to the person being rated determines, in part, the
extent and nature of his/her opportunity to observe the quality of his judgment and the
appropriateness of his/her point of view.

14
By tradition, a manager‟s authority typically has included appraising subordinates‟ performance.
The logic behind this tradition seems to be that since managers are held responsible for their
subordinates‟ performance, it only makes sense that these managers do the evaluating of that
performance. However, others may actually be able to do the job better (Robbins, 1996). Among
these are:

Immediate Supervisor: Traditional rating of employees by supervisors is based on the

assumption that the immediate supervisor is the person most qualified to evaluate the employee‟s
performance realistically, objectively, and fairly. The unity of command notion - the idea that
every subordinate should have only one boss – underlies this approach. The advantage to this
source of appraisal is that supervisors are responsible for managing their subordinates and they
have the opportunity to observe, direct and control their subordinates continuously. Moreover,
supervisors are accountable for the successful performance of their subordinates. On the negative
side, immediate supervisors may emphasize certain aspects of employee performance to the
neglect of others. Also mangers have been known to manipulate evaluations to justify their
decisions on pay increases and promotions.

Managers and employees evaluate performance appraisal systems on different bases. Managers
tend to evaluate the systems on how well they aid in communicating with employees about their
performance levels and if they aid in enhancing better performance (Mathis & Jackson, 1997).
Employees rate the fairness of a performance appraisal higher if the following characteristics
exist: ratings are based on actual performance, standards are consistently applied and two-way
communication is allowed during the interview

Peers: Peer evaluations are one of the most reliable sources of appraisal data. First, peers are
close to the action. Daily interactions provide them with a comprehensive view of an employee‟s
job performance. Second, using peers as raters results in a number of independent judgments. A
boss can offer only a single evaluation, but peers can provide multiple appraisal. And average of
several ratings is often more reliable than a single evaluation. On the downside, peer evaluations
can suffer from coworkers‟ unwillingness to evaluate one another and from friendship-based
biases. Moreover, peer appraisal may be reliable if the work group is stable over a reasonably
long period of time and performs tasks that require interaction.

15
Self-Appraisal: If individuals understand the objectives they are expected to achieve and the
standards by which they are to be evaluated, they are to a great extent in the best position to
appraise their own performance. It is also appropriate under conditions where an employee is
working in isolation or possesses a unique skill in which case he/she may be the only one to rate
his/her behavior. Essentially, it is a self-development tool that forces employees to think about
their strengths and weaknesses and set goals for improvement. Also, since employee
development means self-development, employees who appraise their own performance may
become highly motivated. Having employees appraise their own performance is consistent with
values such as self-management and empowerment.

On the negative side, self-evaluations get high marks from employees themselves; they tend to
lessen employees‟ defensiveness about the appraisal process; and they make excellent vehicles
for stimulating job performance discussions between employees and their superiors. However,
they suffer from overinflated assessment and self-serving bias. Thus, because of these serious
drawbacks, self-appraisals are probably better suited to developmental uses than evaluative
purposes.

Immediate Subordinates: The concept of having supervisors and managers rated by employees
or group members is being used in a number of organizations today. A prime example of this
type of rating takes place in colleges and universities where students evaluate the performance of
professors in the classroom. There are three primary advantages to this source of appraisal. First,
in situations where manager-employee relationships are critical, employee ratings can be quite
useful in identifying competent managers. Second, this type of rating program can help make the
manager more responsive to employees, though this advantage can quickly become a
disadvantage if it leads the manager to try to be “nice” rather than to try to manage. Finally, it
can be the basis for coaching as part of a career development effort for the managers. The hope is
that the feedback will assist their managerial development.

A major disadvantage to appraisal by subordinates is the negative reaction many superiors have
to being evaluated by employees. The “proper” nature of manager/employee relations may be too
great for employees to give realistic ratings. In addition, employees may resist rating their bosses
because they do not perceive it as part of their jobs. If this situation exists workers may rate the
manager only on the way, the manger treats them and not on critical job requirements.

16
360 Degree Evaluations: The latest approach to performance evaluation is the use of 360 degree
evaluations. I t provides for performance feedback from the full circle of daily contacts that an
employee might have, ranging from mailroom personnel to customers to bosses to peers.

Performance data in 360 degree feedback process can be generated for individuals from the
person to whom they report, their direct reports, their peers (who could be team members and/or
colleagues in other parts of the organization) and their external and internal customers
(Armstrong, 2006)

2.8. Time to Conduct Performance Appraisal

In any administration activity of an organization, PA also has its own time to be conducted.
Everyone in the organization has his/her own time to conduct PA depending on their own
philosophy of time period (Mullins, 1996): With the majority of schemes, staff receives an
annual appraisal and for many organizations this may be sufficient. Also more frequent
appraisals may be appropriate for new members of staff, those recently promoted or appointed to
a new position or for those whose past performance has not been up to the required standard.
And also (Mathis & Jackson, 1997) broadly explained as follows:

First, an informal appraisal is conducted whenever the supervisor feels it is necessary. The day-
to-day working relationships between a manager and an employee performance have to be
judged. This judgment is communicated through conversation on the job or over coffee. Informal
appraisal is especially appropriate when time is an issue. The longer feedback is delayed the less
likely it is motivating behavior change. Frequent information feedback of employee can also
avoid surprises later when the formal evaluation is communicated.

Second, a systematic appraisal is used when the contact between manager and employee is
formalized and a system is established to report managerial impressions and observations on
employee performance. Although informal appraisal is useful, it should not take the place of
formal appraisal. When a formalized or systematic appraisal is used, the interface between the
HR unit and the appraising manager becomes more important. Therefore, systematic appraisals
typically are conducted once or twice a year.

17
Appraisals most often are conducted once a year, usually near the employee's anniversary date.
For new employees, an appraisal for 90 days after employment, again at six months, and
annually these after is common timing. This regular time interval is a feature of formal appraisals
and distinguishes them from informal appraisals. Both employees and managers are aware that
performance will be reviewed on a regular basis, and they can plan for performance discussions.
In addition, informal appraisals should be conducted whenever a manager feels they are
desirable.

2.9. Methods of Performance Appraisal

In order for performance appraisal to achieve its purposes, a variety of methods have been
developed. The choice of a method depends on organizational philosophy, its objectives in
making the appraisal, its size, product, technology, etc. The most prevalent methods fall under
four major groups, namely, category rating methods, comparative methods, narrative methods,
and special methods (Mathis and Jackson, 1997).

2.9.1. Category Rating Methods

These are the simplest methods for appraising performance which require a manager (supervisor)
to mark an employee‟s level of performance on a specific form. The graphic rating scales,
checklist and the forced choice method fall under this classification.

Graphic Rating Scale: This is the oldest and most widely used performance evaluation
technique also known as linear rating scale or simple rating scale. It measures the degree of
characteristics required for adequate performance of the job and consists of a number of
characteristics and qualities which are judged on a point scale. The rater is presented with a set of
traits such as quantity and quality of work, knowledge of job, cooperativeness, dependability,
attendance, attitude, initiative, leadership, decisiveness, emotional maturity, etc. The supervisor
evaluates these characteristics on a point scale from high to low, excellent to poor, etc.

The advantage of this method is that it is easy to construct, understand, and use. Moreover, they
allow for quantitative analysis and comparison. A major drawback to this method is its
subjectivity and low reliability. Another limitation is that the descriptive words often used in
such scales may have different meanings to different raters.

18
Checklist: The checklist is a simple rating technique in which the supervisor is given a list of
statements or words and asked to check statements representing the characteristics and
performance of each employee. There are several difficulties with the checklist: (1) as with the
graphic rating scale, the words or statements may have different meanings to different raters; (2)
raters cannot discern the rating results if a weighted checklist is used; and (3) raters do not assign
the weights to the factors-it is someone else, such as a member from the HR department who
usually does so. These difficulties limit the use of the information when a rater discusses the
checklist with the employee, creating a barrier to effective developmental counseling.

Forced Choice: In its simplest form, the method consists of providing a list of behavior related
statements. The supervisor is asked to indicate one least and one most descriptive statement for a
particular subordinate. These statements are usually grouped in clusters of five based on a broad
theme covered by these statement. Each statement carries some weight which is not known to the
supervisor. One distinct advantage of this method is that it is very objective. The supervisor does
not know the weights of the statements and hence can only check those that are most and least
descriptive of an employee. There is no way he/she can favor a particular employee.

However, the same can be said to be the most distinct disadvantage of the method. When a
supervisor genuinely wants to reward an employee, he/she cannot do it because he/she doesn‟t
know the weight of a statement. A second disadvantage of a forced choice method takes lot of
time, effort, and requires professional help.

2.9.2. Comparative Methods

These methods, unlike the other methods, require managers or supervisors to compare
performance appraisals of employees having same job description (Mathis and Jackson, 1997).
For example, an accountant‟s performance can be compared with that of other accountants.

19
Comparative methods include ranking, paired comparison, and forced distribution.

Ranking: The ranking method consists of listing all employees from highest to lowest in
performance. It is difficult to do if the group of employees being compared numbers over 20. It
is also easier to rank the best and worst employees than it is to evaluate the average ones. Simple
ranking can be improved by alternative ranking. In this approach, the evaluators pick the top and
bottom employees first, then select the next highest and next lowest, and move toward the
middle (Ivancevich & Glueck, 1989).

The primary drawback of the ranking method is that the size of the differences among
individuals is not well defined. For example, there may be little difference in performance
between individuals ranked second and third but a big difference in performance between those
ranked third and fourth. This drawback can be overcome to some extent by assigning points to
indicate the size of the gaps. Ranking also means that someone must be last. It is possible that the
last-ranked individual in one group would be the top employee in a different group (Mathis &
Jackson, 1997).

Paired comparisons: The paired comparison method gives more information about individual
employees than the straight ranking method does. The large number of comparisons that must be
made is the major drawback of this method (Mathis & Jackson, 1997). This method requires the
rater to compare each employee with every other employee working under him/her on the overall
efficiency aspect (Saiyadain, 1999).

Forced distribution: This method is developed to prevent the raters from rating too high or too
low. Under the forced distribution method, the rater after assigning the points to the performance
of each employee has to distribute his/her ratings in a pattern to conform to normal frequency
distribution (Rao & Rao, 2004). There are several drawbacks to the forced distribution method.
One problem is that a supervisor may resist placing any individual in the lowest (or the highest)
group. Difficulties may arise when the rater must explain to the employee why he/she was placed
in one grouping and others were placed in higher groupings. Further, with small groups, there
may be no reason to assume that a bell-shaped distribution of performance really exists. Finally,
in some cases the manager may be forced to make distinctions among employees that may not
exist (Mathis & Jackson, 1997).

20
Generally, the distribution of performance appraisal ratings does not approximate the normal
distribution of the bell-shaped curve. Hence this method is based on the rather questionable
assumption that all groups of employees will have the same distribution of excellent, average and
poor performers. If one department has all outstanding employees, the rater would find it
difficult to decide who should be placed in the lower categories.

2.9.3. Narrative Methods

Written appraisal information is sometimes required of some managers and human resource
specialists. These methods are used when documentation and description of an employee‟s
actions are sought rather than an actual rating. The two most widely used techniques that fall
under this classification are the essay and critical incident methods.

Essay or Free Form Appraisal: This method requires the rater to write a short essay describing
each employee‟s performance during the rating period. It emphasizes evaluation of overall
performance, based on strengths and weaknesses of employee performance, rather than specific
job dimension. As raters may be required to enumerate specific examples of employee behavior,
the essay technique minimizes rater bias and hallo effect (Rao & Rao, 2004). A written essay
requires no complex forms or extensive training to complete, but the results often reflect the
ability of the writer. A good or bad appraisal may be determined as much by the evaluator‟s
writing skill as by the employee‟s actual level of performance (Robbins, 1996).

Critical Incidents: Critical incidents focus the evaluator‟s attention on those behaviors that are
key in making the difference between executing a job effectively and executing it ineffectively.
That is, the appraiser writes down anecdotes describing what the employee did that was
especially effective and ineffective. The key here is that only specific behaviors, not vaguely
defined personality traits, are cited (Robbins, 1996).

Critical incidents, according to critics, are misleading because only the extreme and unusual
elements are reported at the expense of the steady, day-to-day performance, which is the real
substance of an employee‟s effectiveness. The unsystematic records kept by supervisors leave
great room for the operation of the bias the system is supposed to eliminate, or at least to reduce
(Barret, 1966).

21
2.9.4. Special Methods

Behavioral Rating Approaches: These approaches attempt to assess an employee‟s behaviors

instead of measuring or quantifying outputs. Behavior-based performance appraisal formats
which concentrate on the ratee‟s behaviors are most appropriate under circumstances where
controlling behaviors or processes assumes that the desired output will result. In other words,
they are most appropriate when the transformation process is understood or when there is a high
degree of linkage between means and ends (Lee, 1985).

Some of the different behavioral approaches are: behaviorally anchored rating scales (BARS),
behavioral observation scales (BOS), and behavioral expectation scales (BES). BARS match
descriptions of possible behaviors with what the employee most commonly exhibits. BOS are
used to count the number of times certain behaviors are exhibited. BES order behaviors on a
continuum to define outstanding, average and unacceptable performance (Mathis and Jackson,
1997). BARS are presented below as representatives to behavioral ratings.

Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS): BARS combine major elements from the critical
incident and graphic rating scale approaches: The appraiser rates employees based on items
along a continuum, but the points are examples of actual behavior on the given job rather than
general descriptions or traits.

BARS specify definite, observable, and measurable job behavior. Examples of job-related
behavior and performance dimensions are found by asking participants to give specific
illustrations of effective and ineffective behavior regarding each performance dimension. These
behavioral examples are then translated into a set of performance dimensions, each dimension
having varying levels of performance. BARS are intended to specify in an ambiguous fashion the
behavioral characteristics of effective and ineffective performance. Briefly, scales are developed
by distilling critical incidents (examples of good and poor performance, supplied by those
familiar with a job) into a manageable number of performance dimensions. The proposed
advantage of BARS is that evaluator bias (halo, central tendency effects) is reduced as criteria of
performance become more behaviorally grounded (Keely, 1978).

