THE EFFECTS OF EMPLOYEE SATISFACTON

AND PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL ON

PERCEIVED JOB PERFORMANCE OF
ACADEMICS IN KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA,
PAKISTAN

MUHAMMAD ASAD KHAN

UNIVERSITI TUN HUSSEIN ONN MALAYSIA

ii
 iii

This thesis has been examined on date 2-May 2019

and is sufficient in fulfilling the scope and quality for the purpose of awarding the
Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Chairperson:

ASSOC. PROF. DR. FAUZI AHMAD BIN MUHAMMAD

Faculty of Technology Management and Business (FPTP)
Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia (UTHM)

Examiners:

PROF. DR. NARESH KUMAR

Global Entrepreneurship Research and Innovation Centre (GERIC)
Universiti Malaysia Kelantan

ASSOC. PROF. DR. AMRAN HARUN

Faculty of Technology Management and Business (FPTP)
Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia (UTHM)
 iv

THE EFFECTS OF EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION AND PERFORMANCE

APPRAISAL ON PERCEIVED JOB PERFORMANCE OF ACADEMICS IN
KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA, PAKISTAN

MUHAMMAD ASAD KHAN

A thesis submitted in
fulfillment of the requirement for the award of the
Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Technology Management

Faculty of Technology Management and Business

Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia

AUGUST, 2019
ii
 iii

I would like to dedicate this thesis to

Almighty “GOD”
(Who gave me strength, knowledge, patience, and wisdom)

to my beloved “Parents”
(Their love, devotion, cares, sacrifices, and prayers helped me to achieve this dream)
 iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First of all, I am much more thankful for Allah SWT, for HIS special blessing over
me. HE always blessed me very well, although if I spend my life only for thanking of
HIS grace, still it is decidedly less effort to be thankful for HIS blessing.
All my achievements are become in my way just because of HIM. Special
appreciation goes to my supervisor Dr. Fadillah Binti Ismail and co-supervisor Prof.
Dr. Rosman MD Yusoff for their supervision, and prestigious guidance, kindness,
patience, constant motivation, and supports during my entire educational journey.
Their valuable help of constructive comments and suggestions throughout this work
have contributed much more to the success of this research. Special thanks to my
Mother and my Late Father Shah Sultan Khan for their immense support, love, and
prayers. I would mainly have not been able to achieve this noble goal without their
kindness and prayers. I wish to express my appreciation for their love and affection
on me in every aspect of life. I want to express my profound admiration to my elder
Brothers Liaqat Hussain Khan, Muhammad Ilyas Khan, Altaf Hussain Khan and
Ibrar Hussain Khan and sisters as well. It is impossible to describe in words how
much you have done for me to go this far without your support. I can never forget
their love and support for me even more than his children. I want to acknowledge a
valuable part on my back throughout this Ph.D. journey to my cousin Sir Rahim
Shah Akhunkhail.
My sincere thanks and special regards go to my elder brother Dr. Altaf
Hussain Khan who provided me the opportunity to start my Ph.D. and help me out
rigorously throughout this journey and introduced me to UTHM and Malaysian
lifestyle. These acknowledgments wouldn't be completed without expressing my
sincere appreciation to my wife Saira Khan and sons Muhammad Saad Khan,
Muhammad Hashir Khan and Muhammad Hasib Khan for their patience, support,
cares, and understanding. In the last many thanks to those friends who supported me.
 v

ABSTRACT

Performance appraisal system is always of significant concern of any institution

when dealing with its academic staff. Therefore, this requires the institutions‘
management to have an effective performance appraisal system, in order to evaluate
and increase the job performance of their academics. Despite this, minimal research
has examined the relationship between performance appraisal and perceived job
performance among academics in the context of public universities of Khyber
Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. The current study examined effects of employee satisfaction
and performance appraisal on perceived job performance among academics in the
target population based on procedural justice theory, expectancy theory and goal-
setting theory. Quantitative research approach along with cross-sectional research
design has been used to collect data from 301 academic staff in the target population
through a self-administered questionnaire. The results of the current study provide
empirical evidence on key issues related to performance appraisal of academics in
the selected public universities. Findings have shown that fairness, untrained rater,
rating scale format, goal-setting and purposes of performance appraisal and
employee satisfaction are the potential hindering factors for low job performance in
the respective universities. This research also gives clear directions to stake holders
and policy makers on the existing performance appraisal system for improvement of
the perceived job performance of academics in the public universities.
 vi

ABSTRAK

Sistem penilaian prestasi adalah sesuatu yang sentiasa dititkberatkan oleh mana-
mana institusi apabila berurusan dengan staf-staf akademik. Justeru, ini memerlukan
pihak pengurusan institusi untuk mempunyai satu sistem penilaian prestasi yang
berkesan untuk menilai serta meningkatkan prestasi staf-staf berkenaan.
Walaubagaimanapun, hanya terdapat sedikit penyelidikan yang mengkaji perkaitan
antara penilaian prestasi dengan penerimaan terhadap prestasi kerja di kalangan staf-
staf akademik di beberapa universti awam di Kyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan.
Penyelidikan yang dijalankan ini mengkaji kesan kepuasan pekerja dan penilaian
prestasi ke atas penerimaan terhadap prestasi kerja di kalangan staf-staf akademik
dalam populasi kajian berdasarkan teori keadilan prosedur, teori jangkaan serta teori
penetapan matlamat. Rekabentuk penyelidikan secara kuantitatif serta kajian keratan
lintang telah digunakan dalam kutipan data daripada 301 ahli akademik dalam
populasi sasaran dengan menggunakan borang kajiselidik. Hasil kajian ini telah
memberikan bukti empirikal kepada isu-isu utama berkaitan penilaian prestasi staf
akademik di universiti awam terpilih, Dapatan menunjukkan bahawa keadilan,
penilai tidak terlatih, format skala penarafan, penetapan matlamat dan tujuan
penilaian prestasi serta kepuasan staf adalah faktor-faktor penghalang kepada prestasi
kerja yang rendah di universiti-universiti berkenaan. Kajian ini juga memberikan
arah tuju yang jelas kepada para pihak berkepentingan dan pembuat polisi ke atas
sistem penilaian prestasi sedia ada bagi meningkatkan penerimaan terhadap prestasi
kerja staf-staf akademik di universiti-universiti awam.
 vii

CONTENTS

TITLE i
DECLARATION ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iv
ABSTRACT v
ABSTRAK vi
CONTENTS vii
LIST OF TABLES xii
LIST OF FIGURES xiv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xv
LIST OF APPENDICES xvi
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 17
1.1 Introduction 17
1.2 Background of the study 18
1.3 Problem statement 23
1.4 Purpose of the Study 29
1.5 Research questions 29
1.6 Research objectives 30
1.7 Significance of the study 31
1.8 Scope of the study 32
1.9 Definitions of terms 33
1.9.1 Performance appraisal 33
1.9.2 Goal setting and purposes of
performance appraisal 34
1.9.3 Fairness of the performance appraisal
system 34
1.9.4 Rating scale format 34
 viii

1.9.5 Rater training 34

1.9.6 Perceived job performance 34
1.9.7 Employee satisfaction 35
1.10 Structure of the thesis 35
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 36
2.1 Introduction 36
2.2 Perceived job performance 37
2.3 The mediating role of employee satisfaction 41
2.4 Performance appraisal (Down the History) 44
2.5 Performance appraisal 46
2.6 Importance and benefits of performance appraisal 54
2.7 Performance models in Higher Education Sector 56
2.8 Performance appraisal and measurement criteria
issues 60
2.9 Methods of performance appraisal system 62
2.10 Performance appraisal measures (objective and
subjective measures) 64
2.11 Goal setting and purposes of performance
appraisal 66
2.12 Fairness of performance appraisal system 69
2.13 Rater training of performance appraisal system 72
2.14 Rating scales format of performance appraisal 76
2.15 Relationship of performance appraisal with
perceived job performance 80
2.16 Relationship of performance appraisal with
employee satisfaction 82
2.17 Relationship of employee satisfaction and
perceived job performance 84
2.18 Theoretical background of performance appraisal
system 85
2.18.1 Procedural justice theory 86
2.18.2 Expectancy theory 87
2.18.3 Goal setting theory 89
 ix

2.19 Conceptual framework and hypotheses

development 94
2.19.1 Conceptual framework 94
2.19.2 Performance appraisal with perceived
job performance 97
2.19.3 Performance appraisal with employee
satisfaction 99
2.19.4 Employee satisfaction with perceived
job performance 101
2.19.5 Mediating effect of employee
satisfaction on the relationship of
performance appraisal with employee
perceived job performance 103
2.20 Chapter summary 105
CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 106
3.1 Introduction 106
3.2 Research methodology 106
3.3 Research philosophy 107
3.4 Research approach 108
3.5 Research design 109
3.6 Research strategy 111
3.7 Population 112
3.7.1 Population parameters of interest 112
3.7.2 Sampling frame 114
3.7.3 Sampling 115
3.7.4 Stratified random sampling 117
3.7.5 Systematic random sampling 120
3.8 Data collection 121
3.8.1 Response rate 123
3.9 Research instrument 125
3.9.1 Performance appraisal 126
3.9.2 Employee satisfaction 129
3.9.3 Perceived job performance 130
3.10 Pilot study 131
 x

3.11 Reliability and validity of instrument 132

3.11.1 Reliability of instrument 133
3.11.2 Validity of Instrument 134
3.11.3 Content or face validity 134
3.11.4 Construct validity 135
3.11.5 Convergent validity 135
3.11.6 Discriminant validity 136
3.12 Data preparation 136
3.12.1 Data coding and cleaning 136
3.12.2 Missing value analysis 137
3.13 Data analysis 138
3.13.1 Descriptive statistics 138
3.13.2 Structural equation modeling (SEM) 139
3.13.3 Mediation analysis 141
3.14 Ethical issues in research 142
3.15 Chapter summary 142
CHAPTER 4 DATA ANALYSIS 144
4.1 Introduction 144
4.2 Demographic analysis of respondents 145
4.3 Examination of outlier 147
4.4 Exploratory factor analysis 148
4.5 Descriptive statistics 150
4.6 Multicollinearity test 151
4.7 PLS-SEM analysis 152
4.7.1 Measurement model assessment 152
4.7.2 Reliability analysis of reflective
constructs 153
4.7.3 Reflective construct validity analysis 155
4.7.4 Formative measures validity 159
4.8 Structural model measurement 161
4.8.1 Coefficient of determination (R2) 163
4.8.2 Significance of path coefficients 163
4.8.3 Effect sizes (f2) 164
4.8.4 The predictive relevance (Q2) 165
 xi

4.8.5 Goodness-of-fit model (GoF) 166

4.9 Hypotheses testing 167
4.10 Mediation analysis 176
4.11 Summary of the chapter 186
CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 187
5.1 Introduction 187
5.2 Review of the study 187
5.3 Discussion of research findings 189
5.3.1 Relationship of performance appraisal
and perceived job performance 190
5.3.2 Relationship of performance appraisal
and employee satisfaction 193
5.3.3 Relationship of employee satisfaction
and perceived job performance 196
5.3.4 Mediating effect of employee
satisfaction 198
5.4 Contributions of the research 200
5.4.1 Theoretical contributions 200
5.4.2 Managerial/ practical contributions 202
5.5 Limitations and future research 205
5.6 Conclusion 205
REFERENCES 209
APPENDIX A 254
APPENDIX B 258
LIST OF PUBLICATIONS 262
VITA 263
 xii

LIST OF TABLES

2. 1 Perceived job performance measurement 40

2. 2 Employee satisfaction measeaurment 43
2.3 Performance appraisal measurement 52
2.4 Comparison of performance models among different countries 59
2. 5 Goal-setting and purposes measurements 69
2.6 Fairness measurements 72
2. 7 Rater training measurements 75
2.8 Rating scale format 80
2.9 Summarization of theories 93
2.10 Summarization table for hypotheses 98
2.11 Summarization table for hypotheses 101
2.12 Summarization table for hypotheses 103
2.13 Summarization table for hypotheses 105
3.1 Province wise public sector universities in Pakistan 112
3.2 Division-wise list of public universities in KP, Pakistan 114
3.3 Sampling frame of public universities of Peshawar Division ................ 115
3.4 Population description ........................................................................... 119
3.5 Sampling description ............................................................................. 120
3.6 Summary of the samples ........................................................................ 125
3.7 Items for performance appraisal dimensions (GSP, FPA, RSF, RT) ..... 127
3.8 Items for employee satisfaction ............................................................. 129
3.9 Items for perceived job performance ..................................................... 131
3.10 Descriptive statistics and reliability estimates for pilot study ............... 132
4.1 Demographic statistics 146
4. 2 Mean and 5% trimmed mean outliers 148
 xiii

4. 3 Assessment criteria for EFA 150

4.4 Descriptive statistics for the variables 151
4.5 Multicollinearity test 152
4.6 Constructs reliability and validity 156
4.7 Fornell-Larcker criterion 158
4.8 Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio 158
4.9 Cross-loadings 158
4.10 Collinearity values 160
4.11 Outer weights and significance level for formative measures 161
4.12 R-square values 163
4.13 Structural model (β-value and t-value) 164
4.14 f-square values 165
4.15 Q2 values 166
4.16 Goodness-of-Fit model 167
4.17 Hypotheses testing (β-value and t-value) 175
4.18 Summary of the direct hypotheses 175
4.19 Specific direct effect of PA on ES and PJP 179
4.20 Specific indirect effect of PA on ES and PJP 179
4.21 Specific direct effect of GSP on ES and PJP 180
4.22 Specific indirect effect of GSP on ES and PJP 181
4.23 Specific direct effect of FPA on ES and PJP 182
4.24 Specific indirect effect of FPA on ES and PJP 182
4.25 Specific direct effect of RSF on ES and PJP 183
4.26 Specific indirect effect of RSF on ES and PJP 184
4.27 Specific direct effect of RT on ES and PJP 185
4.28 Specific indirect effect of RT on ES and PJP 185
4.29 Summary of the mediation hypotheses 185
 xiv

LIST OF FIGURES

2.1 Conceptual framework of the Study 96

4.1 Measurement model 154
4.2 Structural model 162
4.3 Findings of direct relationship between PA and PJP 168
4.4 Findings of direct relationship between GSP and PJP 169
4.5 Findings of direct relationship between FPA and PJP 169
4.6 Findings of direct relationship between RSF and PJP 170
4.7 Findings of direct relationship between RT and PJP 170
4.8 Findings of direct relationship between PA and ES 171
4.9 Findings of direct relationship between GSP and ES 172
4.10 Findings of direct relationship between FPA and ES 172
4.11 Findings of direct relationship between RSF and ES 173
4.12 Findings of direct relationship between RT and ES 174
4.13 Findings of direct relationship between RSF and ES 174
4.14 General mediation model and simple 177
4.15 Mediation effect of ES on PA and PJP 178
4.16 Meditation effect of ES on GSP and PJP 180
4.17 Mediation effect of ES on FPA and PJP 181
4.18 Mediation effect of ES on RSF and PJP 183
4.19 Mediation effect of ES on RT and PJP 184
 xv

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

HRM - Human Resource Management

GRS - Graphic Rating Scale
BOS - Behavioural Observation Scale
BARS - Behavioural Anchored Rating Scale
UOP - University of Peshawar
AUP - Agriculture University Peshawar
KMU - Khyber Medical University
ICP - Islamia College University Peshawar
UET - University Of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
IMSciences - Institute of Management Sciences Peshawar
KP - Khyber Pakhtunkhwa
AVE - Average variance extracted
CR - Composite Reliability
HTMT - Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio
 xvi

LIST OF APPENDICES

APPENDIX TITLE PAGE

A Questionnaires 254
B Exploratory factor analysis Tables 258
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction

The academics and practitioners have given more attention and importance to
performance appraisal measurement. It is considered as a mean to manage and
control different organizations and institutions (Watts & McNair-Connolly, 2012; De
Vries, 2010). Perceived job performance measurement is currently a significant part
of the management of public services, and performance appraisal is intrinsic in the
public sector (De Vries, 2010). Performance appraisal is known to be the systematic
approach through which perceived job performance of academics has been evaluated
over a period of time (Hassan, 2016). The academics have accomplished
development in explaining and prolonging the performance idea, and consider
perceived job performance to be the central construct around work and
organizational behavior (Koopmans et al., 2014).
Another central aim of performance appraisal is to improve perceived job
performance of academics and eliminated performance hurdles regarding biases,
fairness, accuracy, and employee satisfaction (Dusterhoff, Cunningham &
McGregor, 2014). Performance appraisal is used to measure and improve perceived
job performance of employees, and help the organization in progressing towards set
goals and objectives (Abbas, 2012). Likewise, Rahman and Shah (2012) argue that
performance appraisal has been conducted to improve perceived job performance of
academic staff and also serve to enhance university performance.
Human resource management (HRM) practices such as performance
appraisal can play a significant role in the performance of institutions by keeping
 18

their employees motivated and satisfied (Zakaria, Zainal & Nasurdin, 2012).
According to Hussain et al. (2016) academics are considered to be the essential
resources that perform impartially and significant work for the success of any
university, in both the public and the private sector. Satisfied academics play a vital
role in the better performance of institutions (Hussain et al., 2016).
Nowadays, many researchers in the West opine that organizational
performance and effective strategy is interlinked with the significance of perceived
job performance (Othman, 2014). Higher Education Commission is the regulatory
body of universities in Pakistan, and acts as a facilitator to improve quality, growth,
innovation and development in the education sector (Zia-ur-Rehman, Faisal & Khan,
2015). There is a strong need for research to find out how performance appraisal can
be made more acceptable to academic staff and to, further examine its effect on
perceived job performance (Sharma & Sharma, 2017). Previous studies have also
identified various problems, related to performance appraisals, such as fairness,
untrained rater, satisfaction and inconsistent criteria for measuring perceived job
performance of employees (Kompkotter, 2014; Muhammad & Suraya, 2013). These
problems lead to negative attitudes and biases towards the performance appraisal
system, and need to be addressed (Kompkotter, 2014; Muhammad & Suraya, 2013).
The main aim of this research is to investigate the effects of employee satisfaction
and performance appraisal on perceived job performance of academics in the public
universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan.

1.2 Background of the study

Higher education plays a key role in developing a nation's economy. Thus,

universities are the only institutions that involve rigorous human resources. In this
regard, universities are found to be supportive of employing, and dealing competitive
and skilled academics in Pakistan (Ashraf, Hussain & Malik, 2014). There is a dearth
of knowledge and research regarding human resource practices, especially
performance appraisal and perceived job performance at a higher level in the
education sector of Pakistan (Ashraf et al., 2014). Universities in many countries
look to get access to advanced levels in the classification of international
 19

universities; the performance appraisal is employed as one of the things for

organizational rearrangement to approach cutting-edge mattresses (Al-Ashqar, 2017).
Though universities regularly run by both academics and administration, but
primary responsibility of promoting students as professionals comes on academics
side. To attain world-class standards, an effective performance appraisal system for
academics continuously remains a core concern in any education sector, including
Pakistan (Bilal, Shah, Qureshi & Khan, 2014). Universities in Pakistan cannot
achieve quality in higher education without constant evaluation and improvement in
perceived job performance of academic staff (Bilal et al., 2014). Academic staff
assessment is an intrinsic outset to identify the performance of every member; both
public and private universities have adopted different parameters to measure
performance to achieve the desired means (Anjum et al., 2011; Bilal et al., 2014).
Hence, academics should be dealt and managed through effective performance
appraisal system which is the only source for success in education (Rehman, 2012).
In human resource practices, performance appraisal is considered to be the
most significant one (Kehoe & Wright, 2013), unique and prominent subject that is
researched heavily in work psychology (Kim, 2014). To achieve its best, every
university wishes to improve the perceived job performance of its academic staff to a
higher level. Without fairness, the performance appraisal system creates negative
impact and frustration among academic staff, and their satisfaction, motivation and
development are also affected accordingly (Iqbal et al., 2013). According to Kaleem,
Jabeen and Twana (2013) the success of any performance appraisal system depends
on employee satisfaction. Embi and Choon (2014) argue that the performance
appraisal system should be inclined to the development of better rating scale format
to avoid rating errors, and to improve rating accuracy of the system. Performance
appraisal system requires a trained rater to evaluate the performance of an academic
objectively because in rating system the evaluator must be objective and accurate.
However, biases produce when rater deviates from true ratings (Kumar, 2005; Bol,
2011). Performance appraisal process will be linked with the development of training
rater to avoid rating errors, and to improve rating accuracy of performance appraisal
(Embi & Choon, 2014).
Perceived job performance, pertaining to low quality of academic staff, also
remain a subject of concern in the developed nations (Mawoli & Babandako, 2011).
Therefore, the researchers have examined that most of the universities in the world
 20

have the issue of perceived job performance among academic staff in terms of
research output, student‘s graduations ratio, overall university rankings and
performance (Wahab, 2016; Hassel & Ridout, 2018). Employee satisfaction has also
dynamically affected human behavior in the work-settings that is perceived job
performance. The researchers, related to the field of organizational behavior,
interestingly focus on the accurate evaluation of perceived job performance and
understandings its values for academics at work place (Hettiararchi & Jayarathna,
2014; Bakotic, 2016). Perceived job performance includes all work-related behavior.
It is the achievement of those goals that involves a person‘s job and duties
(Hettiararchi & Jayarathna, 2014). Perceived job performance is classified as task or
contextual performance (Hettiararchi & Jayarathna, 2014). Perceived job
performance of academics remains a central task in organizational management, and
assuming effective methods to motivate academics to attain and deliver higher
perceived job performance, as well as enhancement in the intuitional competitiveness
is the vital goal of every institution (Inuwa, 2016).
Employee satisfaction is connected with some fundamental aspects of job,
such as fairness procedures in evaluation, goal-achievement behavior, intrinsic and
extrinsic opportunities. According to Eliphas et al. (2017) the notion of employee
satisfaction, though of impressively current origin, is diligently linked to motivation,
and is a contributing aspect in enhanced perceived job performance in workplace.
Most of the universities, in this challenging era of competition, fail to accomplish
their goals successfully because of low perceived job performance of academics
(Eliphas, Mulongo & Razia, 2017). It occurs due to the incapability of the institution
top management to motivate academic staff through an effective performance
appraisal system to make them industrious and high job performer (Eliphas et al.,
2017). If the management of respective universities does not subsume the issue of
low perceived job performance, it will arise and turn into dissatisfaction among
academic staff and poor institutional performance (Munisamy, 2013; Eliphas et al.,
2017).
Perceived job performance of the academic staff needs proper rectification at
the time, when it is examined below the standard in the universities (Rasheed et al.,
2011). Those institutions, which are serious in the implementations of human
resource practices, such as performance appraisal in an effective way, their
academics feel safe and satisfied which in respond, improve their level of perceived
 21

job performance in a superior way (Nadarajah, Kadiresan, Kumar, Kamil & Yusoff,
2012; Saleem & Khurshid, 2014). Employee satisfaction is observed as vital
component in work-settings that attract a number of academic staff to the
universities. Moreover, the change and challenges in structure and task to become a
leading university has led to various problems confronted by the management,
including administrative and academic staff. Among these issues can be the lack of
rater training and perceived job performance (Okechukwu, 2017).
Various researchers point out that continuous perceived job performance is a
lacking practice in the respective universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan
(Rasheed et al., 2011; Rehman & Hafeez, 2018). The issue of low perceived job
performance among academic staff not only damages their quality of work but also
influences university performance (Malik & Sajjad, 2015). Most of the studies have
been conducted on perceived job performance in the developed world, but very
nominal research is undertaken in the academic setting of developing nations
(Ahmed, Shaheen, Ahmad & Mohd, 2016). Though, a study which is based on
theoretical and practical association between human resource practices, such as
performance appraisal and perceived job performance has not been recognized well
(Rehman, 2012; Okechukwu, 2017). Both employee satisfaction and perceived job
performance have a direct relationship, which indicate that if the satisfaction level of
the academic staff is high, ultimately the perceived job performance will be high and
vice versa, in a university (Okechukwu, 2017).According to Asrar-ul-Haq, Anwar
and Hassan (2017) future researcher should examine the relationship of employee
satisfaction and perceived job performance in academic settings in Pakistan.
Perceived job performance acts as a vehicle in identifying organization‘s
performance. Previous literature has illustrated that academics that do not adequately
match with performance appraisal system have low job performance (Farooqui &
Nagendra, 2014). Educational industry, around the globe, is basically reliant on the
perceived job performance of its academics. The quality and enhancement of the
education system in Pakistan is highly impacted by the academic perceived job
performance (Yusoff, Khan & Azan, 2013). It is assumed that job performance is a
significant factor which enhances not only the educational system but also the entire
society and masses (Yusoff, et al., 2013; Bhat & Beri, 2016).
On the basis of considerable literature and opinions, it can be assumed that
performance appraisal is related with perceived job performance. Yet, this
 22

correlation needs to be tested among academic staff of Pakistan (Shehzad et al.,

2008; Rehman, 2012). Various researchers opine that perceived job performance is
crucial for the success of universities, though nominal studies have examined the
direct effect of performance appraisal on perceived job performance among
academics in Pakistan (Quresh, Akbar, Khan, Sheikh & Hijazi, 2010). Besides, HRM
practices have been studied extensively in firms and businesses, but HRM in
academic settings has yet to be researched rigorously (Roine, 2018). Most of the
literature shows that performance appraisal has a positive association with employee
satisfaction, but this relationship needs to be examined among academic staff in
Pakistan (Mumtaz et al., 2011; Khan et al., 2012).
The academics of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa are found to be the nominal
researched group in studies of HR practices, such as performance appraisal and
perceived job performance, especially in Pakistan (Rehman & Hameed, 2011). In
Pakistan, very scant studies have addressed the issue of low job performance among
academic staff, and bear no conclusive findings, both theoretically and empirically
(Rehman & Hameed, 2011). Moreover, the results a quantitative mode of study may
be generalized to investigate the effect of performance appraisal on perceived job
performance of academics. According to Ahmed, Hussain, Ahmed and Akbar (2010)
very few studies have highlighted the factors of satisfaction and fairness in a
relationship with perceived job performance in Pakistan. Karimi, Malik and Hussain
(2011) state that ample study is required to clarify whether public institutions in
Pakistan exercise fair performance appraisal system or not. Though, the prominence
of HR practices such as performance appraisal, employee satisfaction and perceived
job performance have been researched in various organizations and countries, but
researchers are not content with the empirical findings conducted so far in public
universities (Amin et al., 2014; Singh & Kassa, 2016). Employee satisfaction reflects
a perplex area in the field of academic settings, when it comes to managing academic
staff. However, plenty of articles and studies have been carried out on employee
satisfaction worldwide, in which academics‘ satisfaction is the least researched one
among others (Verma, 2014).
The rationale to examine the performance appraisal system, in public
universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province Pakistan, is that little work has been
done on this system, and it needs further studies to make this system acceptable and
useful for the academics (Rehman, 2012). In this research study, perceived job
 23

performance is the dependent variable, and employee satisfaction is the mediator. On

the other hand, performance appraisal has been taken as the independent variable.
The different independent variables (dimensions) affect the changing aspects of the
dependent variable in the performance evaluation system.

