Name : CATHERINE E.

JOAQUIN
Student No.: 2021-62178
Professor: MS. HILDA G. DIOKNO, MPA

A Critique Paper on Performance Appraisal in the Philippines in Comparison to Singapore

Catherine E. Joaquin

School of Government – Graduate Program

Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila
2022

1. Introduction

Performance appraisal is a particularly controversial management practice. However, despite the

controversy, the appraisal has been embraced by civil services worldwide to monitor government
employees’ performance. This paper looks at the experiences of the Singaporean and Filipino
civil services in appraising the performance of senior government employees. It describes the
broader context in which appraisal operates, and a sketch of employment arrangements in the
two administrations, before describing the methods by which senior government employees are
appraised. Finally, the critique paper attempts to draw attention to the concept of ‘culture’ and its
effects on administrative practice. It argues that performance appraisal provides an excellent
example of a practice that influences culture.

Performance appraisal is once described as the number one management problem, leaving people
embittered, dejected, and unfit for productive work for many weeks after the rating (Glen, 1990),
which aroused more controversy than most human resource management practices. Its advocates
regard it as pivotal to a successful human resources strategy, while critics view it as unnecessary
and potentially destructive to workplace harmony.

Despite such controversy, performance appraisal remains rooted in the personnel practices of
public organizations around the world. Culture and its effects upon appraisal have been identified
as an area that warrants attention (Murphy, 1991), but the effects of culture in its broader,
anthropological sense seem to have been ignored. This is due in no small part to the fact that
‘culture’ is a challenging concept to apply to the study of public administration (Riggs, 1964 ).
Because most countries around the world institutionalized a performance appraisal system for
employees, and because so few of those systems meet all of their stated objectives, an appraisal
has become an interesting case for comparative study.

The paper critiques senior civil servants’ performance appraisal methods in Singapore and the
Philippines. These variables are expected to influence an administrative practice like
performance appraisal. However, the present paper is primarily concerned with describing the
various appraisal methods in the two countries and identifying some of the more obvious ways in
which culture might impact appraisal.

This paper is presented in three parts. First is a review of literature that includes a brief
description of performance appraisal, focusing on its purposes and the various methods used to
Name : CATHERINE E. JOAQUIN
Student No.: 2021-62178
Professor: MS. HILDA G. DIOKNO, MPA

conduct an appraisal. It also introduces the concept of ‘culture’ and suggests some of how culture
may influence performance appraisal. The second part compares and contrasts the two
appraisal systems and discusses some of the possible effects of culture on the appraisal of senior
civil servants in Singapore and the Philippines. The final part provides a conclusion and
recommendation.

2. Review of Literature

2.1 Performance Appraisal: Purpose and Methods

Performance appraisal is 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 (Lansbury,
Australia 1988).

Several methods are used to assess an employee’s performance. Some are formal, others less so.
Informal appraisal involves the assessment of an individual’s performance outside any formal
structure or scheme. For example, employees are subject to their supervisors’ daily conscious
and unwitting assessments. Much of this assessment is subjective and may be affected by such
factors as the ability of the employee to get on with their supervisor, their reactions under
pressure, their appearance, degree of organization, level of attentiveness, and interest. While
these informal assessments are difficult to avoid, contemporary wisdom suggests that formal
appraisals ought not to be trait-based but be directly related to the specific duties of positions
(Hallyer & B Brewer, 1991).

Employees may be rated against explicit performance criteria, ranked against their colleagues
and peers, or assessed against certain qualities and characteristics using a formal appraisal
system. Most appraisal methods used throughout the world today are based, to some extent at
least, upon the following techniques: graphic rating scales; behaviourally anchored rating scales
(BARS); behavioral observation scales (BOS); mixed standard rating scales; and management by
objectives (MBO).

2.2 Culture and Context

Performance appraisal has been transplanted across cultural borders into various administrative
settings, often without consideration of context or circumstance. Practical issues tend to limit the
usefulness of methods like performance appraisal in developing administrations some practical
issues tend to limit the usefulness of methods like performance appraisal. Most commentators
agree, for example, that a goal-based appraisal system, in which an employee’s work
performance is measured against specified goals, is the most satisfactory (Dorfman, 1986).
Developing countries that have attempted to institutionalize goal-based evaluation are likely to
find such methods dysfunctional. It seems surprising that scholars in the field have not paid more
Name : CATHERINE E. JOAQUIN
Student No.: 2021-62178
Professor: MS. HILDA G. DIOKNO, MPA

attention to cross-cultural borrowing of public administration practices. ‘Culture’ is a crucial

epistemological concept of anthropology, but little agreement exists about its meaning.