22
Management by Objectives (MBO): MBO specifies the performance goals that an individual
hope to attain within an appropriate length of time. The objectives that each manager sets are
derived from the overall goals and objectives of the organization, although MBO should not be a
disguised method for a superior to dictate the objectives of individual managers or employees.
Although not limited to appraisal of managers, MBO is most often used for this purpose. Other
names for MBO include appraisal by results, targeting, coaching, work planning and review,
performance objectives and mutual goal setting (Mathis & Jackson, 1997).

Implementing a guided self-appraisal system using MBO is a four-stage process (Mathis &
Jackson, 1997). These are: Job review and agreement, development of performance standards,
guided objective setting and continuing performance discussions. It can be deduced that in theory
MBO promotes success in each employee because, as each employee succeeds, so do the
manager, the department and the organization. However, this happens if all stakeholders have
compatible goals (Cascio, 2003). Additionally, as no management tool is perfect, MBO is not
appropriate for all employees or for all organizations (Mathis & Jackson, 1997).

2.10. Potential Problems in Performance Appraisal

While organizations may seek the performance appraisal process to be free from personal biases,
prejudices, and idiosyncrasies, a number of potential problems can creep into the process
(Robbins, 1996). Problems related to performance appraisal can be of three general types. These
are: human errors, problems of criteria, and problems of confidentiality (Saiyadain, 1999).

2.10.1. Human Errors (rating biases)

Human errors are errors that happened without the supervisor knowledge about them and have
much control over them. To the degree that the following human factors are prevalent, an
employee‟s evaluation is likely to be distorted:

Single Criterion: A typical employee‟s job is made up of a number of tasks. Where employees
are evaluated on a single job criterion, and where successful performance on the job requires
good performance on a number of criteria, employees will emphasize the single criterion to the
exclusion of other job-relevant factors.

23
Leniency Error: Every evaluator has his or her own value system that acts as a standard against
which appraisals are made. Relative to the true or actual performance an individual exhibit, some
raters have a tendency to be liberal in their rating by assigning higher rates consistently. Such
ratings do not serve any purpose. Equally damaging one is assigning consistently low rates.

Halo Error: This is the tendency for an evaluator to let the assessment of an individual on one
trait influence his or her evaluation of that person on other traits. A person may be good in one
trait but is generally rated as overall good. Halo effect takes place when traits are not clearly
defined and are unfamiliar.

Central Tendency Errors: Some raters follow play safe policy in rating by rating employees
around the middle point of the rating scale and they avoid rating at both the extremes of the
scale. They follow play safe policy because of answerability to management or lack of
knowledge about the job and/or the employee rated or the appraisers‟ lack of interest in their job
(Rao & Rao, 2004).

Recency vs. Primacy Effect: One difficulty with many of the evaluation systems is the time
frame of the behavior being evaluated. Raters forget more about past behavior than current
behavior (Ivancevich & Glueck, 1989). Recency refers to the proximity or closeness to appraisal
period. Generally, an employee takes it easy for the whole year and does little to get by the
punishment. However, as appraisal time gets closer, he/she becomes very active creating an
illusion of efficiency in the rater thereby affecting his/her appraisal decision. Primacy is the
opposite of recency, it refers to a situation where an employee‟s initial impression influences
his/her rater‟s appraisal decision irrespective of whether the employee has been able to keep up
the initial impression or not.

Similarity Error: This occurs when appraisers rate other people giving special consideration to
those qualities they perceive in themselves. The similarity between the rater and ratee may take
one or more of the following forms: demographic similarity, affective similarity, perceived
similarity & mutual liking (Schraeder & Simpson, 2006).

24
2.10.2. Problems of Criteria

Appraisal has to be against criteria. If a discrepancy between and actual performance is pointed
out, the question is whether the expected was fully defined and communicated to the employee.
In the absence of such an attempt, the appraisal reports can be questioned. The issue basically to
refer to job description. It is true that jobs can be clearly defined at the lower level in the
organization hierarchy. However, as one goes up, it becomes more and more difficult to clearly
specify the tasks one is supposed to perform (Muhammad, 2013).

The other problem related to performance evaluation criteria is lack of standards. The standard
used by different department in the organization may not be the same, hence, rating becomes
unscientific and employees suffer. Some rates are too liberal while others are too strict causing
lack of uniformity (Saiyadain, 1999).

2.10.3. Problems of Confidentiality

One important issue in performance appraisal has to do with sharing or keeping secret the ratings
on various items of appraisal report. While many organizations have a system of selective
feedback to the employee, the general policy is not to share the total report with the employee.
There are many reasons for this, first, each employees expects rewards if the report is better than
average, which may not be administratively possible, secondly, very often supervisors pass the
challenge to top management by saying that while they did give good rating to employee; top
management did not take that into consideration. Thirdly, giving rewards is not the only
objective of appraising employees. Given these reasons, it is emphasized that supervisory ratings
of employee should be kept confidential (Saiyadain, 1999).

On the other hand, it is claimed that since there will always be differences between the
supervisor and employee‟s perception of the subordinate‟s job performance, perhaps the
employee should fully be aware of how he or she has been rated (Saiyadain, 1999). In fact,
MBO, which is tailored to the individual, was introduced to take care of this problem. However,
MBO does not readily provide the data needed for decisions on wage increase, promotion, and
other personnel actions that require comparisons between two and more employee.

25
In addition to the above three potential errors which affect the performance appraisal system in
one organization, employee opposition to evaluation process and the system design problem by
its self also has factor on the appraisal process. If employees perceive the evaluation to be unfair
there will be lack of trust in the process causing them to oppose the whole system. As a result,
makes it impossible to conduct effective performance evaluation. Poorly designed system that
may cause due to poor criteria, time consuming techniques or irregularly used system may cause
the performance evaluation system to break down (Saiyadain, 1999). So, the performance
appraisal system should be designed with due care and should be tested before being
implemented.

2.11. Techniques to Overcome Performance Appraisal Problems

The performance evaluation process is a potential minefield of problems. For instance,

evaluators can unconsciously have made decision on employee performance evaluation and
commit one of the stated appraisal errors. Just because organization can encounter problems with
performance appraisal should not lead managers to give up the process. Some measures can be
taken to overcome most of the problems identified above. According to Robbins (1996), the
following suggestions have significant help to make the appraisal process more objective and
fair.

Use of Multiple Criteria: The more complex a job is the more criteria that will need to be
identified and evaluated. Only the critical activities, not everything, that lead to high or low
performance are the ones that need to be evaluated.

Emphasizing Behaviors rather than Traits: Many traits often considered to be related to good
performance may, in fact, have little or no performance relationship. For example, individuals
who rate high on such traits as loyalty, initiative, courage, reliability, etc., may be poor
performers. Conversely, it is possible to find excellent performers who do not score well on such
traits.

26
Documenting Performance Behaviors in Diary: Diaries help evaluators to better organize
information in their memory (Mahapatron, 2010). The evidence indicates that by keeping a diary
of specific critical incidents for each employee, evaluations tend to be more accurate and less
disposed to rating errors. Diaries, for instance, tend to reduce leniency and halo errors because
they encourage the evaluator to focus on performance-related behaviors rather than traits.

Use of Multiple Evaluators: As the number of evaluators increases, the probability of attaining
more accurate information increases. Thus, if an employee has had nine supervisors, nine having
rated him/her excellent and one poor, one can discount the value of the one poor evaluation.
Therefore, by moving employees about within the organization so as to gain a number of
evaluations or by using multiple assessors (as provided in 360-degree appraisals), the probability
of achieving more valid and reliable evaluations can be increased.

Evaluate Selectively: Appraisers should evaluate in only those areas in which they have some
expertise. This approach also recognizes that different organizational levels often have different
orientations toward ratees and observe them in different settings. In general, therefore, we would
recommend that appraisers should be as close as possible, in terms of organizational level, to the
individual being evaluated. Conversely, the more levels that separate the evaluator and evaluate,
the less opportunity the evaluator has to observe the individual‟s behavior and, not surprisingly,
the greater the possibility for inaccuracies (Mahapatron, 2010).

Training Employees and Raters: For employees, performance appraisal training focuses on the
purpose of appraisal, the appraisal process and timing, and how performance criteria and
standards are linked to job description and responsibilities. And for supervisors, it coaches on
how to do performance appraisal. Because conducting the appraisal is critical, training should
center around minimizing rater errors and providing raters with detail on documenting
performance information (Mahapatron, 2010).

27
2.12. Effective Performance Appraisal System

According to Delpo (2007), there are some specific qualities that all effective performance
evaluation systems share, paying particular attention to those that you as a manager can control.

A Fair and Communicative Environment: The most effective performance appraisal systems
place concern for the employee at their core. The reality is that you cannot control your
employees‟ behavior only they control how they perform their jobs. Research has shown,
however, that the majority of employees want to perform well; the key is to provide them with
the right environment in which to do so. Such an environment includes support, communication,
collaboration and fair treatment the very qualities created by effective performance appraisal
systems.

Respect for the Employee: Respecting employees respect its foundation for any effective
performance evaluation system. Employees who feel respected are more likely to buy into the
appraisal system to participate fully and sincerely in setting goals and to strive hard to perform to
the standards you set. On the other hand, employees who do not feel respected will show that
same lack of respect for you and your efforts to improve their performance.

Focus on the Future: If, at its heart, a performance appraisal process is designed to improve
employee performance, then a manager should emphasize what the employee can do going
forward, not how the employee did in the past. The past can inform your ideas about the future,
but it should not be the sole focus of the appraisal process.

This means that one should spend the bulk of the appraisal meeting on identifying goals for the
next year and talking about how the employee can achieve them. It also means that your
feedback throughout the year should not punish or shame employees for bad performance, but
help employees see when their performance is slipping and strategize with them on how to
improve. This does not mean that looking to the past performance has no place in the process;
indeed, at each evaluation and discuss how the employee met the goals set at the previous
evaluation. But you should look to the past with goal of learning from it, so that the look
backward is developmental and helpful to the employee, rather than punishing.

28
Employee Participation: Another element common to successful performance evaluation
systems is employee participation. Employees must play a key role, participating in everything
from writing job descriptions, to identifying their own goals and standards, to assessing how well
they have performed. You can increase employee‟s job satisfaction and create their trust in the
appraisal system by bringing them into the loop and giving them power and responsibility for
directing and assessing their own performance. This satisfaction and trust leads employees to
accept the company‟s appraisal process and make a commitment to their own development.

Research has shown that when employees are involved in goal setting, the goals they set are
higher and more demanding than goals that managers set alone. Employees will push the
envelope, often demanding more of themselves than you might demand of them. Employee
participation promotes team work. It gives the two of you the sense of working together rather
than being opposite sides of the fence. It also reduces the chances that you will miss out on
important or insights you could share with each other.

Ongoing Feedback: Giving employee‟s feedback both positive and negative as circumstances
warrant is another important feature of an effective performance evaluation system. If you tell
employees what you think of their performance only once a year, you have wasted a lot of
opportunities throughout the year to encourage good performance and to help employees who are
struggling get back on track.

Feedback also helps employees adjust as circumstances change throughout the year. The
importance of certain goals may shift; obstacles may appear; employees may lose motivation or
focus. Your feedback will tell employees what is still important, what is no longer important, and
what they can do to achieve their goals in the face of these changes.

Studies show that without feedback, a performance appraisal system alone will not improve
employee performance. Positive feedback, often particularly neglected, is important: providing
positive feedback whenever appropriate gives employees a sense of accomplishment and
appreciation, while highlighting standards for how they should continue to perform.

29
Document: Ongoing and accurate documentation is the core of a good performance appraisal
system. Documentation covering the entire appraisal period ensures that your review will be fair
and accurate and gives you rock solid support in case of a complaint. Without good
documentation of an employee‟s performance throughout the year, all you will have are
memories and emotional feelings, neither of which is reliable or legally safe. In addition, good
documentation provides continuity should the employee change departments or managers. If the
old manager properly documented the employee‟s performance, the new manager can take over
easily than if no record existed.

30
 CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

3.1. The Research Design

Research design is a blue print for selecting the sources and types of data relevant to the research
questions (Zikmund et al., 2003). This study employed a descriptive study research design and
used cross sectional survey tools to collect data from samples that were drawn from population
in order to determine the current status of that population with respect to the research objectives
(Mugenda & Mugenda, 2003). Since the study was descriptive type of research, it describes the
practice and challenges of performance appraisal and alignment with the university‟s policy and
objective. It is useful to gather data on a one shot basis and hence is economical and efficient,
represents a wide target population, generates numerical data and provides descriptive,
inferential and explanatory information (Abiy, Alemayehu, Daniel, Melese & Yilma, 2009).

3.2. Sources of Data

The sources of data for the study were both primary and secondary. Regarding the primary
source, data were collected from academic staffs of Kotebe University College working in
different capacities through questionnaire and structured interview. Secondary data was gathered
from the university college strategic plan and university‟s annual reports on human resource
management.

3.3. Sample and Sampling Technique

3.3.1. Sample

Kotebe University College had a total of 564 staffs, out of these 186 academic staffs and 378
administrative (supportive) staffs as of December, 2015. For the purpose of this study the
researcher had taken only academic staffs as a population comprising of five faculties which
includes (Natural and Computational Science, Social Science, Language and Humanity, College
of Teacher Education and Urban Development). The selection for these five faculties was
because of the University College regularly practice performance appraisal only for the academic
staffs.

31
3.3.2. Sampling Techniques

In the determination of sample size, the three criteria are important to gather the required data
from sample of respondents. These included the level of precision, the level of confidence or risk
and the degree of variability in the attributes being measured that enable the researchers to
determine appropriate sample size (Miauous & Michener, 1976), by considering these issues
sample size to collect data through questionnaire for this research was determined by using
Yamane‟s (1967) formula. Therefore, 127 respondents were used as sample for this study to
gather data through questionnaire.

The researcher had taken academic staffs as a population comprising of five faculties. Thus the
researcher deemed it necessary to take independent sample for each faculty to ensure equal
representation, because the faculties have different number of employees. Therefore, the sample
sizes for each faculty were calculated using proportion to size of 68% (127).

