ANALYSIS OF SUPERVISOR AND SUPERVISEE COOPERATION IN PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT IN A PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT IN KWAZULU-NATAL

Abstract

Studies have shown that employees and their supervisors rarely cooperate in the various stages of performance planning including the setting of their performance targets. This study has sought to explore the cooperation of supervisors and supervisees in the implementation of performance management, commonly known as the Employee Performance Management and Development System (EPMDS), in a provincial government department in KwaZulu-Natal (KZN). Drawing on the pragmatist philosophy, the study employed a mixed-method approach which involved in-depth interviews (six), documentary analysis and survey methods (83 questionnaires) to elicit the views of workers on the implementation of EPMDS in a provincial government department in KZN. Through documentary analysis, this study established that there are proper and systematic procedures for EPMDS. A further analysis has revealed that the central tendency is evident when supervisors give performance scores, with most workers being given average scores and only a few scores being above the average, which adversely affects their motivation. These findings have critical implications for human resources managers in the public sector. The consequence of this is that there is a need to balance the tensions between time constraints and proper Performance Management by involving workers in the whole cycle of Performance Management. Without such involvement, workers will continue to be suspicious of the EPMDS which may defeat its purpose. 

Keywords

• Public sector,performance management,performance review,personal development plan

Kaynakça

1. Ammons, D., & Roenigk, D. (2015). Performance Management in Local Government: Is it Influenced by Doctrine? Public Performance and Management Review, Vol.38 (1) 514-541.
2. Balcioglu, H., & Nihinlola, A. (2014). Perception of Employee towards Performing Performance Evaluation System: Case Study of National Horticultural Research Institute (NIHORT) Nigeria. International Journal of Business and Social Science, Vol. 5 (8)135-150.
3. Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. London: Penguin.
4. Goyer, M. (2005). Workplace Monitoring: Today Panopticon. Retrieved on August 14, from 2016http://blog.mattgoyer.com/school/4A/cs492/Asn3.html.
5. Locke, E., & Latham, G. (2002). Building a Practical Useful Theory of Goal Setting and Task Motivation. American Psychologist, Vol. 57 (9) 265-268.
6. Lunenburg, F. (2011). Goal Setting Theory of Motivation. International Journal of Management, Vol. 15 (1) 1-5.
7. Lunenburg, F. (2012). Performance Appraisal: Methods Rating Errors. International Journal of Scholarly Acad emic Intellectual Diversity, Vol. 14 (1) 1- 9. Mosoge, M., & Pilane. (2014). Performance Management. The Neglected Imperative of Accountability Systems in Education, Vol. 43 (1) 1-18.
8. Mpanga, E. L. (2009). Implementation of the Performance Management Programme in Uganda's Public Service with Specific Reference to the Ministry of Public Service. Pretoria: University of South Africa.

9. Ndahinda, M., & Bosman, M. (2014). The Panopticon, Data Protection and the Surveillance Society. London: Tilburg University.
10. Perryman, J. (2006). Panoptic Performativity and School Inspection Regimes: Disciplinary Mechanisms and Life under Special Measures. Journal of Education Policy, Vol. 21 (2)147-161.
11. Polson, T. (2013). Effects of Goal Setting on Performance in Collegiate Athletes. Skyline- The Big Sky Undergraduate Journal, Vol. 1 (1) 1-25.
12. Reeves, G. (2003). Panoptic Modalities of Power. London: Pearson. Roseblant, A., Kneese, T., & Boyd, D. (2014). Workplace Surveillance. Data and Society Research, Vol. 7 (1) 01-33.
13. Mbhanyele, R. E. (2015). A performance management system application model for public institutions: the case of the Regional Land Claims Commissioner, Limpopo Province, North-West , Potchefstroom Campus:University (South Africa).
14. Van Dooren, W., et al. ,(2015). Performance management in the public sector, London:Routledge.