Anthropologists Kroeber and Kluckhohn, for example, found 164 definitions of culture (Kroeber,
1963 ). In recent years, anthropologists seem to have relinquished the word ‘culture’ simply
because of the difficulties involved in its definition. This article does not pretend to deal with
culture comprehensively, mainly for space reasons. Instead, it seeks to raise the issue of culture
as a variable for explaining differences in administrative practices and behavior in specific
settings. At the risk of over-simplification, the term ‘culture’ is used in the present study to
describe the customs, values, traditions, and social institutions often shared by individuals that
distinguish a society. The term ‘administrative culture,’ often used to describe the study of
administrative systems in different national settings (see, for example, Jain and Dwivedi 1990;
Dror 1990), refers to how those beliefs and attitudes affect administrative practice and
organizational behavior.

Performance appraisal provides an exciting focus for comparative study because the practice
itself is based on certain assumptions about individual achievement and motivation that
distinguish developed administrations but are not necessarily shared by members of more
traditional or developing societies (McClelland 1961). Traditional or developing societies, by
contrast, tend to emphasize group over individual interests, preferring good relations to the
promotion of individual achievement. In theory, performance appraisal requires supervisors to
assess an employee’s work performance honestly. Unfortunately, many supervisors are reluctant
to do so (Larson 1989:410). Despite this tendency, however, most Western appraisal systems
require supervisors to show the completed appraisal to the employee being appraised. Moreover,
in many cases, an employee has the right to challenge an appraisal.

Members of many non-western societies look unfavorably upon the candid expression of an
individual’s opinions, mainly if those opinions are critical of another individual. For example, in
many Asian and Latin American countries, an individual must be allowed to save ‘face’ and be
protected from criticism. Failure to protect an individual’s ‘face’ results in ‘shame’ attaching to
the person making the criticism. Smooth interpersonal relationships in many non-Western
countries are founded upon values such as respect for an individual’s feelings and avoiding
situations likely to lead to conflict. The potential influence of these sorts of values on
performance appraisal practice may be expected to be significant.

2.3 Performance Appraisal of Senior Civil Servants in Singapore and the Philippines

Singapore and the Philippines were selected as the focus of this paper because of their contrasts
in administrative heritage, economic development, and political regime. Colonization, for
example, has left an indelible impression on the civil services of Singapore and the Philippines.
Moreover, the Singaporean civil service was based upon the British administration, while the
Philippines was modeled first upon the Spanish civil service and later upon the USA.
Name : CATHERINE E. JOAQUIN
Student No.: 2021-62178
Professor: MS. HILDA G. DIOKNO, MPA

Economic development has played a critical role in developing the public sector in Singapore
and the Philippines. As an industrialized society, Singapore boasts a highly developed civil
service staffed by well-educated professionals able to make optimal use of the rich technological
resources available to them. The Philippines’ public administration remains similar to that in
many developing countries. Skill shortages and poor technology compound the difficulties for an
administrative system dogged by elaborate and excessive procedure, nepotism, and duplication
of functions. The Philippines is still classified by the World Bank as a developing country,
despite being one of the few Asian countries to have emerged relatively unscathed from the
region’s recent financial crisis. The Singaporean civil service enjoys a close relationship with the
political leadership and has been instrumental in implementing the government’s policies. The
lack of meaningful input has doubtlessly fortified its role in the policy process from interest
groups or extra-bureaucratic organizations. The administration has served the same government
for 40 years, making for an interesting comparison with the Philippines’ services.