Number of Natural and Computational Science staff was 87, Social Science staff was 29,
Language and Humanity staff was 39, College of Teacher Education staff was 25 and Urban
Development staff was 6. Proportional allocation to size of 68% was made to each of the five
categories. Accordingly, 59 participants from Natural and Computational Science, 20 from
Social Science staff, 27 from Language and Humanity staff, 17 from College of Teacher
Education and 4 from Urban Development staff were selected using stratified random sampling.

3.4. Instruments and Procedures of Data Collection

3.4.1. Instruments of Data Collection

The research methods that were used in this study are both qualitative and quantitative. Both
primary and secondary data were used to collect the required information. The secondary data
was gathered from the university college strategic plan and university‟s annual reports on human
resource management. Primary data were gathered from questionnaires distributed to the
samples respondents and a structured interview was made with Academic staff affairs director.
The questionnaires were designed and administered to representative employees of Kotebe
University College. It consisted of a five point Likert scale responses ranging from 1=very low to
5=very high (1 = very low, 2 = low, 3 = medium, 4 = high, 5 = very high). The questionnaire had

32
six parts to obtain the necessary information about purposes, processes, criteria, objective,
problem and participants in the appraisal. And also it was made short and clear in order to ensure
that it takes the respondents less time to answer. Moreover, the researcher selected the academic
staff, who would give relevant information for the study. Therefore, the interview was made with
one academic staff affairs director.

3.4.2. Procedures of Data Collection

The questionnaire was prepared in English, as it was distributed to employees of Kotebe

University College. Questionnaires were distributed by the researcher and interviews were also
conducted by the researcher on face to face base to get further and reliable information, opinion,
and attitudes of the respondents to enrich the data gathered by questionnaire.

3.5. Methods of Data Analysis

The method of data analysis was mainly descriptive type and the analysis was handled in a way
that each issue included in the study could be addressed. Both qualitative and quantitative
descriptions were applied. Data entry and analysis of the sample were made by the researcher
with the help of statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20 tools such as mean,
frequency, percentage and tables. The qualitative data obtained from interview was summarized
and used as a means of cross checking the data gathered through questionnaires.

3.6. Ethical Consideration

The researcher asked permission in advance from Kotebe University College for the research and
also to distribute questionnaires to the selected academic staffs. The researcher indicated at the
middle of the questioner and also confirmed the employees that all data would be used for
academic purpose. In general, the collected data and its analysis has been kept confidential and
used only for the study purpose. And the researcher assured them that the data they provided
would not have any kind of harm on them.

33
 CHAPTER FOUR

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter consists of two parts. The first part shows on the characteristic of the respondent
that include personal & professional characteristic the second part deals with the presentations,
analysis and discussion of the major findings in description of the basic questions that were
analyzed based on the response obtained from the employees, Moreover, the numerical data of
the sample, collectibles and response rates are summarized.

4.1. Characteristics of Respondents

A total of one hundred twenty-seven copies of the questionnaire were distributed to the
respondents. Out of these questionnaires one hundred five returned, which is 83% response rate
and considered as acceptable to investigate the study.

Table 1: Age and Gender Distribution of Respondents

No. Variables Frequency Percent
Female 22 21.0
1 Sex
Male 83 79.0
Total 105 100
21-30 4 3.8
31-40 52 49.5
2 Age 41-50 27 25.7
51-60 19 18.1
>60 3 2.9
Total 105 100

Table one show the demographic characteristics of employee regarding sex, age, qualification
and year of service. Out of the total 105 employees 83(79%) were male and 22(21%) were
female. With respect to age distribution of the respondents, 4(3.8%) of them were in the age
group 21-30, 52(49.5%) were in the age group 31-40, 27(25.7%) were in the age group 41-50,
19(18.1%) were in age group 51-60 and 3(2.9%) in age group greater than 60.

34
Table 2: Qualification and Experience of Respondents
No. Variables Frequency Percent
Diploma 1 1.0
Educational BA 5 4.8
1
Level Master 93 88.6
PHD 6 5.7
Total 105 100
1-5 4 3.8
6-10 32 30.5
Experience
2 11-15 32 30.5
at KUC
16-20 8 7.6
>20 29 27.6
Total 105 100

Educational background of respondents, the majorities 93(88.6%) have Master‟s Degree,

6(5.7%) have PHD, 5(4.8%) have BA, and 1(1%) has diploma. Therefore, it is possible to
conclude that the information obtained from them can be considered as a reliable and reasonable
due to their academic background.

Regarding respondents work experience, of the total 105 survey respondents, 4(3.8%)
respondents had 1-5 years of working experience, 32(30.5%) respondents had working
experience of 6-10 years, 32(30.5%) respondents had working experience of 11-15 years, and 8
(7.6%) respondents had 16-20 years of working service and the remaining 29(27.6%)
respondents had over 20 years of service . This has an implication that, high proportions of
respondents had greater than 5 years of working experience. This group of employees most
certainly might have gone through the PA process several times, and could be considered to have
gained greater insight into the system issues.

4.2. Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data

This is the second part of this chapter that deals with the presentation, analysis and interpretation
of data on the assessment of staff performance appraisal practice in KUC. Here, all items were
presented to the respondents to be rated in likert scale with five points from very high =5 to very
low =1. The main aim of this part of analysis is to assess the primary purpose of staff
performance appraisal in KUC and the response were presented, analyzed and interpreted in
table items.
35
The response were scaled from 5 to 1, where 5 indicated very high, 4 indicated high, 3 indicated
medium, 2 indicated low and 1 indicated very low. According to the tool used in the study, the
researcher identified the following as the main purpose of performance appraisal and their
percentage.

Table 3: Purpose of Performance Appraisal in Kotebe University College

Table 3a: Purpose of Performance Appraisal

Very High Medium LowVery
No. Items High Low
F % F % F % F % F %
To what extent the performance 8 7.6 37 35.2 31 29.5 27 25.7 2 1.9
appraisal finds out the strength and
1
weakness of the employee.

The extent of promoting a two-way 3 2.9 27 25.7 40 38.1 32 30.5 3 2.9

system of communication between the
2
supervisors and the employees.

Based on the result to what extent - - 11 10.5 24 22.9 30 28.6 40 38.1

performance appraisal serves to
3 determine appropriate salary
increment.

The first question raised was to get data on whether or not the performance appraisal system
helped employees to gain insights into their strength and weaknesses. Out of the total
respondents; 8 (7.6%) answered very high, 37(35.2%) high, 31(29.5%) medium, 27(25.7%) low
and 2(1.9%) are very low. If performance appraisal system properly implemented, it helps easily
to identify employee performance weakness and strengthens. In addition, if proper feedback is
provided timely, it will bring about improvement. The majority or 42.8% respondents also
supported that performance appraisal system helps employees to gain insights into their strength
and weaknesses. Therefore, we can infer that performance appraisal system have advantage to
identify employee‟s performance strengths and weaknesses.

36
On the statement indicating the purpose of performance appraisal contributes toward promoting
two way systems of communication shows that 3(2.9%) very high, 27(25.7%) high, the majority
40(38.1%) of employees medium, while 32(30.5%) and 3(2.9%) low and very low respectively.
As Ivancevich and Glueck (1989) citing by Robbins (1996), evaluation is a basis for an ongoing
discussion between superior and subordinate about job-related matters. Through interaction, the
parties get to know each other better. Evaluations fulfill the purpose of providing feedback to
employees on how the organization views their performance.

On the ground of this scholarly remarks, one may realize that the extent to which performance
appraisal promotes two-way communication between supervisor and employees in the institution
under study more of seem to range from low to moderate level.

30(28.6%) and 40(38.1%) of respondents rated as low and very low respectively, with statement
that explains performance appraisals a base for salary increment, while 11 (10.5%) high and
24(22.9%) are medium. With respect to performance appraisal, McCoy (2007) states that the
goals of best employee performance appraisals are employee development and organizational
improvement. To this end, one of the means by which employee development can be ensured is
by making salary increment for an employee who achieves the desired performance appraisal
result. However, on the basis of the numerical data presented in this regard, the researcher can
statistically infer that KUC does not use performance appraisals to determine appropriate salary
increment so as to promote employee development.

Table 3b: Purpose of Performance Appraisal

Very High Medium Low Very
No. Items High Low
F % F % F % F % F %
To what extent performance appraisal 3 2.9 30 28.6 22 21 37 35.2 13 12.4
promote personal growth and
1 advancement in the career of the
employees.
To what extent performance appraisal - - 14 13.3 38 36.2 32 30.5 21 20
serves to determine employees'
2 demotion and transfer.

To what extent performance appraisal 3 2.9 32 30.5 23 21.9 28 26.7 19 18.1

serves to determine employee's training
3
needs.

37
On the statement that explains performance appraisal promote personal growth in the career;
3(2.9%) rated very high, 30(28.6%) high, while 22(21%) medium, 37(35.2%) low and
13(12.4%) very low. Performance appraisal is a key component of employee development.
Besides, it is a part of career development and consists of regular reviews of employee
performance within the organization. However, the response provided by the research
participants to this item illuminates that the result of performance appraisal are not used to
promote personal growth and career development.

On the open ended question, the respondents suggested that promotion in KUC is not based on
performance appraisal result; it is a matter of personal endeavor not a result of evaluation.
The other issue suggested was excellent performers and achievers should be rewarded and
recognized. There should be regular response to the results achieved. Moreover, based on the
interview conducted, the interviewee replied that the appraisal was not strictly met its intended
purposes as mentioned in the University college strategic plan which express that employees will
be rewarded for individual performance through job promotions, recognition letter/certificate,
financial rewards, and scholarship.

To conclude, the main purpose of performance appraisal as perceived by respondents is to

identify the strength and weakness of employees it is rated high with the percentage of 48.2.
Meanwhile, items like to promote personal growth in the career, to determine employees‟
demotion and transfer and to determine employee‟s training needs rated low with the percentage
of 47.6, 50.5 and 44.8 respectively. This figure enables us to explain that the purpose of
performance appraisal at KUC to some extent varies from the theories in which various authors
have mentioned as the purposes of performance appraisal that is to make managerial decisions,
to decide on demotion, to transfer and reward.

As Daley, (1992) stated that performance appraisal is an essential management technique. It is

used in judgmental workforce decisions, such as promotion, demotion, retention, transfer, and
pay and for employee development via feedback and training; it also serves the organization as a
means for validating selection and hiring procedures, promoting employee-supervisor
understanding, and supporting an organizations culture.

38
Table 4: Process of Performance Appraisal in Kotebe University College

Table 4a: Process of Performance Appraisal

Very
High Medium Low Very Low
No. Items High
F % F % F % F % F %
To what extent 11 10.5 35 33.3 35 33.3 21 20 3 2.9
performance appraisal
procedures in KUC
1
uniformly apply to all
employees.

To what extent 8 7.6 43 41 27 25.7 21 20 6 5.7

performance appraisal
system in KUC is
2 designed in the way that
it is possible to get
practiced.

To what extent supervisor 8 7.6 14 13.3 26 24.8 57 54. - -

keeps a file on 3
employee‟s activities
3
throughout the appraisal
period.

Table 4 above which deals with the performance appraisal procedures in KUC uniformly apply to
all employees. From the total respondents of 105; 11(10.5%) respondents rated very high,
35(33.3%) high, 35(33.3%) medium. As opposed to the above participants, 21(20%) and the rest 3
(2.9%) respondents rated low and very low respectively.

The other question raised on the questionnaire was the performance appraisal system designed in
the way that it is possible to get practiced; out of the total respondent; 8(7.6%) rated very high, 43
(41%) high, 27(25.7%) medium. On the other hand, 21 (20%) rated low and the rest of 6 (5.7%)
rated very low. Jennifer (2010), explains that performance appraisal criteria should be achievable
or attainable by employees. Thus, employees should have the opportunity to provide input in
formulating the evaluation and restructuring the process in order to ensure the standards for
success are both objective and attainable. The data provided by majority of the research
participants imply that the performance appraisal system does seem to have been designed in the
way that it is practiced or attained.

39
The other issue mentioned on the questionnaire is which deals with the supervisor keep file on
employee‟s activities throughout the appraisal period. Out of 105 respondents; 8(7.6%) rated very
high, 14(13.3%) high, 26(24.8%) medium and the majority respondents 57(54.3%) rated low.

As Delpo (2007), stated that ongoing and accurate documentation is the core of a good
performance appraisal system. Documentation covering the entire appraisal period ensures that
your review will be fair and accurate and gives you rock solid support in case of a complaint.
Without good documentation of an employee‟s performance throughout the year, all you will
have is memory and emotional feeling, neither of which is reliable or legally safe.

Table 4b: Process of Performance Appraisal

Very
High Medium Low Very Low
No. Items High
F % F % F % F % F %
The extent to which 11 10.5 49 46.7 19 18.1 20 19 6 5.7
performance is evaluated
1 as per pre-established
standards.

The extent to which - - 19 18.1 30 28.6 48 45.7 8 7.6

feedback on good or poor
progress is forwarded
2
openly after performance
appraisal.

To what extent - - 22 21 26 24.8 47 44.8 10 9.5

employees have ways to
3 appeal for appraisal
complaints.

The extent to which 14 13.3 48 45.7 19 18.1 19 18.1 5 4.8

performance appraisal is
4
conducted regularly.

On the other hand, the statement that appraisal is done as per the pre-established standards,
11(10.5%) rated very high, the majority of the respondents 49(46.7%) rated high, while
19(18.1%) medium, 20(19%) and 6(5.7%) are rated low and very low respectively. This
elaborates that performance appraisal is conducted based on the pre-established standards.

40
The above table reports results on feedback on good or poor progress is forwarded openly after
performance appraisal, 19(18.1%) high, 30(28.6%) medium, the majority 48(45.7%) of
employees rated low and 8(7.6%) very low. As a matter of fact, one of the objectives of
performance appraisal is to check the employee‟s progress. This provides employers with an
opportunity to assess their employees‟ contributions to the organization and is essential to
developing a powerful work team. On the other hand, it is an important tool to provide
supportive feedback where needed to improve performance deficiencies. Since performance
appraisal is both evaluative and communication tool, regular feedback on good or poor progress
needs to be forwarded after the appraisal. Based on this perspective, the data indicate that this
practice in KUC is carried out at a lower level.

