Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Perception of Performance Appraisal As A Tool For Enhanced Productivity and Career Advancement in Three University Libraries in Ogun State Nigeria
Perception of Performance Appraisal As A Tool For Enhanced Productivity and Career Advancement in Three University Libraries in Ogun State Nigeria
BABCOCK UNIVERSITY,
NIGERIA
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this research work was to identify the perception of library staff on
the effect of performance appraisal on productivity and career growth in order to
enhance the provision of information services through effective performance
appraisals. Descriptive analytic approach was adopted for the study. The study
population was made up of 92 library employees selected from Babcock University,
Ilishan – Remo; Olabisi Onabanjo University, Ago - Iwoye; and University of
Agriculture, Abeokuta. 92 questionnaires were distributed to all the Professional
Librarians, Para professionals and graduates in other fields. 78.2% (85) of the
questionnaires distributed were retrieved. Four research questions were tested and
the results were analyzed using the percentage method. The results revealed that 32
(27.2%) saw performance appraisal as a routine exercise, 25 (21.25%) saw it as a
tool for improving performance, 16 (13.6%) perceived it as a tool for staff
compensation while only 5(4.25%) saw it as a tool for favouring a few people on the
job. Majority of the respondents felt that performance appraisal has positive
influence on job performance and enhances career growth. The study concluded by
arguing that performance appraisal can only be meaningful if employees’ job
descriptions are reviewed to include job performance. The paper finally
recommends that Libraries should carry out internal appraisals apart from the
appraisal conducted by the personnel department for the sole purpose of correcting
deviations and recommendations for improvement must accompany every identified
area of weakness.
INTRODUCTION
Libraries exist with the sole aim of organizing human and material resources to produce
knowledge and services that support man in his attempt to control the universe
(Ologbonsaiye, 1993). While information resources are valuable to the existence of any
library, their selection, acquisition, processing and organization will however remain a
human function, which can only be carried out by the library staff. Library staff provides
access to the information held in a libraries’ collection. The term “performance appraisal”
other hand is a multidimensional idea consisting of many facets; which range from an
employee’s output (job result) to employee mode of accomplishing his or her task (job
behaviour), and the employee’s attitude towards his or her job (personal traits) (Wallace
& Szilagyi,1982).
While the concept of performance appraisal is not new, the study of employee perception
of the concept is still going on. Mullins (1996) defines perception as “the mental
function of giving significance to stimuli”. The process of perception explains the manner
in which information from the environment is selected and organised to provide meaning
for an individual. People see things in different ways bringing about different reactions to
the same issue. The way the library staff perceives performance appraisal affects the
is made up of the main library at the mini campus and four branch libraries which include
the law library, faculty of Arts, Social Sciences and Management Sciences libraries all at
the main campus. There is a Medical library situated at Sagamu and the Sopolu library at
library at Ibogon, are also part of Olabisi Onabanjo Library. The total collection of the
central library is about 40,000 volumes of books, and journals. Combined with the other
branches; the library is said to posses an estimated 75,000 volumes of textbooks and
2,000 journal titles. The library has total staff strength of 147 which includes 25
Babcock University Library is made up of four service points, known as the Main library,
Education and Humanities library, Management and Social Sciences library and Science
and Technology library. As at the time of this study Babcock University library has over
42,692 volumes of books and 450 periodical titles. The library has a staff strength of 44,
University of Agriculture, Abeokuta’s library, has a collection of about 16, 000 volumes
of books and 95 periodical titles. The make up of the library staff is unique. It is made up
of 9 professional librarians and 25 Para professional librarians. The library has a staff
strength of 34.
Statement of problem
appraisals, which will form the basis of most management decisions in matters of salary
Except administrators understand the subordinates view of the appraisal system, libraries
and indeed their parent institutions, would from year to year spend time and money in
carrying out performance appraisals that would end up at very minimal contribution to
University libraries are libraries in higher institutions of learning. They aid the host
institutions where they are situated to achieve their objectives (Odiase, Unegbu & Haliso,
2001). The University Librarian is responsible for the leadership of a University library
he or she is responsible for all the staff in the library. Performance management in the
library begins with the University Librarian linking the goals of the library to the strategic
goals of the parent institution. Professional librarians working in University libraries are
classified as academic staff in the University system, which means that the mode of
performance appraisal for librarians is based mainly on community service and number
of publications rather than office performance, however librarians in carrying out their
services, find themselves in positions where they are responsible for the allocation,
monitor the job performance of subordinates by observing variances between set goals
and actual performance and taking corrective actions. This view is shared by (Schachter,
After surveying library literature it is apparent that most academic library administrations
implement some type of performance appraisal. Sometimes disparity may exist regarding
the process itself and the goals sought (Edwards & Williams, 1998). University libraries
perform staff evaluation in line with the rules and procedures mapped out by their parent
institutions (Arnold, 2005). In most cases, it has been observed that performance
appraisal in libraries are conducted following the guidelines set forth by the human
resource department for the host institution. Experience has however shown that centrally
differences in activities from one department to the other. The work performed at the
Bursary department is certainly different from the work performed in the library. Even
within the library, the work performed by readers’ services is different from the work
performed by Technical services. While the readers’ services is service oriented and
difficult to measure, technical services has more quantifiable measures as the number of
Despite the disparity in the various departments within the library, Belcastro (1998)
argues that the evaluation of performance, whether for customer service or any other unit,
must be based on behaviors that are measurable. In order to make the work at readers’
The study on performance appraisal in libraries is not new, for instance Evans (2005)
Out of those interviewed 90.6% agreed that performance appraisal is necessary for good
performance appraisal in libraries, 16.7% said yes while 83.3% said no. When asked “Do
you think that the process has positive influence on the employee performance?” 87.0%
said no. Hansen (1995) also conducted an in-depth study of staff appraisal schemes in
three British University libraries in 1993, the result of the study revealed that the library
using its own appraisal scheme devoted more time and attention to it against those who
applied general appraisal schemes. It also revealed that when recommended follow-up
actions such as enabling attendance at training courses was followed up, staff showed
Academic library discovered that Librarians dislike the appraisal system because they are
Despite the use of performance appraisal in libraries, arguments abound on the use of
(1996) is of the view that performance appraisals nourishes short term performance,
builds fear, demolishes team work and nourishes rivalry and politics. Supporters of
performance appraisal such as Casio (1996) and Wilson (2001) are however of the
opinion that Performance appraisal is the logical means to appraise, develop, and
Research methodology
Descriptive survey approach was adopted. In selecting the population for this study,
Professional Librarians, Para professional Librarians and graduates in other fields were
considered. The population is therefore made up of the 34 library staff from the
University of Agriculture Abeokuta, 10 library staff from Babcock University library and
48 library staff of Olabisi Onabanjo library, making the total population 92.