1.3 Problem statement

Pakistani government made significant improvement in order to improve

performance of universities in the area of infrastructure development, increased staff
salaries and quality assurance plans. Yet the issue of low job performance of
academics remains unaddressed (Sarwar, Aslam & Rasheed, 2010; Qureshi et al.,
2012). Compared to the leading universities in the world, higher education
institutions in Pakistan are still growing. Furthermore, performance appraisal of
academic staff and their low job performance pertaining to teaching and research
outcomes is not performing to the expected level among universities of Pakistan
(Aslam et al., 2011). Several researchers have carried out studies on comparison of
perceived job performance of academic staff in both private and public universities
and have found out that one of the key edges of private institutions is that academic
staff takes care of their reputation in terms of their job performance (Aslam et al.,
2011). Performance appraisal dimensions (goal setting and purposes, fairness, rating
scale format and rater training) and employee satisfaction has been a significant
consideration in understanding the attitude and behavior of academics in universities
because they are capable to outline the way academics think, feel and behave (Tool,
2012; Islami, 2018; Bakotic, 2016). One of the real issues for both private and public
institutions in Pakistan is about the optimal output and low job performance of the
academic staff. (Ahmed, Vveinhardt, Ahmed & Hemani, 2016). Academic staff plays
a distinctive role in the progress of any educational institution including image
building, efficiency, research output and overall maneuvers. Keeping in view the
growing number of universities in Pakistan, it is important to address the issue of low
job performance of academics. Without enhancing their low job performance, the
goals of quality education and research seem impossible (Zafar et al., 2013).
Additionally, Sherwani (2015) urges on the enhancement of the perceived job
performance of academic staff in universities of Pakistan rather than financial
 24

measures. Various factors have been stated as antecedents of perceived job

performance. To date, some of the performance appraisal dimensions have been
studied in relationship to perceived job performance of academic staff in both private
and public universities of Pakistan (Krishnan, binti Ahmad & Haron, 2018; Sudin,
2011; Othman, 2014, Lunenburg, 2011; Hanson & Pulakos, 2015; Othman, 2014;
Tool, 2012; Harsh & Martin, 2012; Ahmad et al., 2013). In general, these studies
have identified that low job performance of employees, as reflected by unfairness in
the workplace, lack of goal-setting approach and clear purposes, valid and reliable
rating scale formats and untrained raters (Ahmad et al., 2013; Othman, 2014; Islami,
2018; Idowu, 2017 Krishnan et al., 2018), for instance, play a significant role in
influencing perceived job performance.
Despite the aforementioned empirical studies on the performance appraisal
system and methods in shaping academic behavior at higher education sector,
literature shows that few studies have looked at the effects of performance appraisal
on perceived job performance in academic settings (Shahzad et al., 2008; Ahmad &
Shahzad, 2011; Syed, Bhatti, Michael, Sheikh & Shah, 2012; Rehman, 2012; Hashim
et al., 2017). Even if there are studies on performance appraisal and perceived job
performance, the studies were limited to investigating specific factors of job
performance in workplace like; employee ability, well-being and motivation
(Wainaina, 2014; Munisamy, 2013; Idowu, 2017). But, in reality, job performance of
academics in universities of Pakistan plays an important role in shaping academic
behaviour (Ahmed, Vveinhardt, Ahmed & Hemani, 2016). These factors will not
allow better understanding of the perceived job performance such as compared to
task performance in the academic settings (Yusoff et al., 2014). Some researchers
came up with a consensus that performance appraisal and employee satisfaction is of
special importance in institutions to enhance academic job performance (Zhang,
2012; Katavich, 2013; Dauda, 2018). However, as stated earlier, only little empirical
research has examined the effects of performance appraisal on perceived job
performance in the academic settings of Pakistan (Rehman, 2012; Aslam, 2013;
Ahmad & Ghani, 2018). Such neglect has been unfortunate because to a greater
extent, performance appraisal directly affects an academic‘s behavior and job
performance during performance measurement process. Thus, performance appraisal
system is considered crucial for the achievement of institutional goals and objectives
(Rehman, 2012; Othman, 2014; Dauda, 2018).
 25

From theoretical perspectives, researchers have used various theories to understand

the underlying causes of perceived job performance at work (Ashraf et al., 2015;
Rehman & Hameed, 2011; Brata, & Juliana, 2014; Kaufman, 2010; Saqib, 2017).
Currently, some of the theories that have been used to understand the underlying
causes of perceived job performance include theory of planned behavior (Ajzen,
1985), equity theory (Adams, 1963), Job performance theory (Sonnentag & Frese,
2002), social exchange theory (Blau, 1964), Fayol‘s classical organization theory
(1949), among others (Ghauri, 2012; Rehman, 2012; Jalagat, 2016; Dauda, 2018).
Besides, there are a number of theoretical arguments e.g., expectancy theory and
goal-setting theory supporting the concept that performance appraisal influence
perceived job performance and this theoretical argument needs to be tested that how
HR practices such as performance appraisal translate into higher job performance
(Rehman & Hameed, 2011; Brata, & Juliana, 2014). Moreover, other theories that
had been employed to investigate job performance at work settings involve goal
setting theory (Latham & Locke, 1979), expectancy theory (Vroom, 1964), and
procedural justice theory (Thibaut & walker, 1975) among others. One possible
reason for employing various theories to understand the underlying causes of
perceived job performance is due to the complex nature of human behavior. As such,
depending on one or few theoretical perspectives to describe an academic‘s attitude
and behavior is not sufficient.
In general, based on the aforementioned perspectives, existing empirical studies
have been conducted to develop various models by considering different sets of
individuals, organization factors to justify the underlying structures involved in
perceived job performance at work (Jalagat, 2016; Bekele et al., 2014; Sajuyigbe,
2017). Furthermore, while these theories are useful to understand the underlying
causes of academic job performance in academic settings, there seems to be a paucity
of studies employing goal-setting theory (Islami, 2018; Decramer et al., 2013),
expectancy theory (Othman, 2014), and procedural justice theory (Bekele et al.,
2014) to explain perceived job performance effectively. Even, if any, such studies
report conflicting findings (Decramer et al., 2013; Islami, Mulolli & Mustafa, 2018;
Culibrk, Delic, Mitrovic & Culibrk, 2018). Paucity of studies has been noted as a key
issue in the link between HRM (performance appraisal) and job performance
(Kaufman, 2010; Saqib, 2017).Thus, the present study addresses this gap in the
 26

literature by examining a broad range of (performance appraisal, employee

satisfaction and perceived job performance).
In Pakistan, the literacy rate is very minimal as public universities are the major
education providing sectors and it is assumed that besides other factors low job
performance of academic staff is perceived a significant problem for low literacy
(Hashim et al., 2017; Fayyaz, Rauf & Samin, 2014; Shehzad et al., 2008). General
problems in higher education institutions of Pakistan are academics‘ lackadaisical
attitude and lack of employee satisfaction, unclear duties and responsibilities, bad
curriculum, and low job performance of academics expectations of management
which affect job performance negatively (Rehman, 2012; Ashraf et al., 2015). The
quality of academic staff, which is a key factor in any education system, is poor in
Pakistan. The main reason is the low level of qualification, employee satisfaction and
having no accurate system of performance appraisal (Rashid & Mukhtar, 2012;
Akareem & Hossain, 2016; Zafarullah & Pertti, 2017). The higher education system
with poor quality is one of the fundamental reasons why developing nations are
under developed. In these circumstances it is significant to identify the elements
which can augment the low job performance of academic staff in Pakistani
universities. One of the real issues for both private and public institutions in Pakistan
is about the optimal output and low job performance of the academic staff.
Keeping in view the growing number of universities in Pakistan, it is essentially
significant to address the issue of the low job performance of academics. This issue
can be addressed with having an effective performance appraisal system including all
the mentioned dimensions which can even satisfy and enhance academic job
performance in a better way (Rashid & Mukhtar, 2012; Zafarullah & Pertti, 2017).
Without enhancing their low job performance, the goals of quality education and
research seem impossible (Zafar et al., 2013). Additionally, Sherwani (2015) urges
on the enhancement of the perceived job performance of academic staff in
universities of Pakistan rather than financial measures. Performance appraisal of
academic staff and their low job performance pertaining to teaching and research
outcomes has received less attention in universities of Pakistan (Aslam et al., 2011).
This ever-varying demand regarding universities quality in Pakistan and especially in
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa warrants management more cautious and urgent attention in
respect of low job performance of academic staff (Rehman, 2012; Ahmad & Ghani,
2018). Some researchers have pointed out that continuous job performance is lacking
 27

practice in the respective universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan (Rasheed et

al., 2011; Rehman & Hafeez, 2018).
According to Hashim et al. (2017) more work is needed to identify the issue of
low job performance of academic staff specifically in Peshawar, Khyber
Pakhtunkhwa public universities. As it is evident that Peshawar is affected by
terrorism and is considered as under- researched and under-developed city, where
practice of human resource management system is weak and HR activities are not
based properly. It is imperative to fill up the literature gap and to address the low job
performance problem of academic staff at university level in Peshawar, Khyber
Pakhtunkhwa (Hashim et al., 2017; Irfan, 2018). If an academic is having issues
meeting his goals, supervisor should take immediate action during the performance
appraisal to assist improve their issue of low job performance (Rehman & Shah,
2012). Indeed, if the job performance of the academic staff has improved, ultimately
institutional success will be achieved and also, it will contribute to the educational
standards of Pakistan. Earlier studies have paid little attention to the issue of low job
performance of academic staff in the academic settings of Pakistan (Rehman &
Hameed, 2011).
Goal-setting theory Latham and Locke (1979) emphasizes on how goals are
associated to job performance but do not consider its relation with enhanced
perceived job performance. This lack of defined as translation between goals and job
performance calls for future research to refine (Lock & Latham, 2002, 2006). The
most effective support relates with the relationship of goal-setting and task
performance in academic settings (Locke & Latham, 2013). The attainment of goal is
the ultimate way forward to employee satisfaction and high job performance. On the
other side, unaccomplished goals engender dissatisfaction and lower job performance
among academic staff within a university (Lunenburg, 2011; Yurtkoru et al., 2017).
This goal-setting theory should be supportive in addressing these gaps particularly
task performance is closely related to job performance, but it needs empirical proofs
in academic settings (Yurtkoru et al., 2017).
Generally, past empirical research results are not conclusive about the
relationship of performance appraisal and perceived job performance of the academic
staff (Shahzad et al., 2008; Ahmad & Shahzad, 2011), but a convincing theoretical
study is required to address the issue of low job performance among academic staff
in the universities of Pakistan especially in public universities of Khyber
 28

Pakhtunkhwa (Syed, Bhatti, Michael, Sheikh & Shah, 2012; Rehman, 2012; Hashim
et al., 2017). In order to give quality education, embark competitive edge globally
and contribute in the socio-economic development of the country, universities should
concentrate on enhancing the low performance level of their academic staff (Sarwar,
Aslam & Rasheed, 2010).
Moreover, because of its theoretical significance, performance appraisal
system – including goal setting approach – have suggested as substantial predictor of
academic perceived behaviors and job performance (Othman, 2014). Though, very
limited studies have been carried out to identify the effect of goal setting approach of
the performance appraisal system on perceived job performance, particularly in
academic settings, and this predictor of performance appraisal is very important to
understand and explain job performance (Culibrk, Delic, Mitrovic & Culibrk, 2018),
With some exceptions of the studies of Othman, (2014) and Islami et al. (2018). The
current study is significantly different from those studies because the former studies
were mainly concentrated on the general measures of work performance and
employee performance at industrial organizational work setting. Therefore, further
studies are needed to incorporate a broader form of perceived job performance
construct in the academic settings (Shahzad et al., 2008; Ahmad & Shahzad, 2011;
Rehman, 2012; Getnet et al., 2014). As argued by Rehman (2012) and Bekele et al.
(2014), as performance appraisal system has bearing positive effect on academic
behavior, it is expected that they also have to positively affect academic task
performance. The current study addresses this gap by investigating the effects of
performance appraisal and employee satisfaction on perceived job performance at
academic settings using broad measures of task performance, subjective and self-
rated measures of perceived job performance (Decramer et al., 2013; Idowu, 2017).
Drawing on principles underlying employee satisfaction (Karimi et al., 2011;
Kompketter, 2014), employee satisfaction has been used a mediator because it is yet
to be examined in such relationship and such consideration could enhance our
theoretical understanding and give empirical evidence on how performance appraisal
effects employee satisfaction and perceived job performance of academics in the
higher education sector (Decramer et al., 2013). Relevant literature also shows that
employee satisfaction is a well-established factor that excels a significant effect on
perceived job performance (Bakotic & Babic, 2013; Girma, Lodesso & Sorsa, 2016).
Previous studies have suggested that employee satisfaction is positively related to
 29

perceived job performance at work and satisfied academics are high job performers
(Bakotic & Babic, 2013; Saleem & Imran, 2014). While goal-setting theory states
that the level of goal accomplishment is closely linked to employee satisfaction
(Kompketter, 2014).
Most of the empirical studies have been conducted on performance appraisal,
employee satisfaction and perceived job performance in developed countries like
United States of America (USA), United Kingdom and Europe at one hand (Hashim
et al., 2017; Decramer et al., 2013; Rehman, 2012; Okechukwu, 2017), and in
industrial organizational settings at other hand. These studies are questionable that
whether the results of the mentioned research can be generalized to other countries
and settings (Fletcher & Perry, 2001), and for further validation it could be extended
to other settings as well. Though an excessive amount of studies have examined the
issue of perceived job performance but the plethora of empirical research in
exploring the relationships between performance appraisal and perceived job
performance, particularly in the public universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan
seems to be negligible (Rehman, 2012; Ahmad & Ghani, 2018). Hence, study on
such relationship deserves further examination in Pakistan because the results of the
previous studies may not be generalizable to the Pakistani context due to cultural and
contextual differences. This research is an attempt to bridge the gap by examining
the effect of performance appraisal and employee satisfaction on perceived job
performance of the academic staff in public universities of Pakistan.

1.4 Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of employee satisfaction and
performance appraisal on perceived job performance of academics in the public
universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan.

1.5 Research questions

The research study finds out answers of the following research questions:
i. Is there any relationship of performance appraisal and its dimensions (goal-
setting and purposes, fairness, rating scale format, and rater training) with
 30

perceived job performance in public universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa,

Pakistan?
ii. Is there any relationship of performance appraisal and its dimensions (goal-
setting and purposes, fairness, rating scale format, and rater training) with
employee satisfaction in public universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa,
Pakistan?
iii. Is there any relationship of employee satisfaction with perceived job
performance in public universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan?
iv. Is there any mediating effect of employee satisfaction on the relationship of
performance appraisal and its dimensions (goal-setting and purposes,
fairness, rating scale format, and rater training) with perceived job
performance in public universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan?

1.6 Research objectives

The current research is motivated by the following objectives:

i. To investigate the relationship of performance appraisal and its dimensions
(goal-setting and purposes, fairness, rating scale format, and rater training)
with perceived job performance in public universities of Khyber
Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan.
ii. To investigate the relationship of performance appraisal and its dimensions
(goal-setting and purposes, fairness, rating scale format, and rater training)
with employee satisfaction in public universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa,
Pakistan.
iii. To investigate the relationship of employee satisfaction with perceived job
performance in public universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan.
iv. To evaluate the mediating effect of employee satisfaction on the relationship
of performance appraisal and its dimensions (goal-setting and purposes,
fairness, rating scale format, and rater training) with perceived job
performance in public universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan.
 31

1.7 Significance of the study

It is recognized empirically that effective human resource management practices

such as performance appraisal have inevitable importance. There is a significant
practice gap in the research of performance appraisal (Preizer, 2014). The approach
to performance appraisal is pretty different from past studies, which can be looked at
as a contribution to the area. As is enumerated previously, previous research is
mainly carried out in the west, on the one hand, and concentrated on industrial-
organizational settings, on the other hand (Prowse & Prowse, 2009; Rehman, 2012;
Gyasi & Boateng, 2015; Iqbal et al., 2013; Hassan, 2016; Sajuyigbe, 2017). The
main focus, in this research is, explicitly on performance appraisal itself, employee
satisfaction and its relationship with perceived job performance in the public
universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan which can be taking into consideration
as an overture for future study.
Aycan et al. (2000, p.217) and Rehman (2012) called Pakistan as "under-
researched country in the discipline of human resource management practices."
Performance appraisal is among one of them. In developing countries like Pakistan a
very scarce research has been conducted on the relationship of human resource
practices, especially performance appraisal and perceived job performance in the
public universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (Shahzad, Bashir & Ramay, 2008;
Rehman, 2012, Abbas, 2014; Rasheed et al., 2011; Ahmad & Ghani, 2018). It can be
fairly said that this study is a contribution to fill the gap and open avenues of new
insights regarding performance appraisal system effectiveness from the perspective
of perceived job performance among academic staff in public universities of KP,
Pakistan.
Furthermore, this research assists in clarifying understanding about how
performance appraisal system affects perceived job performance in academic settings
and re-confirm the results of the earlier researchers in different industrial
organizational settings. This study also contributes in terms of adding knowledge to
the existing body of literature regarding employee satisfaction and perceived job
performance into the realm of performance appraisal system in public universities of
KP, Pakistan. Another prominent input of this study is about the mediating role of
employee satisfaction on the relationship of performance appraisal with perceived
 32

job performance in the universities of KP, Pakistan because previous scholars have
paid less attention to such construct in the literature at hand.
The findings of this study will be helpful for organizations, particularly the
universities (Management and Academics) and the higher education sector in the
development of academic staff, initially, at the individual level, and finally, at the
organizational level. Findings of this study will benefit both academics and
universities management to pinpoint, understand and recognize the critical issues
related to performance appraisal. If performance appraisal is implemented and
carried out in true spirit, all these benefits and objectives can only be accrued
(Rehman, 2012). Notwithstanding, performance appraisal impact on perceived job
performance is hardly studied in academic settings, like universities in KP, Pakistan
(ibid). Previously, performance appraisal has been ignored in respect of effective
evaluation and measuring the performance of academics by adequately seeing
previous goals, determining development avenues and identifying areas for
improvement. This study is solely conducted in/for the public universities in Khyber
Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan, but private universities and degree awarding colleges may
also get the benefit of it in the future. This study also provides a base for all the
researchers and academics to determine and analyze different possible techniques of
academic's performance.

1.8 Scope of the study

It can be safely stated that there are nominal empirical studies about performance
appraisal and perceived job performance in the public universities of Khyber
Pakhtunkhwa among academic staff (Rehman, 2012). This research shows the
significance and effect of performance appraisal in comprehending academics‘ views
of improvement and development, and increases our understanding of the enhancing
satisfaction level and improvement dimensions of the public universities in Khyber
Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. This research encompasses only academic staff of the
mentioned universities in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa because the function and nature of
both academic and administrative staff are entirely different, and it is not easy for the
researcher to accommodate both in this research. The primary logic behind choosing
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa for data collection is purely based on the specific focus and
 33

critical concentration of the present government towards education. Besides, the

previous researchers have opined that the academic staff of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa is
the least research group in the studies of performance appraisal and perceived job
performance (Rehman & Hameed, 2011). While, nominal studies have examined the
issue of low job performance among the academic staff of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, and
have found no conclusive outcomes empirically (Rehman & Hameed, 2011). Earlier
studies have highlighted such relationship in the private sector universities of
Pakistan (Hashim et al., 2017: Saleem & Imran, 2014).
This study focuses on the relationship of performance appraisal with employee
satisfaction and perceived job performance in the public universities of Khyber
Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Furthermore, dimensions of performance appraisal are goal
setting and purposes, the fairness of the performance appraisal system, rating scale
format, and rater training has also been studied. Data has been collected from 301
academics of six public universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, who has experience of
one to three years. The academic staff in universities is evaluated annually, so such
criterion is followed in this research (Iqbal et al., 2013; Rehman, 2012). Survey-
Based research has been conducted using a self-administered questionnaire tool for
data collection in this study. This study is specified to the public sector universities
of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, Pakistan.

1.9 Definitions of terms

Definitions of all the variables are vital for the understanding of the nature and scope
of the intended study. In this study, the definitions of variables are as under:

1.9.1 Performance appraisal

Performance appraisal is a formal evaluation of an academic‘s job performance in

order to identify the extent to which the academic performs job performance
effectively (Othman, 2014).
 34

1.9.2 Goal setting and purposes of performance appraisal

There are so many goals and purposes of performance appraisal, but the key one is to
accomplish institutional goals with a fundamental principle, such as enhancing
academic perceived job performance through goal-setting approach (Festing et al.,
2010).

1.9.3 Fairness of the performance appraisal system

The perceived fairness of the performance appraisal system is used to determine the
procedures employed in job performance ratings, decision making and outcome
distribution (Aurelien, 2014).

1.9.4 Rating scale format

The development and effectiveness of performance appraisal system are considered

to be dependent on the rating scale formats (Behaviorally Anchored rating scale
format (BARS), graphic rating scale format (GRS), and behavioral observation
scales format (BOS), and is used to reduce errors, enhance academic satisfaction and
job performance (MacDonald & Sulsky, 2009).

1.9.5 Rater training

According to Kumar (2005), performance appraisal requires a trained evaluator to

assess the job performance of an academic objectively, because in rating system, the
rater must be accurate and avoid rating errors and biases produced when rater
deviates from accurate ratings.

1.9.6 Perceived job performance

Job performance is a set of academic‘s behavior which can measure, monitor and
assess achievements in individual (Bhat & Beri, 2016).
 35

1.9.7 Employee satisfaction

Employee satisfaction can be defined as the state of pleasure and satisfaction

resulting from the performance appraisal of one' job or job experiences (Zhang, Hu
& Qiu, 2014).

1.10 Structure of the thesis

The first chapter of the research study exhibits an outline and introduction to study. It
enumerates the role of performance appraisal system in the success and efficacy of
organizations. It highlights that performance appraisal performs its role in affecting
employee satisfaction of employees ultimately which also influences the perceived
job performance of academics. In this chapter, research background, problem
statement, research questions, objectives, significance and scope are also debated.
The chapter ends with operational definitions of the constructs and summary of this
section.
The second chapter highlights the review of relevant literature about all
constructs, i.e. performance appraisal, employee satisfaction and perceived job
performance. The research about dimensions of constructs is also elaborated. In this
section, the mediating effect of employee satisfaction on the relationship of
performance appraisal with perceived job performance has also been explained. It
also shows the theoretical background of the research. The chapter concludes with
hypothesis development, conceptual framework and summary.
The third chapter contains a research methodology which is employed to
perform this study. It explains and covers different topics, such as research tools,
validity, reliability of the items, sampling procedure, data collection method and data
analysis approach of the research study. The chapter ends with a summary.
The fourth chapter comprises of findings and practical outcomes based on the data
analysis. The brief results and consequences of the research are explained in detail
along with techniques of analysis.
Analyzed data is presented in chapter five. It also discusses results, findings,
and conclusion derived on the basis of findings. Further, recommendations for future
study are presented at the end of the chapter.
 36

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

This chapter presents the subject of performance appraisal by getting a

comprehensive understanding from the literature on the aspects and matters that have
a direct effect on perceived job performance, its outcomes, scope and significance in
the public universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. In this chapter, perceived
job performance has been discussed with the help of theoretical background of
appraisal system highlighting the nature and description of performance, supporting
theories of performance and employee satisfaction.
Further, dimensions of performance appraisal, such as; goal setting and
purposes of the performance appraisal, fairness of the performance appraisal have
been looked into. This chapter also enumerates the importance of rating scale format
and reveals the role of rater training in evaluating perceived job performance of
academic staff in the whole process of performance appraisal. Additionally, this
chapter highlights the subjective and objective measurements of performance
appraisal, importance and benefits of performance appraisal, performance appraisal
measurements and its criterion issues, methods of performance appraisal, and
performance models in higher education. While in the last, this chapter also presents
theoretical background of the study, hypotheses development and chapter summary.
 37

2.2 Perceived job performance

Job performance is an established behavior of employee which is able to scale,

monitor and appraised accomplishments in individual (Bhat & Beri, 2016). Job
performance can also be defined in terms of observable and unobservable behavior
that has a yard stick to be evaluated (Johari, & Yahya, 2012). Performance is not
meant for the purpose of what academics engender in institution; in fact, it is
regarding the behavior of employees in an organization. Perceived job performance
is the success of an institution, dependent on the common belief of what the
academic contributes to his/her behavior (Hashim, 2017; Umair, Javaid, Amir &
Luqman, 2016). The most effective method to evaluate the efficacy of performance
appraisal system is to evaluate the responses of the academics in the institution.
Responses are certainly affected by perceptions and changes from person to person
(Umair et al., 2016). Although, perceptions are generally developed in terms of
pleasant or bitter experiences of an academic with the performance appraisal system
in the institutions. In academic context, the central role of academic‘s affirmative
view is to change the attitude of an academic and place positive effect on academic
behavior such as academic satisfaction and job performance in workplace (Umair et
al., 2016). Hence, if academic perceived that existing performance appraisal system
as an accurate and fair system to improve their competency, it may substantially
enhance their satisfaction (Umair et al., 2016). It is clearly elaborated from
behavioural perspective when an employee focuses on job related tasks; he/she is
able to assess job performance accurately by reducing rating errors, as it can be
attained only when outcome criteria of a workplace is explicitly clear (Bhat & Beri,
2016).
Subsequently behaviors are persistent with goals of organization and
positively influence perceived job performance (Kambiz & Majid 2013). Job
performance is a multi-dimensional variable discoursing how one concludes a task,
concentrating on his efficiency, initiatives, skills and resource utilization (Johari, &
Yahya, 2012; Yusoff et al., 2014). It is further categorized into two kinds that are
task and contextual performance. The task performance is related to behaviors that is
directly involved with job completion and comprised of execution of technical
methods, maintenance and services of desires. While contextual performance is
referred to actions or interpersonal behavior‘s that help the organization (Johari,
 38

&Yahya, 2012; Yusoff et al., 2014). Self-rated job performance is known as

"perceived job performance". It is the measurement of the outward and public
manifestation of an individual's underlying and internal structures of job competence
(Graf, 1992; p.7). It is summarized from the reviews of perception and evaluation of
staff on their own actions or relevant behaviors and characteristics that influence
organizational objectives and responds to organization's tasks (Saetang, Sulumnad,
Thampitak & Sungkaew, 2010; p.35). Furthermore, these behaviors are in line with
the institutional goals and objectives (Bhat & Naikoo, 2017). Perceived job
performance is subsumed as a major concept inside work, and institutional
psychology and scholars have made advancement in expounding and spreading the
performance notion (Koopmans et al., 2014).
In the contemporary years quality and products of educational sector is firmly
disposed by academic staff perceived job performance. Low job performance of
academic will unbalance the entire educational system (Bhat & Beri, 2016).
Notwithstanding, in order to grow a dynamic educational society, it is mandatory that
academics must keep robust job performance in a university (Bhat & Beri, 2016;
Bhat & Naikoo, 2017). Perceived job performance is a vital element of an
organization that drives it onward for further excellence. It is obvious from the past
so many years that perceived job performance come to be the central element of the
human resource management and organizational and industrial psychology (Bhat &
Naikoo, 2017). High job performance at workplace is a serious problem of the
current competitive world and how to enhance and keep excellent performer is also a
main challenge for HR management in every work-settings (Lin, Chen, & Wang,
2011). Job performance is termed as a crucial output which provisions an institution
in predicting and rewarding the behavior of its academics (Chen, Yuan, Cheng &
Seifert, 2016). Most of the scholars argued that it is essential in terms of applicability
for both stakeholders and institution of educational society, as it is beneficial and
primary component of the educational industry (Bhat & Naikoo, 2017). Though, the
success of an institution is dependent on the good job performance of its workers
(Colquitt, LePine, & Wesson & Gellatly, 2011; Bhat & Naikoo, 2017). Likewise, the
higher educational sector is also reliant on the high job performance of its academics
as the quality of a university can only be maintained by academic job performance.
Hence, high job performance of an academic is intrinsic for improvement of
university performance as well (Yusoff, Khan, & Azam, 2013).
 39

Yusoff et al. (2014) opined that perceived job performance should measure both the
core activities (task performance and other actions as well (contextual performance).
The task performance involves procedural knowledge, experience, technical tasks
regarding the job. On the other hand, contextual performance is not linked with
technical activities but assist the organizational and social milieu (Yusoff, Ali &
Khan, 2014). In other words Job performance comprises of five elements i.e.
planning, monitoring, developing, rating and rewarding (Elnaga & Imran, 2013).
Planning means setting goals, monitoring is the process in which goals are over
reviewed with the performance of employee, similarly developing is used to improve
academic poor performance and rating involves to conclude the academic perceived
job performance and in the same way rewarding is the final stage to reward and
recognized outstanding job performance of the academics (Elnaga & Imran, 2013).
Academician‘s perceived job performance is subsumed as an essential factor
in the success of universities because it embarks universities to attain competitive
edge around the globe (Hashim et al., 2017). Table 2.1 shows brief description about
the employee perceived job performance measurement carried out by previous
researchers. In the same congruence, Khan (2013) argued that performance criteria
has been developed as how to judge and evaluate perceived job performance and he
also recommends that a managed and systematic approach may be used to assess
academic perceived job performance. Moreover, he also highlights some problems
linked with perceived job performance which are; Knowledge, skills and abilities
that is most critical to perceived job performance. Secondly, Subjectivity in
evaluations minimizes employee‘s satisfaction with and acceptance of performance
appraisal.
According to Agarwal and Doku (2016) performance standards describe the
predictable levels of academics perceived job performance and these are said to be
bench marks, goals and targets that are realistic and easily measurable and having
clear understanding of performance standards that benefit both academic and
institution. The quality of education contingent on high job performance of the
academics in universities and their performance can be increased by their accurate
assessment (Aslam et al., 2011). The development of better rating scale format and
trained rater also ensures satisfaction among academics which consequently, turned
into high job performance (Embi & Choon, 2014). High job performer is capable to
contribute efficiently and help the institution in achieving institutional goals and
 40

objectives (Lahap et al., 2016). It is also documented in literature that academic

satisfaction is a prime contributing factor in fostering perceived job performance
(Bhatti, Cheema, Shaikh, Syed & Bashir, 2014; Asrar-ul-Haq, Kuchinke & Iqbal,
2017). One field of the organization that is robustly researched is job performance
(Kuyumcu & Dahling, 2014). Goal setting and fairness is significant to perceived job
performance in the field of task performance. Fairness effects perceived job
performance through academic‘s perception of how they are being treated (Kuyumcu
& Dahling, 2014). Perceived fairness led to productive or counter-productive
attitudes, which positively or negatively influences academics job performance
(Chang, 2015). Goal-setting is an effective theory in various settings including
academic settings. But the most weighted provision links with the correlation of goal
setting and task performance in academic setting (Locke & Latham, 2013).Goal-
setting theory also emphasizes on how goals are associated to job performance but
have less empirical proofs showing increase in job performance in workplace. This
lack of evidence calls for further research to achieve in-depth results (Locke &
Latham, 2002, 2006).

Table 2. 1: Perceived job performance measurement

Author Context Measurement Findings

Elnaga and Firms Job performance, Planning Engender significant and

Imran, Monitoring positive results in improving
(2013) Developing perceived job performance of
Rating employees specially developing
Rewarding stage
Matolo Banking sector Performance appraisal and Fair and satisfaction based
(2015) perceived job performance performance appraisal enhanced
perceived job performance
Jalagat Universities Job satisfaction and Satisfaction leads to higher
(2016) perceived job performance performance in work settings
Iqbal et al. Banking sector Performance appraisal and Results in higher performances
(2013) employee job performance from employees to get
organizational goals
 41

Table 2.1: Continued

Saetang and Vocational perceived job performance, Results show that goal setting of
Sulumnad center goal setting, job satisfaction PA exhibited a significant
(2010) positive relationship with
perceived job performance.
Yusoff et al. Universities job performance, contextual Results show the development of
(2014) performance, reliability and reliable and valid scale of job
validity performance of academics
Bhat and Education perceived job performance, Presented a scale of perceived
Beri (2016) sector task performance and job performance which is
contextual performance administrable for academic staff
of universities

2.3 The mediating role of employee satisfaction

Employee satisfaction can be defined as the state of pleasure and satisfaction

resulting from the performance appraisal of one job or job experiences (Zhang, Hu &
Qiu, 2014). Therefore, employee‘s satisfaction is a very important attribute that is
frequently measured by all types of organizations that is either public or private
(Sattar & Nawaz, 2011; Saif, Nawaz, Jan, & Khan, 2012). Employee satisfaction is
considered a complex area which is a challenge in today‘s higher education. In one
place, Alvi, Surani and Hirani (2013) continued that it is not easy to comprehend the
nature of academic satisfaction and its impacts on job performance in academic
settings. Since, in few decades industrial and organizational scholars have been
grappling with the relationship of employee satisfaction and job performance. Most
of the researchers have put high valance to establish these two variables are
positively correlated in such a manner in which a satisfied academic is high job
performer (Bakotic & Babic, 2013). Since, it seems like an alluring idea, and till now
the findings of empirical literature are so mixed to assist the hypothesis that
employees‘ satisfaction leads to high job performance (Alvi, Surani & Hirani, 2013).
Moreover, goal-setting theory states that the level of goal accomplishment is closely
linked to employee satisfaction (Kompketter, 2014). Despite the present universal
application of performance appraisal system and its significance in the future there is
substantial disagreement over its efficiency and usefulness. Previous surveys over the
past years have documented relative lack of employee satisfaction towards the
 42

performance appraisal system both in private and public institutions (Getnet, Jebena
& Tsegaye, 2014).
The entire human relations‘ movement was reliant on the concept that
productivity and performance would be enhanced by making academics more
satisfied, initially through agreeable and helpful supervision which causes improved
job performance in return (Islamia, Mulollia & Mustafa, 2018). The satisfaction with
performance appraisal system clearly indicates the extent to which academics turned
to improve their perceived job performance in their respective fields which is in the
best interest of the universities in the long-run (Girma, Lodesso & Sorsa, 2016).
Academic staff is motivated to accomplish specific goals and seem to be satisfied if
they get these goals through improved job performance (Armstrong & Taylor, 2014).
Studies have been conducted so far on the relationship of other variables with
employee satisfaction by several researchers such as (Naji et al., 2015; Karimi et al.,
2011; Shruti & Junalux, 2006). In the same line, Aleassa (2014) has tested the
relationship of performance appraisal satisfaction and counter-productive behaviour.
Sudin (2011) studied the relationship of fairness and satisfaction with performance
appraisal. Jaksic and Jaksic (2013) have also conducted study on the relationship of
performance management and employee satisfaction.
Several studies have used employee satisfaction as a dependent variable
(Karimi et al., 2011; Naji et al., 2015; Othman, 2014; Jaksic & Jaksic, 2013) and as
an independent variable (Shruti & Junalux, 2006; Odette & Kabagambe, 2012;
Weerakkody & Mahalakamge, 2013). But so far, to the best knowledge of the
researcher less attention has been paid to the mediating role of employee satisfaction
in the relationship of performance appraisal and employee perceived job
performance. The researcher is of the view that when performance appraisal of the
university is fair, goals oriented and purposeful, the rater is highly trained with skills
and rating scale format is valid and reliable then academic will be satisfied and will
put more effort to enhance their job performance. Such enhancement in the
performance of academic will help the institution to perform better. In other words,
the performance appraisal predicts the employee satisfaction and employee
satisfaction predicts the perceived job performance of academic staff. The predictor
and outcome relationship of these variables gives us support that employee
satisfaction establishes a relationship between performance appraisal and perceived
job performance. Employee satisfaction has been used as a mediator in the
 43

relationship between servant leadership and employee loyalty (Ding, Song, & Lu,
2012) and it has been used as a mediator in evaluating HR practices on
organizational productivity with the mediation effects of employee satisfaction
evidences from higher education sectors (Mir, Sharif & Naqvi, 2017), while it has
also been used by James (2013) as a mediator in the study of the perceived fairness
of performance appraisal and its influenced on teacher commitment towards school.
But to the best of researcher‘s knowledge it has not been used as mediator in the
relationship of performance appraisal and perceived job performance of academics.
This study has examined the mediating role of employee satisfaction on the
relationship of performance appraisal with employee perceived job performance.
Decramer et al. (2013) argued that academic satisfaction could mediate the
relationship of HR practices such as performance appraisal and perceived job
performance in higher education.