Regarding ways to appeal for complaints, 10(9.5%) are rated very low, the majority 47(44.8%)
low, while 26(24.8%) medium and 22(21%) are rated high. This illuminates that there is no clear
way to complain about their performance appraisal results. On the open ended question, the
respondents suggested that there should be follow ups and corrective measures to be taken by the
supervisory offices. The result reveals on the view of appraisal results not communicated
consistently to the academic staffs. Even if they are communicated and welcomingly accept the
result without compliant, most of them see the performance appraisal as something that has no
effect on their career.

Most respondents 48(45.7%) rated high, 14(13.3%) rated very high that performance appraisal is
conducted regularly, while 19 (18.1%) medium, 19(18.1%) are low and 5 (4.8%) very low. This
shows that staff performance appraisal is conducted regularly. Similarly, on the interview
session, the interviewee responded that the University College appraises academic staffs at the
end of each semester.

41
Table 5: Performance Appraisal Alignment with its Objectives
Very
High Medium Low Very Low
No. Items High
F % F % F % F % F %
The extent to which 6 5.7 19 18.1 38 36.2 32 30.5 10 9.5
performance goals clearly
communicated to
1
employee by supervisor(s)
via job descriptions.

To what extent every 11 10.5 38 36.2 38 36.2 18 17.1 - -

employee in KUC
understands how his/her
2 efforts contribute to
organizational mission
accomplishment.

The extent to which the 6 5.7 32 30.5 35 33.3 26 24.8 6 5.7

performance appraisal
identifies employee's
3
performance toward
organizational goal.

With regard to the issue that performance goals clearly communicated to employee by supervisor
via job description reveals that, 6(5.7%) responded rated very high, 19(18.1%) high, 38(36.2%)
medium, 32 (30.5%) low and others 10 (9.5%) rated very low. According to Armstrong (2009),
performance management is concerned with: aligning individual objectives to organizational
objectives and encouraging individuals to uphold corporate core values; enabling expectations to
be defined and agreed in terms of role responsibilities and accountabilities (expected to do),
skills (expected to have) and behaviors (expected to be); providing opportunities for individuals
to identify their own goals and develop their skills and competencies. Based on the respondent‟s
opinion the researcher can infer that KUC did not clearly communicate performance goals to
employees.

42
Table 5 question number 2 shows that every employee in KUC understands how his/her efforts
contribute to organizational mission accomplishment the respondent answered as the following,
11(10.5%) rated very high, 38 (36.2%) high, 38 (36.2%) medium and the rest 18(17.1%) rated
low. According to Armstrong (2009), performance management is a systematic process for
improving organizational performance by developing the performance of individuals and teams.
It is a means of getting better results by understanding and managing performance within an
agreed framework of planned goals, standards and competency requirements.

Regarding the extent to which performance appraisal identify employee‟s performance toward
organizational goal. Out of the total respondents; 6 (5.7%) rated very high, 32(30.5%) high, 35
(33.3%) medium, 26(24.8%) low and the rest 6(5.7%) very low. On the data collected from the
interview, the interviewee replied that the performance appraisal system of the university college
has little contribution to the overall strategic objective. Moreover, he replied that the University
College so far does not have policy on individual‟s performance appraisal system.

Proclamation No. 650/2009 on higher education, states that higher institution perform regular
annual self-evaluation, evaluation by students and academic staff on its academic and
research performance and make the results of the evaluations public to its community as
well as report to the Agency.

Table 6: Problems of Performance Appraisal System

Very
Very High High Medium Low
No. Items Low
F % F % F % F % F %
To what extent appraisers 11 10.5 53 50.5 24 22.9 17 16.2 - -
1 lack training.

To what extent 8 7.6 45 42.9 38 36.2 11 10.5 3 2.9

performance appraisal is
2 affected by rater's biases
toward ratees.

To what extent link 6 5.7 49 46.7 30 28.6 17 16.2 3 2.9

between some evaluation
3
criteria and employee job.

To what extent 6 5.7 14 13.3 32 30.5 32 30.5 21 20

supervisors provide
4 ongoing feedback on
employee‟s performance.

43
With regard to the issue that the appraiser‟s lack training, majority of the respondents 53(50.5%)
rated high, 11(10.5%) very high, while 24(22.9%) medium and 17 (16.2%) rated low. As to
Chris Joseph (2014), an organization comes across various challenges of performance appraisal
in order to make the appraisal system effective and successful. He points out that lack of
competence is one of the major challenges. He also suggests that top management should choose
the raters carefully. They should have the required expertise and the knowledge to decide the
criteria accurately. Besides, they should have the experience and the necessary training to carry
out the appraisal process objectively. On this ground, appraisers in KUC seem to lack training to
a large extent.

Regarding on the item that says performance appraisal is affected by rater‟s biases, 8(7.6%) rated
very high, the majority of the respondents 45(42.9%) rated high, 38 (36.2%) medium, 11(10.5%)
low and 3(2.9 %) are very low.

On the open ended question, the respondents suggested that performance appraisal does not work
in KUC because of the student weigh is very high whereas peer and supervisor evaluation points
very low. Besides most of the students are not capable of understanding the criteria, they are
biased as well as inefficient to evaluate. And instructors are performing to please somebody else
rather to fulfill their professional ethics.

According to Chris (2014), rater‟s personal bias results in errors in rating and evaluation. He
states that many errors based on the personal bias like stereotyping, hallo effect (i.e. one trait
influencing the evaluator‟s rating for all other traits), etc. Therefore, the rater should exercise
objectivity and fairness in evaluating and rating the performance of the employees. From this
point of view, performance evaluation in the education institution understudy seems to be
affected by rater‟s bias from moderate to high level towards ratees.

Concerning the issue of whether there is a link between evaluation criteria and employee job. Out
of the total respondents; 6 (5.7%) rated very high, 49 (46.7%) high, 30 (28.6%) medium,
17(16.2%) low and the rest 3(2.9%) very low. Appraisal system will be successful only when the
items appraised address the requirements and essential functions on the job. The criteria used
should be specific and directly related to the job.

44
Jeffery (2006), states that to be fair and objective, performance appraisal must be based on the
employee‟s job related behavior not on the employee personal traits or other factors not related
to the job. Accordingly, the appraisal criteria of this university college are linked to a higher
extent to employees‟ job.

Table 6 as shown above stated supervisors provide ongoing feedback on employee‟s

performance. Out of the total respondents; 6 (5.7%) rated very high, 14 (13.3%) high, 32(30.5%)
medium, 32(30.5%) low and the rest of respondents 21 (20%) rated very low. On the data
collected from the interview, the interviewee replied that some of the students are not capable of
understanding what the criteria is because of knowledge shortages about appraisal. Besides, he
replied no formal training occurred since now.

Finally, the interviewee suggested that KUC did not implemented a successful performance
appraisal system for all the reason he mentioned in the interview, the other thing he added is a
problem of not going according to how it should be done, like the department head guessing the
results before receiving the students compiled appraisal result from the assigned staff and also
the assigned staff amending the result.

As Delpo (2007), states that giving employee‟s feedback both positive and negative as
circumstances warrant is another important feature of an effective performance evaluation
system. If you tell employees what you think of their performance only once a year, you have
wasted a lot of opportunities throughout the year to encourage good performance and to help
employees who are struggling get back on track.

45
Table 7: Performance Appraisal Standards/Criteria
Very Very
High Medium Low
No. Items High Low
F % F % F % F % F %
To what extent the performance criteria 14 13.3 32 30.5 43 41 11 10.5 5 4.8
1 are objective.

To what extent the criteria distinguish 3 2.9 32 30.5 45 42.9 22 21 3 2.9

2 effective from ineffective performers.

To what extent criteria are customized 5 4.8 22 21 41 39 27 25.7 10 9.5

based on the characteristics of
3
employee‟s job.

To what extent the Criteria are 3 2.9 22 21 32 30.5 38 36.2 10 9.5

exhaustive to appraise employee
4
performance.

To what extent participation of 6 5.7 19 18.1 24 22.9 41 39 15 14.3

employees in the development of
5
performance appraisal criteria.

With regard to the question that performance criteria are objective. Out of the total respondents;
14(13.3%) rated very high, 32(30.5%) high, 43(41%) medium, 11(10.5%) low and the rest of
respondents 5(4.8%) rated very low. Concerning the issue of that the criteria distinguish effective
from ineffective performers. Out of 105 respondents; 3(2.9%) very high, 32(30.5%) high, most
of the respondents 45(42.9%) rated medium, 22(21%) low and the rest 3(2.9%) rated very low.

The other aspects of the questionnaire dealt with criteria are customized based on the
characteristics of employee‟s job. Out of the total respondents; 5 (4.8%) rated very high, 22
(21%) high, 41 (39%) medium, 27 (25.7%) low and the rest 10 (9.5%) rated very low. Regarding
criteria are exhaustive to appraise employee performance 3(2.9%) rated very high, 22(21%) high,
32(30.5%) medium, 38(36.2%) low and the rest 10(9.5%) rated very low.

46
Concerning the issue of employees‟ had participation on the development of performance
measurement criteria, out the total respondents of 105; 6 (5.7%) rated very high, 19 (18.1%) high, 24
(22.9%) medium, 41(39%) low and the rest 15(14.3%) rated very low. As Jordan (1992), stated that
greater employee‟s participation generates an atmosphere of cooperation and support, which
facilitates the development of a coaching or counseling relationship, thereby reducing appraisal
related tension and rater-rate conflict. Participation gives an opportunity to the employees to raise
their voice into the appraisal process. Performance standards, criteria for evaluation and the
evaluation form itself all can be developed with the help of employees.

Majority of respondents‟ reply from the open ended question the level of participation of employees
in the development of performance criteria was not as greater as it had to be. It seemed to be rather
contrary to the fact above cited scholarly remark. So, we can infer that KUC employees did not have
that much reasonable participation when performance measurement criteria developed.

Table 8: Participation in Appraising Employee’s Performance

Very
Very High High Medium Low
No. Items Low
F % F % F % F % F %
To what extent immediate 14 13.3 43 41 30 28.6 14 13.3 4 3.8
supervisor are responsible
1
to performance appraisal.

To what extent peers 19 18.1 45 42.9 24 22.9 11 10.5 6 5.7

performance appraisal
2 techniques are practical in
KUC.

To what extent individual 11 10.5 49 46.7 30 28.6 15 14.3 - -

employee assesses their
3 own performance
appraisal.

To what extent upward 29 27.6 45 42.9 19 18.1 8 7.6 4 3.8

performance appraisal
techniques are practical in
4
KUC. (students evaluates
their instructors)

47
Item 1 and 2 of Table 8 as shown above immediate supervisor is responsible to performance
appraisal. Out of the total 105 respondents; 14 (13.3%) rated very high, 43(41%) high, 30(28.6%)
medium. In contrast, 14(13.3%) low and the rest respondent 4(3.8%) rated very low and
performance appraisal among peers is common in KUC. Accordingly, 19 (18.1%) rated very high,
45(42.9%) high, 24(22.9%) medium, 11(10.5%) low and the rest respondent 6(5.7%) rated very
low respectively.

Item 3 and 4 of Table 8 as shown above individual employee assesses their own performance
appraisal. Out of the total respondents; 11 (10.5%) rated very high, 49(46.7%) high, 30(28.6%)
medium and the rest respondent 15(14.3%) rated low and upward performance appraisal
techniques are practical in KUC. Accordingly, 29 (27.6%) rated very high, 45(42.9%) high,
19(18.1%) medium, 8(7.6%) low and the rest respondent 4(3.8%) rated very low respectively.
Consequently, the respondent rated high for all the above items.

According to Armstrong (2006), the latest approach to performance evaluation is the use of 360
degree evaluations. It provides for performance feedback from the full circle of daily contacts
that an employee might have, ranging from mailroom personnel to customers to bosses to peers.
Performance data in 360-degree feedback process can be generated for individuals from the
person to whom they report, their direct reports, their peers (who could be team members and/or
colleagues in other parts of the organization) and their external and internal customers. Based on
the respondents KUC used immediate supervisor, peer, self and subordinate/student to conduct
performance appraisal as stated in the above literature.

48
 CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter presents the summary of the study, the conclusions drawn from the findings and
recommendations.

5.1. Summary

The purpose of this study was to assess the current practice and challenges of performance
appraisal in Kotebe University College. As a result, the following basic questions were raised:

1. Does Kotebe University College have policy on performance appraisal system?

2. What does the performance appraisal practices of Kotebe University College look like?
3. Is the performance appraisal system of the Kotebe University College meeting its
intended objectives?
4. What are the major challenges that affect the practices of performance appraisal at
Kotebe University College?

A descriptive survey method was employed for the study. Accordingly, stratified random
sampling technique was used to select sample respondents proportionately from each faculty of
the university college. To deal with the basic question, a total of 127 questionnaires were
distributed to the employee of KUC. Out of these 105 were appropriately filled in and returned to
the researcher. One academic staff affairs director was also interviewed. Finally, the data
gathered through questionnaire were analyzed using frequency, percentage and mean score using
SPSS version 20. The information gathered through open-ended questionnaire and interview was
qualitatively narrated accordingly. Depending on the results of the analysis, major findings of the
study were presented and recommendations were forwarded. The following were the major
findings.

49
 Characteristics of Respondents

Regarding respondents background information, Majority of respondents 83(79%) were male,

while 22(21%) were female. Majority of the respondents‟ educational level was MA, which are
93(88.6%). With regard to their age, the majority of respondents were from 31-40 years, which
are 52(49.5%). With respect to service year in the KUC, majority of respondents had worked
from 6-10 years and 11-15 years, each represent 32(30.5%).

Purpose of Performance Appraisal

The main purpose of performance appraisal in KUC as perceived by respondents is to identify

the strength and weakness of employee rated „high‟ and to promote two way of communication
was rated „medium‟. Salary increment, training and promote personal growth in the career were
rated „low‟.

Interview results showed that the appraisal was not strictly met its intended purposes as
mentioned in KUC strategic plan, which expresses that employees will be rewarded for
individual performance through job promotion, recognition letter/certificate, financial reward &
scholarship.