According to those who administer the system, the intention behind the Work Review is to
enable the employee to contribute to the appraisal process while minimizing opportunities for
confrontation. It is widely recognized by supervisors and employees alike that the Work Review
document focuses on the positive rather than the negative aspects of an employee’s performance.
Supervisors are required to comment on employees’ training and development needs and make
an overall assessment of employee potential. Part two of the document, the Development
Assessment, is closed. The Development Assessment requires an assessment of the employee
against the 10 qualities developed by Shell. Against each of the qualities, employees are rated on
a four-point scale. The supervisor is also required to rank the various qualities. The scale ranges
from ‘High’ to ‘Exceeding’, to ‘Meeting’ to ‘Below’. Reporting officers are expected to illustrate
their rating choices with narrative comments in the space provided. The most important part of
the appraisal is the section on ‘potential,’ The appraiser must assess the appraisee’s ‘Currently
Estimated Potential’ (CEP), by matching job level with salary grade. Assessment is made by
shading a circle for the predicted job level and salary grade. The second part of the potential
section requires the appraiser to assess the likelihood of the appraisee becoming a permanent
secretary. The following section deals with the appraisee’s development and requires the
appraiser to make narrative comments on development prospects over three years, long-term
development prospects, and recommend training needs. In consultation with the permanent
secretary, the supervisor must then make a recommendation for promotion for the appraisee.

2.4 Employment Arrangements in Singapore

The Singaporean civil service is based upon a structure recommended by the Trusted
Commission in 1947, convened by the British government to refine the personnel management
system in Singapore (Seah Chee Meow, 1985). Responsibility for personnel management within
the Singaporean civil device is shared between the Public Service Commission, the Education
Services Commission, the Police and Civil Defence Services Commission, and the Public
Service Division within the Office of the Prime Minister. The PSD formulates, monitors, and
reviews personnel policies in the civil service and ensures that the personnel practices of
ministries are consistent with such policies.
Name : CATHERINE E. JOAQUIN
Student No.: 2021-62178
Professor: MS. HILDA G. DIOKNO, MPA

On 1 January 1995, responsibility for recruitment and promotion of most civil servants,
including those in Division One, was devolved from the commissions to a system of personnel
boards of permanent secretaries and senior officers.

Significant social prestige attaches to employment in the higher ranks of the Singaporean civil
service. Indeed an analysis of power structures and occupational prestige in Singapore revealed
that the most influential groups in Singaporean society are the ‘political elite’, the ‘civil
bureaucrats’ and the ‘professional elite’ (Chen, 1977 ). Senior civil servants in Singapore are
richly rewarded for their efforts, with civil service salaries in Singapore being amongst the
highest in the world. Except for officers in the Administrative Service, civil service salaries are
commensurate with those offered by the private sector. Perhaps, as a consequence of the salary
structure in Singapore, corruption among civil servants occurs infrequently. Nevertheless, the
Singaporean government has pursued acts of corrupt or unethical conduct by its civil servants
ferociously and legal sanctions have served as a significant deterrent to corrupt behavior.

2.5 Performance Appraisal in the Senior Ranks of the Singaporean Civil Service

Performance appraisal is a cornerstone of the promotion and development process in the

Singaporean civil service, and the Potential Appraisal System used to appraise senior
Singaporean civil servants was introduced in 1983. The Singaporean government borrowed the
PAS from the Shell petroleum company. Shell developed its PAS during the 1960s to enable the
company to identify those employees with potential for senior management. Introduced by Shell
in 1966, the PAS was based upon the work of Professor Van Lennup, an industrial psychologist
from the University of Utrecht in Holland. Shell engaged the services of Professor Van Lennup
to examine possible means of evaluating employee potential. The Singaporean civil service
adopted Shell’s revisions in 1994, with one modification: political sensitivity was substituted for
business sense. Shell has overseen each of the refinements made to the PAS since its adoption by
the civil service in 1983, and the company continues to advise the PSD on the operation of the
system. The PAS document for senior civil servants is in two parts. Part one, known as the Work
Review, allows the employee to comment on the supervisor’s assessment, while part two, the
Development Assessment, is not shown to the employee. The Work Review requires mainly
narrative comments on the employee’s work performance.