Table 2. 2: Employee satisfaction measurement

Author Context Measurement Findings

Karimi et al. Non-profit Performance The results reveal that PA and
(2011) organizations appraisal system employee satisfaction have a positive
and employee relationship.
satisfaction
Naji et al. Organizational Performance Satisfied and motivated employees
(2015) settings appraisal and are more likely to enhance their job
employee performance.
satisfaction
Jaksic and Performance company Employee satisfaction is a key factor
Jaksic (2013) management and in the success of every organization.
employee
satisfaction
Odette and Education sector Employee Majority of the employees were found
Kabagambe satisfaction and to be significantly satisfied from the
(2012) performance promotion, transfer and performance
appraisal measures of PAS.
 44

Table 2.2: Continued

Weerakkody Banking sector Employee Organization should give such a PAS
and satisfaction, PA, where employees should feel
Mahalakamge job performance satisfaction with the system.
(2013)
Saleem and Universities Job satisfaction, There is positive impact of employee
Imran (2014) job performance, satisfaction on job performance
commitment among academic staff.
Ibeogu and Banking sector Performance Satisfaction with PAS can only be
Ozturen (2014) appraisal, translated into high job performance
employee when employees see positive results.
satisfaction,
justice

2.4 Performance appraisal (Down the History)

The history of performance appraisal is quite brief. It is evident from the previous
studies that the systematic appraisal of employees had been there since centuries.
Patten (1977) found its existence to the third century A.D and he pointed out the
evidences of criticism raised at that time when an unfair assessment had made by
rater hired by the Wei dynasty. The rater was criticized for his likes and dislikes
merit ratings. From the very beginning performance appraisal system was in use in
organizational and industrial setting such as Prowse and Prowse (2009) reveals the
official recording of employees emerged from the Robert Owens‘ factory in new
Lanark in early 1800 century.
However, most of the researchers trace its roots in the early start of 20th
century to Taylor‘s pioneering time and motion studies. The performance appraisal
system initially comes into practice for the first time in organizational settings,
mainly in 1940s for the purpose of justification of employee wages through merit
rating near the Second World War (Lillian, Mathooko & Sitati, 2011; Iqbal, Ahmad
& Haider, 2013). However, Mazhar-ul-Haq (1977) and Khan (2007) find out the
foundation of formal performance appraisal laid by state functionaries to Hazrat
Umar Farooq, the second caliph of Islam (634-644 AD/ 13-23 AH). According to
Eichel and Bender (1984) before the 1960s, this activity was used as an instrument to
control employees for the organization and specifically used for administrative
 45

decisions like retention, discharge, promotion and salary fixation. In 1970s a

development phase had entered in the assessment system with the concept of
management by objective (MBO). During this era the primary purpose of assessment
process was to judge employees and then to deliver feedback of performance. In
addition, it has also been observed that performance appraisal considered as a
process to isolate and measure job performance (Rehman, 2012). In the initial days
of 1980s the system was full of institutionalization factor and appraisal of employees
that became a usual method in modern organization at that time (DeNisi & Stevens,
1981). Most organization had added some extra rewards such as (raises and
promotion) to these evaluations (DeNisi & Stevens, 1981).Research on the problem
strengthened and got a new aspect known as cognitive role in the appraisal process
and then some researcher (DeNisi, Cafferty & Meglino, 1984; Landy & Farr, 1983)
took the responsibility to investigate the cognitive factor in the assessment. The main
problem was to observe the possible relationship between performance appraisal
assessment errors and performance rating accuracy (Fisicaro, 1988).
Researchers took keen interest to examine the fairness of performance
appraisal system because it was of great importance that how employee perceived the
fairness of performance appraisal and also to study its impact on job performance
(Katavich, 2013). The research had shifted from addressing employee satisfaction to
remain focus on the improvement of rating techniques and reducing errors within
performance appraisal system (Dipboye & de Pontbriand, 1981; Landy, Barnes &
Murphy, 1978). According to Mitchell (1983) most evaluators used different motives
during the assessment of employees hence, traditional methods i.e. essay method;
forced distribution method, checklist method and critical incident method to
employee performance assessment were called unsatisfactory. Boswell and Boudreau
(2002) empirically check the relationship between supervisor and employees and
observed that effect on the job performance varies differently in those who are
supervised closely have greater effect on performance than those who have been
supervised not closely (Mcfillen & New, 1979).
Viewing into the depth of this extensive research and examining its different
aspects and problems that affect organization and employee have been addressed.
Employee evaluation and assessment still have the issues and uncertainty (Pettijohn,
Parker & Pettijohn, 2001). According to Dierdorff and Surface (2007) it was still
assumed as a detested ―paper chase‖ and employees are reluctant to participate in the
 46

process. Literature on the topic shows that in the start inputs of the individual
employee were being focused but with the passage of time, researchers shift their
interest to organizational side of the performance appraisal system (Sulsky, Skarlicki
& Keown, 2002). Performance appraisal has various purposes but mostly related
with individual employee and organization. While passing through its history, it is
proved that it has some other purpose which is for the researchers. In short,
performance appraisal is also considered for research use also (Hooft, Flier & Minne,
2006). While, many organizations are accepting the worth of performance appraisal
to both employees and organization, there is still much misunderstanding about the
conducting management and meaning of performance appraisal (Khoury & Analoui,
2004).

2.5 Performance appraisal

The most controversial but an important HR instrument that has pinched the
awareness and attention of many scholars around the globe is undeniably
―Performance Appraisal‖. Despite the fact, it has been used widely with
contradictory practices (Adler et al., 2016). Performance appraisal is the merely
instrument that has been practiced across in many fields to measure and supervise
employee job performance in several kinds of organization; including higher
education sector. The performance appraisal system has been criticized continuously
regarding the way it has been employed which produces inequity, biasness,
dissatisfaction and so there happens large disagreement on the application of this
process (Khedkar, 2016). The author further explored that all the related
controversies produced a question among the scholars to comprehend the
performance appraisal system and point out the areas where the problems can be
reduced as well as the instrument can be improved. However, Kisang and Kirai
(2016) exposed that performance appraisal is one of the most challenging
components of HRM as some academics are dissatisfied with their institution‘s
performance appraisal system.
Effective performance appraisal stand to generate a vision of triumph and an
environment in which performers get satisfied and desire to provide their best and
struggle for constant improvement (Saba & Nsubuga-Kyobe, 2014). The researcher
 47

further established that in order to get satisfaction among employees and to construct
their trust on the performance appraisal system in public institutions of Pakistan,
research based polices are required. Notwithstanding, years of study and practice
intended at developing the performance appraisal and performance management
system in organizations, performance issues with the system is still at hand to some
extent (Corporate Leadership Council, 2012). Mostly, the human resource heads,
managers and academics perceive that their performance appraisal system miss the
mark to deliver the output they expected and view that the present system as
inefficient and or unfair (Corporate Leadership Council, 2012). According to the
researcher Iqbal, Akbar and Budhwar (2015) previous research engrossed basically
on the rating accuracy for performance appraisal effectiveness but current studies
have advised aiming on employee‘s motivational aspects to the performance
appraisal e.g. satisfaction, acceptance, fairness. An ultimate business provision of all
organizations is to continuously appraise and improve individual and organizational
performance (Mathis & Jackson, 2011), which is also the situation for higher
education institutions in Pakistan that come across under maximum pressure to
overcome costs while improving outputs of academics regarding job performance
(Rahman, 2015; Dusing, 2017).Performance appraisal has been used by businesses
and industry for the last few decades and counted between 74 to 98% (Iqbal et al.,
2013). But Prowse and Prowse (2009) has found that 90% organizations of the
United States of America (USA) and United Kingdom (UK) are executing
performance appraisal as an instrument to affect job performance and behaviour. But
still a small number of evidence revealed its usefulness and even several
organizations imply low job performance with their evaluation schemes (Kuvaas,
2011).
Performance appraisal is considered as one of the most significant human
resource practices (Kehoe and wright, 2013). Performance appraisal is termed to be
the most comprehensively studied subjects in industrial organizational settings
(Agyan-Gyasi & Boateng, 2015; Preizer, 2014) and emphasizes on both task-related
job and contextual perspective (Shumi & Begum, 2017). It is discernible that
developmental implications of a performance appraisal system would lead to
improve job performance of an academic and both the parties (academics,
management) have an agreement of psychological contract between the employer
and employees in work-settings (Harrington & Lee, 2015).Performance appraisal is
 48

conducted to identify academic weaknesses and strengths within a university such as

room for enhancement of academics, and assist to set goals and to improve job
performance (Kampkotter, 2014). Specifically poor job performer can be detected
and may receive feedback on how to enhance in the long run. Academic staff
reactions to performance appraisal in terms of perceived academic fairness, accuracy,
and satisfaction are significant elements of performance appraisal system because
these perceived academic reactions can influence academic staff to increase their job
performance (Selvarajan & Cloninger, 2012).
Performance appraisal has been examined broadly in different organizations
in different context. But appropriate emphasis has not been focused in academic
settings (Suhasini & Koneru, 2016). Still, there is inadequate investigation on how
the performance appraisal system can help improve job performance of academics.
The evidence and empirical support of the effectiveness of performance appraisal
and its effect on perceived job performance is rare (Suhasini & Koneru, 2016).
According to Sajuyigbe (2017) any institution without a valid, reliable, appropriate
and consistent performance appraisal system will subject to failure and poor
academic job performance. Tekalegn Girma, Solomon and Gebre (2015) in his
research on performance appraisal reveal that there is need of study to identify the
different dimensions of performance appraisal which can play its role in improving
job performance of academic staff in higher education institutions. It is a systematic
approach through which job performance of academics have been evaluated over a
period of time (Hassan, 2016). Performance appraisal has been conducted in an
institution for bringing quality and improvement in academic perceived job
performance (Dusterhoff, Cunningham & McGregor, 2014). However, if the
performance appraisal has not conducted adequately or the academic staff perceived
that it is biased and subjective, it may lead to reduce employee satisfaction and
hence, decline can be seen in their job performance and in institutional performance
(Grabner, Künneke & Moers, 2016).
In the same manner, performance appraisal success is related with the
reactions of employees. If the employees perceived dissatisfaction, unfairness and
inequity in performance appraisal process then any appraisal system will be
considered failed (Palaiologos et al., 2011). Several researchers such as Mulli (2011
and Mollel et al. (2017) have proposed that those academics which are satisfied from
performance appraisal system are more co-operative, high performer and diligent to
 49

make able institution accomplishing its objectives. On the other hand, dissatisfied
employees from performance appraisal system are less supportive, inefficient, low
performer and indulge in negative activities like strike, absenteeism (Mollel et al.,
2017).
The employees‘ contribution towards an organization depends on the
evaluation assessment of his/her rating so, for measuring academics perceived job
performance, it is necessary to have an accurate, unbiased performance appraisal
evaluation system to be in hand (Shaout & Yousif, 2014). Raters utilize attributes
such as, adaptability, assertiveness, job knowledge, quality and quantity of work,
skills to accomplish a goal and target achieving attitude to decide on the academic‘s
job performance (Shaout & Yousif, 2014). Performance appraisal reliability and
validity about rating scale format still remain a major issue in the existing
performance appraisal system (Agyan-Gyasi & Boateng, 2015). The philosophy of
performance appraisal system has been transformed positively over the years, earlier
it was thought that performance appraisal is a tool for identifying employee
behaviour and his success (Rasheed et al., 2011). But now it is strongly recognized
that performance appraisal is used for motivating academics to improve their job
performance (Haque, 2012).
A study carried out by Ahmad, Sultana and Paul (2013) and their findings
show some hindering factors of performance appraisal system in Pakistani
universities that are untrained raters. According to Bekele et al. (2014) performance
appraisal has been criticized due to rater lack of skills and knowledge about
measuring academics job performance. The employee improvement in performance
is the most valuable assets and is possible through their performance appraisal
system (Torabi & Setodeh, 2010). A research carried out by Moradi, Mehraban and
Moeini (2017) in the field of performance appraisal have shown that the existing
system of performance appraisal have no required objectivity. The past literature
showed that performance appraisal is a method to measure how an academic is
performing and how their job performance can be improved in the institution
(Mohammad, 2011; Zafarullah et al., 2017). Performance appraisal could be seen as
the systematic approach of academic-job relevant strengths and weaknesses for the
aim of making a decision about the academic perceived job performance (Ahmad &
Bujang, 2013).
 50

According to Zafarullah et al. (2017) performance appraisal is the tool which can be
used to overview academic‘s perceived job performance successfully. Performance
appraisal system is a continuous process which is subject to identification, measure
and improves academic job performance in the institution (Sajuyigbe, 2017).
Specifically, now performance appraisal research has emphasized on how to accurate
or better measure perceived job performance of an academic including rating scale
development, reducing rater error and linking employee satisfaction (Zheng et al.,
2012).
Rasheed et al. (2011) continued that 360-degree appraisal method is more
effective as compared to the previous systems that were one sided and could be
biased at times. Performance appraisal has been tested solely in terms of its
evaluations aspects but its relationship with developmental and satisfaction aspects
has been overlooked so far (Asamu, 2013; Sajuyigbe, 2017). During performance
appraisal it is noted that academics performance improvement and effectiveness is
strongly influenced by their evaluations (Mir & Ahmad, 2014). Biased performance
evaluation produces challenges for decision making in organizations (Maas &
Torres-Gonzalaz, 2011) and commonly leads to employee dissatisfaction with the
performance appraisal process (Ahmad, Paya, Baig & Ismail, 2012) which
subsequently negatively affect perceived job performance (FU & Deshpande, 2014;
Wong, Wong & Wong, 2015). However, there is less research on how performance
appraisal system can help improve academic perceived job performance (Sharma &
Sharma, 2017). This may be a credible reason that mostly organization‘s (public and
private sector) only report effectiveness and efficiency of their performance appraisal
system and feel reluctant from reporting its effect on academic perceived job
performance (Fink, 2010).
Subjectivity biases such as rating errors in the existing performance appraisal
system is one of the burning issues that needs to be addressed to increase its
perceived rating accuracy and fairness which in turn effect employee satisfaction
with the performance appraisal system (Sharma & Sharma, 2017). Critiques referred
the current performance appraisal system as it projects biasness and rating errors
(Khedkar, 2016). These issues now compel the researchers to understand the
performance appraisal system and point out those areas, where the rater errors can be
minimized as well as the rating tool can be enhanced (Khedkar, 2016). Othman
(2014) elaborate that performance appraisal is certainly a perplex method and
 51

carrying space for variation specifically when subjective judgments or measurements

of academic perceived job performance has conducted by a supervisor as compared
to objective one, where the judgments are based on measureable aspects of employee
perceived job performance. Those performance appraisal systems that are based on
subjective measurements having the capacity to absorb or weak the quality of the
process which may be affected due to biases or distortion as a result of emotion
(Othman, 2014).
A positive relationship has been found by Bowra et al. (2011) between
performance appraisal system and perceived job performance. Effective performance
appraisal plays a vital role in evaluation of academic staff especially, in academic
institutions, it defines the institutions overall success or failure (Anjum et al., 2011).
Mir and Amin (2016) advocated that improvement in work is considered to be the
only tool that creates more efficiency and effectiveness in accomplishing the goals
and purposes of performance appraisal and this system provides an opportunity of
improvement in weak areas. Goal setting is relevant in all aspects of life including
academic setting (Abu Bakar, Yun, Keow & Li, 2014). In education setting, short
term goals are set with the purpose to achieve long term goals. Goal setting is a
widely embraced practice in corporate settings and a highly regarded subject in
literature on the workplace. However, its presence is weaker in higher education
(Camp, 2017). The most influential theory of the study is goal-setting theory and it
stresses on goal setting aspect of performance appraisal, academic satisfaction and
job performance and needs more clear empirical evidence in such relationship in
academic settings (Locke & Latham, 2004; Culibrk, Delic, Mitrovic & Culibrk,
2018).
Performance appraisal is an organizational method of dealing with the
employees regarding their performance. While performance management on the
other side, contains not only individual characteristics but also describes
organizational strategy and situational limitations (Prowse & Prowse, 2009). Farrell
(2013) concluded the difference between performance appraisal and performance
management in such a way that performance appraisal generally lacks strategic
business polices, widespread and continuing feedback for improvement of employee
job performance in the future. Moreover, Sherwani (2015) make it more clearly by
arguing that performance appraisal is generally an annual activity that is usually
executed by human resource department, whereas performance management is year-
 52

round event of managing business activities that is operating by managers. Though,

performance management is traditionally reliant on performance appraisal,
performance management is a wide and more incorporating process and is the
alternate goal of performance appraisal activities (Farrell, 2013). Performance
appraisal is an essential part of performance management and it is actually the heart
of performance management (Opatha, 2013). In other words, the essence of
performance management is performance appraisal. Rater, having little or no formal
training of rating an employee perceived job performance which leads to biases and
errors in the performance appraisal system during measuring academics perceived
job performance (Adler et al., 2016). Performance appraisal is considered as
significant instrument for evaluation of employees across different organizations and
has also found place in academic sector to track the performance and progress of the
academics in this field (Khedkar, 2016).

Table 2.3: Performance appraisal measurement

Author context measurement Findings

Ghauri Industry HRM, performance Qualitative
(2012) appraisal, employee PA plays an effective role to achieve
satisfaction the desired goals on giving clear
strategic future directions to improve
job performance.
Khedkar Education sector Performance The study urges on the fact the
(2016) appraisal, employee employee satisfaction and job
performance and performance can be enhanced through
organizational accurate PAS.
performance
Sajuyigbe Telecom sector Performance PA performs a significant role in
(2017) appraisal, employee contributing to high job performance
performance of employees in MTN.
 53

Table 2.3: Continued

Iqbal et al. Performance Banking sector Found a positive and significant
(2013) appraisal, relationship between PA and EP.
motivation and
employee
performance
Royes PA, job satisfaction, Service industry All the variables have a significant
(2015) job performance, relationship among each other.
fairness
Rasheed et HRM, PA, Universities The research urges on the exploration
al. (2011) of different dimensions of PA to
enhance the performance of academics
in HES.
Sherwani Performance Universities PA enables the universities to enhance
(2015) appraisal, PM the entire performance to get its goals
and the outcomes should be ES, and
assist the university understand job
performance.
Iqbal, Akbar Performance Telecommunication PA purposes such as administrative
and appraisal, purposes sector and developmental both are crucial in
Budhwar of performance PA, determining the success of PA system.
(2015
Bitange, Performance Private universities If the PAS applied in private
Kipchumba appraisal system, universities are not effective it cannot
and Magutu effectiveness, job satisfy academics and positively affect
(2010 performance their job performance
Khan et al. Performance Results revealed that PA has a strong
(2017) appraisal and job Banking sector relationship with job performance.
performance,
motivation
Rehman Performance Universities This research showed that the quality
(2012) appraisal, employee of PA has importance for advancing
development and job individuals development perceptions.
performance
Abbas Performance Banking sector PA has a positive and significant
(2014) appraisal and job impact on job performance
performance
 54

Table 2.3: Continued

Saleem and Performance Banking sector The findings of this study found that
Shah (2015) appraisal and job PA have suitable and high significant
satisfaction relationship with employee satisfaction
Islami et al. Goal setting of PA, Product sector Goal setting of PA has a significant
(2018) MBO and employee impact on ES.
satisfaction
Kaleem, Organizational Manufacturing There is positive and significant
Jabeen and justice, PA, ES and sector relationship among fairness, PA, and
Tawana Job performance ES.
(2013)
Selvarajan Fairness, PA, ES, Public sector Higher level of fairness in PA could
and Job performance led to higher levels of ES and
Cloninger improved job performance
(2012)
Girma, Performance University There is positive and significant
Lodesso and appraisal, employee correlation between PA and EJP.
Sorsa performance
(2016)

2.6 Importance and benefits of performance appraisal

Performance appraisal is known to be one of the vital parts of human resource

management field (Khan, 2010). An extensive focus has been given to the formal
performance appraisal system because of the concept that if a well-managed
appraisal system has implemented it can encompass both the benefits of academic
and institution (Zhang, 2012). Performance appraisal system also enhances academic
motivation, satisfaction and productivity, encourage interaction regarding academic
growth and development (Armstrong & Taylor, 2014). Beside this, there are different
methods in which performance appraisal can be useful for organizations. First,
performance appraisal can enhance and maximize organizational decisions relating
reward allocation, promotions, layoffs and transfers. Second, performance appraisal
can help in improvement of individual career decisions and ultimate prompt
decisions about where to allocate one‘s time and effort (Zeb et al., 2018). The
researcher Khan (2013) urges on other benefits of performance appraisal system
which are associated with individual employee‘s decisions related to their present
 55

and future roles in an organization or institution. Performance appraisal system has

been loaded with future strengths and development for the academics with clear
career goals to pursue (Rehman, 2012).
Performance appraisal is assumed as significant tool for assessment of
employees across diverse organizations and has also established place in academic
settings to grab the performance and improvement of the employees in this area
(Khedkar, 2016). Performance appraisals can benefit and inspire supervisors to
examine their academics closely which results into its better management. However,
an organization that has an effective performance appraisal may gain few or all of
these mentioned benefits. According to Kolawole, Komolafe and Adebayo (2013)
individual academics have some major benefits from the performance appraisal in
the form of (1) increased aims and own role in organizational success (2)
development of potentials (3) better informed career planning. While on the other
hand it also enhances the organizational performance like (1) improved
communication of organizational goals (2) improvement in work performance and in
overall organizational performance (3) more objective distribution of rewards and
improve retention of employees (Kolawole et al., 2013). Performance appraisal
system provides some benefits to the supervisor, academics and the organization as a
whole. There are some benefits for the academics being appraised (Sudin, 2011;
Farrell, 2013).
i. Having information of strengths and weakness
ii. Exist a development plan for the improvement of employees in weak areas
iii. Maximize employee satisfaction and motivation
iv. The opportunity to elaborate work issues and problems related
v. Rewards for high performers
All academics must be well informed by their supervisors or mangers about the
benefits of the performance appraisal system while conducting performance appraisal
(Chuluunkhuu, 2010). The aware and timely informed academics can take the
benefits of performance appraisal positively and in turn they will be participating
with full devotion and sincerity in overall activities of performance appraisal
(Chuluunkhuu, 2010). For the managers/supervisors conducting performance
appraisal includes the following benefits (Chuluunkhuu, 2010; Farrell, 2013).
i. Supervisors or managers have deep knowledge about their employees
weaknesses and strengths, hopes and aspirations
 56

ii. The possibility to re-visit the targets

iii. Development plan for staff performance also
iv. The opportunity to link individual and team based goals with organizational
objectives
Performance appraisal system has also some benefits for the organization/
institutions (Chuluunkhuu, 2010; Farrell, 2013).
i. Better productivity
ii. The greater achievement of goals and objectives
iii. Enhanced the whole corporate performance
iv. Maximize the organizational outcomes and customer satisfaction
v. Competitive advantage in the market place

2.7 Performance models in Higher Education Sector

The premier aim of higher education commission in Pakistan is to engender quality

in universities and held it responsible to nation, employers, each other and students
(Haider, Husnain, Shaheen & Jabeen, 2015). To control over productivity and
enhance academic job performance in higher education it is essential that policy
makers should adopt such a performance based model which has a clear motive of
accountability. A performance appraisal system is considered to be one of the best
processes that are helpful in assessing and improving job performance and efficiency
of academic‘s (Flaniken, 2009). Request for external accountability has been found
of greater importance for the performance outputs regarding job performance and
formal assessment (Haider et al., 2015). Although, the broader use of performance
appraisal in organization has noticed by various researchers that there is little study
about the use of performance appraisal in higher education in the United States
(Flaniken, 2009). Moreover, enough research has been done in the area of
performance appraisal of faculty but less study exists on the evaluation of academic‘s
perceived job performance in higher education (Ahmad & Shahzad, 2011).
Igbojekwe et al. (2015) stated that performance appraisal carries weaknesses
in general employment practices within the higher education institutions, especially
in universities. Flaniken (2009) established that performance appraisal process is
considered to be the important tool for policy maker‘s efforts to execute such a plan
 57

and mechanism to overcome the problem of low job performance in higher

education. Hunnes, Kvaloy and Mohn (2012) identified that still there is less
empirical study on the performance appraisal and efficiency of higher education
employees about their contribution to over productivity and performance. Before
going in detail about the performance appraisal model practicing in Pakistan and
critically examining its performance it looks credible to discuss various performance
models that are approved by different countries (Haider et al., 2015). There are five
proposed models to calculate the performance, credibility and excellence associated
matters of higher education. These models are as under;
i. Quality Audit
ii. Accreditation
iii. Performance Funding and Performance Budgeting
iv. Performance Reporting
v. Surveys and Tests
Mostly different developed countries of the world are using these performance
models for measuring quality assurance in the higher education, particularly in
Australia, United States of America and United Kingdom etc. (Denise et al., 2008).
According to the study carried out by Haider et al. (2015) the performance models in
developing countries like India and Pakistan, their results are not in relevance with
the prescribed requirements and expectations. All these performance indicators are
established on some assumptions that are essential in the performance model used for
quality standards (Haider et al., 2015). After presenting models formally now we are
discussing some advantages and disadvantages of few performance model and then
get into a detailed insight on the implications of these models in case of Pakistan
higher education sector (Haider et al., 2015).
According to International Network for Quality Assurance Agencies in
Higher Education, (2008) many countries throughout the world practicing the quality
audit as a performance model for their higher education. But in Pakistan Higher
Education Commission (HEC) is exercising both internal and external audit. While
Hodgson and Whaley (2006) criticize quality audit and termed it is time consuming
and highly costly process and bears no acquired results in the higher institutions of
United Kingdom (UK). Especially in European higher education system
accreditation is one of the famous forms of performance model as per Joint
Committee on Higher Education (2000). This performance model also undergoes
 58

criticism. The author further added that accreditation standards always lacks the
updated quality practices because of predefined criteria and required some time to be
adjusted.
Haider et al. (2015) proposed that in Pakistan, like other countries Higher
Education Commission have a quality Assurance Agency (QAA) to check the
accreditation councils and these councils are made for the premier aim to ensure
quality of the programs and courses that are offered at institutional level. Khan
(2010) urges that the role of higher education cannot be undermined in economic
development as it produces productivity and efficiency of individuals, generate
knowledge and thus produces skilled manpower. Higher education institutions
(HEIs) and Higher Education Commission (HEC) have now understood their
responsibility in reforming and transforming higher education in Pakistan (Khan,
2010).
In Pakistan higher education institutions (HEIs) are the main sources that are
providing skills to manpower to boost up the economic prosperity of the country
(Rashid, 2011).While Haider et al.(2015) opined that in Pakistan none of the above
models implemented with its true spirit because of lacking respective environment
and culture. Rana and Reid (2008) suggested that a comprehensive performance
model is required for Pakistan to be implemented in its true spirit for uplifting higher
education. Several researchers (Haider et al., 2015) reported that higher education
commission (HEC) is pressing hard to develop such a performance model for the
university academics to improve their performance and satisfaction. According to
khan (2010) a comprehensive performance model is need of the hour for
implementing quality assurance in higher education institutions (HEIs) of Pakistan.
Yet, it is a bitter reality like several other developing nations, the circumstances of
education sector in Pakistan is not very promising (Haider et al., 2015). Table 2.4
reveals the details of the performance models has been in practiced throughout the
world for improving higher education sector.
 59

Table 2.4: Comparison of performance models among different countries

Author Context Performance models Remarks country

Denise et al. Higher education Quality audit Improve the USA, UK,
(2008) sector/universities Accreditation quality of higher Australia
Performance funding education and
and budgeting have
Performance reporting accountability
Survey and tests
Carley and Business and Quality assurance Maintained and West
Waldron (1984) industrial sector improved the countries
Bounds (1994) quality of learning
Skilbeck (2001) Higher education for employees.

sector Focuses on
training of
academics to their
performance.
involves
curriculum and
development of
academics
Haider et al. Higher education Internal quality audit Significant effect Italy,
(2015) sector and external on universities Sweden
and academics
performance
Dickeson (2006) Higher education Accreditation Applied for European
sector professionals in countries,
the field of USA
business,
accounting and
medicine
Miao (2012) Higher education Performance based Crucial for HIE‘s Canada,
sector funding and academics North
performance American
states
Haider et al. Higher education Quality assurance Ensuring quality Pakistan
(2015) commission agency (QAA) of the universities
 60