Performance Appraisal Process

Concerning performance appraisal process the following findings obtained; accordingly, as

revealed in the data, items mentioned in the process of performance appraisal i.e. performance is
evaluated as per pre-established standards, performance appraisal system is designed in the way
that it is possible to get practiced and appraisal is conducted regularly were all rated „high‟ by the
respondents. On the other hand, supervisor keeps a file on employee‟s activities throughout the
appraisal period, feedback on good or poor progress is forwarded openly after performance
appraisal and employees have ways to appeal for appraisal complaints were rated „low‟.

50
 Performance Appraisal Alignment with its Objectives

The result on performance appraisal alignment with its objectives shows that, all items were
rated as „medium‟. Interview results showed that PAS has little contribution to the overall
strategic objective; this indicates performance appraisal alignment with its objective was not
appreciated by the respondents.

Problems of Performance Appraisal System

The finding shows that appraisers lack training and appraisal affected by rater‟s biases were rated
as „high‟. On the other hand, supervisors provide ongoing feedback on employee‟s performance
were rated as „low‟. In general, all the above mentioned areas need improvement so as to have
enhanced performance appraisal practice.

Performance Appraisal Standards/Criteria

The result shows that on the questions raised on appraisal criteria are objective, to distinguish
effective from ineffective performers and criteria are customized based on the characteristics of
employee‟s job were rated as „medium‟. This indicates, almost all identified items to assess
performance appraisal standards/criteria are not satisfactory in the institution. On the other hand,
employees had participation on the development of performance measurement criteria were rated
as „low‟.

Participation in Appraising Employee’s Performance

The result showed that all items were rated „high‟, this implies that immediate supervisor, peer,
self and subordinate/students are used to conduct performance appraisal. It helps the university
college to get more valuable information about the performance of employees from different
sources.

51
5.2. Conclusions

On basis of the major findings of the study, the following conclusions have been drawn:

Performance appraisal is a formal determination of individual‟s job related actions. The purpose
of the evaluation should also be clearly communicated to employees. This can be achieved by
letting employees get involved in the entire evaluation process. On this ground, the study
concludes that the purpose of performance appraisal in KUC was not clearly communicated. The
appraisal is conducted merely to identify employees‟ weaknesses and strengths.

Employees‟ performance is not evaluated for nothing. It has a predefined objective to be attained
and also has something to do with the development of the organization and employees. An
effective performance appraisal system is one that meets the objectives for which it is intended.
In this regard, the study concludes that the KUC‟s performance appraisal system had not
thoroughly met its intended objectives but, to a moderate extent.

The practice of performance appraisal in Kotebe University College was affected by a number of
challenges. The study concludes that the major challenges that affected the practice of appraisal
were inadequacy of knowledge and skills on the side of appraisers, absence of employee‟s
participation in the development of performance criteria and standards as well as absence of
clearly established ways of presenting compliant on performance appraisal results and lack of
complaints handling mechanisms. In addition, poor documentation of employees‟ appraisal
results throughout the appraisal period was among the major challenges.

Moreover, the study concludes that in spite of the presence of performance appraisal practice,
Kotebe University College had no performance appraisal policy by which the appraisal process
is governed and to be strictly followed an individual‟s appraisal.

Generally, for all the reason obtained in the findings KUC did not implemented a successful
performance appraisal system and not strictly met its intended purposes as mentioned in the
University college strategic plan.

52
5.3. Recommendations

Based on the findings of the research, the following recommendations are forwarded to improve
the practice of performance appraisal in Kotebe University College.

 The study revealed that the performance appraisal practice was limited to communicate
the purpose of performance appraisal to employees. Therefore, appraisers and the
concerned top level supervisors in KUC have to exert efforts to communicate the purpose
of performance appraisal and to raise employees‟ awareness on appraisal related issues.

 The study revealed that performance appraisal system had not thoroughly met its
intended objectives. Therefore, KUC need to set the objectives of performance appraisal
in such a way that it could be attainable by employees. Besides, the entire appraisal
process should gear toward achieving these objectives.

 The study founds out the major challenges that affected the practice of performance
appraisal were inadequacy of knowledge and skills on the side of appraisers, absence of
employee‟s participation in the development of performance criteria and standards as
well as absence of clearly established ways of presenting compliant on performance
appraisal results. In addition, poor documentation of employees‟ appraisal results
throughout the appraisal period was among the major challenges. Therefore, KUC need
carefully select appraisers and need to have adequate level of knowledge and skill. They
should also get capacity building trainings on continual basis. The institution should
make the development of evaluation criteria participatory and it needs to design
appropriate grievance mechanism for employees‟ complaints. Besides, effective record
keeping and documentation system of employees‟ appraisal results need to be
established.

 Since performance appraisal is an ongoing process, its implementation needs to be

consistent and uniformly applicable on every individual employee. Therefore, KUC has
to formulate its own performance appraisal policy which is strictly to be followed and
similarly applied on each employee‟s appraisal as mentioned in the proclamation No.
650/2009.

53
 References

Abiy Z., Alemayehu W., Daniel T., Melese G. & Yilma S. (2009), “Introduction to Research
Methods: Preparatory Module for Addis Ababa University Graduate Programs”,
Unpublished manual, AAU

Armstrong Michael (2006), “A Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice”, 10th

edition: London, Cambridge University Press.

Armstrong, M. & Baron (1998), “Performance Management”, the new Realities, CIPD,
London

Armstrong, M. (2009), “A Handbook of Personnel Management Practice”, 11th Ed. London:

Kogan Page Ltd.

Barret, R. S. (1966), “Performance Rating”, Science Research Associates, Inc., Chicago.

C. Haslam, et al. (1993), “The Function of Performance Appraisal in UK Universities”‟,

Higher Education, Vol.25, No. 4, pp. 473-486.

Chris Joseph (2014), “Managing Human Resources”, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey.

Cleveland, J. N, & Murphy, R. E. (1989), “Multiple Uses of Performance Appraisal:

Prevalence and correlates”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 130–135

Cooper, Donald R., Schindler, Pamela S. (2003), “„Business Research Methods”, McGrew -
Hill/Irwin.

Daley, D. M. (1992), “Pay for Performance, Performance Appraisal and Total Quality
Management”, Public Productivity & Management Review, 16(1).

Danial, Aslam (2011), “Proceedings of International Conference on: Teaching, Learning, and
Change”, September, 5-8 2011, Omoku-Nigeria.

David, DeCenzo (2007), “Fundamental of HRM”, 8th ed. San Diego state University

David G. Collings & Geoffrey Wood (2009), “Human Resources Management”, Milton
Park,

54
DelPo, A. (2007), “The Performance Appraisal Handbook: Legal and Practical Rules for
Managers”, 2nd Ed. [E-book] Berkeley: Nolo.

Devries, D.L. (1983), “Viewing Performance Appraisal with a Wide Angle Lens”, an Annual
Convention of the American Psychological Association.

Federal Negarit Gazeta of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. (2009). “The
Proclamation to Higher Education”. Proclamation No. 650/2009, 15th Year No. 64 .
Addis Ababa.

George, Murdoch (2000), “Introducing a Teacher Supportive evaluation system”, ELT

Journal Vol. 54 No. 1 Oxford University Press, pp. 54-64.

Hallinger, P. and J.F. Murphy 1997. “Assessing and Developing Principal Instructional
Leadership.” Educational Leadership Vol.45, No. 1, pp.54-61

Ivancevich, J.M. & Glueck, W.F. (1989), “Foundations of Personnel/ Human Resource
Management”, IRWIN Inc., Homewood/Boston.

Jeffery G. Covin (2006), “Performance Evaluation Process”, Harvard Business Review.

John M. Ivancevich (2006), “Human Resource Management”, New Delhi.

Jordan, J.L. (1992), “Performance Appraisal Satisfaction and Supervisor‟s Traits”,

Psychological Reports, 66, 1337-1338.

Keely, M. (1978), “A Contingency Framework for Performance Evaluation”, The Academy

of Management Review, 3(3).

Krug, S.E. (1992). “Instructional Leadership: A constructivist Perspective.” Educational

Administration [Link].3, pp.430-443

Laurie, J. Mullins (1996), “Management and Organizational Behavior”, 8th ed. Great Britain,
prentice Hall

Lee, C. (1985), “Increasing Performance Appraisal Effectiveness: Matching Task Types,

Appraisal Process, and Rater Training”, Academy of Management Review Vol. 10,
No. 2. Page 322-331, Temple University.

55
Longenecker, C. O., & Fink, L. S. (2001), “Improving management performance”: in rapidly
changing organizations. Journal of Management Development, 20(1), 336–346 Mgt 32
(1) 89 98

Mahapatro, B.B (2010), “Human Resource Management”, New Delhi. New Age
International (P) Limited Publisher.

Mansoor, Ahmed Junejo (2010), “Third International Conference on Assessing Quality in Higher
Education”, paper presented at Lahore – Pakistan, 6th – 8th December.

Mathis, Robert L. Jackson John H. (1997), “Human Resource Management”, 8th ed. New
York: West Publishing Company.

Miaoulis, G. & Michener, R. (1976), “An Introduction to Sampling”. Dubuque, lowa:

Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company.

Muhammad, Faseeh Khan (2013), “Role of Performance Appraisal System on Employees

Motivation”, IOSR Journal of Business and Management (IOSR-JBM) e-ISSN: 2278-
[Link] 8, Issue 4 (Mar. - Apr. 2013), PP 66-83.

Mugenda & Mugenda (2003), “Business Research Methods”, 8th ed. New York: The Dryden
Press.

Rao, P. S. (2000), “Personnel/Human Resource Management”, University of Delhi.

Rao, V.S. P. & Rao, P. Subba (2004), “Personnel/ Human Resource Management-Text,
Cases and Games”, 8th ed., Konark Publishers Pvt. Ltd. Co. New Delhi.

Saiyadain, Mirza (1999), “Human Resource Management: Elements of Performance

Appraisal”,Delhi: Tata McGraw Hill Pub Co. Ltd.

Sandler, C. & Keefe, J. (2004), “Performance Appraisal Phrase Book: The Best Words,
Phrases, and Techniques for Performance Reviews”, [E-book] Avon: Adams Media.

Schraeder, M. & Simpson J. (2006),“How Similarity and Liking Affect Performance

Appraisals”, The Journal for Quality & Participation.

56
Somerick, N.M. (1993), “Strategies for Improving Employee Relations: By using
Performance Appraisals more effectively”, Public Relations Quarterly, 38 (3), 37-39.

th
Stephen, P. Robbins (1996), “Organizational Behavior” 7 ed. New York, Prentice Hall
Publishers.

William, B. Werth and Keith, Davis (1993), “Human Resource & Personnel Management”,
New Delhi.

William, McCoy (2007), “Human Resource Management Systems”, Hills Publishers.

Yong, F. (1996), “Inflation of Subordinates Performance Ratings: Main and interactive

effects of Rater Negative Affectivity”, Documentation of Work Behavior, and
Appraisal visibility”, Journal of organizational Behavior, Vol.20, No.4. , pp. 431-444.

Zikmund, W. G. (2010), "Business Research Methods”, Thomson-South-Western, Ohio:

publisher.

57
 APPENDICES

Appendix I: Questionnaire
Appendix II: Interview Guide
Appendix III: Instructions for Completing a Knowledge Transfer Form

58
 APPENDIX I

ADDIS ABABA UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF EDUCATION AND BEHAVIORAL STUDIES
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT
HUMAN RESOURCE & ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Dear Respondents,

This questionnaire is prepared to employees of the Kotebe University College. The purpose of

this questionnaire is to collect data on the topic, Employees Performance Appraisal in Kotebe

University College: Analysis of Practices and Challenges as partial fulfillment to the completion

of degree of masters of art in Human Resource Management and Organizational Development in

Education.

In this regard I kindly request your time to provide me with reliable information so that the

findings of this study would meet the intended outcome.

The researcher would like to thank you for taking your invaluable time in order to fill this

questionnaire. Your response will be kept confidential.

Guidelines
 No need to write your name
 Please put a √ mark to reflect your opinion.

Jedida Muhibu
Student

59
Part I. Background Information

1. Gender:

Male Female

2. Age:

Below 20 21-30 31-40 41-50

51 – 60 > 60

3. Educational Level:

Diploma B.A. Post-Graduate PHD

Others ________________

4. In which faculty/work unit are you currently working _________________________

________________________________________________________________________

5. Total years of Service at KUC: 1-5 6-10 11-15

16-20 > 20

Part II. Questions on Performance Appraisal

This part is divided in to six sections based on the performance appraisal purpose, process,
objective, criteria, participation and problems. Please indicate the column which nearly reflects
your opinion by using the following five-point Likert scale. Very High(5), High (4), Medium (3),
Low (2) and Very Low (1).

60
 Very Very
Variable Description High Medium Low
High Low

A. Understanding the purpose of performance

appraisal in Kotebe University College (KUC)

To what extent the performance appraisal find

1 out the strength and weakness of the employee.

The extent of promoting a two way system of

communication between the supervisors and
2 the employees.
Based on the result to what extent performance
appraisal serves to determine appropriate
3 salary increment.
To what extent performance appraisal promote
personal growth and advancement in the career
4 of the employees.
To what extent performance appraisal serves to
5 determine employees' demotion and transfer.
To what extent performance appraisal serves to
6 determine employee's training needs.

B. Performance appraisal process

To what extent performance appraisal
procedures in KUC uniformly apply to all
7 employees.
To what extent performance appraisal system
in KUC is designed in the way that it is
8 possible to get practiced.
To what extent supervisor keeps a file on
employee's activities throughout the appraisal
9 period.
The extent to which performance is evaluated
10 as per established standards.
The extent to which feedback on good or poor
progress is forwarded openly after performance
11 appraisal.
To what extent employees have ways to appeal
12 for appraisal complaints.
The extent to which performance appraisal is
13 conducted regularly.
61
C. Performance appraisal system aligns with its
objectives.
The extent to which performance goals clearly
communicated to employee by supervisor(s)
14 via job descriptions.
To what extent Every employee in KUC
understands how his/her efforts contribute to
15 organizational mission accomplishment.
The extent to which the performance appraisal
identify employee's performance toward
16 organizational goal.

D. Problems of Performance Appraisal System

17 To what extent appraisers lack training.

To what extent the performance appraisal is
18 affected by rater's biases toward ratees.
To what extent link between some evaluation
19 criteria and employee job.
To what extent supervisors provide ongoing
20 feedback on employee‟s performance.