2.6 Employment Arrangements in the Philippines

Third-level positions are filled by executives who constitute what is known as the Career
Executive Service (CES), the senior ranks of the Philippine administration. The Civil Service
Commission is the central personnel agency in the Philippine civil service, responsible for
employment matters relating to first- and second-level employees. The CES is made up of both
political and non-political appointees.
Name : CATHERINE E. JOAQUIN
Student No.: 2021-62178
Professor: MS. HILDA G. DIOKNO, MPA

Political CES employees have temporary appointments and serve at the pleasure of the
appointing authority. Non-political appointees, known as Career Executive Service Officers
(CESOs), enjoy the security of tenure within the CES and may not be removed from office
‘except for cause and after due process, as provided by law’ (Juridico 1995:218). The president
may dismiss officers at will; however, this right is invoked upon change of government.
Currently, only 47 percent of all CES positions are filled by CESOs, and the remaining 53
percent by temporary employees (Santa Tomas 1995:272).

Entry to most positions in the Philippine Civil Service, including the CES, is by competitive
examination with exams designed in accordance with the classification and position
requirements of each job. Individual organisations in the Philippines have a certain amount of
latitude in determining selection criteria for appointment. Nepotism figures prominently in the
recruitment process in the Philippine administration. An individual seeking appointment to the
civil service will most commonly contact a senior officer in the department in which he wishes to
work, and seek a letter of introduction. The letter serves as a recommendation and testimony to
the person’s character and diligence. Such letters tend to be the first step in the recruitment
process. The nature of the relationship between the letter writer and the addressee may help
determine the outcome of the application. Advancement in the Philippine civil service occurs
according to the principles of next-in rank.

Salaries for senior civil servants in the Philippines are very low, and many officials are forced to
supplement their income with secondary jobs. Perhaps in part as a consequence, corruption is
generally acknowledged to be entrenched at all levels of the Philippine administration orced to
supplement their income with secondary jobs. Perhaps in part as a consequence, corruption is
generally acknowledged to be entrenched at all levels of the Philippine administration (Varela
1993)..

2.7 Performance Appraisal in the Senior Ranks of the Philippine Civil Service

Members of the Career Executive Service are subject to their own annual appraisal system,
known as the Career Executive Service Performance Evaluation System, administered by the
CESB. Developed by the Development Academy of the Philippines on behalf of the CESB,
CESPES sought to improve the performance of CES members by identifying and properly
rewarding officers whose performance has been excellent while identifying non-performers
(CESB, 1990). Evaluations are based upon a performance contract that lists specific functions
and undertakings expected of the officer and reflects the commitments of the department’s
secretary, contained in the secretary’s agreement with the president. The contract system was
introduced in 1990 and is yet to be fully implemented. Government employees in the Philippines
have tended to regard performance appraisal as an unnecessary intrusion upon their time and
have thus been reluctant to embrace the system in earnest.

In addition to a contract document, the CESPES model comprises two virtually identical forms,
the Subordinate Rating Form and the Superior Rating Form. CESPES is unusual in that it
Name : CATHERINE E. JOAQUIN
Student No.: 2021-62178
Professor: MS. HILDA G. DIOKNO, MPA

requires subordinates of senior employees to evaluate their bosses’ performance. According to

the CESB, subordinates are often in the best position to comment upon the management abilities
of their bosses. The rating system is designed to encourage managers to treat their staff correctly
and identify the mistakes in the system. In the final assessment of an officer’s performance, the
subordinate’s rating accounts for 22 percent and the superior’s rating for 78 percent. The
subordinate must assess the general office’s accomplishments in terms of timeliness and quality,
and the personal contributions of the superior to those accomplishments. After ticking the
relevant statements, the subordinate is required to rate his/her superior’s accomplishments on a
scale of one to five, according to the same rating used in the Superior’s Rating Form.

3. Critique: Comparisons, Contrasts, and Culture

Singapore and the Philippines offer different systems of performance appraisal. Some of the
critical differences are shown in Table 1. Between the two, Singapore has ta more sophisticated
appraisal system. The PAS serves as the principal source of data in the Singaporean civil service
about employees’ skills, qualifications, and potential. The fact that decisions about promotions
are made almost exclusively based on appraisal results (generally without interviews) indicates
the importance of the system in the government’s overall human resource strategy. In the
Philippines, CESPES seems almost superfluous to human resource management practices for
senior civil servants. Promotion at all levels of the Philippines civil service has historically
depended upon nepotism and patronage.