2.8 Performance appraisal and measurement criteria issues

Performance measurement may be defined as a set of process, methods and

techniques that are used for measuring the effectiveness and efficiency of academic
past actions (Rehman, 2012). In addition, it is evident that organizations need to
realize employee past actions and take decisions of future, ―without a general
understanding of past events, there will be no permanent change and improvement‖
(Azmaa, 2010). Performance appraisal measurement studies encompassing different
public sector organizations (Petrovsky & Ritz, 2014) and universities (Decramer et
al, 2013). The measurement of human performance is not a simple task, according to
Prowse and Prowse (2009) the development of performance appraisal measurement
is ever been a difficult task with organizations. They further argue that using
performance appraisal measurement criteria for individual performance should be the
vital part of this process.
However, according to Rehman (2012) performance appraisal measurement
criteria are not producing the actual results what are expected or desired to be the
outcome. The available research on this topic is full with complex issues. Now, the
researchers are busy to find out the viable solution for this issue concerned with
performance appraisal measurement criteria (Rehman, 2012). Researchers are there
to examine what has been conducted till now and then compare the relevance of
those results with the real problems in hand. Awadallah and Allam (2015) stated that
performance evaluation that has been done by superior has long history with having
some successful stories also. But anyhow, the performance measurement system has
always criticized with some way or other and questioned being more personalized for
example, questions regarding relation between employee and boss and of employee
and organization (Awadallah & Allam, 2015). It was felt important that employee‘s
would be evaluated with sufficient evidences and not from single evidence-boss/rater
(Espinilla et al., 2013).
The common issue related to performance appraisal measurements from its
very history is the absence of consensus on the specific problem area that is
academic job performance and still looks impossible because it is a job of different
variables with different values in various situations (Rehman, 2012). Haque (2012)
noted that the existing performance measurement system has faults and suggested for
the new evaluation instruments to be formulated. Roch et al. (2012) suggested
 61

training for raters to minimize rating errors. Furthermore, Embi and Choon (2014)
documented that training for rater is necessary because it can improve his/her rating
ability, enable rater how to evaluate the academic perceived job performance
accurately.
A second issue, which Campbell and Tawadey (2016) pointed out, is of
measurement criteria which are based on personal attributes and not on results of
performance related work behaviours. It has been noted that organizations fail to
conduct performance appraisal based on work behaviour but also be influenced by
personal attributes or traits (Campbell & Tawadey, 2016). To overcome this problem
organizations are advised to carry out job analysis to reach the conclusion as to what
type of behaviours and standards are needed for successful performance. According
to Campbell and Tawadey (2016) human resource experts suggested that raters are
needed to focus their attention on academic perceived job performance in workplace
not on his personal attributes or traits. Previous research studies findings confirmed
that performance measurements techniques developed and used so far are not free
from biases (Haque, 2012). Therefore, absolute accuracy in performance
measurement is not possible but there are ways to minimize it like through rater
training, objectivity and fairness. So, thereby some improvement or changes are also
proposed by Rehman (2012) which are as follows:
i. Rating scale length: It is proposed that employee assessment should be done
in an organization with less number of categories to avoid complications.
ii. Who evaluates performance: This work should be done through those who
have sufficient knowledge and information about the employee‘s
performance within the organization i.e. supervisor, peers, superiors etc.
iii. What is required to be evaluated: The assessment should be based on work
performance of the employees and the assessment criteria must be in
relevance to the job.
iv. Whether to evaluate an individual or team performance: It is good for an
organization and rater‘s to focus more on individuals rather than on team‘s
performance.
 62

2.9 Methods of performance appraisal system

The vital element of performance appraisal system is performance measurement

which is used where the basic function of performance measurement is to specify
broad and abstract goals and missions to do evaluations and the core aspects of
performance measurements are: (1) what to measure (2) how to measure it (3)
interpreting the data (4) communicating the results (Kim, 2011). Performance
appraisal is a usual assessment activity of academic perceived job performance in
both public and private sectors. The approaches can be categorized as trait-behaviour
and result based system (Kim, 2011). Several performance appraisal methods have
been used for measuring academic perceived job performance i.e. graphic rating
scale (GRS), forced choice distribution method, behavioural check list method.
Mostly, previously researcher‘s methods that were employed in the past are not
prevailing currently like ranking method, critical incident and narrative essays
(Shaout & Yousif, 2014). New methods have been suggested for performance
appraisal system is management by objective method (MBO), 360-degree appraisal,
behavioural anchored rating scale (BARS), assessment center, 720- degree appraisal
(Shaout & Yousif, 2014).
Traditional methods were subjected to past oriented approaches and focused
only on the past performance while modern methods are subjected to improve the
conventional methods. Modern methods tend to enhance the short-comings of the old
methods such as biasness and subjectivity (Shaout & Yousif, 2014). The rater‘s is not
always aware enough to make a valid evaluation of academic job performance so, a
solution to this issue is to use peer evaluation method (Agyen-Gyasi & Boateng,
2015). Currently, performance appraisal system must be subjected to the opinion of
various groups of reviewers who interacts with the assessed employees, since they
can accurately measure and respond how an employee improves his/her perceived
job performance (Espinilla et al., 2013). This method of performance appraisal
process is called 360-degree appraisal (Espinilla et al., 2013; Grund & Przemeck,
2012) and it controls some disadvantages of traditional performance appraisal
evaluation such as lack of objectivity, rater biases and halo errors.
Sharma (2012) opined that traditionally used methods like free-form method
and rater evaluations has not been shown some valuable results in measuring
academic perceived job performance. In order to get accurate measurements 360-
 63

degree appraisal including (superior appraisal, peer appraisal) can also be used to
measure academic perceived job performance (Sharma, 2012). In the same context,
Suhasini (2016) urges on 360-degree appraisal method for performance evaluation of
employees because this method of performance appraisal is a full circle, multi-source
and multi-rated system of getting information from the peer‘s and heads of the
department/faculties about an academic staff/employee. The main goal of
performance appraisal is to measure each employee‘s annual performance and
provide feedback to employee to improve subsequent performance (Kim, 2011). 360-
degree appraisal (multi-rater evaluation) underpins the utilization of multiple raters
as an effective technique of examining performance both for developmental and
appraisal purposes (Kim, 2011). 360-degree appraisal comprises of superiors, raters
peer‘s and subordinates to be involved in evaluating one another on work related
items such as performance, behaviour, attitude and leadership (Kim, 2003).
However, in designing performance appraisal system more focus must be diverted to
a number of aspects that effect on how effectively the system really measures
academic perceived job performance (Kim, 2011), these includes valid and reliable
criteria and control on rater errors (recency, halo, central tendency) and biases.
Rasheed et al. (2011) maintained that 360-degree appraisal system is
considered to be more efficient and effective in comparison with previous systems
that were based on subjective biases like favouritism, rater rating errors, personal
likes and dislikes, inaccuracy and one sided at times. In 360-degree appraisal system
information can be collected from multi-sources about the academic perceived job
performance (Rasheed et al., 2011). It includes boss, top management, assistants and
co-workers i.e. in academic settings top management is considered as Dean, Deputy
Dean, Chairman and Head of the department and faculties. Despite the fact, 360-
degree performance appraisal method collects information from multi-source unlike
traditional methods and tends to minimize errors and biases (Apak, 2016). This
method is more rational and useful for measuring academic perceived job
performance. Bafra Pillai and Pramood (2016) stressed on using multi-rater method
like 360-degree appraisal which is comprises of peer evaluation, superior appraisal
and co-workers and projects its advantages in the shape of reducing biases and
errors. 360-degree appraisal should be used to increase objectivity and overcome
subjective biases in performance appraisal system (Sharma & Sharma, 2017). 360-
degree appraisal is recommended to be used in higher education institutions
 64

(Sherwani, 2014). Previous research studies findings confirmed that performance

measurements techniques developed and used so far are not free from biases (Haque,
2012). Therefore, complete accuracy in performance measurement is not promising
but there are means to curtail it on emphasizing rater training, objectivity and
fairness.

2.10 Performance appraisal measures (objective and subjective measures)

All over the world Governments are pursuing to review the performance and strength
of their public institutions. Many organizations design such a performance appraisal
system which carries variance in their levels of subjectivity and objectivity in their
evaluation method (Othman, 2014). Where, subjectivity can be defined as the degree
to which rater has a direct personal effect on academic perceived job performance
rating (Maas & Torres-Gonzalz, 2011). According to Othman (2014) apart from such
progress a consistent problem still remains intact for the researchers that how to
conceptualize and measure the academic perceived job performance in the milieu of
individual capacity. There are different means and methods to assess performance in
common, performance details can be divided into two parts: subjective or judgmental
measures and objective or non-judgmental measures (Merchant, Stringer & Paul,
2010). However, subjective measures are mostly used (Merchant et al., 2010).
Subjective evaluation of academic perceived job performance is perceived to be
unfair and biased (Maas & Torres-Gonzalz, 2011).
Raters are subject to a number of possible errors (halo, horn, recency) when
they make subjective evaluation of job performances (Kim, 2011). Subjective
performance measurement about the qualitative aspects of the perceived job
performance and maximum discretion of rater in performance ratings leads to
performance evaluation biases (Can, 2018). 360-degree appraisal should be used to
increase objectivity and overcome subjective biases in performance appraisal system
(Sharma & Sharma, 2017). A study carried out by Bento, White and Zacur (2012)
and identified that subjectivity biases (leniency, halo, centrality bias, inter-personal
relationship) effect academic perceived job performance in performance appraisal.
Most of the employee dissatisfaction problems related with performance appraisal
system are due to this subjectivity biases in performance measurement (Javidmehr &
 65

Ebrahimpour, 2015). While objective performance indices (production output and

time to complete a task) is one of the most useful measures of performance appraisal
for routine, manual jobs since the 1940s (Othman, 2014), and gained so much
attention for the last 30 years.
Providing objective measures is one method to reduce biases in supervisory
ratings (Merchant et al., 2010) and objective performance criteria are usually
considered to be less susceptible to rater biases. Biases can be minimized by putting
more emphasis on objective rather than subjective measures in performance appraisal
system (Can 2018). Numerous studies have shown that subjective rater biases can be
minimized by rater training and using improved rating scales (Embi & Choon, 2014;
Merchant et al., 2010). Both objective and subjective measures of performance were
also used in the studies of performance appraisal in public sector organizations
(Breuer, Nieken & Sliwka, 2013). An objective measure should be considered as
impartial, independent and easily separated from the overall analysis (Othman,
2014). They further added that objective-based performance appraisal has been used
by different central governments of the world and public organizations across
Australia, Canada, America, United Kingdom and New Zealand.
Thurston and Mcnall (2010) argued that usually employees even aware of the
bias in performance appraisal system but unable to rise his voice or show any
concerns mostly to avoid confrontation with their superiors. This view advocated that
performance appraisal is lacking of organizational control measures and also
considered to be neither objective nor subjective. According to Schachter (2010)
objectivity is a concept that are based on making accurate judgments, timing
measures and independent of the background attributes of the individual employee.
Given that perceived job performance is a multi-dimensional construct and it is not
easy to accurately capture with subjective assessments (Schachter, 2010).
Othman (2014) is of the view that objective performance appraisal minimizes
both intentional and unintentional biases from rater side while measuring academic
perceived job performance. On the other hand, subjective performance measures may
be contaminated with leniency error, halo error and low differentiation. ―Objective
performance ratings are unbiased or at least significantly closer to the true
performance value than the subjective ratings‖ (Bol, 2009, p.15). Breuer, Nieken and
Sliwka (2013) identified that subjective performance appraisal produces distortions
 66

in performance ratings and has found empirical results that mostly subjective
performance appraisal is biased to a larger extent.
Mir and Amin (2016) proposed that objective performance appraisal is not
used by most organizations for measuring academic perceived job performance.
While those organizations that are practicing subjective measures of performance
appraisal are still facing the problems of biasness and errors and loses its
effectiveness widely (Mir & Amin, 2016).

2.11 Goal setting and purposes of performance appraisal

The performance appraisal study recommends that appraisal goal-setting and purpose
is another vital characteristic that can affect appraisal outcomes such as employee
satisfaction and job performance (Selvarajan & Cloninger, 2012). The most effective
support relates to the relationship of goal-setting and task performance in academic
setting (Locke & Latham, 2013). The attainment of goal is the ultimate way forward
to employee satisfaction and high job performance. On the other side,
unaccomplished goals engender dissatisfaction and lower job performance among
academic staff within a university (Lunenburg, 2011; Yurtkoru et al., 2017).
According to Lawler (2012) the main aim of performance appraisal is to achieve the
purposes such as goal setting, employee development and goal base appraisal of
academic perceived job performance. The reason behind goals oriented performance
appraisal system is to achieve a specified target and particularly higher goal
influence choice, determination and consistency. In the same context, Lawler (2012)
maintained that a specific goal and target maximize an employee‘s attention on what
is to be achieved contrary, to put it off to future date. A following research on goal
setting is proceeding to the expansion of the higher performance phase (Lawler,
2012). A researcher Locke and Latham (2013) further elaborate from his research
that to examine how an academic perceived job performance can be maximized by
goals and how high performance result into internal and external rewards and
considered as a source of employee satisfaction with performance appraisal.
The past literature indicates that the performance appraisal system usually do
not fulfill the purposes for which they are practiced in work settings (Islami, et al.,
2018). There are so many purposes of performance appraisal but the key one is to
 67

accomplish organizational goals with three fundamental principles i.e. enhancing

academic job performance, development of the employee and administrative
decisions (Festing et al., 2010). If performance appraisal purposes are acceptable and
apparent to both supervisor and academics while having same perceptions about the
appraisal, then it seems to be highly acceptable (Khan, 2013). Performance appraisal
system are administer for different purposes in organizations like to improve
academic perceived job performance, develop employees to promote their skills and
to develop low performance rating area (Ikramullah et al., 2012). Another valuable
purpose of performance appraisal effectiveness is the acceptance of employees and it
is only possible when accuracy and fairness are reflecting from that system (Idowu,
2017).
Afif et al. (2013) has highlighted that it is accepted worldwide from the
human resource management studies that performance evaluation has been gained
the specified purposes i.e. salary and administrative purposes but unsuccessful to
accomplish implied purposes which are improvement in academic job performance
and its satisfaction. Purposes of performance appraisal will be more objective, when
both the supervisor and employee have similar perceptions about the acceptance of
performance appraisal process (Maley, 2013). One of the main goals of performance
appraisal system is the recommendation of actions that lead to academic improved
job performance (Idowu, 2017). The concept of performance appraisal in universities
gets more attention and practicing at different levels in many universities in order to
take benefits from its goals and purposes (Flaniken & Cintrom, 2011; Hung, 2013).
Universities should develop such a performance appraisal system that is purely based
on their own goals and purposes. According to Hung (2013) there is three basic
purposes of performance appraisal system within a university usually i.e. (a)
recognizing and evaluating performance of academics (b) giving incentives to
academics (c) and monitoring the institution progress towards achieving its goals and
objectives. Iqbal (2012) opined that administrative purposes would be the most
heavily studied and using category of performance appraisal. Other purposes and
uses were judgmental or objective, evaluative and personnel (Iqbal, 2012). The
purposes of performance appraisal particularly administrative purposes are quite
helpful for management to take a variety of administrative decisions that strengthen
the performance appraisal system, improve academics perceived job performance
 68

and ultimately established overall compliance with performance standards (Iqbal,

2012).
The author continued that if performance appraisal used for administrative
purposes it will give immediate and tangible results such as in pay and promotion.
While, if performance appraisal has been conducted for developmental purposes it
will bear no such results but only affect the academics learning and development
skills. It means different purposes need different approaches with the performance
appraisal system (Iqbal, 2012). The basic purpose of the performance appraisal
system is to minimize the biases and to surface an image of an objective and
unbiased management to the academics (Apak et al., 2016). In general, the
organizations are utilizing the performance appraisal system for three purposes i.e.
managerial purposes, development oriented purposes and educational purposes
(Apak et al., 2016). While Vasset, Marnburg and Furunes (2011) revealed that most
of the goal setting and purposes of performance appraisal serve largely for
organizations to help them to improve employee perceived job performance. Again
the goal setting and purposes of performance appraisal is performance improvement,
initially at individual level i.e. employee perceived job performance and ultimately at
the level of the organization (Vasset, Marnburg & Furunes, 2011). Goal setting has
also positive effects on performance appraisal as it is evident from the five
recognized scholarly literature findings (Idowu, 2017). The researcher like Locke
and Latham (2013) identified that above 90% of empirical studies have revealed that
goal setting has positively affected academic perceived job performance and
employee satisfaction. While different researchers (Lock & Latham, 2013; Vasset et
al., 2011; Choon & Patrick, 2016) proposed that goal-setting has a strong positive
relationship with job performance and employee satisfaction.
 69

Table 2. 5: Goal-setting and purposes measurements

Author Context Measurement Findings

Othman (2014) PA, goal setting Public sector Goal setting and purposes of PA has a
and purposes, significant effect on job performance.
fairness,
employee
satisfaction and
job performance
Camp (2017) Goal setting, Higher education Goal setting aspect can be used to help
teacher teachers to foster growth in teaching.
development,
employee
satisfaction
Lunenburg Goal setting and General Research assist predictions that goal
(2011) performance perspective setting influence performance
positively
Hanson and Goal setting, Organizational Goal setting is one of the powerful
Pulakos (2015). performance settings drivers of performance management to
management, job improve job performance of
performance employees.
Choon and Goal setting, Industries Results showed that goal setting has
Patrick (2016) performance, an impact on effectiveness and job
employee performance of employees.
effectiveness
Sahai and Goal setting, Companies The basic flaw of goal setting and PA
Srivastava performance is having both strengths but donot
(2012) appraisal, form an integrated model to improve
employee job performance.
development
Khan (2014) Goal setting, Non-government Results shows that goal setting has
curiosity and Job sector strong influence on job performance
performance

2.12 Fairness of performance appraisal system

In many institutions, the sternest issue in performance appraisal system is the

perception of academic about fairness in performance assessment and job
 70

performance (Umair, Javaid, Amir & Luqman, 2016). Fairness influences perceived
job performance through academic‘s perception of how they are being handled
(Kuyumcu & Dahling, 2014). Moreover, studies also pinpoint some kinds of
problems in performance appraisal such as unfairness in performance appraisal
system, which result into negative attitude of the academics towards the appraisal
system (Kampkotter, 2014; Muhammad & Suraya, 2013). Employee satisfaction is
directly related to employee perception of fairness in the performance appraisal
system (Dusterhoff et al., 2014). When the academics perceived that performance
appraisal system is unfair, eventually this perception leads to poor job performance
(Royes, 2015). Employee satisfaction is based on the perception of fairness which in
turn influences the academic perceived job performance (Ikemefuna and Chidi 2012;
Royes, 2015), as a result the success of performance appraisal system is reliant on
the perception of procedural fairness with the system. Fairness is substantial to job
performance in the area of task performance. Perceived fairness may result into
productive or counterproductive behaviors, which positively or negatively affect the
academic‘s job performance (Chang, 2015).
According to many researchers like (Palaiologos et al, 2011; Farrell, 2013)
the important criteria for examining the effectiveness of performance appraisal
system is the fairness of the performance evaluation. In evaluation system fairness of
the performance appraisal process and its conclusions are identified and consider
being effective if the academic perceive it to be accurate and fair (Matlala, 2011).
The performance appraisal system yields frustration and negative impact if its
fairness is not in accordance employee satisfaction (Ahmad et al., 2013). Employee
perception about the fairness of the performance appraisal system has significant
effect on the attitude, behavior and performance of the employees and ultimately on
the success of the system (Kaleem, Jabeen & Twana, 2013). If the employees
perceive dissatisfaction, unfairness and inequity in appraisal process then any
appraisal system will be considered failed. Sudin (2011) stated that when academic‘s
feel that they are assessing fairly, they respond through satisfaction and high job
performance. Most of the studies have researched fairness with employee satisfaction
and job performance in western context but very scarce investigation addresses this
relationship in Pakistan (Sudin, 2011; Umair et al., 2016). To understand this
problem we need to examine the relationship between fairness and employee
satisfaction with performance appraisal process (Sudin, 2011).
 71

In the context of Pakistan, there are still unrevealed aspects that can badly affect the
efficacy of performance appraisal that is, clear goals and purposes and fairness
(Ishaq, Iqbal & Zaheer, 2009), and needs further investigation in the academic
settings. Furthermore, significant amount of inquiry is needed to endorse that both
the private and public sector organization in Pakistan i.e. public universities is using
fair practice of performance appraisal system or not (Karimi et al., 2011). Most of
the research has been conducted on employees perceptions with reference to fairness
and performance appraisal (Arshad, Masood & Amin, 2013), but none concentrated
on the perception of public sector employee. The studies of (Selvarajan & Cloninger,
2012: Abbas, 2014; Umair et al., 2016) have linked fairness with performance
appraisal system and academic‘s perceived job performance and found a significant
and positive relationship among them. Malik and Aslam (2013) have also found that
a psychometrically sound performance appraisal system will be failed, if rater and
ratee did not satisfy, accept and support it, as a result, a performance appraisal
system will not be subjected to a successful one, until and unless academics
perceived it as a fair system.
If performance appraisal perceived to be unfair and biased, so it can reduce
rather than develop academician‘s attitudes and performance. Iqbal et al. (2013)
suggests that without fairness performance appraisal system creates negative impact
and frustration among employees and their satisfaction, motivation and
developments are also effected accordingly. Employee‘s perception regarding
effectiveness of performance appraisal can be measured through perceived accuracy
and fairness of the process (Sharma, Sharma & Agarwal, 2016). Effectiveness of
performance appraisal system has based on fairness perception of academics (Clarke,
Harcourt & Flynn, 2013). Hence, perceived accuracy and fairness is the degree
through which the performance appraisal accurately assessing academics‘ perceived
job performance (Kim & Rubianty, 2011). Academic perception of fairness
influences by the quality of performance ratings which affect its perceived job
performance (David, 2013; Selvarajan & Cloninger, 2012). While many researchers
(Heslin & Walle, 2011; Kaleem et al., 2013) have investigated a notable function of
fairness in the performance appraisal system likely it may boost, guide and improve
academic job performance. Meta-analysis advocate perceptions of fairness are
correlated to improved job satisfaction and performance (Selvarajan & Cloninger,
2012). Many researchers (Selvarajan & Cloninger, 2012; Heslin & Walle, 2011;
 72

Umair et al., 2016; Ikemefuna and Chidi 2012; Royes, 2015) opined that there is
positive relationship among fairness, employee satisfaction and perceived job
performance.

Table 2.6: Fairness measurements

Author Context Measurement Findings

Ikramullah et Public sector Fairness, PA, OJ Fairness is one of the crucial factors
al. (2011) that are related to PA and JP.
Sudin (2011) companies Organizational This study showed that fairness is an
justice, PA and essential element of PA to make
employee employees satisfied.
satisfaction
Kumari (2015) Telecom sector Fairness, PA, job There exists a strong effect of fairness
performance of PA on job performance.
Selvarajan and Fairness, PA, ES, Public sector Higher level of fairness in PA could led
Cloninger Job performance to higher levels of ES and improved job
(2012) performance

2.13 Rater training of performance appraisal system

Historically before 1980, the performance appraisal research was first focused on
finding ways of improving psychometric quality of performance ratings produced by
raters (Heather, MacDonald & Sulsky, 2009). The concept was to improve rating
formats and rater training programs that increase the psychometric quality of
performance appraisal system (Murphy & Cleveland, 1995). In history, the first
training was introduced in a way that American army officers had provided training
on the performance dimensions of the military on format scale and hence their
performance improved due to this training (Heather et al., 2011). In the same
context, Embi and Choon (2014) argued that performance appraisal process research
should be focused on the development of training raters to avoid rating errors and to
improve rating accuracy of performance appraisal. The studies examining rater
training needs are still continue to be published (Ferreira et al., 2015), and training is
compulsory for academic staff development (Gaba & Mishra, 2015). Due to lack of
training, raters are still facing some challenges in assigning job performance ratings
 73

to academics during performance appraisal sessions (Rothwell, 2012). Most common

rating errors are leniency, central tendency, halo effect and recency of events
(Rothwell, 2012). Researcher‘s main focus has been remained to improve the
accuracy by giving training to raters on performance ratings (Gorman & Rentsch,
2009). The researcher has further indicated two important benefits of rater training
that is, (a) with the help of training rater knowledge and skills improves for carrying
out evaluations and (b) it helps in increasing rater ability and experience to use that
learned knowledge and skills while evaluating academics perceived job performance.
Kumar (2005) proposed that performance appraisal require a trained rater to
evaluate the job performance of an academic objectively because in rating system the
rater must be objective and accurate and biases produced when rater deviates from
true ratings. Supervisor needs training, if any, to properly evaluate academic
perceived job performance (Kumar, 2005; Bol, 2011). Many performance appraisal
programs appears to be weak because the raters are not sufficiently trained (Kumar,
2005). Now the researchers have shifted their attention towards rater training and
scale format to improve performance appraisal accuracy for enhancing academic‘s
job performance (Embi & Choon 2014). It is further illustrated by the author that if
rater or supervisor assesses their subordinate‘s performance they must consider the
rating errors.
Gorman and Rentsch (2009) have also found that rater training positively
affects academic perception regarding fairness, satisfaction, accuracy and credibility
of the performance rating process. Roch, Woehr and Mishra (2012) also described
four general approaches for rater training i.e. (a) rater error training (b) performance
dimension training (c) behavioural observation training (d) frame-of-reference
training. The most widely cited one is frame-of-reference training due to its relative
effectiveness at improving rating accuracy. Roch et al. (2012) outlined two basic
approaches that have been followed generally for improving performance ratings of
performance appraisal system such as developing better rating scales format and rater
training. In these two approaches rater training is considered to be successful and
widely acceptable.
Roch et al. (2012) maintained that little empirical research has been done so
far, to investigate the benefits of rater training with performance appraisal system
and job performance. The author further endorse that training has the potential to
improve rater and equipped him/her with adequate knowledge and skills for accurate
 74

ratings in future. It is still not evident about frame-of-reference training that to how
extent its protocols differ and to what extent this type of training is successful.
Frame-of-reference training is designed in such mode that affects how raters encode,
represent, organize and recall information (Roch et al., 2012). This type of training
can improve rating accuracy through two methods (1) helps raters to know the
behaviors through which he establishes clear levels of performance on specific
dimensions, and (2) by creating performance prototypes that allow raters to recover
normal information loss (i.e. forgetting) by classifying academic perceived job
performance established on these performance prototypes presented during the
training (Roch et al., 2012).. Thus, a number of scholars have pointed out that one of
the vital benefits of frame-of-reference training is the creation of prototypes because
this prototype enables raters to categorize academic staff perceived job performance
and ultimately leads to rating accuracy in comparison with untrained raters (Woehr
& Huffcutt, 1994; Roch et al., 2012).
According to Kumar (2005) performance appraisal system comprises of two
key components in place. First, this system have technically sound rating process and
secondly, the rater who is responsible for evaluating academic perceived job
performance must be proper trained with skills and motivation for conducting
effective performance appraisal. The primary requirement of performance appraisal
system is that rater must achieve an objective conclusion of academic job
performance and used that rating for the very purpose of improving their satisfaction
and perceived job performance (Kumar, 2005). Due to untrained raters these rating
errors generates which reduces the reliability, validity, and utility of performance
appraisal systems. There are some common types of rater biases which are as
follows:
i. Halo effect: This error occurs when rater gives more importance to one factor
and rate employees on such factor and ignores to discriminate the academic‘s
strong points and weak points.
ii. Horns effect: This error is opposite to the halo effect, whereby rater gives
weak rating to overall perceived job performance.
iii. Central tendency: This occurs when rater assign average ratings to the entire
employees and ignores high and low ratings. The rater believes that all
academic staff is equal in performance.
 75

iv. Leniency effect: To avoid controversy over the appraisal, the rater used high
rating for all poor and good performers.
v. Personal bias: Intentionally or unintentionally, a rater may assign certain
academic lower or higher ratings then others due to race, origin, gender and
age.
The success of performance appraisal has linked with the importance of skilled rater
because many organizations have given little attention to rater training for
conducting effective appraisals (Govaerts et al., 2013). Most rater possesses
inadequate training on how to properly assess employee perceived job performance
(Bol, 2011). Rater training and rating scale format also contribute significantly in
decreasing biasness and rater errors in performance measurements (Haque, 2012).
Performance appraisal has been criticized due to rater‘s biases that is, raters are being
affected due to favouritism and training (Agyen-Gyasi & Boateng, 2015). The
obstructing factor in effective performance appraisal system in public universities of
Pakistan is untrained rater and need to be examined (Ahmad et al., 2013). The same
criticism has been raised by Bekele et al. (2014) on performance appraisal which is
related to subjectivity biases and lack of rater training. Performance appraisal has a
strong relationship with rater training (Kumar, 2005). From the studies of several
researchers (Kumar, 2005; Bol, 2011; Roch et al., 2012) it has been found that rater
training has a positive relationship with performance appraisal and indirectly with
employee satisfaction and perceived job performance.