E. Standards/ Criteria of performance appraisal

21 The performance criteria are objective.

The criteria distinguish effective from
22 ineffective performers.
Criteria are customized based on the
23 characteristics of employee‟s job.
The criteria are exhaustive to appraise
24 employee performance.
Participation of employees in the development
25 of performance appraisal criteria.

62
F. Participation in appraising employees
performance
To what extent immediate supervisor are
26 responsible to performance appraisal.
To what extent peers performance appraisal
27 techniques are practical in KUC.

To what extent individual employee assesses their

28 own performance appraisal.
To what extent upward performance appraisal
technique is practical in KUC. (students evaluates
29 their instructors)

Part III.

Do you have any suggestions or comments to improve the practice of performance appraisal at
KUC?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

63
 APPENDIX II

ADDIS ABABA UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF EDUCATION AND BEHAVIORAL STUDIES
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT
HUMAN RESOURCE & ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Dear Respondent,

This interview is prepared to employee of the Kotebe University College. The purpose of this

interview is to collect data on the topic, Employees Performance Appraisal in Kotebe University

College: Practices and Challenges as partial fulfillment to the completion of degree of masters of

art in Human Resource Management and Organizational Development in Education.

In this regard I kindly request your time to provide me with reliable information so that the

findings of this study would meet the intended outcome.

The researcher would like to thank you for taking your invaluable time. Your response will be

kept confidential.

Jedida Muhibu
Student

64
 INTERVIEW GUIDE

1. How do you see the performance appraisal of the KUC in respect of its contributions to
the achievement of organizational mission and goals?

2. To what extent is performance appraisal system of the KUC meeting its intended
purposes?

3. How often KUC conduct performance appraisal within a year?

4. Does KUC have policy on performance appraisal system?

5. How do you see the capability of existing raters?

6. Have there been any attempts to develop rating skills of appraisers through formal
training programs?

7. Could it be possible to say that KUC has successfully implemented performance

appraisal system?

8. Do you have any other comments or suggestions regarding performance appraisal system
at KUC?

65
 APPENDIX III

በኮተቤ ዩኒቨርሲቲ ኮሉጅ የመምህራን መገምገሚያ ቅፅ

በትምህርት ክፍሌ ሀሊፊ የሚሞሊ (30%)
¾}ÑUÒT>¨</ዋመምህር/ት eU _____________________________
¾€UI`€ ¡õM _____________________________
የትምህርት ዘመን --------------------------------- መንፇቀ አመት ----------------------------------
ማሳሰቢያ
1. •Á”ǔƾSÑUÑT>Á’Øw uØ”no ›”ww/ብቢ
2. ግምገማዉ የሚዲስሰዉ
2.1 KTe}T` ¾T>ÁÅ`ግ ´Óπን
2.2 የፇተና ዝግጅት አሰጣጥ እና ዉጤት ማሳወቅን
2.3 Ø“€“ U`U` KTÉ[Ó ¾T>ታዩ Ø[ቶችን
2.4 ከተማሪዎችና ላልች ሠራተኞችጋር ያሇ ግንኙነት
2.5 K€UI`€ ¡õK<U J’ K}sS< Y^ Sn“€“ ShhM ´”vK? ማሳየትን'
2.6 K}sS< ”w[€ የምታሳየዉ/¾T>Ád¾¨<” }q`s]’€'
2.7. ¾Y^ c¯€' ¾u=a c¯€“ ¾kÖa c¯€ ማ¡በርን'
2.8. በማህበረሰብ አገሌግልት መሳተፍን
2.9. ›ÖnLÃ vI]'
2.10 ላልች ጉዲዮችን
uT>³“©’€ ÑU€/ገምች
3. Ÿ›’uwŸ¨</ሽዉ ¾SÑUÑT>Á ’Øw ›"DÁ ¾Y^ vMÅ[vI”/ሽን ¾Y^ ›ðíìU Ÿu×U ´p}— •eŸ u×U Ÿõ}—
ulØ` }S”´a Ÿ}kSÖ¨<¨<eØ›”Æ” uS¡uw ›SM¡€/አመሌክች
4. የተቀመጠዉ ¾SÑUÑT>Á ’Øw ¾Y^ vMÅ[vI”/ሸንበU€S´”u€/ኝበት Ñ>²? ’Ñ\ ¾TÃSKŸ}¨/ታት<ከሆነ ወይም
እርግጠኛ ካሌሆንከ/ሽ #›ÃSሇከተዉም/ታትም” uT>M e` ¾T>kSÖ¨<” "X" UM¡€ ¡uw/ክበቢ::

u×U ´p S"ŸK— Ÿõ}— u×U ›ÃSKŸ

}.l ¾SÑUÑT>Á Seð`€ ´p}— }— Ÿõ}— }¨<U/ታ
ትም
2.1 KTe}T` ¾T>ÁÅ`ግ ´Óπ 1 2 3 4 5 X
1 KT>Áe}U^†¨</ሇምታስተምረዉ ¢`f‹ ¾Te}T]Á îG<õ 1 2 3 4 5 X
/+‹”Ó T]ÁM/ ያዘጋጃሌ/ ታዘጋጃሇች፡፡
2 ኮርሱን በተመዯበዉ ጊዜ መሰረት ሙለ በሙለ 1 2 3 4 5 X
ታጠናቅቃሇች/ያጠናቅቃሌ
3 ክፍሇጊዜ ሳይባክን ሙለ በሙለ ሇማስተማር ስራ 1 2 3 4 5 X
ትጠቀማሇች/ይጠቀማሌ
4 ሇሚያስተምረዉ/ሇምታስተምረዉ ትምህርት የማማከሪያ ሰዓት 1 2 3 4 5 X
በመበዯብ በአግባቡ ጥቅምሊይ ታዉሊሇች/ያዉሊሌ
5 ተመሳሳይ ኮርሶችን ከሚሰጡ መምህራን ጋር ተቀናጅቶ/ታ እና 1 2 3 4 5 X
ተናቦ ታስተምራሇች/ያስተምራሌ፡፡
2.2 የፇተና ዝግጅት አሰጣጥ እና ዉጤት ማሳወቅ

6 የፇተና ጥያቄዎች የተሇያዩ የምዘና ቴክኒኮችን (subjective and 1 2 3 4 5 X

objective) ባካተተ መሌኩ ታዘጋጃሇች/ያዘጋጃሌ
7 የሚሰጡ ፇተናዎች ካስተማረችዉ/ካስተማረዉ ምዕራፎች እና 1 2 3 4 5 X
የተመዯበሊቸቸዉ ሰዓቶች ጋር የተገናዘበ ነዉ
8 በፇተና አሰጣጥ ወቅት ተገቢዉን ቁጥጥር ማዴረግ መቻለ/ሎ 1 2 3 4 5 X
9 በፇተና ዝግጅት በማባዛት ስቴፕሌ በማዴረግ በማዯሌ 1 2 3 4 5 X
በመሰብሰብሰብ ከስራ ባሌዯረቦችጋር አብሮ/አብራ ይሰራሌ
ትሰራሇች
10 u¡õK< ¾T>cÖ<€” ¾ð}“ wn€/zK=Ç=+/ uÒ^ 1 2 3 4 5 X
ትገመግማሇች/ ÃÑSÓTM'
2.3 Ø“€“ U`U` KTÉ[Ó ¾T>ታዩ Ø[ቶች
11 uS<Á¨</ዋ Ø“€“ U`U` ÁÅ`ÒM/ታዯርጋሇች' 1 2 3 4 5 X
12 በተሇያዩ ምሁራን የተገኙ የጥናትና ምርምር ዉጤቶች መጠቀም 1 2 3 4 5 X
ማካፇሌ መቻሎ/ለ
66
13 2.4 ከተማሪዎችና ላልች ሠራተኞችጋር ያሇ ግንኙነት

14 ከተቃራኒ ፆታ ተማሪዎች ጋር አሊስፇሊጊ የሆኑ ግንኙነቶች 1 2 3 4 5 X

በመፍጠር በተማሪዎቹም/በላልች ተማሪዎች ሊይ ጫና እና
ጥርጣሬ ከመፍጠር ነፃ ናት/ነዉ፡፡
15 ሇተማሪዎችና ሇላልች የኮላጁ ማህበረሰብ አባሊት ጥሩ አርአያ 1 2 3 4 5 X
መሆን መቻለ/ሎ
16 u¡õK< uT>Å[Ñ< cwcv­‹ LÃ ትሳተፋሇች/ Ãd}óM' 1 2 3 4 5 X
17 ¾¢T> Y^ ትቀበሊሇች/ÃkuLM' 1 2 3 4 5 X
18 uÓUÑT ¾}Ñ–< Ñ”u= ›c}Á¾‹” ትቀበሊሇች/ÃkuLM' 1 2 3 4 5 X
KS}`ÔU ÃØ^M'
2.5 K€UI`€ ¡õK<U J’ K}sS< Y^ Sn“€“ ShhM
´”vK? ማሳየት'
19 u€UI`€ ¡õK< ¾ST` Te}T` Y^” ¾T>ÁhiMu€” 1 2 3 4 5 X
Gdw /ታቀርባሇች/Ák`vM' }d€öU ታዯርጋሇች/ÁÅ`ÒM'
2ዏ u€UI`€ ¡õK< ‹Óa‹ c=Ÿc~ ¾Sõ€H@ Gdw 1 2 3 4 5 X
ታመነጫሇች/ÁS’ÝM' }d€öU ታዯርጋሇች/ÁÅ`ÒM'
2.6 K}sS< ”w[€ የምታሳየዉ/¾T>Ád¾¨<” }q`s]’€'
21 በቢሮ ዉስጥ የሚገኙ የተቋሙ ንብረቶች እንዯግሌ ንብረት 1 2 3 4 5 X
አዴርጎ መቁጠር(ወንበር ጠረጴዛ ፕሪንተር ወዘተ)
22 በማስተማሪያ በሊቦራቶሪ እና በሪሶርስ ሴንተር የሚገኙትን 1 2 3 4 5 X
ንብረቶች እንዯግሌ ንብረት ንብረት መንከባከብ
2.7 ¾Y^ c¯€' ¾u=a c¯€“ ¾kÖa c¯€ ማ¡በር'

23 ¾ewcv ስዓት አክብሮ/ራ ይገኛሌ/ትገኛሇች በብቃትም 1 2 3 4 5 X

ይሳተፋሌ/ ትሳተፋሇች
24 u}sS< ¾Y^ c¯€ በስራዉ/ዋ ›²¨<€a ¾SÑ–€ MUÉ 1 2 3 4 5 X
›K¨</አሊት'
2.8. የማህበረሰብ አገሌግልት
25 ኮላጁ በሚመዴበዉ ማንኛዉንም ሥራ ሇመፇፀም 1 2 3 4 5 X
የምታሳየዉ/የሚያሳየዉ ተነሳሽነት
26 ከመዯበኛዉ የመማር ማስተማር ሥራ ዉጭ ተማሪዎች 1 2 3 4 5 X
የተማሩትን ትምህርት ከአካባቢዉ ተጨባጭ ሁኔታ ጋር
እንዱያግዙ ሁኔታዎችን ማመቻቸቷ/ቱ
27 ”Å›eðLÑ>’~ Ÿ}sS<¨<ß LK¨< Iw[}cw 1 2 3 4 5 X
S<Á©›ÑMÓKA€ታበረክታሇች/Áu[¡•M'
2.9. ›ÖnLÃ vI]'
28 ¾›M¢M SÖØ ¨ÃU ¾K?KA‹ ›Å”³» °ï‹ }Ñ» 1 2 3 4 5 X
አይዯሇችም/አይዯሇም
29 ÁK¨<”/ሊትንሀሳብ uÓMî“ u}Ñu=¨< SÉ[¡ LÃ 1 2 3 4 5 X
Ák`vM/ታቀርባሇች
2.10. ላልች ጉዲዮች
30 ›e†Ó ›×Çò e^­‹ c=Ÿc~ •Lò¨</ዋ በSዯቡት e^ Là 1 2 3 4 5 X
Ãd}óM/ትሳተፋሇች'
31 ¾}cÖ¨<”/የተሰጣትን }Å^u= e^ u}cÖ¨</ት ¾Ñ>²? ÑÅw 1 2 3 4 5 X
uT>ðKѨ< G<’@• W`/ታ KSÚ[e ÃØ^M/ትጥራሇች'
32 ¾}sS<” ”w[€“ ¾€UI`€ SX]Á­‹ K}sS< e^ w‰ 1 2 3 4 5 X
Á¨<LM/ታዉሊሇች'
33 ከY^ •Lò­‹“ vMÅ[x‡/ቿጋር ተባብራ/ሮ፤ተከባብራ/ሮ፤ 1 2 3 4 5 X
ተዯጋግፋ/ፎ ትሰራሇች/ይሰራሌ፡፡