Table 1: Key Features of Performance Appraisal for Senior Civil Servants in the Philippines and
Singapore

Feature Philippines Singapore

Terminology Career Executive Service
Performance Evaluation System
(CESPES)
Objective of Appraisal To determine the adequacy of
performance; to support CES
programs, including conferment
of CES eligibility, pay increases
and promotions
Mandatory or Optional Unenforceable
Type of Appraisal Based upon a performance
contract. Makes use of narrative
assessment, BARS and BOS
Potential Appraisal System
To identify potential; to
assist in decision-making
about promotions and
development
Mandatory
Work Review and
Development Assessment.
Makes use of narrative
assessment, graphic rating
Name : CATHERINE E. JOAQUIN
Student No.: 2021-62178
Professor: MS. HILDA G. DIOKNO, MPA

scales, BARS and BOS

Rater/Appraiser Supervisor and subordinate Supervisor
Linked to System of No No
Performance Pay?
Closed or Open Superior is open. Subordinate Work Review document is
appraisal is closed discussed with and shown to
the appraisee; Development
Assessment is not available
to the appraisee
Timing Annual Annual

Performance appraisal seems particularly well suited to the Singaporean preoccupation with
achievement. In Singapore, as in certain other Asian countries like Taiwan, Japan, and South
Korea, organizational success depends on individual ability and effort. It is not surprising that the
PAS is designed to identify employees with potential for more challenging roles. Singaporeans
also place a higher premium upon hard work than certain of their Southeast Asian neighbors,
including Filipinos. A study of Singaporean workers in high, middle, and low prestige
occupations, for example, found that 83 percent of those interviewed agreed with the proposition
that ‘Becoming a success is a matter of hard work. Luck has little or nothing to do with it’ (Quah
1991:101). There is little doubt that performance appraisal works most effectively in an
environment in which a high value is placed upon superior performance and individual effort. Its
practical application to systems that are not oriented towards achievement and performance is
consequently likely to be questionable.

The ‘closed’ nature of the PAS recognizes the disinclination of Singaporean supervisors to give
poor or negative appraisals directly to an appraisee. Indeed the whole PAS is structured so as to
ensure the negative aspects of appraisal are not revealed to the employee being appraised, and
that the open part of the appraisal accentuates the employee’s positive attributes. This is an
important feature of Singaporean culture and offers a good example of the Singaporean concern
for protecting the ‘face’ of an employee and minimizing opportunities for conflict. It is
interesting to note that the Shell appraisal system, upon which the PAS was based, requires
‘Currently Estimated Potential’ results to be shown to employees being appraised. Shell is a
western company with a single appraisal system for its senior employees around the world. The
adaptation of the PAS to an exclusively Singaporean setting, namely the upper ranks of the
Singaporean civil service, has involved a fundamental alteration to the appraisal system.

Performance appraisal in the Philippines provides an excellent example of what Fred Riggs
described as ‘formalism’ (Riggs 1964:15). Although the system itself is quite elaborate, it seems
doubtful that it meets its stated objectives. Despite its introduction 10 years ago, fewer than half
of all Career Executive Service staff participate in the appraisal scheme.
Name : CATHERINE E. JOAQUIN
Student No.: 2021-62178
Professor: MS. HILDA G. DIOKNO, MPA

The Philippine appraisal system for senior executives in the USA and Australia is based upon a
performance contract. However, unlike their counterparts in the USA and Australia, CESOs in
the Philippine civil service enjoy tenured employment. In reality, few non-political appointees
are ever removed from the CES. Moreover, poor performance has only led to dismissal on a few
occasions, and there is little evidence to suggest that the appraisal system was used to assist in
that process. With this in mind, the purpose of a performance contract is unclear.

One of the most unusual features of CESPES is the use of subordinate appraisal which
constitutes 22 percent of the overall rating. To protect the interests of the subordinate rater, this
part of the appraisal is not disclosed to the employee being appraised. Subordinate ratings reflect
the Filipino concern for fairness and the view that everyone, regardless of their position, ought to
be treated with respect (Jocano 1995:180). This is an important cultural value that characterises
interpersonal behaviour among Filipinos.

According to the Executive Director of the CESB, the major difficulty in managing CESPES has
been the indifference of senior management to appraisal. While subordinates complete their
appraisals promptly, many superiors fail to complete their part of the appraisal. Political
appointees to the CES in particular seem almost oblivious to CESPES. Such problems are
compounded by the inability of the CESB to enforce completion of th appraisal.