Table 2. 7: Rater training measurements

Author Context Measurement Findings

Harsh and Organizational Rating scale An attempt has been made to improve
Martin (2012) settings development, Rater rater training and rating scale
training, rating scale development based on the CEF.
validation
Ahmad et al. universities Performance Results presented that accurate
(2013) appraisal, fuzzy performance appraisal system an
logic, rater training untrained raters are the potential
hindering factors for PA system in the
case study university
 76

Table 2.7: Continued

Kumar (2005) Public sector Rater training, Improving any PAS required trained
performance rater. There is no substitute to the
appraisal system success of a PAS which can minimize
rating errors.
Hii and Ahmad Public sector Performance Raters must have the skills,
(2015) appraisal, rater competencies and motivation to carry
competency, self- out effective PAS.
efficacy
Roch et al. Meta-analysis Rater training, Rater training has the capacity to
(2012) performance enhance rater skills and abilities to
appraisal and job provide accurate rating during
performance, frame performance evaluation sessions.
of reference training

2.14 Rating scales format of performance appraisal

Precisely now performance appraisal study has been stressed on how to accurately
and fairly assess academic perceived job performance containing rater scale
development, decreasing rater biasness and relating employee satisfaction (Zheng et
al., 2012). According to Ikramullah, et al. (2016, P.11) ―Rating format it is the form
on which job performance of an academic is assessed and recorded. This form needs
to be reliable and valid, i.e., the form should be designed in such a way that it could
measure the perceived job performance of academic accurately. Moreover,
performance appraisal (i.e. assessing performance and recoding on form) needs to be
conducted at a specified period of time (quarterly, semi-annually or annually)‖.
Heather, MacDonald and Sulsky (2009) have described that historically
before 1980 Performance appraisal research was initially concentrated on cognitive
ways of developing psychometric quality of performance ratings made by raters. The
idea was to develop rating formats and rater training programs that enhance the
pshychometric worth of performance appraisal system. According to Othman (2014)
there are different types of rating scales formats including graphic ratings scale
(GRS); behaviourally anchored rating scales (BARS) behavioural observation scale
(BOS). However in this research, the focus will be on the prominent and often used
rating scales i.e. graphic ratings scale, behaviourally anchored rating scales and
 77

behavioural observation scale. Popular psychometric instruments could be either

criterion-referenced or norm-referenced. In norm-referenced performance appraisal
academics are categorized on the basis of some traits, labels and output measures i.e.
ranking method, critical incident method, essay method (Haque, 2012). While in
criterion-referenced performance evaluation the performance of each employee is
measured against a standard behaviour defined on a rating scale for example,
Graphic rating scale and behaviourally anchored rating scale (Haque, 2012). The
author further added that these scales reduce biases and errors to larger extent on the
basis of these assumptions such as (1) Tasks can be easily differentiated and measure
in absolute or relative terms (2) Raters have enough information about academic‘s
task behaviour and are able to evaluate ratee‘s performance fairly (3) Use uniform
criteria for judging job performance exist (Haque, 2012).
A sufficient amount of study has been carried out on rating scales format,
such as GRS with the primary objective of refining the measurement quality and the
figures that such an instrument produces. Previously graphic rating scales were
included of trait tags and constant lines with different kinds and number of
adjectives. In rating scale formats rater were requested to rate individual employee
on the basis of each quality or report by ticking a box or circling a number to find
that how much characteristics possess that academic (Othman, 2014). One systematic
attempt was made by Smith and Kendall (1963) to develop behaviourally anchored
rating scales (BARS). These two researchers have tried their best to change
numerical anchors with actual instances of job performance.
The primary purpose of designing BARS was to improve the psychometric
properties of performance appraisal ratings regarding measurement of academic
perceived job performance (Majid, 2016). While, behavioural observation scale was
introduced to develop the BARS. In BOS, rater assesses the frequency of particular
academic behaviours that have been examined. In the same fashion, Embi and Choon
(2014) argued that performance appraisal process studies focused on the
development of better rating scales format and raters training to avoid rating errors
and to improve rating accuracy of performance appraisal. DeNisi (2011) has
identified that problem related to performance appraisal accuracy and rating scales
format is to obtain true scores (direct measure) and avoid incorrect proxy (indirect
measure of accuracy).
 78

Enough research in this area suggests that there are different performance and non-
performance factors which influence performance appraisals. Levy and Williams
(2004) have conceptualized the context of both proximal and distal factors affected
performance appraisal process. Distal factors affect the rater indirectly and the
proximal factors influence the raters directly as a result performance rating is
affected (Harari & Rudolph, 2017). Proximal factors consist of performance
appraisal aspects like performance appraisal purposes, rater training and frequency of
performance appraisals (Harari & Rudolph, 2017). These factors have a direct effect
on rater and the performance ratings being rendered by a rater on rating scale format
during evaluating academic job performance (Djurdjevic & Wheeler, 2014; Harari &
Rudolph, 2017).). For example, one proximal factor i.e. rater training has been noted
to affect the accuracy of performance ratings. According to Djurdjevic and Wheeler
(2014) little work, however, has been observed on organizational and societal factors
that influence performance appraisal. The same scholar has further confirmed that if
institutions value fairness, retaining and improving academic job performance the
expecting outcomes from accurate performance ratings will be according to the
employee satisfaction. Heather et al. (2009) highlighted some critical problems
linked to rating scale format are lack of theory guiding predictions, scale-based rating
differences and use of indexes of rating quality standards for comparison e.g. halo
error. When raters react negatively to rating formats some poor or invalid ratings
may be expected from him during conducting performance appraisal (Djurdjevic &
Wheeler, 2014)
More positive responses regarding job performance and satisfaction can be
seen from both raters and academic when rating scale format provide a specific and
clear performance indicators (Heather et al., 2009). Such formats decreases
ambiguity and dissatisfaction among academics and also helpful for high
performance expectations (Heather et al., 2009). In contrary, those rating formats
that seems to be measured the wrong things and are too subjective, will lead to
negative rater and dissatisfaction. This argument of Othman (2014) supported the
previous studies which revealed that employee satisfaction is considered to be an
important factor in the development and implementation of appraisal systems with
respect to specific rating formats. Heather et al. (2009) have found that BOS format
will increase more positive rater and employee satisfaction (Heather et al., 2009).
Employees have shown more satisfaction towards ratings provided by a (BOS)
 79

format because this format is seen to be more objective, specific, and unbiased rather
using other formats. Considerable amount of literature on performance appraisal
have studied rater errors (Hii & Ahmad, 2015).
Behaviourally anchored rating scale is also used to measure how an
individual behaviour is judged in different performance categories while achieving
organizational goals (Ohland & Loughry et al., 2012). BARS rating scale format
gives information regarding particular behavior of employees at different levels of
job performance (Iqbal et al., 2013). Moreover, research indicated that BARS scale
have a plenty of advantages over other rating scales, having greater inter-rater
reliability and less leniency error (Ohland et al., 2012). In Pakistani public
institutions performance appraisal should be intend in a such a rating format that it
involves all the essentials and aspects for measuring academic perceived job
performance (Zia-ur-Rehman et al., 2015).
According to Djurdjevic and Wheeler (2014) if we could develop reliable,
valid and accurate rating scale format (measures of performance) definitely there will
be chances of finding a significant relationship between rating scale format of
performance appraisal and employee satisfaction through accurate job performance
ratings. Improving the reliability, accuracy and validity of rating scale format of
performance appraisal is a value added goal for judging academic perceived job
performance (DeNisi & Pritchard, 2006). Perceived validity and reliability of rating
scales of the performance appraisal system motivate the academics to change
behaviour for improved performance (Othman, 2014). According to Djurdjevic and
Wheeler (2014) rating scale formats have a positive and significant relationship with
performance appraisal system focused on ratings used for employee purposes (e.g.
merit pay raises and career development) and the extent to which an academic is
evaluated. The final assumption was come from DeNisi and Pritchard (2006) that
rating accuracy is considered to be the proper criteria for evaluating academic
perceived job performance. Various researchers such as (Levy & Williams, 2004;
Djurdjevic & Wheeler, 2014; Getnet, Jebena & Tsegaye, 2014) have found that
rating scale format of performance appraisal effect academic perceived job
performance and satisfaction with ratings.
 80

Table 2.8: Rating scale format

Author Context Measurement Findings

Othman (2014) Public sector Rating scale format, Rating scale format has a positive
PA, employee effect on employee satisfaction and job
performance performance.
Harsh and Organizational Rating scale An attempt has been made to improve
Martin (2012) settings development, Rater rater training and rating scale
training, rating scale development based on the CEF.
validation
Tool (2012) Book PA, rating scale Valid Rating scale format of PA has a
format, employee significant impact on employee
satisfaction and job satisfaction and job performance.
performance
Harsh and Organizational Rating scale An attempt has been made to improve
Martin (2012) settings development, Rater rater training and rating scale
training, rating scale development based on the CEF.
validation

2.15 Relationship of performance appraisal with perceived job performance

Studies have been conducted so far on the relationship of other variables and
perceived job performance is; Elnaga and Imran (2013) have done work to find out
the empirical findings of training and perceived job performance. Another study
carried out by Matolo (2015) on the relationship of job satisfaction and perceived job
performance. In the same context, several researchers have conducted their studies
with other variables and job performance such as employee work related behaviour
and perceived job performance by Hettiararchchi and Jayarathna (2014) and Johan et
al. (2016) to test the relationship of training and development and job performance.
Very nominal study has been conducted so far to investigate the relationship
between the performance appraisal and perceived job performance effectively in the
universities of Pakistan (Rehman, 2012; Abbas, 2014; Ahmed, Shaheen, Ahmad &
Mohd, 2016; Ashraf et al., 2014). Furthermore, future research needs to be carried
out on HR practices i.e. performance appraisal and university teachers performance
in Pakistan (Ahmad & Shahzad, 2011). And the preceding literature on this subject
aims at classifying observational facets and little emphasis has given on the empirical
 81

conclusions of the effectiveness of performance appraisal and its effect on academic

perceived job performance (Selvarajan & Cloninger, 2012: Abbas, 2014). However,
this relationship needs to be tested on university teachers of Pakistan (Ahmad &
Shahzad, 2011; Rehman, 2012). According to Iqbal et al. (2013) better institutional
performance and success are related with academic perceived job performance.
Furthermore, the scholar continued that satisfactory performance of academics
cannot achieve automatically but managerial standards, skills and performance
appraisal are the key factors that effecting perceived job performance.
Tool (2012) has illustrated that performance appraisal is not only results
oriented but also have links with tasks and behaviours of academic perceived job
performance in order to accomplish the assign goals and objectives. Tool (2012)
stated that performance appraisal is a method to examine how an individual
employee are performing and how they can improve their performance and give
input to overall organizational performance. After employee selection, the most
prominent work has to be done by managers or supervisors are to evaluate employee
perceived job performance and getting results is the performance appraisal (Tool,
2012).
Performance appraisal is employed to evaluate the employee perceived job
performance and helps the organization in succeeding towards set goals and
objectives (Abbas, 2012). In the similar way, Fakharyan, Jalilvand and Dehafarin
(2012) proposed that performance appraisal is a wide term that used for number of
activities like evaluating academics; improve abilities of academic staff and
enhancing their job performance. Lillian, Mathooko and Sitati (2011) noted that
performance appraisal provide basis for different human resource activities like
recruitment and selection, training and development, rewarding and improving
academics perceived job performance. Institutions require high job performances of
academics to effectively meet their goals and easily achieve the competitive
advantages (Iqbal et al., 2013). It is concluded that fair performance appraisal is one
which is based on performance related behaviour not on traits of persons. Ghauri
(2012) highlighted that if academics have confidence and satisfied from the
performance appraisal system consequently they will try their best to remove the
barriers between actual and desired outcomes of performance appraisal system,
which means satisfaction can boost academic job performance. Rahman and Shah
(2012) argued that performance appraisal has been led for the aim of cultivating
 82

academic perceived job performance and also as a reason to boost the institutional
success and overall maneuvers.
Agarwal and Doku (2016) explained that Performance appraisal is an
assessment and acknowledgment of academic job performance of expressed tasks
and accountability. Organizations globally accept the importance and usage of
performance appraisal due to the vast benefits it gives to both management and their
employees. Agarwal and Doku (2016) have continued that performance appraisal
used in most organizations based on subjectivity rather than objectivity and usually
problems arises with subjective performance appraisal system during evaluation of
academic perceived job performance. Several other researchers (Heslin & Walle,
2011; Kaleem et al., 2013) have inspected a distinguished task of performance
appraisal is to increase, guide and expand academic perceived job performance.
Institutions need fair and effective performance appraisal system to encourage and
improve academic perceived job performance and development (Agyan-Gasi, 2015).
While Zeb et al. (2018) have investigated statistically a positive and significant
relationship between performance appraisal and perceived job performance. On the
basis of literature, it can be safely assumed that performance appraisal system is
positively and significantly correlated with perceived job performance (Shehzad et
al., 2008; Khedkar, 2016; Royes, 2015; Khan et al., 2017; Sajuyigbe, 2017). There is
positive and a significant relationship of goal-setting and purposes with perceived job
performance (Othman, 2014; Hanson & Pulakos, 2015; Choon & Patrick, 2016;
Camp, 2017). Fairness of performance appraisal is also one of the important
dimensions to foster employee satisfaction and perceived job performance among the
academic staff in universities. So, previous researchers documented that fairness has
a positive and a significant relationship with perceived job performance (Kumari,
2015; Kaleem et al., 2013; Selvarajan & Cloninger, 2012). Rating scale format and
rater training have also positively correlated to perceived job performance (Othman,
2014; Embi & Choon, 2014; Tool, 2012; Roch et al., 2012, Kumar, 2005).

2.16 Relationship of performance appraisal with employee satisfaction

Human relation movement supports the concept that employee satisfaction results
into enhanced job performance (Ghauri, 2012). Of all the appraisal reactions,
 83

employee satisfaction is considered to be the most frequently researched and

prominent factor in identification of appraisal effectiveness (Decramer Smolders &
Vanderstraeten, 2013). The area of performance appraisal and employee satisfaction
is still open and unsolved (Okwuazi, 2014). Although, the performance appraisal has
several advantages for institutions, but still there is some negative attitudes prevails
in the form of dissatisfaction perceived by both academics and non-academics
(Taylor, 2013). One of the leading aspects that caused the failure of performance
appraisal system and low job performance among academics is termed to be
employee satisfaction (Javidmehr & Ebrahimpour, 2015; Karimi et al., 2011). A
survey conducted by Okwuazi (2014) in private and public institutions of the United
States and found that absence of satisfaction among employees effect the success of
performance appraisal system. Morris, Stanton and Mustard (2011) summarized from
his research that current performance appraisal system fails to motivate and enhance
the academics satisfaction of higher education institutions. It is suggested that
academics satisfaction must be examined with the performance appraisal system and
if elements of dissatisfaction existed it needs to be addressed conclusively to
improve low job performance issue to a greater extent and make this system
acceptable for all (Fakhimi & Raisy, 2013). In addition, employee satisfaction and
acceptance of with performance appraisal system is vital for their best usefulness
(Culbertson, Henning & Payne, 2013). Various scholars have stated that numerous
employees are dissatisfied with their performance appraisal system. Surveys have
illustrated that biasness and rater unfairness is common problems that are observed
by many academics (Aurelien, 2014).
Pichler (2012) urges to examine elements of performance appraisal such as
perceived accuracy, fairness and employee satisfaction with performance appraisal
system. Employee satisfaction with performance appraisal system is to some extent
identified by the perceived justifiability of the performance appraisal process
(Dusterhoff et al., 2014). According to Akhtar and Khattak (2013) a major challenge
in the performance appraisal system is its widely acceptance and satisfaction among
academics. Their study revealed that, generally a performance appraisal system can
get a high level of acceptance and employee satisfaction through effective
measurement procedures. Academic‘s react to performance appraisal system in three
aspects i.e. perception of fairness, perception of accuracy and satisfaction (Abbas,
2014). One field of research that has given little attention by researchers is employee
 84

satisfaction with performance appraisal system (Kuvass, 2011). Hence, employee

satisfaction with performance appraisal can also affect job performance of academics
(Kuvass, 2011).
Various researchers (Karimi et al., 2011; Naji et al., 2015; Aleassa, 2014;
Weerakkody & Mahalakamge, 2013; Ibeogu & Ozturen, 2014) show the
performance appraisal system have a strong relationship with employee satisfaction.
Dusterhoff et al. (2014) and Getnet, Jebena and Tsegaye (2014) reveals that
employee satisfaction with performance appraisals is linked with employee
perception of fairness in the appraisal process. The level of goal setting is closely
linked to employee satisfaction (Kompketter, 2014; Selvarajan & Cloninger, 2012).
In the past, researchers have also identified relationship of rating scale format and
rater training with employee satisfaction (Tool, 2012; Kumar, 2005). The other
researchers (Qamar & Asif, 2016; Khan, 2013) have also identified that there is
positive relationship between performance appraisal and employee satisfaction.

2.17 Relationship of employee satisfaction and perceived job performance

Public institutions are facing enormous stress to excel in their performance. Now-a-
days the global environment is categorized by factors such as scarcities of critical
expertise, technological innovations and employee satisfaction (Mafini & Pooe,
2013). These dynamics compel public institutions to improve and execute strategies
and policies for improving their academics perceived job performance to gain
organizational effectiveness. One of the key strategies is to have employees with
high level of satisfaction regarding their work (Mafini & Pooe, 2013).
Employee satisfaction is related to perceived job performance in a manner
that when employees show satisfaction with what they are performing it can be
directly revealed in their subsequent performance (Priya, 2011). Employee
satisfaction has a key role in every performance appraisal process and cannot be
ignored (Farrell, 2013). According to Ghauri (2012) fair and unbiased performance
appraisal system in organization enhances the satisfaction levels of employees, which
result into high job performances from academics in respond. The connection
between employee satisfaction and perceived job performance is a subject of
continuous discussion and disagreement. But an extensive number of studies argue
 85

that only small research has been addressed the association of employee satisfaction
and perceived job performance (Alvi, Surani & Hirani, 2013). Satisfied academics
are vigorous while unsatisfied are not all around, notwithstanding, the success of a
university depends upon the academic satisfaction for achieving its goals (Saleem &
Imran, 2014). According to Asrar-ul-Haq, Anwar and Hassan (2017) future
researcher should examine the relationship of employee satisfaction and perceived
job performance in academic settings.
Employee satisfaction has been broadly acknowledged as a predictor of job
performance in institutions (Mafini & Pooe, 2013). Employee satisfaction has been
widely researched as a dependent or independent construct (Nowotniak, 2005). There
is sufficient support in the literature that those employees who are satisfied have
higher levels of performance rather than dissatisfied employees (Westover, 2011;
Royes, 2015). A study carried out by Mir (2017) and found that those employees
who are not satisfied with their system and jobs are gauged to be demotivated and
low performer at all. A considerable amount of literature reveals that individual job
performance or institutional performance results as an outcome of employee
satisfaction. A number of studies have been examined and found that employee
satisfaction is positively linked with perceived job performance (Akdol & Arikboga,
2015; Rubel & Kee, 2014; Saleem & Imran, 2014; Sageer et al., 2012; Spagnoli et
al., 2012).

2.18 Theoretical background of performance appraisal system

In social sciences, political science, anthropology, social psychology, economics and

sociology are included and all these are said to be traditional and basic discipline of
social sciences (Steuer, 2003). If we consider the perspective of performance
management especially performance appraisal, the primary theoretical basis is social
psychology. As the name states, social psychology is something related with
interpersonal relationships in a different social surroundings containing work
organizations and communities. In the line with performance appraisal, there are
various theories that underpin the notion of performance from the social psychology
theory perspective. These theories are goal setting theory; Expectancy theory; Equity
theory; Two-factor motivation theory; Procedural justice theory. But in this study,
 86

the researcher has used procedural justice theory (Thibaut & Walker, 1975), Goal
setting theory of Latham and Locke, (1979) and Vroom (1964) expectancy theory.

2.18.1 Procedural justice theory

Thibaut and walker (1975) have related this theory to fairness procedures of the
performance appraisal process to make verdicts regarding the allocations of
outcomes among employees (George & jones, 1999). A procedural decision relates
to the performance appraisal standards, how complaints and issues are solving and
how outcomes are distributing equally among all academics. In this theory,
academic‘s perception are concerned with fairness satisfaction to performance
appraisal procedures, accurate performance ratings and depends on by what means
they observe the procedures and rules rather than what are the actually measures
prevails (Usmani & Jamal, 2013).
Procedural justice theory grasps those academics that are more motivated to
perform at high level when their perception regarding procedures, ratings and about
making decision of outcomes distribution is fair (Hyde, 2005). In addition, those
academics will be highly motivated, if they feel that their perceived job performance
would be assessed precisely. On the contrary, if academics perceive that their job
performance has not evaluated fairly, because of the lack of rater training and used of
invalid rating scale format they decrease their efforts. Academic staff is motivated
and perform better when they find that they are treated fairly in compensation,
promotion and there is accuracy and transparency in their performance evaluation
(Hyde, 2005). On the other hand, academic staff decreases their efforts and
demotivated if they perceived unfairness and biasness in performance appraisal
evaluation (Hyde, 2005; Girma et al., 2016). Such theory support this study that if
performance appraisal of the respective universities is fair enough, accurate and
unbiased in procedures, ratings and outcomes then academics get satisfied and being
motivated to improve their job performance and put more effort to achieve
institutional goals and objectives.
Procedural justice theory relates to the variables of the present study in
respect that academics are getting motivated and satisfied when they find fair
treatment in rewards, promotion and accuracy and fairness in their assessment
 87

through performance appraisal system (Kellogg & Negros, 2002; Girma et al., 2016).
On the other hand, if academics feel that they are handled unfairly in procedures and
outcomes ultimately they decrease their efforts and shows dissatisfaction and hence
their perceived job performance is also affected (Hyde, 2005). This theory strikes
academic staff perceived job performance in the universities that institutional justice
prevails when fairness reflects in the job performance measurement of academics and
they believe that the prevailing rewards and procedures are fair enough and justified
with the performance appraisal system and relates with underlying dimensions such
as fairness which can not only enhance their satisfaction level with performance
appraisal system but results into improved job performance of the academics in the
specified universities. This research is positively supported by the procedural justice
theory of Thibaut and walker (1975) which exhibit that if the academics perceived
that the performance appraisal is fair enough and accurate in decision making
regarding fairness in ratings, outcomes distribution in their respective universities,
then they will be highly motivated and satisfied from the performance appraisal
system and in turn they will struggle to perform better individually and enhances
institutional performance as a whole. Such procedural fairness in assigning
performance ratings on the basis of perceived job performance also creates some
motivational forces which keep academics satisfied and high job performer in the
institution.

2.18.2 Expectancy theory

Even though there are various theories related to performance appraisal, the
researcher understands that expectancy theory of Vroom in (1964) is appropriate one
amongst them for the present research. This theory specifies that academics will be
motivated and exercise greater level of efforts if they trust that these exertions will
engender to greater performance (expectancy), greater performance will result into
rewards (instrumentality) and rewards and compensation are cherished to academics
(valence). Again this determination is a way forward to good performance appraisal
and pursued by institutions compensations that is, increase in salary increment, bonus
and promotion which eventually satisfy individual goals (Vroom, 1964). This theory
is established on the assumptions that academics modify their attitudes and
 88

behaviours in the universities on the basis of expected satisfaction of appreciated

goals set by them. The academics adjust their attitudes in a manner which is likely
leading them to get assigned goals and objectives (Salaman, Storey & Billsbery,
2005). This theory inspires the notion of performance appraisal as it is evident that
performance is inclined by the expectations regarding future events and overture
(Salaman, Story & Billsbery, 2005). Hence, the relationship between performance
appraisal and perceived job performance cannot be subjected to a direct and causal
one but their effect on performance can be attributed to their capability to improve
effectiveness, merit pay, administration, expectancy and instrumentality assessments
(Salaman et al., 2005). The author further clarify the notion that enhancement in
expectation might influence both the effort and performance; expectancy and
performance and instrumentality and performance.
Vroom in (1964) recognized that an individual perceived job performance has
established on personal level factors i.e. knowledge, skills, capabilities and expertise.
This theory propose that mostly individuals endure unlike set of tasks and being
motivated to perform at high level because a positive relationship exist between work
and performance and that adequate performance yields in a desired compensation.
The reward finally becomes a base for satisfaction and the academics satisfied with
their reward whether the reward is in the shape of promotion, bonus and incentives.
It means, if the academics are satisfied from the performance appraisal system by
getting reward on higher level of job performance so, he or she will be highly
motivated to achieve the task or goal assign to him or her. The satisfaction and
motivation has enhanced its perceived job performance and the academic performs
better and effectively.
i. Expectancy can be defined as the concept that higher effort will lead to
better performance. The relationship between effort and performance is
called the E-P linkage. According to Redmond (2010) employers need to
focus on motivating and satisfying their academics by encouraging and
building self- efficacy, managers can maximize academic‘s expectancy.
ii. Instrumentality can be explained as the belief that if an individual academic
performs better, then a cherished outcome will meet to that individual.
Instrumentality is a person‘s belief that if they can attain performance
expectations, they will be getting a great reward (Scholl, 2002).
 89

iii. Valence may be defined as ―value‖ and mention about beliefs and outcome
desirability (Redmond, 2010). For instance, a bonus is not an alternative for
increasing satisfaction unlikely, motivation and satisfaction increases with
formal recognition of status such as promotion. Valence refers mostly to
emotional states with respect to outcomes (rewards). For example. Extrinsic
reward (money, promotion, benefits) and intrinsic reward (work
satisfaction). Management need to find out what academic‘s values are.

If the academic‘s think that the performance appraisal system of their respective
university prevails to be just, fair and purposeful, they will be more motivated and
satisfied from the performance appraisal and in turn will put more effort to perform
better. Although many academics correlate reward with performance and expectancy,
instrumentality, and valence inter-relate psychologically to produce a motivational
force with which an academic acts in such a way that bring pleasure and avoid
discomfort. Such motivational force keeps the academics satisfied which in turn
affect the job performance of academic staff positively in particular and the
performance of institution in general. This theory is commonly confirmed by
empirical evidences of Tien (2000) and Vansteenkiste et al. (2005) and considered to
be the utmost frequently applied theory of motivation in organizational settings. Such
theory suits this study in a way that expectation of fair or good performance appraisal
is fulfilled in the public universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan it will not
only motivate academics to perform better but also make them satisfied with the
performance appraisal system and lasts a pleasant effect on their perceived job
performance in the short term also in the long term.

2.18.3 Goal setting theory

This theory of goal setting by Latham and Locke (1979) provides a well-built process
of motivation of employees. This theory stresses the important relationship between
goals and job performance. Goal-setting is a common theory which can be used in
different settings. The support of this theory comes from different segments such as
individual, laboratory, groups and field studies, across various cultures and
encompasses different tasks (Locke & Latham, 2002). But the most effective support
 90

relates with the relationship of goal-setting and task performance in academic setting
(Locke & Latham, 2013). The accomplishment of goal is the alternative way leads to
employee satisfaction and high job performance. On the other hand, incomplete goals
create dissatisfaction and lower job performance among academics in a university
(Lunenburg, 2011; Yurtkoru et al., 2017). When performance appraisal system is
undertaken in the absence of clear goals and purposes, performance appraisal can
however have serious implications in respect of employee dissatisfaction and
consequently a decline in academic job performance (Idowu, 2017).
Research predicts that when goals are specific and challenging the job
performance seems to be more effective (Girma et al., 2015). The author further
suggests that there is significant and positive relationship between clear and
measurable goals and job performance. According to Locke and Latham (1990) more
than 90% of the empirical studies have been revealed the goal-setting has positive
effects on perceived job performance. Latham et al. (2008) identified the cause why
goal setting has positive impact on job performance and found that definite target or
goal increases person‘s attention on what is to be achieved and also affects effort and
consistency. This theory is linked with individuals goals set by an institution which
perform a key role in motivating him for higher performance. The reason behind that
superior performance is pursuing their goals. If academic cannot achieve their goals
they simply enhance their performance or modify the predefined goals and strive to
make it more convincing (Girma et al., 2015; Salaman et al., 2005). Managers and
human resource leaders extensively recognize goal setting as a source to develop and
retain job performance of individuals (DuBrin, 2012). According to Teo and Low
(2016) goal setting within performance appraisal system has been related with higher
employee satisfaction and improved job performance.
Goal setting theory clarifies that universities management is completely
aware about the enhancement of its academic‘s efficiency through performance
appraisal system and need to further provision its efforts to maintain and increase
institutional performance. Goal setting theory defines employee effectiveness could
be considered as improved level perceived job performance that will lead to greater
efficiency and outputs (Teo & Low, 2016). A number of previous researchers have
supported this assumption both in qualitative studies (Latham; 2004; Terpstra &
Rozell, 1994) and quantitative studies (Terpstra & Rozell, 1994) and documented
that the application of this theory enhance employees level of effort and job
 91

performance. A number of organizations across the world have accepted that by

adopting goal setting approach in their work settings were found able to effectively
motivate their employees (McShane et al., 2004). Academics perceived job
performance can be enhanced through having goal setting approach in their
performance appraisal system in such ways like prolonging the vigor and
determination focused on effort and clear goals and roles should be given to
academics so that any effort they exercised is channeled towards habits which results
into fostering their work conduct (McShane et al., 2004; Kamau, 2015).
Individual goal setting is as important as team goal setting. Goals have a
persistent effect on academic perceived job performance and behaviour in
institutions and management practice (Locke & Latham, 2002). Furthermore, it is
added that if academics are satisfied with the performance appraisal system
ultimately their perceived job performance will be at high level and the goals assign
to them if even difficult but still achievable, because of academics at high level of
performance and motivation. Locke and Latham (2002) results were based on
hundreds of studies and the major finding of goal setting is that individuals perform
better if their goal is specific, difficult but achievable then those who have
nonspecific easy or no goals at all (Lunenburg, 2011; DuBrin, 2012). According to
Latham (2003) employees must have enough ability to accept the goals and perform
accordingly. Locke and Latham (2015) postulated that goals also affect behaviour
(academics perceived job performance) through different mechanisms. Once the goal
has achieved then it directly leads to satisfaction and further motivation or produces
frustration and lower motivation when the goal has not accomplished.
In education setting, short term goals are set with the purpose to achieve long
term goals. Goal setting is a widely embraced practice in corporate settings and a
highly regarded subject in literature on the workplace. However, its presence is
weaker in higher education (Camp, 2017). The most influential theory of the study is
goal-setting theory and it stresses on goal setting aspect of performance appraisal,
academic satisfaction and job performance and needs more clear empirical evidence
in such relationship in academic settings (Locke & Latham, 2004; Culibrk, Delic,
Mitrovic & Culibrk, 2018). Additionally, goal-setting theory also emphasizes on how
goals are associated with job performance but have less empirical proofs showing
increase in job performance in workplace. This lack of evidence calls for further
research to achieve in-depth results (Locke & Latham, 2002, 2006). Study on
 92

academics goal setting is still in its infancy. Jan Retelsdorf and Katarina Gunther
maintain that more research is needed ―to investigate and uncover further details on
how academics‘ goals are effective in educational settings‖ (2011, p. 1115; Camp,
2017). Low job performance is the issue of academic staff in public universities of
Pakistan. This theory should be supportive in addressing these gaps particularly task
performance is closely related to job performance, but it needs empirical proofs in
academic settings. If specific and clear goals are assigned to academics in their
performance appraisal system consequently, they will exert more effort to enhance
their job performance and get satisfaction in accomplishing these goals and
objective.
A number of researchers are agreed that goals have persistent effect on job
performance and a major source of motivation and satisfaction. If this theory is
implied on academics in universities it will not only improve their job performance
(task performance) by pursuing goals but also make them satisfied (Locke & Latham,
2002; Lunenburg, 2011; DuBrin, 2012; Saleem & Imran, 2014) This theory supports
the study in a way that if performance appraisal of the respective universities is
purposeful and goals oriented academics will be more motivated and satisfied to
perform at high level and will strive for achieving institutional goals and objectives.
Universities top management would provide goals in their current performance
appraisal system which is clear and specific as academics are most likely to invest
more effort on achieving these goals. By clarifying what the academics are expected
to do. By doing so, loopholes of mistrust and misunderstanding are removed and
higher job performance and output is grasped. Table 2.9 summarized all the three
theories that how variables of the current study is being overlapped with the
application of these theories.
 93

Table 2.9: Summarization of theories

Theory Definition Main element Relation with the

study
Procedural justice A procedural justice Fairness An academics could
theory (1975) theory focuses on Employee satisfaction be motivated and
fairness procedures in And job performance satisfied if he/she
distribution of finds fair procedures
outcomes and in in their university
rating system of PA PAS and in turn they
measurement of PJP improve their
perceived job
performance
positively
Expectancy theory This theory signifies Knowledge A motivated
(1964) that employees could Skills academics can
be motivated to a Abilities increase their
greater level of efforts Expertise, effort, knowledge, skills and
and satisfaction, if employee satisfaction effort and get satisfied
they trust that these and job performance to improve their
exertions will engender performance if
to greater performance expectation of good
in the form of (VEI) PAS is fulfilled in
their universities
Goal-setting theory This theory is related Goals A motivated
(1979) with individuals goals Effort academician can
set by an organization Consistency, employee follow clear goals and
which perform a key satisfaction purposes assigned to
role in motivating him Job performance him. PAS is not only
for higher improve their
performance. perceived job
performance but
makes them satisfied
as well.
 94

2.19 Conceptual framework and hypotheses development

The conceptual framework of this study is based on the previous researcher‘s studies,
literature review and theories of motivational aspects applied in work settings which
overlaps to this conceptual framework and hence, assist this study to develop
hypotheses on the basis of mentioned studies and literature and all the relevant
constructs included in this research are patronized.