ከሊይ ባካሄዴሽዉ/ከዉ ግምገማ መሰረት ማጠቃሇያ መስጫ ቦታ

ነጥብ 1 2 3 4 5 X
የነጥቡ ብዛት
ÖpLL ÉU`
›T"Ã ’Øw , ÖpLL ÉU`/የግም ገማ መስፇርቶቹ ብዛት ,

67
 በኮተቤ ዩኒቨርሲቲ ኮሉጅየመምህራን መገምገሚያ ቅፅ
u}T]­‹ ¾T>VL (50%)
ማሳሰቢያ
1. Á”ǔƔ ¾SÑUÑT>Á ’Øw uØ”no አንብ/ቢ
2.ካነበባችሁት ¾SÑUÑT>Á ’Øw ›"EÁ ¾SUIሯን/ሩን
2.1. KTe}T` የምታዯርገዉን/¾T>ÁÅ`Ѩ<” ´Óπ
2.2. የፇተና ዝግጅት አሰጣጥ እና ዉጤት ማሳወቅ
2.3 ከተማሪዎችና ላልች ሠራተኞችጋር ያሇ ግንኙነት uT>³“©’€ ትክክሇኛ መረጃ ሇመስጠት ሞክሩ፡፡
3. ካነበባችሁት ¾SÑUÑT>Á ’Øw ›"EÁ ¾SUIሯን/\” ¾e^ ›ðíìU Ÿu×U ´p}— eŸ u×U Ÿõ}— ulØ`
}S”´a Ÿ}kSÖ¨< ¨<eØ ›”Æ” uS¡uw ›SMት/ቺ
4. ¾T>Ÿ}K<€” upÉT>Á ሙሊ/ይ/ ክበብ/ቢ
4.1. ¾}ÑUÒT>¨</ዋመምህር/ት eU
4.2. SUIሯ/\ Áe}T[ች¨</ያስተማረዉ €UI`€ (¢`e) ስምና lØ`
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4.3. የተማሪዉ/ዋዱፓርትመንት
4.4. የስንተኛ አመት ተማሪ ነህ/ሽI II III IV
4.5. የትምህርት ዘመን/ዓ.ም --------------------------------- መንፇቀ አመት/ሴሚስተር -----------------------------
k”
u×U u×U ›ÃSKŸ
2.1 KTe}T` ¾T>ÁÅ`Ѩ<” ´Óπ
ተ.ቁ ´p} ´p S Ÿõ} Ÿõ} }¨<U/
— }— "Ÿ — — ታትም
1 KT>Áe}U^†¨</ሇምታስተምረዉ ¢`f‹ ¾Te}T]Á îG<õ /+‹”Ó 1 2 K—
3 4 5 X
T]ÁM/›eðLÑ> îG<ö‹” (handouts) በማ²Òጀት ሇተማሪዎች
ትሰጣሇች/ይሰጣሌ
2 ሇሚያስተምረዉ/ሇምታስተምረዉ ሇእያንዲንደ ክፍሇጊዜ በቂዝግጅት አዴርጋ/ጎ 1 2 3 4 5 X
መገኝት
3 ሇሚያስተምረዉ/ሇምታስተምረዉ በቂ እዉቀት እና ብቃት አሇዉ/አሊት 1 2 3 4 5 X

4 ኮርሱን በተመዯበዉ ጊዜ መሰረት ሙለ በሙለ ታጠናቅቃሇች/ያጠናቅቃሌ 1 2 3 4 5 X

5 የተሇያዩ መርጃ መሳሪያዎችን እንዯአስፇሊጊነቱ በመጠቀም 1 2 3 4 5 X

ታስተምራሇች/ስተምራሌ
6 ክፍሇጊዜ ሳይባክን ሙለ በሙለ ሇማስተማር ስራ ትጠቀማሇች/ይጠቀማሌ 1 2 3 4 5 X

7 የተመዯበዉን ክፍሇጊዜ ሰዓት አክብራ/ሮ ትገኛሇች/ይገኛሌ 1 2 3 4 5 X

የማትገኝም/የማይገኝም ከሆነች/ከሆነ በቅዴሚያ ታሳዉቃሇች/ያሳዉቃሌ
8 በማስተማሪያ ቋንቋ በመጠቀም ትምህርቱን በቀሊሌና ግሌጽ ቋንቋ 1 2 3 4 5 X
ያቀርባሌ/ታቀርባሇች
9 ከአቅም በሊይ ሇባከነ ክፍሇጊዜን ሇማካካስ ጥረት ታዯርጋሇች/ያዯርጋሌ 1 2 3 4 5 X

10 ተገቢ ማጣቀሻ መፅሀፍትን በመሇየት ሇተማሪዎች ታሳዉቃሇች/ያሳዉቃሌ 1 2 3 4 5 X

11 ሇሚያስተምረዉ/ሇምታስተምረዉ ትምህርት የማማከሪያ ሰዓት በመመዯብ 1 2 3 4 5 X

በአግባቡ ጥቅም ሊይ ታዉሊሇች/ያዉሊሌ
12 መማር ማስተማርን በተመሇከተ ተማሪዎች ራዕይ እንዱኖራቸዉ 1 2 3 4 5 X
ታዯርጋሇች/ያረጋሌ
13 u¡õM ¨<eØ ¾}T]­‹” ØÁo ተቀብሊ/}kwKA ታስተናግዲሇች/ 1 2 3 4 5
Áe}“ÓÇM፡፡
14 ትምህቱን ተማሪ ተኮር እንዱሆን የቡዴን ሥራ እና ላልች አሳታፊ 1 2 3 4 5
የማስተማሪያ ዘዳዎችን በመጠቀም ተማሪዎች የሰሩትን ሥራ ክፍሌ ዉስጥ
ራሳቸዉ ገሇፃ እንዱያዯርጉ ያመቻቻሌ/ታመቻቻሇች ግብረመሌስ/አስተያየት
ትሰጣሇች/ይሰጣሌ
15 K€UI`~ ÖnT> ¾J’< SMSÍ­‹ እና ምዘናዎች 1 2 3 4 5 X
(አሳይመንቶች!ፕሮጄክቶች! የመጽሀፍት ግምገማዎች ትስጣሇች/Ãc×M
አርማ/ አርሞ ¨<Ö?~”ናግብረመሌስ/በወቅቱትሰጣሇች/ይሰጣሌ

ተ.ቁ 2.2. የፇተና ዝግጅት አሰጣጥ እና ዉጤት ማሳወቅ

68
16 የፇተና ጥያቄዎች የተሇያ የምዘና ቴክኒኮችን (subjective and 1 2 3 4 5 X
objective) ባካተተ መሌኩ ታዘጋጃሇች/ያዘጋጃሌ
17 የሚሰጡ ፇተናዎች ካስተማረችዉ/ካስተማረዉ ምዕራፎች እና 1 2 3 4 5 X
የተመዯበሊቸዉ ሰዓቶች ጋር የተገናዘቡ ናቸዉ
18 ¾ð}“ ØÁo­‹” "e}T]¨</ችዉ €UI`€ Ò` ›³Uዲ/Ê 1 2 3 4 5 X
Á¨×M/ታወጣሇች የምዘና ዘዳችንና ዋጋቸዉን
አስቀዴሞ/አስቀዴማ ሳዉቃሌ/ታሳዉቃሇች::
19 KT>c׆¨< ð}“­‹ KT>ÖnKK< ØÁo­‹ T>³“© uJ’ 1 2 3 4 5 X
S”ÑÉ ªÒ ትሰጣሇች/Ãc×M::
2ዏ በሚሰጡ ምዘናዎች የተመጣጠነ ጊዜ ይሰጣሌ /ትሰጣሇች 1 2 3 4 5 X
21 የተካታታይ ምዘና የአጋማሽና የማጠቃሇያ ፇተና ዉጤትን በጊዜ 1 2 3 4 5 X
ታሳያሇች/ያሳያሌ፡፡
22 የፇተና ጥያቄች ሳይንሳዊ ዘዳን በመተከተሌ ማሇትም ከቀሊሌ
ወዯከባዴ በሆነመሌኩ በማስቀመጥ በተፇታኞች ሊይ የስነሌቦና
ተፅኖ እንዲያዯርስ በማዴረግ ያቀርባሌ/ታቀርባሇች
2..3. ከተማሪዎችጋር ያሇ ግንኙነት

23 ሁለንም ተማሪ ያሇሌዩነት በአግባቡ ታስተናግዲሇች/ያስተናግዲሌ 1 2 3 4 5 X

24 የተማሪዎችን አቤቱታ! ቅሬታና ላልች ተዛማጅ ጉዲዮች 1 2 3 4 5 X
ሇማዲመጥ እና ከተቻሇ ሇመፍታት ፇቃዯኛ ነዉ/ናት
25 ከተቃራኒ ፆታ ተማሪዎች ጋር አሊስፇሊጊ የሆኑ ግንኙነቶች 1 2 3 4 5 X
በመፍጠር በተማሪዎቹም/በላልች ተማሪዎች ሊይ ጫና እና
ጥርጣሬ ከመፍጠር ነፃ ናት/ነዉ፡፡
26 ue’ e`¯€ ›¡v]’~ uT>Ád¾¨< Úª’~ Gk—’~ ¾}T]¨<” 1 2 3 4 5 X
›¡wa€“ U’€ KTÓ–€ Ø[€ ÁÅ`ÒM K}T]­‹U
}Ñu=¨<” ¡w` ትሰጣሇች/Ãc×M::

ከሊይ ባካሄዴሽዉ/ከዉ ግምገማ መሰረት ማጠቃሇያ መስጫ ቦታ

ነጥብ 1 2 3 4 5 X

የነጥቡ ብዛት

ÖpLL ÉU`

›T"Ã ’Øw , ÖpLL ÉU`/የግም ገማ መስፇርቶቹ ብዛት ,

69
ክፍሌ ሁሇት

መግሇጫ
ከዚህ ቀጥል የቀረቡትን ጥያቄዎች በጥሞና በማንበብ መሌሽ/ስ

1.በአጠቃሊይ በኮርሱ አሰጣጥ ዙሪያ ጠንካራና ዯካማ ጎኖችን ዘርዘርዝሪ/ር

ሀ. ጠንካራ ጎኖች

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ሇ. ዯካማ ጎኖች

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. በኮርሱ አሰጣጥ ዙሪ ሉሻሻለ የሚገቡ ነገሮች ምን ምን ናቸዉ?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. የመመህሩ/ሯን አጠቃሊይ ሙያዊ በቃትና ሥነምግባር እንዳት ትገመግሚዋሇሽ/ኅ?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4.የመመህሩ/ሯን አጠቃሊይ የኮርስ አሰጣጥ ሲመዘን / አንደን አክብቢ/ብ

ሀ. እጅግ በጣም ጥሩ ሇ. በጣም ጥሩ ሏ. ጥሩ መ. ዯካማ ሠ. በጣም ዯካማ

70
 በኮተቤ ዩኒቨርሲቲ ኮሉጅ የመምህራን መገምገሚያ ቅፅ
በትምህርት ክፍሌ አባሊት (ካውንስሌ) ¾T>VL (15%)
¾}ÑUÒT>¨</ዋመምህር/ት eU _____________________________
¾€UI`€ ¡õM _____________________________
የትምህርት ዘመን --------------------------------- መንፇቀ አመት ----------------------------------
ማሳሰቢያ
1. Á”Ç”Æ ¾SÑUÑT>Á ’Øw uØ”no ›”ww/አንብቢ
2. ግምገማዉ የሚዲስሰዉ

2.1 KTe}T` ¾T>Åረግ ´Óπ

2.2 የፇተና ዝግጅት አሰጣጥ እና ዉጤት ማሳወቅ
2.3 ከተማሪዎችና ላልች ሠራተኞችጋር ያሇ ግንኙነት
2.4 K€UI`€ ¡õK<U J’ K}sS< Y^ Sn“€“ ShhM ´”vK? ማሳየት'
2.5 K}sS< ”w[€ የምታሳየዉ/¾T>Ád¾¨<” }q`s]’€'
2.6. ¾Y^ c¯€' ¾u=a c¯€“ ¾kÖa c¯€ ማ¡በር'
2.7. ›ÖnLÃ vI]ን

uT>³“©’€ ÑU€/ገምች
3. Ÿ›’uwŸ¨</ሽዉ ¾SÑUÑT>Á ’Øw ›"DÁ ¾Y^ vMÅ[vI”/ሽን ¾Y^ ›ðíìU Ÿu×U ´p}— eŸ u×U Ÿõ}—
ulØ` }S”´a Ÿ}kSÖ¨< ¨<eØ ›”Æ” uS¡uw ›SM¡€/አመሌክች
4. የተቀመጠዉ ¾SÑUÑT>Á ’Øw ¾Y^ vMÅ[vI”/ሸንበU€S´”u€/ኝበት Ñ>²? ’Ñ\ ¾TÃSKŸ}¨/ታት<ከሆነ ወይም
እርግጠኛ ካሌሆንከ/ሽ #›ÃSሇከተዉም/ታትም” uT>M e` ¾T>kSÖ¨<” "X" UM¡€ ¡uw/ክበቢ::

u×U u×U ›ÃSKŸ

´p}— ´p}— S"ŸK— Ÿõ}— Ÿõ}— }¨<U/ታትም
}.l ¾SÑUÑT>Á Seð`€

2.1 KTe}T` ¾T>ÁÅ`ግ ´Óπ

1 KT>Áe}U^†¨</ሇምታስተምረዉ ¢`f‹ ¾Te}T]Á îG<õ 1 2 3 4 5 X
/+‹”Ó T]ÁM/ ያዘጋጃሌ/ ታዘጋጃሇች፡፡
2 ኮርሱን በተመዯበዉ ጊዜ መሰረት ሙለ በሙለ 1 2 3 4 5 X
ታጠናቅቃሇች/ያጠናቅቃሌ
3 ክፍሇጊዜ ሳይባክን ሙለ በሙለ ሇማስተማር ስራ 1 2 3 4 5 X
ትጠቀማሇች/ይጠቀማሌ
4 ሇሚያስተምረዉ/ሇምታስተምረዉ ትምህርት የማማከሪያ ሰዓት 1 2 3 4 5 X
በመበዯብ በአግባቡ ጥቅምሊይ ታዉሊሇች/ያዉሊሌ
5 ተመሳሳይ ኮርሶችን ከሚሰጡ መምህራን ጋር ተቀናጅቶ/ጅታ እና 1 2 3 4 5 X
ተናቦ ያስተምራሌ/ታስተምራሇች፡፡

2.2 የፇተና ዝግጅት አሰጣጥ እና ዉጤት ማሳወቅ

6 የፇተና ጥያቄዎች የተሇያዩ የምዘና ቴክኒኮችን (subjective and 1 2 3 4 5 X
objective) ባካተተ መሌኩ ያዘጋጃሌ/ ታዘጋጃሇች
በፇተና ዝግጅት በማባዛት ስቴፕሌ በማዴረግ በማዯሌ 1 2 3 4 5 X
በመሰብሰብሰብ አብሮ/አብራ ይሰራሌ/ ትሰራሇች
7 የሚሰጡ ፇተናዎች ካስተማረችዉ/ካስተማረዉ ምዕራፎች እና 1 2 3 4 5 X
የተመዯበሊቸቸዉ ሰዓቶች ጋር የተገናዘበ ነዉ
8 በፇተና አሰጣጥ ወቅት ተገቢዉን ቁጥጥር ማዴረግ መቻለ/ሎ 1 2 3 4 5 X