Another common problem, raised by the Executive Director of the CESB at interview, relates to
the tendency of many supervisors to complete the appraisal and return it to the CESB without
discussing the rating with the appraisee. Many supervisors are reluctant to reveal their ratings to
the officer being appraised to avoid the possibility of confrontation. The CESB must then return
the form to the superior, who often requests a new form to prepare an appraisal less likely to
cause affront to the appraisee. To some extent, such difficulties are exacerbated by the appraisal
system itself, which requires the supervisor to address questions which are unnecessarily
confrontational or negative, such as ‘In what ways do you think your subordinate should
improve? What are his/her problem areas?’. In a society concerned with protecting the feelings
of its members, such questions are unlikely to elicit frank responses, unless, of course, the
employee is not able to see them. The concern for being seen to have performed adequately is a
distinctive Filipino trait, as one
writer has observed:

The feeling of the other person is a central element in interpersonal relationships among
Filipinos. He fears offending others, and always opts for smooth interpersonal relations. Hence,
the use of third parties or intermediaries is a common practice among them. It is also a strategy
to save face (Varela 1995:164–5).

The desire for saving ‘face’ in the Philippines is illustrated by the reluctance of many senior
officers to show the completed appraisal to the employee being appraised. The fact that senior
officers often request clean appraisal forms so they can prepare a diluted appraisal to be signed
by the employee being appraised is testimony to the need to be seen to be positive rather than
negative about an employee’s performance.
Name : CATHERINE E. JOAQUIN
Student No.: 2021-62178
Professor: MS. HILDA G. DIOKNO, MPA

Performance appraisal in the Philippines should not be studied in isolation from the context in
which it operates. Appraisal is shaped by certain distinctive cultural values and norms which
stress teamwork rather than individual achievement. Employees may be more inclined to look
out for the interests of their colleagues, rather than to strive to improve their own work
performance, as one commentator notes:

The Filipino values of bayanihan (team spirit) and pakikisama (going along with) lead a Filipino
worker to smooth interpersonal relationships with his subordinates, peers and supervisors.
Teamwork, then, should not be a problem among government employees in their task
performance. These values should enhance productivity in the workplace. These same values,
however, may have a negative effect upon performance. For the sake of ‘pakikisama’, an
employee or group of employees may decide to peg performance at a certain level to not
jeopardise the individual performance ratings of slow workers (Micor 1989:62).

Unlike Singaporeans, Filipinos enjoy relationships based upon reciprocity. The phrase utang na
loob which literally translates as ‘debt of gratitude’, describes the reciprocal nature of
sociopolitical life in the Philippines, based upon a state of indebtedness between the giver and
the recipient. Failure to honour one’s obligations to friends and family may lead to social
rejection in the Philippines. Relationships between superiors and subordinates in the Philippine
civil service should be considered within the historical context of patron–client relationships.
Individuals of lower social standing would attach themselves to a ‘patron’. In return for the
subordinate’s support and loyalty, the patron would be obliged to take care of the subordinate
and to protect that person’s interests (Scott 1972). The practice of gift-giving to one’s boss is an
important feature of reciprocal relationships between government employees in the Philippines,
and one which seems likely to weaken even further the usefulness of a western-style appraisal
system.

4. Conclusion

Performance appraisal provides a good example of an administrative practice that enables the
public administration student to understand some of how culture might influence public
administration. This is because appraisal requires individuals to assess the work performance of
other individuals, thus providing a unique opportunity to study a variety of interpersonal
relationships and behaviors. While it is challenging to explore the full range of those behaviors
without observing the actual conduct of the appraisal process, the design of appraisal methods,
their objectives, their history, and their shortcomings all provide valuable insights into how
culture may influence performance appraisal.