2.19.1 Conceptual framework

A considerable amount of research has contributed in outlining and designing the

framework for this study. The studies of several researchers (Levy & Williams,
2004: Othman, 2014; Rehman, 2012; Saleem & Imran, 2014; Decramer et al., 2013;
Ahmad, Sultana & Paul, 2013) served as building block for this research. The results
of these studies have shown that performance appraisal and its dimensions are related
to different human behavioral outcomes that is, employee satisfaction and perceived
job performance.
The framework of this research is based on the findings of different studies
which explain that performance appraisal is related with perceived job performance
and employee satisfaction. Several researchers (Abbas, 2014; Zia-ur-Rehman et al.,
2015; Zafarullah et al., 2017; Husin & Gugkang, 2017: Royes, 2015; Zeb et al.,
2018) have identified that performance appraisal has a positive and significant
relationship with perceived job performance. In the same line, it has been established
that academics who get satisfied from their performance appraisal system are turned
to be high performer, supportive, co-operative and avoid involving in negative
activities (Katavich, 2013). Furthermore, some other researchers (Karimi et al., 2011;
Ahmed et al., 2013; Dusterhoff et al., 2014; Royes, 2015) have also found positive
relationship between performance appraisal and employee satisfaction. These studies
revealed that if performance appraisal is fair, just and based on accurate rating
system the academics feel better and ultimately enhances their job performance to
the desired level.
An extensive amount of literature has also shown that employee satisfaction
is positively linked with perceived job performance (Akdol & Arikboga, 2015; Rubel
 95

& Kee, 2014; Saleem & Imran, 2014; Spagnoli et al., 2012). Employee satisfaction is
directly related to academic perceived job performance in a sense that when
employees are satisfied from their performance appraisal system their satisfaction
can be replicated in their performance (Priya, 2011; Farrell, 2013). This research
assumes that performance appraisal and its dimensions are positively and
significantly related to perceived job performance and employee satisfaction. This
research also proposes that employee satisfaction mediates the relationship of
performance appraisal and its dimensions with perceived job performance among the
academic staff to observe that empirical data from developing country Pakistan and
confirms the proposed frame work. The brief investigations of the literature show
that relationship of performance appraisal with perceived job performance are
examined previously but such dimensions of performance appraisal with perceived
job performance are paid less attention to examine and also needs more research for
the betterment of understanding such relationship (Shahzad et al, 2008; Zia-ur-
Rehman et al., 2015; Ishaq, Iqbal & Zaheer, 2009; Iqbal, 2011; Roch et al., 2012;
Embi & Choon, 2014).
It is also shown in the literature that relationship of performance appraisal
and perceived job performance has been studied earlier and obtained an extensive
focus in the literature (Zafarullah et al., 2017; Zeb et al, 2018). But little attention
has been given to such relationship in higher education sector (Suhasini & Kalpana
Koneru, 2016; Rehman, 2012). Furthermore, employee satisfaction has been
employed by various studies (Mir, Sharif & Naqvi, 2017; James, 2013; Ding, Song,
& Lu, 2012) as mediator with other variables. But using employee satisfaction as a
mediator in this study in a relationship between performance appraisal and academics
perceived job performance has not been yet received an appropriate focus in the
literature. The usage of goal-setting theory in work settings would have a substantial
effect on perceived job performance and employee satisfaction. Latham and Locke
(1979) postulated that goal-setting element in performance appraisal system
motivates academics to do higher performance in accomplishing set goals and
objectives. By getting higher performance academic get satisfied and foster
organizational performance as well. Goal-setting theory supports this framework by
focusing in performance appraisal on setting and agreeing goals and purposes against
which academic perceived job performance can be scaled and managed (Islami et al.,
2018).
 96

Expectancy theory of Vroom (1964) also emphasizes on suitable and effective

performance appraisal system involving expectations of recognition for high
performer, intrinsic and extrinsic satisfaction which assist academics to enhance their
perceived job performance (Miles, 2012; Usmani & Jamal, 2013). Likewise,
providing good instances of high performer and those who were awarded with high
compensation and recognition will give positive ambition to others to get inspired
and become high performers at work settings (McShane et al., 2004). In the last,
procedural justice theory of Thibaut and walker (1975) also overlaps to this research
framework that if academics found fairness and equity in their performance appraisal
system regarding outcome distributions, procedures prevail and particularly in rating
system. In respond they will be satisfied and get motivated to perform better or
otherwise they will minimize their efforts if they are dealt unfairly (Hyde, 2005).
Figure 2.1 is demonstrated the conceptual relationship among the variables of the
study.

Figure 2.1: Conceptual framework of the Study

 97

2.19.2 Performance appraisal with perceived job performance

Several studies of various researchers (Jabeen, 2011; Meysen, Mohammad &

Ebrahim, 2012; Sajuyigbe, 2017; Abbas, 2014; Zafarullah et al., 2017; Husin &
Gugkang, 2017; Zeb et al., 2018 ) have found that the performance appraisal has a
positive relationship with perceived job performance. When the performance
appraisal is purposeful and goals oriented, there will be a positive relationship of
performance appraisal with perceived job performance. According to Othman (2014)
goal setting and purposes have positive effects on job performance. Goal setting has
a positive relationship with perceived job performance (Lock & Latham, 2013; Sahai
& Srivastava 2012; Choon & Patrick, 2016; Teo & Low, 2016). While Iqbal (2012)
shows the positive relationship of the purposes of performance appraisal and
perceived job performance. Many researchers such as (Sudin, 2011; Kumari, 2015;
Kaleem et al., 2013; Selvarajan & Cloninger, 2012) also indicated that there is
positive and significant relationship exists between fairness and perceived job
performance.
The findings of Ikramullah et al. (2011) show that if supervisor makes fair
and unbiased evaluation of an employee‘s in a performance appraisal system the
fairness perception will positively affect perceived job performance. Iqbal et al.
(2013) maintained that without fairness the performance appraisal system has a
negative relationship with satisfaction and job performance. Rating scale format and
rater training have also positively correlated to perceived job performance (Othman,
2014; Embi & Choon, 2014; Tool, 2012; Roch et al., 2012, Kumar, 2005).
Roch et al. (2012) proposed that if rater is proper trained, skilled and
knowledgeable then it has the ability to motivate his academic with accurate and fair
rating to make them satisfy and improve their job performance. Researchers such as
MacDonald and Sulsky (2009) and Othman (2014) have statistically found a positive
relationship between rating scale format and perceived job performance. These
researchers opined that if there is such a rating scale format which is reliable, valid,
and acceptable to academics resultantly, academics will be satisfied and hence their
job performance would also be improved positively.
 98

Table 2.10: Summarization table for hypotheses

Author Context Result

Abbas (2014)
Sudin (2011)
Zeb et al. (2018)
Getnet, Jebena and Tsegaye
(2014)
Sahai and Srivastava (2012)
Teo and Low (2016) Bussiness enterprises
High tech company
Othman (2014)
MacDonald and Sulsky (2009)
Kumar (2005)
Roch et al. (2012)
Banks Positive and significant
relationship between PA and
PJP
Universities Positive and significant
relationship between PA,
Fairness and PJP
Telecom sector Positive and significant
relationship between PA and
JP
Universities Results show a positive and
significant relationship
between fairness of PA and
PJP
Goal-setting has a positive
and significant relationship
with PJP
Public sector Rating scale format has a
positive and significant effect
on JP
Meta-analysis Rater training has a positive
Public sector and significant impact on JP

Findings are based on the logic that when the performance appraisal of the
respective universities is fair, purposeful, goal achiever, the rater is more trained with
skills and knowledge and rating scale format is reliable and valid and in turn
academic perceived job performance will be enhanced in particular and institutional
performance in general. The following hypotheses have been formulated by the
researcher based on the above mentioned literature.
H1: There is a significant and positive relationship between performance appraisal
and perceived job performance.
H1a: Goal setting and purposes are significantly and positively related to perceived
job performance.
 99

H1b: Fairness is significantly and positively related to perceived job performance.

H1c: Rating scale format is significantly and positively related to perceived job
performance.
H1d: Rater training is significantly and positively related to perceived job
performance.

2.19.3 Performance appraisal with employee satisfaction

Researchers like Ghauri (2012) and Aleassa (2014) show the correlation of
performance appraisal system with employee satisfaction. In the same way, Naji,
Mansour and Leclerc (2015) have also recognized that there is positive relationship
between performance appraisal and employee satisfaction. Khan (2013) in addition
to this discoursed that a strong relationship exists between performance appraisal and
employee satisfaction. Mostly previous studies of several researchers (Karimi et al.,
2011; Odette & Kabagambe, 2012; Ahmed et al., 2013; Ibeogu & Ozturen, 2014
Dusterhoff et al., 2014; Poornima & Manohar, 2015) have found that performance
appraisal effects employee satisfaction positively and significantly. If performance
appraisal system carries fairness and goal setting approach for measuring academics
perceived job performance in turn they will be satisfied from the system and exerts
more effort to enhance their own job performance and institutional performance as
well. Moreover, another important argument comes from Royes (2015) that
performance appraisal system and employee satisfaction is interdependent. A valid
and reliable rating scale format and trained rater can maximize an academic
satisfaction to a greater extent by assigning fair and accurate ratings (Tool, 2012;
Kumar, 2005). Otherwise subjective, unfair and biased rating will engender
dissatisfaction and frustration among academic staff and the performance appraisal
system loses its effectiveness. Gorman and Rentsch (2009) have found that rater
training of performance appraisal has positively affected academic perception
regarding satisfaction. When the rater is trained, skillful and informative about fair
rating while assessing academics ultimately there will be less error occurs and
academics will be satisfied and their performance will be improved.
Previous scholars like (Ikramullah et al., 2012; Kompketter, 2014; Selvarajan &
Cloninger, 2012) found a positive and significant relationship between goal-setting
 100

and purposes and employee satisfaction. From the above studies it is evident that if
performance appraisal is purposeful and goals achiever academics will be satisfied
and motivated to get the defined organizational goals and objectives through
continuous performance. Several researchers (Ikramullah et al. 2011; Heather,
MacDonald & Sulsky, 2009) investigated that rating scale format has positive
relationship with employee satisfaction. It has been assumed from different studies of
the researchers that if rating scale format is valid, reliable and accurate while
measuring academic perceived job performance then they will be satisfied and strive
for improving their job performance.
Findings are based on the logic that when the performance appraisal is fair,
purposeful, goal achiever, the rater is highly trained with skills and knowledge and
rating scale format is reliable and valid academics will be satisfied from the
performance appraisal system and will put more effort to enhance their own job
performance and institutional performance. According to the aforementioned
literature the following hypotheses have been formulated.
H2: There is a significant and positive relationship between performance appraisal
and employee satisfaction.
H2a: There is a significant and positive relationship between goal-setting and
purposes with employee satisfaction.
H3b: There is a significant and positive relationship between fairness and employee
satisfaction.
H3c: There is a significant and positive relationship between rating scale format and
employee satisfaction.
H3d: There is a significant and positive relationship between rater training and
employee satisfaction.
 101

Table 2.11: Summarization table for hypotheses

Author Context Result

Naji, Mansour and Leclerc Banks Positive and significant
(2015) Universities relationship between PA and ES
Aleassa (2014) Education sector
Odette and Kabagambe (2012)
Karimi et al. (2011)
Poornima and Manohar (2015)
Ikramullah et al. (2012) Public sector Positive and significant
Kompketter (2014) relationship between goal-
Selvarajan and Cloninger setting and purposes and ES
(2012)
Getnet, Jebena and Tsegaye Companies Positive and significant
(2014) Universities relationship between fairness
Iqbal et al. (2013) and ES
Ikramullah et al. (2011) Public sector Positive and significant
Heather, McDonald and Comparison between western relationship between rating
Sulsky (2009) and East-Asian cultures scale format and ES
Kumar (2005) Public sector Rater training has a positive and
Roch et al. (2012) significant relationship with ES
Tool (2012)

2.19.4 Employee satisfaction with perceived job performance

According to Priya (2011) ―Employee satisfaction is linked to academics perceived

job performance in a way that when academics are satisfied with what they are doing
it can be directly reflected in their performance‖. Employee satisfaction has a
primary role in any performance appraisal system and cannot be under-estimated
(Farrell, 2013). It means fair, accurate and unbiased performance appraisal in
institution increases employee satisfaction levels, which leads to high job
performances from academics in return (Ghauri, 2012). In the same tune, Thurston
and Mcnall (2010) continued that if academics are satisfied with the fairness of
performance appraisal its outcomes will do not effect perceived job performance.
Ghauri (2012) noted that if performance appraisal has positive dimensions and
 102

perceived as fair, results will be in the form of employee satisfaction and job
performance improvement. So, majority of the researchers have agreed that there
exists a positive relationship between employee satisfaction and perceived job
performance (Ghauri, 2012; Bakotic & Babic, 2013; Weerakkody & Mahalakamge,
2013; Asrar-ul-Haq, Kuchinke & Iqbal, 2017; Felder, 2018), and continued that
satisfied academic is a high job performer in the institution. It is evident from the
previous studies that those academics who have higher levels of employee
satisfaction found to be greater performer in their institutions (Edmans, Li & Zhang,
2015; Melian-Gonzalez et al., 2015). Additionally, Sageer et al. (2012) mentions that
employee satisfaction is positively correlated with perceived job performance.
Research revealed that employee satisfaction is closely linked to the attributes
of raters such as their personality, procedures and aims to motivate or develop
employee perceived job performance (Kompketter, 2014; Ghauri, 2012). Again
Ghauri (2012) postulated that considerable amount of studies have been focused on
the inter-relation of employee satisfaction and perceived job performance in the
previous half century and also established that there is a positive relationship
between employee satisfaction and perceived job performance. The concept of
human relation movement endorses that employee satisfaction result into improved
job performance. Jaksic (2013) also recognized that academic job performance
measurement is of particular significance as it leads to employee satisfaction and this
concept shows that there is significant link between employee satisfaction and
perceived job performance. In the past number of scholars, like (Weerakkody &
Mahalakamge, 2013; Saleem & Imran, 2014; Farrell, 2013; Sageer et al., 2012;
Ghauri, 2012) have found that employee satisfaction has a positive relationship with
perceived job performance.
Findings are based on the logic that when performance appraisal system of a
university goal-oriented and purposeful, fair and accurate, rater is trained and having
valid and reliable rating scale format eventually, academic would be satisfied and in
turn will exert more effort to perform better. The following hypothesis has been
formulated by the researcher based on the above mentioned literature.
H3: There is a positive and significant relationship between employee satisfaction
and perceived job performance.
 103

Table 2.12: Summarization table for hypotheses

Author Context Result

Sageer et al. (2012) Work settings Positive and significant
relationship between ES and
PJP
Farrell (2013) Public sector Same results
Ghauri (2012) Companies Same results
Universities
Weerakkody and Banking sector Results shows positive and
Mahalakamge (2013) significant association between
ES and PJP
Saleem and Imran (2014) Universities There is significant influence of
ES on JP among academic staff

2.19.5 Mediating effect of employee satisfaction on the relationship of

performance appraisal with employee perceived job performance

Existing studies have also related performance appraisal to employee perceived job
performance (Daoanis, 2012; Warokka, Gallatto & Moorthy, 2012) and also exposed
that performance appraisal have a significant and positive effect on the perceived job
performance. Moreover, performance appraisal has been examined in a relationship
with employee satisfaction by many scholars (Sreedhara, 2010; Karimi, Malik &
Hussain, 2011; Zhang et al., 2014) and identified that performance appraisal has
positively and significantly predicts employee satisfaction. Studies have been
conducted by Morris et al. (2011) and Sherwani (2014) argued that academic
perceived job performance can be evaluated on the basis of development and
satisfaction aspects. Rasheed et al. (2011) and Rehman (2012) suggested that one of
the main reasons of the failure of the present performance appraisal system in higher
education institutions is the lacking of focus on enhancing academic job
performance. According to Culbertson et al. (2013) perceived job performance and
satisfaction with performance appraisal system is crucial for their positive
effectiveness. Nyagoa and Magutu (2010) summarized his research outcomes in such
a manner that the performance appraisal has an impact on perceived job performance
and satisfaction, especially academic job performance and employee‘s satisfaction
 104

are enhanced when the performance appraisal is based on fairness, goal and result
oriented with having valid rating scale format.
Consequently, it can be recognized that employee satisfaction with
performance appraisal system can play a vital role in improving academic motivation
and job performance (Fakhimi & Raisy, 2013). There is considerable provision in the
literature that satisfied academics with performance appraisal system have higher
levels of performance then those who are less satisfied (Westover, 2011; Dusing,
2017). Usually, in recent years most scholars stresses on better usage of performance
appraisal outcomes, giving feedback to employees, fairness and changing the
methods of measuring academics perceived job performance (Rasheed et al., 2011).
In current perspectives, there has been an agreement of mentioning satisfaction with
performance appraisal system (Fakhimi & Raisy, 2013), and it has been accepted that
academics are satisfied with the outcomes and indices specified in the performance
appraisal system it will result into the outcome i.e. employee satisfaction and
improvement in job performance (Fakhimi & Raisy, 2013).
Findings are based on the logic that if performance appraisal of the respective
universities is fair, just, purposeful and goals oriented and the rater is trained enough
and assign fair and accurate ratings to academics on a valid rating scale format.
There is no doubt that academics will be satisfied from the performance appraisal
system and get motivated to reciprocate in terms of high performances i.e. individual
and organizational performance. The following hypotheses have been developed on
the basis of above mentioned literature.
H4: Employee satisfaction mediates the relationship between performance appraisal
and perceived job performance.
H4a: Employee satisfaction mediates the relationship between goal setting and
purposes with perceived job performance.
H4b: Employee satisfaction mediates the relationship between fairness and perceived
job performance.
H4c: Employee satisfaction mediates the relationship between rating scale format
and perceived job performance.
H4d: Employee satisfaction mediates the relationship between rater training and
perceived job performance.
 105

Table 2.13: Summarization table for hypotheses

Author Context Result

Ding et al. (2012) Universities Employee satisicfation has been
used as a mediator and found
significant results
Mir, Sharif and Naqvi (2013) Higher Education Sector Same results
James (2012) Education sector Same results

2.20 Chapter summary

The field of performance appraisal will continue to be the center of focus from
academics and scholars in both public and private institutions as a method to control
and deal institutions and academic staff. Academic perceived job performance is a
central concept within academic setting for accomplishing institutional goals and
objectives. The literature about the performance appraisal system shows that if
dimensions of this system such as goal setting and purposes, fairness, rating scale
format and rater training are addressed adequately ultimately the academics would be
satisfied and hence, their low job performance can also be enhanced to a greater
extent. The effect of performance appraisal system and its dimensions on perceived
job performance and employee satisfaction are briefly discussed with considerable
amount of previous literature and findings. The mediating effect of employee
satisfaction in such relationship has also enumerated with sufficient literature. This
chapter provided the theoretical base for the model in detail. Broader support for the
theoretical relationships has been given with considerable references. The stage has
been set for testing and verifying the model.
 CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This chapter reveals the methodology which was used in carrying out this study. The
chapter consists of the research design which is adequate for the intended research
questions. In this chapter the researcher has highlighted the research devices;
reliability and validity of the instruments; and besides this, sampling procedure, data
collection method and data analysis techniques used in the study have also been
presented.

3.2 Research methodology

Research methodology is considered to be the usual framework and strategy for a

particular research. It entails identifying problem(s) and aiming at resolving those
problem(s). One can call it the blueprint on which the research process is established.
Methodology can be termed as the plan and strategy that involves the whole research
process from the start till the end. While, Creswell (2003), in a very comprehensive
statement, defines methodology as the ―process of research‖. Hence, research
methodology is a plan of action that relates research process to results and directs the
choice and use of techniques. It is comprised of research approach, sampling
procedure, data collection, and its presentation and analysis. The research
methodology starts with formulating and determining the research problem,
 107

established on studies and review of existing literature. This is followed by the

development of research questions, research objectives and the research hypotheses.
In other words, this process encompasses the kind of research, sampling
procedure, sample size, items and techniques to gather data, forms of tables and
figures, data coding and encoding, and eventually, analysis and presentation of the
data (Haier et al., 2006; Kumar, 2014). There are different reasons which are
considered important to understand a research methodology for a specific research.
For any research to be carried out, an appropriate selection of research methodology
is important. In the same tune, for any proper research study, an appropriate selection
of research methodology has a central role to research success (Jonker & Pennink,
2010).

3.3 Research philosophy

While carrying out social science research, there exist two different philosophical
opinions that explain how it should be conducted, that is, positivism versus social
constructivism/ interpretivism (Kalof, Dan & Dietz 2008; Saunders, Lewis &
Thornhill, 2009; Wahyuni, 2012). Positivism means that the existence of reality is
external, whereby; its properties would be measured with objective procedures and
methods instead of subjective ways. It further assumes that social world occurs
externally or outside and independent of social actors, termed as objectivist
(Saunders, et al., 2009) or realist (Neuman, 2011); not established on sensations,
reflections, and the importance of knowledge is identified when the external reality
has been examined (Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill, 2015). It simply emphasizes on
those facts which are accumulated via surveys and experiments and are measured
empirically by means of statistical and quantitative techniques and methods
(Eriksson & Kovalainen, 2008; Hatch & Cunliffe, 2006; Saunders et al., 2007).
On the other hand, social constructivism or interpretivism considers that
people recognize reality without objectivity or external factors. It gives value to
various meanings and constructions that people posit opinions based on their
experience while drawing attention towards the feelings and thoughts of people, and
also focus on how they interconnect with each other (Easterby-Smith, Thorpe &
Lowe, 2012). Subjectivist adopter theory considers that reality is dependent on social
 108

actors and proposes that individuals contribute to social world or phenomena

(Wahyuni, 2012). In positivist research the observer plays an independent role and
basically this idea also elaborates the causality relationship of variables present in the
study. This concept is formed on deductive approach and strives to study phenomena
by means of hypotheses. For getting quantitative measurements, research variables
are operationalized to achieve the purpose. Statistical probability is being used to
discover the reality that occurs in an observable form (Easterby-Smith et al., 2012).
If we look into the hypothesis formulation, use of quantitative data and
statistical techniques; these are features of the positivism, therefore it is considered
more suitable and favorable philosophy for this study. This study also frames
hypotheses to recognize the relationship between variables through quantitative data
by means of statistical techniques.

3.4 Research approach

Research approach is more frequent than not employed interchangeably with

research techniques and research strategy in literature (Creswell, 2014). Research
approach is a useful technique for research that leads the steps from comprehensive
assumptions to complete approaches of data collection, analysis and explanation
(Creswell, 2014). There are three wide research approaches at hand which contain
quantitative, qualitative and mixed mode approach.
Research approach, i.e., quantitative approach statistically describes the
phenomena of the world by empirically analyzing the collected data using
standardized statistical techniques. Established on the literature, research framework
and conceptual framework model has been formulated in this and previous chapter –
2 and 3 – to achieve the research objectives discussed in chapter 1. According to
many researchers (Creswell, 2018; Dang & Pheng, 2015; Saunders et al., 2009), it is
essential that research approach is outlined and adjusted to the research questions and
objectives of the study. The main methodology of this study was quantitative in
nature as discussed above. This method is used to collect, analyse and measure
statistical data from a big sample size to look into and observe the existence of
relationship between different constructs. This approach has been used to test the
developed hypotheses established on the basis of literature, in order to grasp the
 109

research objectives. This approach generates statistical evidences regarding links

between different variables (Creswell, 2018; Dang et al., 2015; Saunders et al.,
2009).
These statistical proofs clarify a strength and direction of the relationship
between variables when pooled with a theory by evaluating a hypothesis (Creswell,
2018). This approach has been used by many earlier empirical studies which have
examined the relationship of performance appraisal and perceived job performance.
Since, the purpose of this research was to empirically investigate and test the
relationship among the performance appraisal, employee satisfaction and perceived
job performance statistically; the quantitative approach is assumed to be the most
suitable for such study (Creswell, 2018; Dang et al., 2015; Saunders et al., 2009).

3.5 Research design

In order to accomplish the aim of the study, a viable and appropriate research design
is required. As discussed before, the purpose of this study is to determine the
relationship of performance appraisal with perceived job performance, and mediating
effect of employee satisfaction on such relationship. So, descriptive research design
has been selected for this research. According to Hair et al. (2006), if a research
assignment is to find out meaningful relationships amongst various variables, then
descriptive research would be the appropriate one to be in hand. This study also
covers correlational research given by Sekaran (2003). Henceforth, this study can
also been termed as correlational research study.
It is worthy to know the designs of management in research, because it is
helpful to clarify and identify which research design is appropriated and needs to be
in use. Research design is known as the leading one or master plan of a study (Nardi,
2003), and if a researcher wants to find answers to the research questions, he or she
must follow the research design. In other words it is a whole plan of the research
(Kerlinger & Lee, 2000). Strategy, framework, sampling, data collection methods
and data analysis are important parts of research design (Punch, 2013). A research
can be exploratory or descriptive, depending on the purpose of the study (Sekaran,
2005). To accomplish the goals and objectives of the study, it can be causal or
correlational but subject to the type of inquiry needed. Descriptive research is more
 110

appropriate when the aim of research is to answer issues linked to where, what, who,
when, and how, in addition to clarifying and determining relationships and finding
the occurrence of true differences (Hair, Black, Babin, Anderson, & Tatham, 2006).
Descriptive research consists of research problem which is easy in understanding and
well structured (Gauri, Gronhaug & Kristianslund, 1995). For data collection and
their interpretation in such research, scientific methods and techniques are used. The
core purpose of this study is to provide the researcher with a profile or explain
relevant aspects of phenomenon. Sekaran (2003) further argues that if a researcher is
going to conduct descriptive research, it will help and support him in different
aspects such as the researcher will have more knowledge and understanding of the
characteristics of group of interest, have clear vision for looking into certain issues
systematically and make decision or identify future action.
Causal research is a study which gives attention to the relationship of the
cause and effect (Sekaran, 2003). In causal research, firstly, a research problem is
well planned and structured and then comes the scientific techniques to collect data
and finally, its evaluation. The information gathered via causal research allows the
researcher to know the relationship between the causal factors and outcome (Hair et
al., 2006). The causal research is considered to be the most suitable one when the
research objective is to find out the variables that cause a certain dependent
phenomenon. Contrary to causal research, correlational research is a study which
entails such a design that investigates the important factors related to a problem
(Sekaran, 2003). The focus of this sort of research is not to establish a causal
relationship of one variable with another but to investigate the existence of
relationship among the variables under examination. Survey based quantitative
research design was used in this study to achieve the aims and objectives. A survey is
defined as ―a method for gathering information from a sample of individuals‖
(Scheuren, 2004, p.9). Survey research is mainly purposed to ―collect information
from one or more individuals on some set of organizationally relevant constructs‖
(Bartlett, 2005, p.99). Furthermore, the present study strived to measure a
phenomenon which is not directly visible and apparent, for which a survey
questionnaire is believed to be an appropriate mean to collect the results at one time
from a large set of population (Martella et al., 2013; Schneider, Ashworth, Higgs &
Carr, 1996).
 111

Data has been gathered from more than one case at single point in time because cross
sectional type of survey was used in this research. Due to time and cost
considerations, cross sectional is favored over longitudinal design of study. In a
correlational research design a researcher uses survey research to gather data and
also they need to know the advantages and disadvantages related to this
methodology. To get accurate and needed information, the only way to get easier,
quicker and inexpensive results is survey research (Alreck & Settle, 2004). More
specifically, this study was employed self-administered questionnaire.
Hypotheses testing were also involved in this study. The hypotheses testing
was carried out to establish the nature of relationship between performance appraisal
and perceived job performance, to seek variance in employee satisfaction and
perceived job performance, elaborated by performance appraisal and to identify the
mediating effect of employee satisfaction on the relationship of performance
appraisal and perceived job performance. According to Hair et al. (2006) for testing
different kinds of hypotheses, quantitative research method is more suitable and
applicable. Thus, structured questions and statistical type of analysis were used in
this research.

3.6 Research strategy

After research methodology, another crucial stage for the researcher is selection of
proper research strategy towards a research. Marking any specific strategy is not vital
rather it is to recognize whether it is appropriate for your particular research
objectives and research questions or not (Saunders et al., 2007). It should be
confirmed by the researcher that opted research strategy is simple, clear and is able to
attain research objectives and answer research questions of the research study (Collis
& Hussy, 2013).
This research has selected survey technique to accomplish research objectives
and answer research questions. Business and management studies assume survey
method as a key research strategy. Survey method strategy has been linked with
deductive research approach (Saunders et al., 2007). Another researcher Alreck and
settle (2004) call this strategy as quicker, easier, economical and more accurate way
of data and information gathering. Saunders et al. (2007) also opined that survey
 112

method for data collection is mostly applied in both descriptive and correlational
studies.

3.7 Population

The large set of elements from which sample is derived and taken is called
population (Saunders, et al., 2009). The target population of this study is academic
staffs who are employed at selected universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan.
There are total of 161 universities in Pakistan that consist of 91 public and 70 private
sector universities (HEC, 2014-2015b). These universities are based in five
provinces, i.e., Punjab, Sindh, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Baluchistan and two federally
controlled units Islamabad and Azad Jammu and Kashmir (HEC, 2014-2015b).
According to the data given by statistical division of HEC (2014-2015a) more than
37,397 teaching staff is serving at all these universities or higher education
institutions throughout Pakistan. For detailed list of public universities and academic
staff employed at these universities refer to Table 3.1.

Table 3.1: Province wise public sector universities in Pakistan

S.No. Province Number of universities Number of faculty

01 Federal capital 13 3,997
02 Punjab 28 7,892
03 Sindh 19 4,840
04 Khyber Pakhtunkhwa 19 4,039
05 Baluchistan 06 1,322
06 Azad Jammu and Kashmir 05 649
07 Gilgit Baltistan 01 162
08 Total 91 22,901
Source: Higher Education Commission Pakistan (2014-2015a)

3.7.1 Population parameters of interest

The population parameters of interest are playing a key role and are deemed to be
helpful in choosing specified population regarding the objectives of the study. This
topic outlines the fundamental characteristics of the components of interest within a
 113

targeted population of study (Donald & Schindler, 2010). The researcher has selected
universities of Peshawar Division of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) for data collection
and has taken overall Khyber Pakhtunkhwa as a specified population. For this
purpose the following criterion was used to narrow down the population to Peshawar
division. Population of the research included 1672 academic staff working at
University of Peshawar, Agricultural University of Peshawar, University of
Engineering and Technology, Khyber Medical University and Institute of
Management Sciences. Sample was derived from the Professors, Associate
Professors, Assistant professors and Lecturers of the respective universities.
As it is not feasible to examine the whole population as it needs more
resources in terms of capital and time; so, it is crucial to find out ways and means of
increasing the number of participants of the study without biasing the results
(Rehman, 2012; Khan, 2013). Stratified random sampling is a better approach to give
equal representation to each university irrespective of its size and thereby to reduce
bias and ensure fair representation. In accordance with Yusoff, Ali and Khan (2014)
random selection of the respondents was carried out on the basis of university and
number of academic staff. It was ensured that all the six public universities of
Peshawar division are selected due to different nature and varying number of
academic staff because it will provide better representation in sampling process. The
same method was followed by various researchers in studying academic staff of both
public and private universities (Yusoff, Ali & Khan, 2014; Getnet, Jebena &
Tsegaye, 2014). Khyber Pakhtunkhwa is selected to be a research area due to the
fact, that this region is least studied in terms of HR practices i.e. performance
appraisal and its relationship with perceived job performance and its academic staff
are nominal researched group in comparison with other provinces of Pakistan
(Hashim et al., 2017; Rehman & Hameed, 2011). Besides, another reason behind the
selection of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Peshawar division for data collection is purely
based on the special attention and keen focus of the current government towards
higher education. According to Higher Education Commission official website, there
are nineteen universities and one degree awarding institutes in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa,
Pakistan (Pakpakistan, 2016). Following is the list of public universities situated in
seven different divisions of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa as shown in the Table 3.2.
 114

Table 3.2: Division-wise list of public universities in KP, Pakistan

S. No Division Number of universities Number of academic staff

1 Peshawar
2 Mardan
3 Malakand
4 Kohat
5 Bannu
6 D.I.Khan
7 Hazara
6 1672
2 419
3 480
1 150
2 145
1 290
2 468

Notwithstanding, Peshawar Division is the largest and highly populated division in

the KP (Pakpakistan, 2016). This division entails uniqueness in education because
six universities of different nature – general, medical, engineering and agriculture –
are located here. The academics of Peshawar Division universities are more in
number then the rest of the division‘s universities (refer Table 3.2). Peshawar is also
one of the historical cities of Pakistan and is the capital of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa
province, and is considered as a hub of higher educational institutions (Pakpakistan,
2016). In addition, geographical ease of access and time and cost limitations were
also assumed as essential factors for the choice of these universities. So, the selected
public universities of KP depict the whole population fairly and accurately.