9 u¡õK< ¾T>cÖ<€” ¾ð}“ wn€ /zK=Ç=+/ uÒ^ ትገመግማሇች/ 1 2 3 4 5 X

ÃÑSÓTM'
10 በተሇያዩ ምሁራን የተገኙ የጥናትና ምርምር ዉጤቶች መጠቀምና 1 2 3 4 5 X
ማካፇሌ መቻሎ/ለ

2.3. ከተማሪዎችና ላልች ሠራተኞችጋር ያሇ ግንኙነት

71
11 ከተቃራኒ ፆታ ተማሪዎች ጋር አሊስፇሊጊ የሆኑ ግንኙነቶች 1 2 3 4 5 X
በመፍጠር በተማሪዎቹ/በላልች ተማሪዎች ሊይ ጫና እና
ጥርጣሬ ከመፍጠር ነፃ ናት/ነዉ፡፡
12 ሇተማሪዎችና ሇላልች የኮላጁ ማህበረሰብ አባሊት ጥሩ አርአያ 1 2 3 4 5 X
መሆን መቻለ/ሎ
13 ከY^ Lò­‹“ vMÅ[x‡/ቿጋር 1 2 3 4 5 X
ተባብራ/ሮ፤ተከባብራ/ሮ፤ ተዯጋግፋ/ፎ ትሰራሇች/ይሰራሌ፡፡
14 u¡õK< uT>Å[Ñ< cwcv­‹ LÃ ትሳተፋሇች/ Ãd}óM' 1 2 3 4 5 X
15 ¾¢T> Y^ ትቀበሊሇች/ÃkuLM' 1 2 3 4 5 X
16 uÓUÑT ¾}Ñ–< Ñ”u= ›c}Á¾‹” ትቀበሊሇች/ÃkuLM' 1 2 3 4 5 X
KS}`ÔU ትጥራሇች/ ÃØ^M'
2.4 K€UI`€ ¡õK<U J’ K}sS< Y^ Sn“€“
ShhM ´”vK? ማሳየት'
17 u€UI`€ ¡õK< ¾ST` Te}T` Y^” ¾T>ÁhiMu€” 1 2 3 4 5 X
Gdw /ታቀርባሇች/Ák`vM' }d€öU ታዯርጋሇች/ÁÅ`ÒM'
18 1 2 3 4 5 X
u€UI`€ ¡õK< ‹Óa‹ c=Ÿc~ ¾Sõ€H@ Gdw
ታመነጫሇች/ÁS’ÝM' }d€öU ታዯርጋሇች/ÁÅ`ÒM'
2.6 K}sS< ”w[€ የምታሳየዉ/¾T>Ád¾¨<” }q`s]’€' 1 2 3 4 5 X
19 በቢሮ ዉስጥ የሚገኙ የተቋሙ ንብረቶችን እንዯግሌ ንብረት አዴርጎ 1 2 3 4 5 X
መቁጠር(ወንበር ጠረጴዛ ፕሪንተር ወዘተ)
20 በማስተማሪያ በሊቦራቶሪ እና በሪሶርስ ሴንተር የሚገኙትን ንብረቶች 1 2 3 4 5 X
እንዯግሌ ንብረት ንብረት መንከባከብ

2.5 ¾Y^ c¯€' ¾u=a c¯€“ ¾kÖa c¯€ ማ¡በር'

21 ¾ewcv c¯€ ÁŸw^M/ታከብራሇች 1 2 3 4 5 X
22 u}sS< ¾Y^ c¯€ በስራዉ/ዋ ›²¨<€a ¾SÑ–€ MUÉ 1 2 3 4 5 X
›K¨</አሊት'
23 ”Å ›eðLÑ>’~ Ÿ}sS< ¨<ß LK¨< Iw[}cw S<Á© 1 2 3 4 5 X
›ÑMÓKA€ ታበረክታሇች/Áu[¡•M'
2.6. ›ÖnLÃ vI]'
24 ¾›M¢M SÖØ ¨ÃU ¾K?KA‹ ›Å”³» °ï‹ }Ñ» 1 2 3 4 5 X
አይዯሇችም/አይዯሇም፡፡
25 ÁK¨<”/ታንሀሳብ uÓMî“ u}Ñu=¨< SÉ[¡ LÃ 1 2 3 4 5 X
Ák`vM/ታቀርባሇች

ከሊይ ባካሄዴሽዉ/ከዉ ግምገማ መሰረት ማጠቃሇያ መስጫ ቦታ

ነጥብ 1 2 3 4 5 X
የነጥቡ
ብዛት
ÖpLL ÉU`

›T"Ã ’Øw , ÖpLL ÉU`/የግምገማ መስፇርቶቹ ብዛት ,

72
 በኮተቤ ዩኒቨርሲቲ ኮሉጅ የመምህራን መገምገሚያ ቅፅ
በግሇ ግምገማ ¾T>VL /Self Evaluation/ (5%)
¾}ÑUÒT>¨</ዋመምህር/ት eU _____________________________
¾€UI`€ ¡õM _____________________________
የትምህርት ዘመን --------------------------------- መንፇቀ አመት --------------------------------
ማሳሰቢያ
1. ግምገማዉ የሚዲስሰዉ
2.1 KTe}T` ¾T>Åረግ ´Óπ
2.2 የፇተና ዝግጅት አሰጣጥ እና ዉጤት ማሳወቅ
2.3 ከተማሪዎችና ላልች ሠራተኞችጋር ያሇ ግንኙነት
2.4 K€UI`€ ¡õK<U J’ K}sS< Y^ Sn“€“ ShhM ´”vK? ማሳየት'
2.5 K}sS< ”w[€ የምታሳየዉ/¾T>Ád¾¨<” }q`s]’€'
2.6. ¾Y^ c¯€' ¾u=a c¯€“ ¾kÖa c¯€ ማ¡በር' ሲሆን ›ÖnLà vI]ን
uT>³“©’€ ÑU€/ገምች

3. Ÿ›’uwŸ¨</ሽዉ ¾SÑUÑT>Á ’Øw ›"DÁ ¾Y^ ›ðíìUህንሽን Ÿu×U ´p}— eŸ u×U Ÿõ}—
ulØ` }S”´a Ÿ}kSÖ¨< ¨<eØ ›”Æ” uS¡uw ›SM¡€/አመሌክች
u×U ´p}— S"ŸK— Ÿõ}— u×U
}.l ¾SÑUÑT>Á Seð`€ ´p}— Ÿõ}—

2.1 KTe}T` የማዯርገው ´Óπ በተመሇከተ

1 ሇማስተምረው ኮርሶች የማስተማሪያ ጽሐፍ /ቲቺንግ 1 2 3 4 5
ማቴሪያሌ/ አዘጋጃሇው፡፡
2 ኮርሱን በተመዯበዉ ጊዜ መሰረት ሙለ በሙለ 1 2 3 4 5
አጠናቅቃሇው፡፡
3 ክፍሇጊዜ ሳይባክን ሙለ በሙለ ሇማስተማር ስራ 1 2 3 4 5
እጠቀማሇው፡፡
4 ሇማስተምረው ትምህርት የማማከሪያ ሰዓት በመበዯብ 1 2 3 4 5
በአግባቡ ጥቅም ሊይ አውሊሇው፡፡
5 ተመሳሳይ ኮርሶችን ከሚሰጡ መምህራን ጋር ተቀናጅቼ 1 2 3 4 5
በመናበብ አስተምራሇው፡፡

2.2 የፇተና ዝግጅት አሰጣጥ እና ዉጤት ማሳወቅ

6 የፇተና ጥያቄዎችን የተሇያዩ የምዘና ቴክኒኮችን 1 2 3 4 5
(subjective and objective) ባካተተ መሌኩ
አዘጋጃሇው፡፡
7 በፇተና ዝግጅት በማባዛት ስቴፕሌ በማዴረግ በማዯሌ 1 2 3 4 5
በመሰብሰብሰብ ከላልች ጋር አብሬ እሰራሇው፡፡
8 የሚሰጡ ፇተናዎች ካስተማርኩት ምዕራፎችና 1 2 3 4 5
ከተመዯበሊቸው ሰዓቶች ጋር የተገናዘበ ነዉ
9 በፇተና አሰጣጥ ወቅት ተገቢዉን ቁጥጥር አዯርጋሇው 1 2 3 4 5

1ዏ u¡õK< ¾T>cÖ<€” ¾ð}“ wn€ /zK=Ç=+/ uÒ^ 1 2 3 4 5

በሚገባ እገመግማሇው

2.3. ከተማሪዎችና ላልች ሠራተኞችጋር ያሇ ግንኙነት

73
11 ከተቃራኒ ፆታ ተማሪዎች ጋር አሊስፇሊጊ የሆኑ ግንኙነቶች 1 2 3 4 5
በመፍጠር በተማሪዎች ሊይ ጫና እና ጥርጣሬ ከመፍጠር
ነፃ ነኝ፡፡
12 ሇተማሪዎችና ሇላልች የኮላጁ ማህበረሰብ አባሊት ጥሩ 1 2 3 4 5
አርአያ መሆን ችያሇው፡፡
13 ከY^ Lò­‹“ vMÅ[xቼ ጋር ተባብሬና ተከባብሬ 1 2 3 4 5
እሰራሇው፡፡
14 u¡õK< uT>Å[Ñ< cwcv­‹ LÃ እሳተፋሇው 1 2 3 4 5
15 ¾¢T> Y^ን እቀበሊሇው 1 2 3 4 5
16 uÓUÑT ¾}Ñ–< Ñ”u= ›c}Á¾‹” በመቀበሌ 1 2 3 4 5
ሇመተረጎም እሰራሇውእጥራሇው'
2..4 K€UI`€ ¡õK<U J’ K}sS< Y^ Sn“€“
ShhM ´”vK? ማሳየት'
17 u€UI`€ ¡õK< ¾ST` Te}T` Y^ 1 2 3 4 5
¾T>ÁhiMu€” Gdw አቀርባሇው' }d€öU
አዯርጋሇው'
18 u€UI`€ ¡õK< ‹Óa‹ c=Ÿc~ ¾Sõ€H@ Gdw 1 2 3 4 5
አመነጫሇው' }d€öU አዯርጋሇው'
2.6 K}sS< ”w[€ የምታሳየዉ/¾T>Ád¾¨<” 1 2 3 4 5
}q`s]’€'
19 በማስተማሪያ በሊቦራቶሪ እና በሪሶርስ ሴንተር 1 2 3 4 5
የሚገኙት እንዱሁም በቢሮ ዉስጥ የሚገኙ የተቋሙ
ንብረቶችን እንከባከባሇው

2..5 ¾Y^ c¯€' ¾u=a c¯€“ ¾kÖa c¯€

2ዏ ¾ewcv c¯€ አከብራሇው
ማ¡በር' 1 2 3 4 5
21 u}sS< ¾Y^ c¯€ በስራዬ ሊይ ›²¨<€ሬ ¾SÑ– 1 2 3 4 5
€ MUÉ አሇኝ'
22 ”Å ›eðLÑ>’~ Ÿ}sS< ¨<ß LK¨< Iw[}cw 1 2 3 4 5
S<Á© ›ÑMÓKA€ አበረክታሇው'
2.6. ›ÖnLÃ vI]'
23 ¾›M¢M SÖØ ¨ÃU ¾K?KA‹ ›Å”³» °ï‹ }Ñ» 1 2 3 4 5
አይዯሇሁም፡፡
24 ያሇኝን ሀሳብ uÓMî“ u}Ñu=¨<መንገዴ SÉ[¡ LÃ 1 2 3 4 5
አቀርባሇው፣

ከሊይ ባካሄዴሽዉ/ከዉ ግምገማ መሰረት ማጠቃሇያ መስጫ ቦታ

ነጥብ 1 2 3 4 5
የነጥቡ ብዛት

ጠቅሊሊ ÉU` ከ12ዏ

›T"Ã ’Øw , ÖpLL ÉU` ሲካፇሌ ሇ24 ,

74
 በኮተቤ ዩኒቨርሲቲ ኮK?ጅ
የመምህራን የሥራ አፇፃፀም ግምገማ ማጠቃሇያ ቅፅ

¾}ÑUÒT>¨</ዋመምህር/ት eU

ትምህርት ክፍለ/ሎ

ግምገማው የተካሄዯበት የትምህርት ዘመን መንፇቀ አመት/ሴሚስተር

SUIሯ/\ ያስተማረው/ችው ኮርስ/ሶች ሰምና lØ`

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ሀ/ በተማሪዎች የተካሄዯ ግምገማ

ግምገማ¨<ን ያካሄደ ተማሪዎች ብዛት

›T"Ã ’Øw 5 , የተሰጠ ÖpLL ÉU`/ የግምገማ መስፇርቶች ብዛት አማካይ ነጥብ, ነጥብ ከ5X 0.5

የተማሪዎችን ግምገማ ስላት ያጠናቀረው/ችው መምህር/ት ስም

ፊርማ __________________ ቀን __________

ሇ/ የካውንስሌ ግምገማ

ግምገማዉን ያካሄደ መምህራን ብዛት

ነጥብ ከ5= የተሰጠ ጠቅሊሊ ዴምር/የግምገማ መስፇርቶቹ ብዛትአማካይ ነጥብ, ነጥብ ከ5X 0.15

ሏ/ የትምህርት ክፍሌ ሀሊፊ ግምገማ

ነጥብ ከ5= የተሰጠ ጠቅሊሊ ዴምር/የግምገማ መስፇርቶቹ ብዛት አማካይ ነጥብ, ነጥብ ከ5X 0.3

የትምህርት ክፍለ ሀሊፊ ስም

ፊርማ------------------------------------ ቀን----------------------

መ/ ግሇ ግምገማ

ነጥብ ከ5= የተሰጠ ጠቅሊሊ ዴምር/የግምገማ መስፇርቶቹ ብዛትአማካይ ነጥብ, ነጥብ ከ5X 0.05

አጠቃሊይ አማካይ ’Øw

የመምህሩ/ሯ ስራ አፇፃፀም አጠቃሊይ አማካይ ነጥብ = ሀ+ሇ+ሏ+መ

ግምገማውን ያፀዯቀ¨< ሀሊፊ ስም

ፊርማ ቀን

75