The results of the comparison of performance appraisal between the Philippines may share
common cultural characteristics along the organic-mechanistic and integration-differentiation
continuums. In addition, similarities in their competitive environment, requirements, and societal
expectations might explain some of those commonalities. However, the results may be limited,
as they have yet to be verified by similar explorations into other demographic variables.
Name : CATHERINE E. JOAQUIN
Student No.: 2021-62178
Professor: MS. HILDA G. DIOKNO, MPA

The influence of culture upon appraisal in Singapore and the Philippines seems evident, even if
we cannot determine the extent to which that influence occurs. Particularly in the Philippines, the
appraisal of senior civil servants reflects the various cultural and traditional forces that
distinguish the two societies. To some extent, at least, the culture of the Filipinos seems
incompatible with a system that seeks to appraise individual performance. Performance appraisal
for senior Singaporean civil servants has been designed to protect‘face’ and minimize conflict
opportunities. However, concern for saving ‘face’ seems to sit awkwardly with the demands
found in western countries for openness in performance appraisal. In most other respects,
appraisal seems well suited to the Singaporean culture, particularly in the orientation towards
individual achievement and the desire for personal success.

5. Recommendation

Policy implications in the culture literature typically revolve around socialization issues —
whereby organizational members are ‘inculturated’ in the corporate culture—culture change and
the use of cultural aspects as a source of competitive advantage. As regards culture change, it has
been suggested that there are at least two levels of potential change in the industry environment
that will most likely require changes in the culture of organizations within a given industry: the
level of basic assumptions and the level of values (Schein, 1990) . For example, it has been
shown that environmental changes necessitating culture change include: the level of regulation or
deregulation, levels of technology and growth, the entrance of different types of competitors, and
the like. However, the criticality or limitedness of these relationships has yet to be confirmed by
added explorations into other variables and by further empirical research.

This critique paper has attempted to draw attention to how culture may impact performance
appraisal. However, more research needs to be undertaken before public administration scholars
can apply the culture construct to their studies rigorously. In addition, further study should
examine the influence of culture relative to the many other variables likely to impact
administrative practice. However, there seems little doubt that until culture is recognized as an
essential feature of comparative public administration, our understanding of administrative
practices like performance appraisal in countries other than our own is likely to be limited.

6. References

Belasco, H. M. (Ithaca, N. Y.: Cornell University,1966). Emotional Health and Employer

Responsibility. State School of Industrial and Labor Relations, Bulletin 57.
CESB, C. E. (1990). The Career Executive Service: An Introduction, Republic of Philippines.
Chen, P. (1977 ). Asian Values and Modernisation: A Sociological Perspective’ in Seah Chee
Meow (ed.) Asian Values and Modernisation,. Singapore: Singapore University Press.
Dorfman, P. W. (1986). Performance Appraisal Behaviours: Supervisor Perceptions and
Subordinate Reactions’, Personnel Psychology.
Name : CATHERINE E. JOAQUIN
Student No.: 2021-62178
Professor: MS. HILDA G. DIOKNO, MPA

Frink, D. &. (1998). Accountability, Impression Management, and Goal Setting in the
Performance Evaluation Process.
Glen, R. (1990). Performance Appraisal: An Unnerving Yet Useful Process’, Public Personnel
Management 1. 9(1):1–10.
Hallyer, M., & B Brewer. (1991, April 15–17.). Performance Appraisal in the Hong Kong Civil
Service — An Appraisal of the G.F 1 System’, Civil Service Systems in Asia-Pacific —
An International Workshop,.
Jabbra, J. a. (1989). Public Service Accountability: A Comparative Perspective. CT, USA:
Kumarian Press.
Kroeber, A. &. (1963 ). Culture: A Critical Review of Concepts and Definitions, Vintage Books.
New York.
Lansbury, R. (Australia 1988, March). Performance Management: A Process Approach’, Human
Resource Management,. pp. 46–55.
Levinson, H. (1965, March ). Reciprocation: the Relationshipbetween Man and Organization.
Administrative Science Quarterly, IX , pp. pp. 370-79.
Murphy, K. &. (1991). Performance Appraisal: An Organisational Perspective. Allyn and
Bacon, Boston.
Potter, J. (1988). Consumers and the public sector: How well does the coal fit? Public
Administration. 66(2), 149-64.
Riggs, F. (1964 ). Administration in Developing Countries: The Theory of Prismatic Society.
Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Schedler, A. D. (1999). The Self Restraining State: Power and Accountability in New
Democracies.
Schein, E. (1990). Organizational Culture,” . American Psychologist, 45(2),, pp. 109-119.
Seah Chee Meow. (1985). The Civil Service’ in J Quah, Chan Heng Chee & Seah Chee Meow
(eds.) Government and Politics of Singapore. Singapore: Oxford University Press.