3.7.2 Sampling frame

Sampling frame delineates a complete list of respondents of the target population

from which the sample is taken (Yusoff et al., 2014; Getnet et al., 2014). Without
sampling frame, selection of probability sampling is not feasible (Saunders et al.,
2016). So, the sampling frame of the current study comprises of 1672 respondents
employed at six public universities of Peshawar Division, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa,
Pakistan. Table 3.3 shows the sampling frame of the academic staff. The sample
selected for the current study gives specific advantages because the faculties perform
a crucial role in universities in enhancing academic standards.
 115

Table 3.3: Sampling frame of public universities of Peshawar Division

S. Name of University Location Population Total

N Number of Faculty
o members

Male Female
1 University of Peshawar Peshawar Division 402 264 666
2 University of Agriculture Peshawar Peshawar Division 273 31 304

3 University of Engineering and Peshawar Division 298 31 329

Technology Peshawar

4 Khyber Medical University Peshawar Peshawar Division 30 64 94

5 Islamia College University Peshawar Peshawar Division 155 36 191
6 Institute of Management Sciences Peshawar Division 75 13 88
Peshawar
Total 1233 439 1672
Source: Higher Education Commission Pakistan (2014-2015a)

3.7.3 Sampling

A portion of the target population which fairly represents the total population or in
other words it is a subset of the population. Sampling is defined as ―the number and
or identification of respondents in the population who will be or have been included
in the survey‖ (Alreck & Settle, 2004, p. 447). Sampling is carried out to meet the
purpose of data collection as a representative of the total population and to infer into
the larger group (Neuman, 2011). In addition, data collection would spend less time
and cost from respondents and also, the study results will remain accurate (Neuman,
2011). Sampling design is consisted mainly of two kinds, which are, probability and
non-probability sampling (Saunders et al., 2007). Furthermore, Probability sampling
is further classified into cluster sampling, simple random sampling, stratified random
sampling and systematic random sampling. While on the other hand, non-probability
sampling is classified into sub-groups of purposive sampling, snowball sampling
convenience sampling and self-selection sampling (Saunders et al., 2007; Neuman,
2011). The implications of these sampling procedures depend on the aim of the
research, convenience of both time and means, and requirement of generalizability
(Saunders et al., 2007). Probability or random sampling is suggested for this
research. This method is selected by the researcher due to less bias and because the
findings can be generalized to entire population (Saunders et al., 2007; Neuman,
 116

2005), since the researcher concentrated on universities faculty (academic staff) in

six public universities in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Random sampling method is best fit
in circumstances where generalization of the population is needed (Sajuyigbe, 2017).
Various methods have been used so far by previous researchers to determine
the sample size such as Sekaran (2003, 2006) proposed that a sample size greater
than 30 and less than 500 is satisfactory for most researches. In the absence of an
exact sample size for multivariate data analysis method that is, structural equation
modeling, recommend a ratio of five to ten participants for each estimated parameter
(Reisinger et al., 2006). According to Hair et al. (2010), minimum sample size of
100 to 150 can be taken for the model consisting of five variables or less than five or
otherwise the model involves seven constructs or less than that respectively. In
multivariate research (e.g. multiple regressions) sample size should be at least ten
times larger than the number of variables being considered (Roscoe, 1975). As the
total population of this study is 1672 academic staff. In order to determine sample
size in this research a formula along with G-power software was applied to identify
minimum sample size. Both have their own pros and cons but most of the scholars
have recommended G-power for studies using PLS-SEM (Henseler et al., 2015; Hair
et al., 2014; Cunningham et al., 2007). The sample size (232) determined based on
the sample size determination formulae of Cochran (1970), already used by previous
researchers in their studies to identify minimum sample size (Walsh, 2003, Getnet,
Jebena & Tsegaye, 2014).

n0= = = (a)

Where, n0 is the minimum sample size

t = Selected alpha level (.05 with error of 5%)
p = Estimated proportion of an attribute in population
q = 1-p and (p) (q) are the estimate of variance
d = Acceptable margin of error .03
Likert point scale = 5

Thus, n = = = 203 (With anticipated return rate of 65%) (b)

Where; N= Population size

Ni = minimum sample size
 117

n = required sample size

Hence, using this criterion, the total population of 1672 was narrowed down
to establish the minimum required sample size of 232. But the researcher received
usable responses of 301 and it was used for further analysis. According to the
GPower analysis, a sample of 150 with an alpha of .05 and seven predictors would be
sufficient to find a medium effect size with a power of .95 (Okwauzi, 2014). On the
other hand, Hair et al. (2014) recommend the application of G-power to identify
sample size in PLS-SEM studies. Hence, employing G-power software, a priori test
based on multiple regressions with effect size of 0.15, alpha value of 0.05 and a
power of 95%, was conducted to arrive at a minimum sample size for this study. G-
power analysis showed that a minimum sample size of 146 was needed to get the
desired power of 95%. The usable sample size of this study is 301 and it is a
representative sample of the population of up to 1672.
As it is apparent that the whole sample would involve both male and female
staff serving at these six public universities in Peshawar Division, KP, Pakistan,
therefore, to give proportionate representation to both male and female academic
staff and to choose the first respondent for this research, a two-stage sampling
method has been conducted. The first stage is related to division of population into
strata on the basis of gender and job positions of academic staff. Stratification was
made on the basis of gender, i.e., male and female categories were made while job
position wise, academics were divided into Professors, Associate Professors,
Assistant Professors and Lecturers. Furthermore, stratified random sampling was
carried out to give equal representation to each selected respondent. Where, in the
second stage, the researcher has used the systematic random sampling including
replacement mechanism to select individuals for present research. In the next
sections the researcher has briefly discussed the detail of both steps of sampling
method.

3.7.4 Stratified random sampling

If a population from which a sample has to be taken does not form a homogenous
group, stratified sampling method is usually used to get a representative sample
(Kothari, 2004; Saunders et al., 2015; Getnet, Jebena & Tsegaye, 2014; Saleem &
 118

Imran, 2014; Iqbal & Mehmood, 2011). Under this method the population is
categorized into various sub-populations that are individually more homogenous than
the whole population. In this method the population is categorized into various sub-
groups or strata that are individually more homogenous than the total population. In
other words, according to Agarwal and Daku (2016) stratified random sampling is
best fit to choose samples in circumstances where the population is heterogeneous
but has certain strata which are homogenous. This stratification is vital in such cases
to confirm that the opinions of the respondents portrayed the views of the total
population (Agarwal & Doku, 2016). Stratified random sampling is a modification of
random sampling in which we divide the target population into two or more relevant
and significant strata based on one or a number of attributes (Saunders et al., 2016).
In effect, sampling frame is divided into a number of sub sets. A random sample
(simple or systematic) is then drawn from each of the strata. According to AL-Hinai
(2013) if a sample involves both male and female academic staff; it is required to
consider stratified sampling.
Two strata have been made: one on the basis of gender i.e. male and female
academic staff and another on job position like, Professors, Associate Professors,
Assistant Professors and Lecturers, refer to (Table 3.4). The same method was
followed by Yosuff et al. (2014) and Getnet et al. (2014) in their studies. This
stratification ensures more precise estimates of each stratum and accurately obtains a
better estimate of the total population. In the context of this study, a proportionate
stratified random sampling is used, as the size of each university is different. In
education research, when the researcher needs the surety of suitable representation of
specific sub groups of the people within a sample, he employs stratified random
sampling (Rehman, 2012).
In this research study the researcher has employed proportionate stratified
sampling to ensure equal or proportionate representation of both male and female
academics of each opted university under category of Professor, Associate Professor,
Assistant Professor and Lecturers. The researcher has chosen a sum of 219 male and
83 female academics comprising 21 Professors, 39 Associate Professors, 68
Assistant Professors, 91 Lecturers and 82 female academic staff comprising 11
Professors, 16 Associate Professors, 24 Assistant Professors, 31 Lecturers
established on their proportion in the target population of the present research.
Academics have been chosen from every single university based on their ratio in
 119

target population, i.e. 120 academics from University of Peshawar, followed by 55

from Agriculture University Peshawar, 59 from University of Engineering and
Technology Peshawar, 17 from Khyber Medical University Peshawar, 34 from
Islamia College University Peshawar and in the last 16 from Institute of Management
Sciences Peshawar, see Table 3.4.

Table 3.4: Population description

S.No Universities professor Associate Assistant Lecturers Tota

professor professor l
M F M F M F M F
1 University of 70 30 92 48 110 90 130 96 666
Peshawar
2 University of 10 5 33 6 94 6 136 14 304
Agriculture Peshawar
3 University of 10 5 53 6 101 6 134 14 329
Engineering and
Technology
Peshawar
4 Khyber Medical 6 9 6 14 6 19 12 22 94
University Peshawar
5 Islamia College 10 6 25 9 49 7 71 14 191
University Peshawar
6 Institute of 6 3 15 3 24 3 30 4 88
Management
Sciences
Total 112 58 224 86 384 131 513 164 1672

For sampling description refer to Table 3.5.

 120

Table 3.5: Sampling description

S.No Universities Professor Associate Assistant Lecturers Total

Professor Professor
M F M F M F M F
1 University of 13 5 17 9 20 16 23 17 120
Peshawar
2 University of 2 1 6 1 17 1 24 3 55
Agriculture Peshawar
3 University of 2 1 9 1 18 1 24 3 59
Engineering and
Technology
Peshawar
4 Khyber Medical 1 2 1 2 1 4 2 4 17
University Peshawar
5 Islamia College 2 1 4 2 8 1 13 3 34
University Peshawar
6 Institute of 1 1 2 1 4 1 5 1 16
Management
Sciences
Total 21 11 39 16 68 24 91 31 301

3.7.5 Systematic random sampling

To select the research participants from the total sample population, initially the
researcher randomly selected the first element from the sampling frame and then
used systematic random sampling formula to achieve the required sample size
(Odette & Kabagambe, 2012). Sampling interval (k) is calculated as k = N/n, where k
stands for sampling interval, N stands for population size and n denotes sample size
respectively (Bloom & Trice, 2012; White, 2012; Saunders et al., 2015). The
selection of first respondent randomly falls in the sampling list which is assigned any
number between 1 and sampling interval while, in the next step the sampling interval
can be continuously added to choose later respondent. In this method each element of
population has been recognized and given equal opportunity of selection which
 121

functionally marks it identical to simple random sampling (Bloom & Trice, 2012).
Applying this technique this research has:
N = 1672
n = 301
k = N/n = 1672/301 = 5
r = 3 first respondent (randomly chosen between 1 and sampling interval).
Hence, respondent‘s selection for this research was done as: first = 3, second = 3+5
=8, third = 8+5 = 13 and so on. This practice kept on till the required sample size was
obtained. This process also used replacement mechanism in order to ensure the
proportionate representation of each selected university academics i.e. both male and
female. Replacement mechanism provides autonomy to the researcher for
replacement of any chosen respondent in case of his/ her unwillingness or
unavailibity to take part in the survey. Replacement is made and next individual‘s
selection is done from the list and this method of selection keeps on till the
achievement of selected sample size (Onwuegbuzie & Collins, 2007). Systematic
sampling with replacement is completely feasible in such cases (Cochran, 1970).
This sampling is useful for this study in terms of accuracy and fair selection. This
method is easily accessible and does not contain periodic pattern (Saunders et al.,
2016). By using this sampling, the researcher is not always in need of the actual list
and it is appropriate for all sample sizes, has low cost and is comparatively easy to
explain. One of the outmost benefits of systematic sampling is that it is adequate in
cases only if the researcher does not need face to face contact during data collection.
Besides, this technique was also found to have low risk error and data contamination
(Saunders et al., 2016). This technique is not suitable in the cases where there is no
re-ordering or stratifying of the sampling frame. Unlike random sampling, this
method guarantees perfectly equal selection from the population. This is useful in the
case when groups/ strata have been distinguished within the population (Saunders et
al., 2016).

3.8 Data collection

The data collection process is an essential part of any research design. The views of
the respondents from the targeted population are collected on specific research
 122

subject. Various ways and means are utilized for data collection procedures to get
maximum responses for a satisfactory result (AL-Hinai, 2013). This method ranges
from interviews to questionnaire technique i.e., self-administered survey, postal
services, online and mail surveys (Othman, 2014). The self-administered
questionnaire was selected as a tool for the research due to its practicability and
applicability to the research problem and the size of the population (Wainaina,
2014). Quantitative based studies use commonly self-administered questionnaires for
collection of data as this technique is considered as quicker, easy to deal, manage and
inexpensive. This technique provides the respondents more sense of liberty in
comparison to other techniques i.e., interview or focus group (Evans & Rooney,
2010). First, an online survey was made by the researcher and was sent to ten
academic staff individuals but failed to obtain any response from the respondents and
hence went for the alternative method. The alternative method was personal
distribution and collection of questionnaires and mostly, previous researchers have
employed self-administered items along with this method for primary data collection
worldwide including Pakistan (Rehman, 2012; Shahzad et al., 2008; Koster et al.,
2011; Newman et al., 2011).
The researcher had approached the administration of the universities and was
advised to directly approach the selected universities faculties and deal with the
assistant departments in regards to the sample survey distribution. The researcher
distributed 450 questionnaires through several visits towards the academics of the six
public universities of Peshawar Division of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. In the
first week, only 50 questionnaires were returned back. In order to encourage
participation in this research, after three weeks the researcher went through a second
visit to the selected universities and explained to them the value and significance of
their participation in order to enhance their participation in the process and response
rate. Besides, the researcher approached the respective universities again to gather
filled questionnaires and also to request those who are did not fill and return the
questionnaires. The advantage of delivery and collection questionnaires is that you
have sometime the option of checking the answers of the items at collection
(Saunders et al., 2016), which can enhance the reliability of your data. Consequently,
after repeated visits 312 questionnaires were collected out of 450. This overall
process took three months to complete. The questionnaire is termed to be widely
employed data collection method within survey strategy in which each respondent is
 123

asked to answer the same set of items (Dillman et al., 2014). The main aim of
distributing 450 questionnaires in the target population is to meet the minimum
required sample size and to increase the response rate. The response rate can be
increased by two ways i.e., providing special attention to the respondents and the
distribution of more items (Alreck & settle, 2004). According to Naing (2003) a
researcher needs to consider such criteria during collection of samples. If the
researcher requires minimum sample size from the target population, they must
assume the drop-out percentage and response rate. In this study, the minimum
sample size of this study is 232 and 450 questionnaires were distributed because of
considering 15% drop out and 65% response rate. It means 232 (minimum sample
size) + 250 (drop-out number) = 450 academic staff needed to be sampled in order to
get the minimum sample size. This criterion has been used by previous researchers
for achieving minimum sample size (Naing, 2003). This method is recommended by
previous researchers because self-completed items are comparatively unlikely to
respond to please the researcher or because the respondents believe certain answers
are more socially desirable (Saunders et al., 2016; Dillman et al., 2014). Besides,
earlier researchers have also distributed 450 questionnaires in their studies to get the
sample size (Naqshbandi, Tabche & Choudhary, 2019; Naqshbandi & Tabche,
2018). Distributing fewer questionnaires among the target population has also a
greater risk of being missing value, outliers, typo errors, and unwillingness of the
respondent. Though, the use of postal services and email questionnaires can
adversely influence the response rate. This research also employed secondary data
and it refers to a valuable base of information which allows academics to base and
extend their research on the established evidences discussed in secondary data and
provide help to primary data (Ghauri & Gronhaug, 2002). Secondary data was
grasped from books, academic journals, webpages, reports and various institutional
documents on universities of Pakistan.

3.8.1 Response rate

Being an appropriate approach, cross-sectional survey was used to gather data from
respondents in this particular research study. According to Babbie (1973) this
method is known as an effective systematic mechanism to gather data because it
 124

involves respondent‘s opinions and perceptions. Otherwise it is hard for a researcher

to perceive such opinions and perceptions in large set of respondents. Alreck and
settle (2004) stated that low response rate is one of the main hurdle in survey
method. It happens due to refusal from respondents to fill out the questionnaires or
researcher‘s failure to get access to the target respondents. The response rate can be
increased by two ways i.e. providing special attention to the respondents and the
distribution of more items (Alreck & settle, 2004). The design of items and reliability
and validity can enhance the response rate of the data collection (Saunders et al.,
2016). Response rates can be increased by careful design of individual items, lucid
explanation of the aim, pilot testing and carefully planning, execution of delivery and
return of completed questionnaires (Saunders et al., 2015, 2016). All these methods
were practiced to enhance the response rate to a greater extent in this study. Various
response facilitation methods were also applied in addition to enhance the response
rate of this survey. The prominent one was timing (preliminary and follow-up
efforts) and approaches such as the length of items, the order of instruments and
anonymity.
On the basis of these criteria, 450 questionnaires were distributed by the
researcher among the academic staff of the six public universities of Peshawar
Division, KP, Pakistan. Out of which 312 questionnaires were collected from the
respondents having a response rate of 69%. Consequently, eleven questionnaires
were excluded due to missing data issues. The final quantity of usable questionnaires
was 301 with 67% response rate which was used for further analysis. A response rate
above 50% is acceptable in business and behavioral sciences research (Saunders et
al., 2015, 2016). Moreover, Non-response bias can sometimes affect findings of a
study. Hence, to rule out potential problems that could emanate as result of non-
response bias. The researcher used t-test to compare the mean difference between
early and late respondents (Bostrom et al., 1993; Naqshbandi, Singh & Ma, 2016).
No significant differences were found, showing lack on non-response bias in the
study. Other methods were also used to control non-response bias such as the Non-
coverage: this problem occurs when the researcher fails to visit some units in the
sample. This was managed by choosing Peshawar Division public universities in
which all the units are located at one area and the researcher had an easy access to
approach these units frequently during data collection period as mentioned earlier.
The most prominent problem of non-response bias is unwillingness of respondents to
 125

answer the questions (Cochran, 1970). Skillful wording, length of the questionnaires
and pretesting of the items were found to be the best possible solutions to deal this
issue (Cochran, 1970), and it was implemented during designing questionnaire of the
study. Frequent visits to the units, making a careful listing that serves as a check
were also undertaken to handle non-response bias. A figure of 301 is considered to
be satisfactory as recommended by Rubin and Babbie (2012). Refer to Table 3.6 for
summary of response rate.

Table 3.6: Summary of the samples

No Strata Response Response rate

Distributed Returned Completed Non-
Sample or Usable completed
1 University of 150 125 120 5 80%
Peshawar
2 Agriculture 75 57 55 2 73%
university of
Peshawar
3 University of 75 60 59 1 78%
engineering and
technology
4 Islamia college 50 35 34 1 68%
university
5 Khyber medical 50 18 17 1 34%
university
6 Institute of 50 17 16 1 32%
management
sciences
Total 450 312 301 11 67%

3.9 Research instrument

As a research instrument, a self-administered questionnaire was used in this research

(refer to Appendix A). The items were divided into two parts. Demographic
information was asked from the respondents in first part regarding gender, age
education level, marital status and job title, length of service, faculty and name of
university. The second part of questionnaire was further sub divided into three major
 126

segments. In the second part of questionnaire, respondents were inquired to show

their level of agreement or disagreement to every item on a scale based on five-point
Likert Scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The questions
have been adopted in these three segments of questionnaire from previous studies
and were found valid and reliable because these are already tested in different
contexts. The variables in the second part are classified as performance appraisal,
employee satisfaction and perceived job performance.
A covering letter with the questionnaire was also attached to identify the
research objective of the research and to assist the respondents for their
confidentiality. The covering letter was labeled with a logo of Universiti Tun
Hussein Onn (UTHM) knowing and establishing the credentials of the researcher. In
addition, the questionnaire was made more simple, clear and reasonable for the
respondents by providing distinct headings to several instruments applied to measure
the constructs of the research. The preceding topics give detail of each research item
used in the present study.

3.9.1 Performance appraisal

Performance appraisal was employed as independent variable in this research and it

is subdivided into four dimensions: goal setting and purposes, fairness of
performance appraisal, rater training and rating scale format. A 5-point Likert Scale
was adopted due to the frequent usage of previous researchers (Amin et al., 2014).
Secondly, this scale ensures fairness and balance in the statements and posits
accuracy in measuring of strength of attitude and perception (Usman, 2016). Though,
it won‘t be the accurate measure of attitude but is subsumed as the most effective
relative measure of perception (Usman, 2016). Additionally, 5-point Likert Scale is
presumed suitable because it provides participants with reasonable range of options
to select from (Mujis, 2004). Applying more numbers of scales such as 7-point and
9-point Likert Scales can confuse participants and pose difficulty in making clear
distinctions among the scales (Johns, 2010). On the basis of these arguments a 5-
point Likert Scale was used ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5)
to measure all the items of the study. The validity of the items was verified through
content review, consultation with experts, and by reviewing previous studies. The
 127

original reliability of the questionnaire was found upto the recommended value of
0.70. Five items were taken for goal-setting and purposes of performance appraisal
from Latham and Locke (1984) study with an alpha coefficient of 0.729. Six items
were used to measure the fairness in a performance appraisal system with alpha
coefficient of 0.813 which has been taken from Greenberg and Cropanzano (1993)
study. Six items were applied to measure the rating scale format of a performance
appraisal with alpha coefficient of 0.747 which has been taken from Pearce and
Porter (1986). Lastly, four items were employed to measure the rater training with
alpha coefficient of 0.806. These items have been adopted from the study of
Elverfeldt (2005). In Table 3.7 item wise details of these research instruments are as
under. Earlier, few studies have used the same questionnaire in different contexts and
have found valid and reliable results (Othman, 2014; Getnet et al., 2014).

Table 3.7: Items for performance appraisal dimensions (GSP, FPA, RSF, RT)

Dimension Original Items Modified items

Goal setting 1. An important aspect of 1. An important aspect of
and performance management is performance appraisal is goal-
purposes the setting of goals. setting.
Latham and 2. It is important to be aware of 2. It is important to be aware of the
Locke the purpose and objectives of goal-setting and purposes of the
(1984) the performance appraisal performance appraisal system.
system 3. Performance appraisal purposes
3. Performance management should be employee
should be focused on development oriented.
development of employees 4. The current performance
4. My current performance appraisal system is very
appraisal system is very effective in its intended
effective purposes.
The current performance 5. The current performance
appraisal system in my appraisal system in my
organization is related to my organization is employee
development development oriented.
 128

Table 3.7: Continued

Fairness 1. The appraisal system should be 1. A good performance appraisal
Greenberg
fair needs to be fair.
and
Cropanzano 2. The appraisal criteria in 2. The appraisal criteria (general)
(1993)
evaluating my performance of my university are fair.
should be made clear 3. The appraisal system of a
3. The appraisal system should be university needs to be
transparent transparent.
4. The appraisal criteria (general) 4. The performance appraisal
in which I am evaluated is fair criteria of my university are
5. Performance measurement clear.
criteria should be subjective 5. Performance measurement
6. Performance measurement criteria of my university are
criteria should be objective subjective in assessing the
performance of the employees.
6. Performance measurement
criteria of my university are
objective in assessing the
performance of the employees.
Rating 1. Format of rating scale is 1. If performance is appraised by
scale important to measure the several sources (rater, peers,
format accuracy of individual superiors) they would enhance
Pearce and performance the accuracy of performance
Porter 2. The format of rating scale used appraisal.
(1986) in the appraisal form should be 2. The format of rating scales used
measurable in my university for appraising
3. Performance ratings should be employee‘s working behaviour,
based on how well I do my are measurable.
work 3. Performance ratings should be
4. The performance criteria used based on how well I do my
in the appraisal form actually work.
measure my real performance 4. The performance criteria used in
5. Being appraised by various the rating scale format actually
raters (supervisor, peers, measure my real performance.
superiors) would provide me 5. The format of rating scale is
with worthy information important to measure the
regarding significant aspects of accuracy of individual
my performance performance.
6. If performance is assessed by 6. Being appraised by several
various raters (rater, peers, sources (supervisor, peers, and
 129
Table 3.7: Continued
superiors) they would improve superiors) would provide me
the accuracy of performance with valuable information about
appraisal important aspects of my
performance.
Rater 1. I need more training in 1. Rater needs more training in
training conducting performance conducting performance
Elverfeldt appraisal interviews appraisal interview to get its
(2005) 2. I am sufficiently trained in all intended goals.
skills needed in assessing 2. Rater must be sufficiently
performance trained in all skills needed in
3. My appraisal skills are appraising performance.
regularly refreshed and updated 3. Rater appraisal skills are
through training regularly refreshed through
training.

3.9.2 Employee satisfaction

In this study, employee satisfaction was used as mediator. Moreover, the second
section is planned to record the respondent‘s response concerning employee
satisfaction. A 5-item questionnaire was used on a five-point Likert Scale (strongly
disagree [1] to strongly agree [5]. This questionnaire has been taken from the Pearce
and Porter study (1986) with a cronbach‘s alpha of 0.82. The item wise details of
these research instruments are shown below in Table 3.8. This scale has also been
used by various researchers in their studies and has found it valid and reliable
(Othman, 2014; Rehman, 2012; Sageer et al., 2012).

Table 3.8: Items for employee satisfaction

Variables Original Items Modified items

Employee 1. I am satisfied with the job 1. I am satisfied with the working
satisfaction security and working environment of my university.
Pearce and environment 2. My university takes me as an
Porter 2. I am satisfied with my working asset and I am satisfied with
study relationship with the the progress I have made
(1986) management 3. I think performance appraisal
3. My organization takes me as an is valuable to me as well as to
asset and I am satisfied with the my university as it affects my
progress I have made performance in the university.
 130
Table 3.8: Continued
4. Performance appraisal is 4. I think my performance is
valuable to me as well as to my affected by my overall
organization satisfaction keeping in view all
5. My present job provides me the present and potential
overall satisfaction keeping in benefits that the university
view all the present and potential offers
benefits that the organization 5. I am satisfied with my working
offers relationship with the
management.

3.9.3 Perceived job performance

Perceived job performance was employed as a dependent or outcome variable in this

research. Perceived job performance was measured using a 5-point Likert Scale
ranging from (1) ―strongly disagree‖ to (5) ―strongly agree‖ including 5-items scale
which has been adopted from the study of Khan (2013). The significant way to
examine the effectiveness of performance appraisal system is to analyze the
responses of the academics in the universities. Responses are mainly affected by
perception and are always varying from individual to individual (Umair, Javaid,
Amir & Luqman, 2016). In institutional context, the key function of academic‘s
affirmative perception is to change the behaviour and attitude of an academic and put
positive impact on academic behavior such as satisfaction, job performance. On the
basis of these arguments perceived job performance scale was used to examine the
responses of academic staff in the target population (Umair et al., 2016). In this third
part of the questionnaire the respondents were asked to record their response
regarding perceived job performance. These scales has also been used by earlier
researchers such as Khan (2013) and Bekele et al. (2014) in their studies with
different contexts and have found it valid and reliable with Cronbach‘s alpha of 0.83.
In Table 3.9 the research instrument of perceived job performance item wise details
are as follows:
 131

Table 3.9: Items for perceived job performance

Variables Original Items Modified items

Perceived 1. I have improved my 1. I think I have improved my job
job performance during my service performance during my service.
performance 2. The productivity of the 2. The current performance
Khan workforce in this organization appraisal system in vogue in
(2013) has been improving as a result my university has helped me in
of the performance appraisal improving my job performance.
system 3. I think an effective
3. An effective performance performance appraisal system
appraisal system is an important is an important indicator of the
indicator of the effectiveness of effectiveness of employee
individual employee perceived job performance.
performance 4. Institutional support assessed
4. Organizational support has me to enhance my perceived
helped me improving my job performance.
performance 5. The institutional environment
5. Organizational environment is is conducive for improved job
conducive for improved job performance.
performance.

3.10 Pilot study

According to Fink (2003, p.108) pilot study may be defined as ―an opportunity to try
out an instrument well before it is made final. Pilot test tries to simulate the use of
survey instrument in its intended setting‖. To find out errors and flaws in the survey
form and presentation, this process assists the researchers for onward study and
results. This process is used in predicting possible issues related to applying survey
instrument and getting useful information regarding how the survey tool carries out
in the field. Question clarity, questionnaire format inconsistency in responses are the
main areas of focus in assessing pilot tests as stated by Babbie (1990).
The survey instruments were pilot tested, before the commencement of data
collection. A sample size of 30 questionnaires has been proposed by different
researchers to do pilot study (Whitehead et al., 2016). ―Even with the relatively small
pilot sample of 20, the planned studies do have at least 80% power to detect the
target effect size‖ (Teare et al., 2014). Moreover, different researchers have
 132

recommended a sample size from 10-40 for pilot study (Hertzog, 2008). Academics
have been taken as a small sample from target population of this study which was
further utilized for administering pilot test. Those who were the participants of pilot
study were provided with a comprehensive letter to facilitate, elaborate and guide the
pilot test process. Particularly, to test the survey a purposive sample of fifteen to
thirty people from academic staff was used. The survey was designed in such a
manner to make sure that it is easy to read, have possibly lower response error and
increase the response rate. A number of changes were made on the basis of the
results of pilot test. To analyze the data SPSS-23 version was used accordingly.
Cronbach‘s alpha was assumed as a test of internal consistency to measure the
reliability of all the scales involved in the research. In the pilot study, outcomes of
the reliability of all the scales employed in the research were verified and found
satisfactory. Table 3.10 shows the values of Cronbach‘s alpha noted for each scale
and details of the descriptive statistics of the constructs i.e., mean and standard
deviation employed in the pilot study.