The sampling is enumerative as all members of the population were taken as subjects for
this study. A four point likert type questionnaire was used for data collection. The
questionnaire were indicated by ticking one of the options in the category strongly agree,
agree, disagree and strongly disagree. The scales were given values of 4, 3, 2 and 1
respectively, however scoring was reversed for negatively worded items. The scores of
The simple percentage method was used for data analysis. A total of 92 questionnaires
were sent out to the respondents, out of which 85 were returned thereby representing a
(SA), agree (A), disagree (D) or strongly disagree (SD) to the statements in the tables, F
In order to find out how library staff understand or perceive the term “performance
appraisal” the question which says “which of the following do you consider as the
frequency
1 Performance appraisal is the routine evaluation of 32 27.2
work
2 Performance appraisal is a management technique 7 5.95
improving performance
4 Performance appraisal is a tool for staff 16 13.6
compensation
5 Performance appraisal is a management tool used in 5 4.25
From the analyses carried out majority of the respondents 32 (27.2%) felt that
merely a form filling exercise. 5(4.25%) saw it as a management tool used in favouring a
few people on the job. This finding is in line with the findings of Evans (2005) who
S/N SA A D SD No
response
F % F % F % F % F %
1 Performance appraisal improves 32 27.2 37 31.4 10 8.5 6 5.1 - -
job performance 5
2 The assessment of performance 26 22.1 40 34 11 9.35 8 6.8 - -
appraisal
5 Performance appraisal does not 6 5.1 15 12.7 34 28.9 24 20.4 6 5.1
my performance 5 5 5
Source: Author’s data presentation, 2007
While responding to the statement that performance appraisal improves job performance,
69(58.65%) agreed while 16(13.6) disagreed. Even when put negatively in number five
(5) “Performance appraisal does not contribute to job performance, only 21(17.85%) of
the respondents agreed while 58. (49.3%) disagreed. This implies that library staff
perceive performance appraisal as having positive effect on job performance. The finding
however disagrees with that of Nelson (2005), whose study showed that performance
S/N SA A D SD No
response
F % F % F % F % F %
1 The appraisal of performance 22 18.7 35 29.7 18 15.3 10 8.5 - -
performance evaluations 5 5
3 I discover some of my weakness 14 11.9 38 32.3 17 14.4 10 8.5 6 5.1
during appraisals 5
4 Appraisals enhances the chances for 36 30.6 29 24.6 12 10.2 8 6.8 - -
promotion 5
5 Performance appraisal provides me 19 16.1 38 32.3 14 11.9 8 6.8 6 5.1
goals
6 Appraisals encourage career growth 32 27.2 37 31.4 10 8.5 6 5.1 - -
5
7 Performance appraisals do not 5 4.25 8 6.8 37 31.4 29 24.6 6 5.1
Analysis of this table shows that performance appraisal provides an opportunity for
“appraisals enhance the chances for promotion”, 55.25% of the total number of
respondents gave positive indications while 17% disagreed. Responses to the statement
“performance appraisal encourages career growth” were also on the positive side with 69
response
F % F % F % F % F %
1 Librarians are better equipped than 30 25.5 25 21.2 15 12.7 9 7.65 6 5.1
performance appraisal
3 I will be more committed to 28 23.8 28 23.8 22 18.7 7 5.95 - -
personnel department
4 Performance appraisal instrument 28 23.8 33 20.0 18 15.3 6 5.1 - -
The result of the data collected shows that 55 (46.75%) feel that they will be more
committed to performance appraisals organised within the library than those organised by
the personnel department against 29(24.65%) who felt otherwise.55 (46.75%) were of the
opinion that librarians are better equipped to organise work oriented appraisals for the
library staff. 24(20.4%) did not share the same opinion. 6(5.1%) did not respond to that
statement. This finding agrees with the findings of George (1995) Hansen (1995.
Conclusion
As long as appraisal reports continue to form the basis for managerial decisions in
matters affecting staff welfare, organizations must find ways of making them relate to
productivity or scrap them entirely. Failure to find a good appraisal system will affect the
way library employees go about their day to day activities and this will result in poor
services. Based on the findings of the study, the following recommendations are made;
1 Libraries should carry out internal appraisals apart from the appraisal conducted
References
Pp 10-13
8/2/05
available at www.aslib.co.uk/caa/abstracts/open/95-
19/5/05
Odiase, J.O. U, Unegbu, V.E & Haliso, Y (2001) Introductionto the use of
Schachter, D. (2004, Sept.) How to set performance goals: Employee reviews are
techserv.lib.vt.edu/TechServices/LAMAWeb/Personnel%20Evaluation.doc
accessed on 3/9/05