Table 3.10: Descriptive statistics and reliability estimates for pilot study

Construct Mean Std.deviation Alpha (α)

Goal setting and purposes 4.640 .743 .927
Fairness 4.144 .661 .931
Rating scale format 4.427 .654 .934
Rater training 4.250 .725 .937
Employee satisfaction 4.326 .756 .923
Perceived job performance 4.186 .905 .933
N 30

3.11 Reliability and validity of instrument

Reliability and validity of instruments is crucial to every research study to ensure the
results consistency and accuracy. In this study, the researcher employed the reliable
and validated data collection items. Though, further reliability and validity of the
data collection tools was identified once the data was gathered from the targeted
respondents. Both Content and construct validity was used for the identification of
validity of instruments, while reliability of the instruments used in the study is based
on the internal consistency. Methods for determination of validity and reliability of
the instruments are discussed below.
 133

3.11.1 Reliability of instrument

Internal consistency method has been employed in this study to measure reliability of
the instrument. Reliability ―refers to the degree to which the survey results are free
from random error‖ (Alreck & settle, 2004, p. 447). While Fink (2003, p.4) illustrates
that ―a reliable survey instrument is one that gets consistent results‖. When a well-
managed and careful sampling plan has been developed then it can be possible to
accomplish high degree reliability. Consistency and measurement scale stability
affects the reliability. Reliability of an instrument could be evaluated by employing
different methods (Green et al., 1995; Hair et al., 2006). The recommended method
of internal consistency using cronbach‘s alpha was applied in this study for
reliability.
The homogeneity of set of it/ems is evaluated in the internal consistency
method. Items of the scale in this method measure the same construct should be
highly inter-correlated, implying that they act similarly. The two well-known
techniques of this method are termed to be split half technique and Cronbach‘s alpha.
Items in the scale are divided into halves and the summated results of the first half‘s
scores are correlated with the second half‘s score and this process is known as split
half technique. Though, the reliability estimate of split half‘s technique is extremely
dependent on the division of items into half. While, Cronbach‘s alpha on the other
side may be enumerated as it measures the mean reliability coefficient for all
possible ways of dividing the items in half. This argument has been weighted that
Cronbach‘s alpha results in better estimation of reliability (Davis, 2005; Hair et al.,
2006).
Furthermore, multidimensional constructs are used in this study and the
internal consistency method is known to be the most appropriate method when
investigating multi-dimensional constructs (Hair et al, 2006). In this study,
Cronbach‘s alpha was conducted for estimation of the reliability. It is not only
recognized and used worldwide (Hair, Anderson, Tatham, & Black, 1998), but it has
also the potential and capability to control the problem that comes up in the split-half
method (Davis, 2005). General acceptable limit for cronbach‘s alpha is 0.70 (Hair et
al., 2010). Composite reliability is also used to identify internal reliability and
consistency of constructs in addition to Cronbach‘s alpha method. The recommended
value for composite reliability is also 0.70 (Hair et al., 2010). PLS-SEM has the
 134

power to calculate composite reliability and Cronbach‘s alpha values at once through
PLS-algorithm method. In order to confirm the consistency and accuracy of results,
investigation of reliability and validity is considered as a vital step in any research
process.

3.11.2 Validity of Instrument

Fink and Litwan (2003) identified that random error and measurement error are two
basic errors in survey research. Random error occurs due to sampling technique and
measurement error occurs due to instrument performance. Validity may be defined as
the extent or degree to which survey findings are free from both random and
measurement error (Alreck & settle, 2004). While, Fink (2003, p.4) reported that ―a
valid survey instrument is one that obtains accurate results‖. A valid measurement
scale is made to be able to measure whatever is supposed (theoretical). Content and
construct validity is of important nature in the measurement scale (Bryman, 2008;
Davis, 2005). The researcher carried out the lying method to confirm the validity of
the tool.

3.11.3 Content or face validity

Content validity may be defined as the degree or extent to which the items in the
measurement scale explicitly show concept given in the study. Though, this practice
is more subjective and judgment based, an expert opinion will be needed to do for
this procedure. It also gives enough extent of assurance as to whether and how much
measurement scale represents concept concerned (Bryman, 2008; Davis, 2005). A set
of questionnaire was sent to three experts from the organizational behaviour and
management field. The experts were asked to assess the questionnaire and to propose
necessary changes. Every expert gave its recommendations and views without being
interfered with the other expert‘s opinion participating in this part. After studying
suggestions made by this panel of experts, necessary corrections were carried out and
some questions were excluded as they were assumed very irrelevant and difficult for
the academic staff to respond to. After removing these items and taking into account
the suggestions, the item was employed to proceed for the next phase of testing.
 135

These experts were from three different universities such as Associate professor Dr.
Wali-Rehman (Sarhad University of Science and Technology Peshawar), Assistant
Professor Dr. Fayyaz Ali Shah (ICP, Peshawar) and Assistant Professor Dr. Jawad
Ahmad (University of Malakand, Dir lower, KP). The content validity of the
measurements can also be established via the citation of corresponding literature
(Ghauri & Grønhaug, 2002). Particularly, psychometric evaluation of the scales
chosen for present study has served the aim of content validity.

3.11.4 Construct validity

Contrary to the above, construct validity may be defined as the extent or degree to
which a measurement scale represents and acts like the concept under study (Davis &
Cosenza, 1995; Davis, 2005). In other words, it can also be termed as to examine the
occurrence of expected arrangement of association among constructs. Factor analysis
is such a technique that is generally used to determine construct validity (Davis,
2005; Rasli, 2006) which minimizes data into small number of basic dimensions
termed as factors (Green, Tull & Gerald, 1995). Notwithstanding, this research used
the measures which are established i.e., all the constructs of the study have already
been validated. Therefore, factor analysis was done to determine construct validity,
appropriateness, and fitness of the instrument used in the study. Construct validity
was identified for this research employing two general types such as, convergent and
discriminant validity.

3.11.5 Convergent validity

Convergent validity can be defined as the extent of shared variance between items of
a variable (Hair et al., 2014). Convergent validity can be measured using cross
loadings, average variance extracted (AVE) and composite reliability (CR) for each
variable. A considerable amount of convergent validity is established if both the
AVE and CR values are higher than 0.5 and 0.7 respectively. In this study,
convergent validity was examined using average variance extracted, composite
reliability and factor loadings values of the variables.
 136

3.11.6 Discriminant validity

Discriminant validity is defined as the extent in which different indicators of

different constructs diverge. This validity occurs when the measures of the variables
would not be conceptually linked or not associated to each other (Hair et al., 2006).
Different techniques have been used to evaluate the discriminant validity for the
variables. This study has employed Fornell and Larcker criteria and Heterotrait-
Monotrait (HTMT) ratio to measure the discriminant validity among the variables.
To confirm the discriminant validity between the constructs the square root of
average variance extracted (AVE) values of a variable should be higher than its
corresponding squared inter-constructs correlation (SIC) with all the other constructs
(Fornell & Larcker, 1981; Picon et al., 2014; Chaimongkonrojna et al., 2015).

3.12 Data preparation

For examining the data, the researcher must understand about the nature of data and
formulate it for onward analysis process. Data preparation have some stages, that is,
editing and coding which needs to be carried out before data entry into the software
for last analysis. The accuracy of data is ensured when the raw data is converted into
classified final shape (Kirch, 2008). In this study new version of statistical package
for social sciences (SPSS-23) was used for data preparation. Considering the
predefined codes, the raw data from questionnaires were fed into the software. For
making it sure that the data entry is accurate, the researcher needs to check and cross
reference all the questionnaires, at least two times with the relevant information in
the database.

3.12.1 Data coding and cleaning

As the first step, prior to starting data analysis, it is imperative to confirm the errors
in the data set and further examine the record to verify its validity (Pallant, 2013). In
data preparation, data coding is considered as the initial step for an empirical
research. It provides introduction to the gathered data in statistical tools like SPSS.
All the questions are included in a survey questionnaire which reflect the
 137

measurements of the proposed variables of this study (refer to Appendix A). For data
analysis every item was given a code. A sum of 301 usable items was gathered from
the respondents. Each and every questionnaire was labeled with a serial number
identical to its record number in the SPSS program. This phase is essential for
outlining inaccuracies.
The responses to all collected items were given numbers and entered into SPSS
software to be screened (Krishna, 2013; Saunders, 2009). The aim of data screening
is to confirm if any missing data, outliers and measuring normality of data
distribution is presumed by SEM (Krishna, 2013). Once all the information was
entered, the data were analysed for completeness and reliability by using descriptive
methods. Furthermore, most of the data were found having no missing issues but
only a few items had issues which were rectified.

3.12.2 Missing value analysis

Another important step regarding data preparation is to find out missing data before
data analysis. If the data set includes some missing information it may cause many
problems. Missing information occurs when a respondent intentionally or
unintentionally does not reply on one or more items (Hair et al., 2010; Saunders et
al., 2009; Vinzi et al., 2010). The acceptable limit for the missing information is
below 15%, otherwise that item is not suitable for data analysis (Hair et al., 2014).
There are many techniques and approaches to get rid of missing data like, list-wise
and pairwise approaches which can be used with any statistical analysis. These
approaches work rapidly and are easy to use in deleting the cases with missing data
but by applying this approach the sample size decreases (Vinzi et al., 2010). The
appropriate method for solving this problem is in SmartPLS (Hair et al., 2014). In
SmartPLS one can find three options for solving this problem i.e. mean value
replacement, pairwise deletion and case-wise deletion. The researcher, like Hair et al.
(2014), emphasizes on using mean value replacement approach when the missing
value is below 5% per indicator. In this option all the missing data can be replaced
with the mean value of all remaining data points per column i.e. indicator or variable.
The advantage of this option is that after excluding/ replacing the missing data the
 138

sample size will remain the same and similarly, the mean value of the variables also
does not change.
Though, the data were screened finally and (11) questionnaires out of 312
were observed having the missing data above 15%. After eliminating the missing
values 301 usable questionnaires were left for further analysis. Accordingly those
survey items were excluded from the data set. In the last, (03) cases of missing value
below 5% were found after cross check with the original questionnaire. The missing
information were rectified which occurred due to typing error. So, missing data were
omitted respectively.

3.13 Data analysis

Alreck and Settle (2004, p.239) describe data analysis as ―the manipulation of
numbers, letters and symbols in order to suppress the detail and reveal the relevant
facts or relationships.‖ In this research, the data were screened enough by the
researcher to ensure its suitability for various analyses and tests to be conducted for
answering hypotheses of the research. Different statistical techniques have been
applied which were based on various assumptions to accomplish reliable and valid
findings from the research. The preliminary assumptions were found satisfactory in
the first step before the actual analyses i.e., Multivariate data analysis to be done.
This research has used statistical package for social sciences (SPSS-23) and partial
least square structure equation modelling (PLS-SEM) for analysis of the data. Detail
of both techniques is as under.

3.13.1 Descriptive statistics

It primarily defines what does the data represent and it includes organizing and
explaining the data with the purpose to make it further clear and understandable. This
technique gives summary of every variable of the study and gives summary of the
degree of extent of relationships among variables of the study. The main function of
descriptive statistics for which it was used is to calculate mean, percentages,
frequencies and standard deviation for study variables and demographic information.
 139

3.13.2 Structural equation modeling (SEM)

Structural equation modeling (SEM) is accounted as one of the prominent method of

choice for researchers and practitioners in several disciplines but particularly,
considered ―must‖ for the field of social sciences (Memon et al., 2016; Hooper et al.,
2008). SEM has been applied to measure more complex multivariate data analysis
process. By using SEM the researcher can easily and simultaneously analyse
multiple variables through multivariate data analysis. SEM can be classified into co-
variance based approach (CB-SEM) i.e., AMOS (Arbuckle, 2003) and variance
based or components based (PLS-SEM) i.e., SmartPLS (Ringle, Wende, & Will,
2005).
CB-SEM focuses more on testing a theory and it is suitable for confirmatory
research while on the other hand, PLS-SEM is fit well on prediction of the dependent
constructs (observed and unobserved) as compared to CB-SEM (Hair et al., 2012).
PLS-SEM is generally used for predictive relationship and theory developing (Calvo-
Mora et al., 2013; Henseler et al., 2009). But, PLS-SEM can be applied to test theory
and also for carrying out confirmatory analysis as CB-SEM (Calvo-Mora et al.,
2013; Henseler et al., 2009; Hair et al., 2011). Partial least square technique (PLS) is
not a suitable one for testing an early stage theory development (Ronkko et al.,
2013). The author further added that PLS is best choice for complex model. Beside
this, PLS is designed in such a way to deal both reflective and formative
measurements model (Chin, 1998; Diamantopoulos, 1999; Henseler et al., 2009).
Co-variance based structural equation modeling (CB-SEM) is a useful tool
and is employed for data analysis, though many industry researchers show an
agreement that in real sense it is quite difficult to achieve a data set that fulfills
overall model fit requirements (Wong, 2013; Awang, 2015). On the other hand,
partial least square structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) is basically considered
for causal-predictive analysis in conditions of more complexity (Vinzi et al., 2010).
Moreover, it can be employed for exploratory studies in which there is little
information on the surface about variable relationships (Wong, 2013).
To conclude, this study has identified to use PLS, particularly SmartPLS
(3.2.8). According to several researchers, it is modern, easy to deal and user friendly
software with having advance reporting mechanism as well (Henseler et al., 2010;
Ringle et al., 2005). It was formulated by Ringle et al. (2005) and subsequently
 140

revised in 2015 by the same researcher. The selection of PLS over other techniques is
justifiable for this study, the reasons are as under:
i. The research problem and research hypotheses comprise of measuring and
predicting the link between latent variables (Henseler & Sarstedt, 2013),
through PLS path estimation method.
ii. Sample size analyzed is 301 that is considered suitable for PLS path modelling
(Henseler & Sarstedt, 2013).
iii. This study used 5-point Likert Scale and PLS accommodates the all three
kinds of scales i.e., ordinal, nominal and continuous for further data analysis
(Haelein & Kaplan, 2004).
iv. PLS can analyse data if the data is somewhat not normally distributed
(Henseler & Sarstedt, 2013).
v. PLS excludes multicollinearity problem as well (Henseler & Sarstedt, 2013;
Haelein & Kaplan, 2004).
vi. The important reason for selection of PLS-SEM is the presence of the second-
order formative construct in this study. As it is a rule of the thumb that if
formative construct exists in the study, go for PLS-SEM (Hair et al., 2011).
This technique is also designed in such a way that permits researchers to examine the
relationships simultaneously i.e., both direct and indirect in such situations where
this would be hard to perform (Byrne, 2001; Kline, 2005). Notwithstanding, SEM is
not only limited to co-variance based and factorial analysis. But now partial least
square (PLS) has also gained popularity among researchers (Richter et al., 2015;
Hair et al., 2014; Jannoo et al., 2014; Henseler et al., 2013). Structural equation
modelling is assumed as a statistical technique to measure hypotheses regarding
relationships among observed and underlying constructs (Khine, 2013; Henseler et
al., 2017 (a)). PLS-SEM can allow the researcher to simultaneously measure the
reliability and validity of the measurement model constructs and the estimation of the
relationship between these variables (Calvo-Mora et al., 2013). In this research,
Partial least square (PLS) method is used to analyse data employing SmartPLS
(version 3.2.8) particularly for the assessment of measurement model and structural
model. The benefit of applying PLS method is that it permits the underlying variable
to be modeled either as reflective or formative constructs. Established on the
suggestion of different researchers (Hair et al., 2010; Awang, 2012; Krishna, 2013)
SEM is conducted in two stages such as measurement model assessment and
 141

structural model assessment. In the first step measurement model assessed to verify
the validity and reliability of all the constructs. While, in the second stage hypotheses
was tested in structural model.
Another prominent feature of PLS is combining all constructs into one model
termed as pooled model and this technique is recommended by Hair et al. (2010).
The advantages of pooled model are that all the variables are included at the same
time and are even correlated with each other respectively. Another good application
of pooled model is that it is easy to formulate structural model. In this research
pooled measurement model was run and evaluated for all variables in the model. As
indicated, all the variables in this analysis were measured employing more than one
indicator. For multi-indicator constructs, it is important to properly categorize them
as reflective or formative prior to assessing measurement properties (Jarvis et al.,
2003). All multi-item first order variables in this study are hypothesized as reflective
such as, employee satisfaction, perceived job performance and dimensions of
performance appraisal. While, performance appraisal is hypothesized as second-
order formative construct along with its four dimensions i.e., goal setting and
purposes, fairness, rating scale format, and rater training; but all these dimensions are
reflective in first order construct.

3.13.3 Mediation analysis

Mediation analysis can also be performed through PLS-SEM. According to Baron

and Kenny (1986) Mediator can be explained as intervening variable. Previously,
most of the studies investigated the direct relationship between constructs and
disregarded the indirect effect that is mediating effect (Nitzl, 2016). In PLS-SEM
bootstrapping method is used to find out the mediating effect or specific indirect
effect with 95% confidence intervals percentile (Vinzi et al., 2010). PLS makes it
sure to measure the mediating or indirect effects in one single model and ignore a
causal-step process for measuring the mediating effect (Nitzl, 2016). So, in this
research the mediation effect of employee satisfaction on the relationship of
performance appraisal and its dimensions with perceived job performance has been
tested through PLS bootstrapping technique and Variance Accounted Factor (VAF)
method as well.
 142

3.14 Ethical issues in research

Research ethics is also an integral part of conducting any research. Ethics is the
essential part of our life and it also extends too many fields regarding research. In
simple words, when someone is performing some job or research he/she must be
familiar with its ethical aspects. Morality is also very vital in every walk of life.
According to the researcher‘s point of view both morality and ethics can be
explained as the human capability of knowing and identifying what is right or wrong.
If we commit any unethical error or mistake in this study, it will have an impact on
future scholars. So, ethics should be prioritized in research also.
Research ethics involve the accuracy, fairness, correctness and suitability of
pre-defined norms and behaviours of research regarding the rights of individuals and
organizations that are directly related to this research (Saunders et al., 2009). In this
study, from the inception to completion all ethics and codes of research were fully
addressed i.e., selection of the topic and consequent upon its approval from
Universiti Tun Hussein Onn (UTHM) by doing so, the very first step was to make
sure that no one is affected during this study. Followed by data collection step, in
which duly verified questionnaires were sent to the respective organizations involved
in this study. All requisite information about the aim of this study is somehow
delivered to the organization such as data utilization.
A special care is considered for future readers and scholars who will get
benefit of it in future in the form of reading out this research. All the relevant
information must be reported honestly and accurately without changing or modifying
the results to fulfill some predictions or personal concern. Credit should be given to
other researchers for their investigations in the form of reference citations. In a
nutshell, the respondents were also provided with confidentiality, free choice,
privacy regarding their names, organization names and information that have been
collected.

3.15 Chapter summary

This chapter viewed the methodology employed to identify the relationship between
performance appraisal and perceived job performance and took into account
 143

employee satisfaction as a mediator in such relationship among academics in six

different public universities of KP, Pakistan. In this study quantitative approach has
been used with correlational research design. This chapter also highlights other
important topics of the study i.e., population and sampling, research instrument,
reliability and validity of the instrument along with structural equation modelling.
Furthermore, Data collection process and data analysis techniques were also
elaborated and followed by pilot study. The chapter finishes with chapter summary.
 CHAPTER 4

DATA ANALYSIS

4.1 Introduction

This chapter shows the method in which research model is analysed with the help of
collected data. Data analysis process and the research results of a survey studied at
six public universities in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan, which are University of
Peshawar, Agriculture University of Peshawar, Khyber Medical University
Peshawar, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar, Islamia College
University Peshawar and Institute of Management Sciences Peshawar are presented
in this chapter. In addition, this chapter is categorized into sub sections. The first
section presents demographic analysis, examination of outliers and exploratory factor
analysis. The second section discusses descriptive and inferential statistics data
analysis and multicollinearity assessments. The third section gives particulars about
the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and using Partial Least Squares (SmartPLS:
version3.2.8) through SEM (Structural Equation Modelling) for data analysis and
testing reliability and validity of the constructs used in the study. The fourth section
demonstrates the structural model assessment and mediation role of employee
satisfaction on the relationship of performance appraisal and perceived job
performance. While, the last section shows how the research hypotheses were
analysed using PLS-SEM.
 145

4.2 Demographic analysis of respondents

The demographic data (refer to Table 4.1) are also considered in the questionnaire of
this study in a way to assist the analysis of the data. All the relevant information
regarding these eight demographic profiles of the respondents is shown in the Table
4.1. According to the information in respect of gender, a sum of 219 male and 82
female participated in this research study recording a proportion of (72.8% male and
27.2% female). Age (11.7%) are between 26-30, most of the respondents were
observed between the age of 31-35 having a proportion of 47.5%, 25.2% respondents
recorded in the age of 36-40, while 15.6% were found in the age of 40 and above.
According to the available information about academic designations, lecturers were
having a proportion of 40.5%, 30.6% recorded as Assistant professors and 18.3%
recorded as Associate professor while, professors had a proportion of 10.6%. In
addition, education level seems to be dominated by the M.Phil./MS degree holder
(47.5%) followed by PhD holders having 35.9%, respondents holding master degree
recorded a proportion of 16.6%.
As per the information obtained, majority of the respondents were from
University of Peshawar with a proportion of 39.9%, followed by Agriculture
University of Peshawar having 18.3%, while, the rest of the universities were having
proportions of University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar (19.6%), Islamia
College University Peshawar (11.3%), Khyber Medical University Peshawar (5.6%)
and Institute of Management Sciences Peshawar 5.3%. From the information given
in Table 4.1, (31.2%) of the academics had an experience between 4-6 years. While
the rest of the academics‘ experience was found as 24.6% between 7-10 years, 19.3%
as more than 10 years and 24.9% have 1-3 years‘ experience respectively. Moreover,
the results also exhibited that majority of the academics responded from the
management science faculty, recording a proportion of 33.2% followed by social
sciences with a proportion of 20.3%, engineering sciences which is (20.3%), natural
sciences (19.9%), while medical sciences have the lowest response rate of 6.3%.
 146

Table 4.1: Demographic statistics

Frequency Percentage
Gender Male 219 72.8
Female 82 27.2
Total 301 100.0
Age 26-30 years 35 11.7
31-35 years 143 47.5
36-40 years 76 25.2
Above 40 years 47 15.6

Total 301 100.0

Marital status Married 243 80.7
Single 58 19.3
Total 301 100.0
Education level Doctorate 108 35.9
M.phil/MS 143 47.5
Master degree 50 16.6

Total 301 100.0

Designation Professor 32 10.6
Associate professor 55 18.3
Assistant professor 92 30.6
Lecturer 122 40.5
Total 301 100.0
University University of Peshawar 120 39.9
Agriculture University Peshawar 55 18.3
University of Engineering and 59 19.6
Technology
Islamia College University 34 11.3
Khyber Medical University 17 5.6
Institute of Management 16 5.3
Sciences
Total 301 100.0
 147

Table 4.1: Continued

Experience
1-3 years 75 24.9
4-6 years 94 31.2
7-10 years 74 24.6
Above 10 years 58 19.3
Total 301 100.0
Faculty Social sciences 61 20.3
Management sciences 100 33.2
Natural sciences 60 19.9
Eng. sciences 61 20.3
Med. Sciences 19 6.3
Total 301 100.0

4.3 Examination of outlier

―Outlier is an observation in a data set which appears to be inconsistent with the

reminder of that set of data‖ (Ben-Gal., 2005 p.2). According to other researchers
Hair et al. (2010), outlier is an observation that varies significantly from the rest of
the observations. In other words, it can be described as ―an extreme response to a
particular question or extreme responses to all questions‖ (Hair et al., 2013). If a case
has increasing or decreasing value as compared to other values or has high value that
produces too much difference with the rest of the cases it is known as outliers
(Cresswell, 2012; Hair et al., 2015; Pituch & Stevens, 2015).
Outliers produce undesired effect on the correlation coefficient (Pallant,
2010). The keeping or excluding of outlier depends on the strength and impact on the
results. Consequently, outlier is considered as an error or noise but keeps important
information. Therefore, it is necessary to expose outlier prior to initiate modelling
and analysis (Ben-Gal., 2005; Ghofar et al., 2014). Very nominal outliers were
investigated in this research study having proportion of below 5%. In the same line,
with missing data outliers have also an influence on the validity of the results (Hair et
al., 2015). With the help of SPSS, outliers can be detected easily via histogram or
box plot. In this study, for finding outlier, the mean value (5% trimmed mean) can be
compared with mean of every construct. If there is slight difference between these
two values, there is no need for further investigation and vice versa. Refer to Table
 148

4.2 which illustrates that both mean values are not so much dissimilar and
subsequently these cases were kept in the data set.

Table 4. 2: Mean and 5% trimmed mean outliers

Construct Mean 5% Trimmed Std.Deviation Std.Error

Mean
Goal setting and 4.492 4.593 .750 .041
purposes
Fairness 4.122 4.209 .738 .041
Rating scale 4.169 4.286 .797 .045
format
Rater training 3.722 3.849 1.031 .059
Employee 4.206 4.115 .983 .058
satisfaction
Perceived job 3.993 .972 .057
4.067
performance

4.4 Exploratory factor analysis

Before the usage of PLS-SEM, exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted to
measure the unidimensionality of the factors involved in this study constructs
(Pallant, 2016). Principal component analysis was employed as the extraction
method to examine associations among a group of items with a smaller set of latent
constructs. EFA is conducted basically to identify the suitable numbers of common
factors and to make sure which measured constructs are reasonable items among the
different underlying dimensions (Brown, 2015). Though all the items were adopted
from past studies and had no issue of validity. The extraction method was established
on Keiser technique. This method is termed as the most applicable technique through
which factors having Eigen value of 1 or more are kept for prior analysis (Pallant,
2011, 2016). Findings of EFA were basically based on the items loadings, Kaiser-
Meyer-Olkin (KMO), Bartlett‘s test of sphericity, Eigen value and the total variance
explained. According to Pallant (2011, 2013, 2016) many scholars have used both
orthogonal and oblique rotations and then report the clear and easy one to interpret.
The most used methods of orthogonal technique are Promax and Varimax which
strive to decrease the number of constructs that have greater loadings on each factor
(Pallant, 2010). The Varimax method was used in this study.
 149

The recommended value for inter-item correlation would be greater than 0.3, KMO
value can be greater than 0.6 and Bartlett‘s test of sphericity would require
significant at p<0.001 (Hair et al., 2010; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007; Alolah et al.,
2014). The communality values are also applied when the aim is to measure each
item fit into other items. It described how much of the variance has been explained
by each item (Pallant, 2011). The decision rule for cumulative variance is as low as
50 percent while others argue that it should be upto 75 percent (Beavers et al., 2013).
EFA analysis has been carried out for the present study and it was found that
maximum items have loadings above 0.5. On the basis of Kaiser Criterion in the first
go of EFA, four items (RM-1, RM-2, RM-3 and RM-4) were not loaded properly and
have values below 0.5 which were excluded. Then in the second analysis one another
item was removed which was RT-4, the same item was having loading below the
recommended range of 0.5. After all, thirty items were retained for further analysis
with loading above 0.5. The results of the rotated component matrix for each item are
discussed such as for goal setting and purposes are (GSP1, GSP2, GSP3, GSP4,
GSP5 = .605, .605, .624, .705, .648), fairness (FPA1, FPA2, FPA3, FPA4, FPA5,
FPA6 = .504, .641, .567, .590, .553, .601), rating scale format (RSF1, RSF2, RSF3,
RSF4, RSF5, RSF6 = .726, .544, .597,.672, .525, .503), rater training ( RT1, RT2,
RT3 = .701, .775, .647), employee satisfaction (ES1, ES2, ES3, ES4, ES5, ES5 =
.600, .636, .673,.655, .696), perceived job performance (PJP1, PJP2, PJP3, PJP4,
PJP5 = .672, .737, .722, .665, .666).
The KMO value was 0.963 which is greater than the acceptable limit of 0.6
and the Bartlett‘s test of sphericity was observed significant and variance explained
is also above 50 percent. Based on these assumptions it can be summarized that the
dataset is appropriate for further analysis. Table 4.3 shows the KMO and Bartlett‘s
test of sphericity, cumulative variance and pattern matrix cut-off values. While the
detail of the tables have been placed in Appendix B.
 150

Table 4. 3: Assessment criteria for EFA

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .963

Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 6608.620
Df 528
Sig. .000
Cut-off factor loading should be
> 0.50
above (0.50)

Cumulative variance 65%

4.5 Descriptive statistics

In this section, descriptive statistics explain the characteristics of the data. In the
current study; means, standard deviation, minimum and maximum data points were
examined. The closeness of the values to the mean in the data file is called standard
deviation. Lower value of standard deviation denotes that most of the item answers
in the data file are close to the mean, while higher value of standard deviation
specifies the most of the item answers in the data file are ranging mostly around the
mean. The descriptive statistics information about the constructs of the study is given
in the Table 4.4. The mean and standard deviation values was recorded for all the
constructs of the study such as for goal-setting and purposes (Mean= 4.54, S.D= .76),
for fairness (Mean= 4.21, S.D= .74), for rating scale format (Mean= 4.36, S.D= .77),
rater training (Mean= 3.87, S.D= 1.0), employee satisfaction (Mean= 3.50, S.D=
.99), and for perceived job performance was recorded (Mean= 3.98, S.D= .92). Refer
to Table 4.4 for details.
The values for both mean and standard deviation occur in the acceptable
range and not a single variable of the existing study has a greater value of mean on
the scale. So, the standard deviation value of the variable reflected that no significant
variance was observed in the responses provided by the respondents of the present
study. In addition, it is evident from the mentioned information that the higher value
of mean and lower value of standard deviation specified that respondents showed
agreement regarding all options of the questions asked from them.
 151

Table 4.4: Descriptive statistics for the variables

Variable N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation

Goal setting and purposes 301 1.00 5.00 4.54 .760

Fairness of PA 301 1.00 5.00 4.21 .744
Rating scale format 301 1.00 5.00 4.36 .779
Rater training 301 1.00 5.00 3.87 1.013
Employee satisfaction 301 1.00 5.00 3.50 .991
Perceived job performance 301 1.00 5.00 3.98 .925

4.6 Multicollinearity test

Partial least square (PLS) defines both measurement model and structural model by
means of multiple regressions. So, verifying multicollinearity between independent
variables is necessary in this case. Multicollinearity refers to the association between
independent constructs (Pallant, 2010, 2016) and it occurs when the independent
constructs are extremely correlated. The existence of multicollinearity influences the
validity and the results of the regression model (Pallant, 2010, 2016). Consequently,
it constrains not only the size of regression value but also makes it hard to recognize
the contribution of each independent construct in such relationship (Field, 2009).
Multicollinearity exists when all the correlation among different variables exceed the
acceptable limit which is 0.90 (Kim, 2011; Pallant, 2016). It causes estimation
problems particularly in formative models (Kim, 2011).
To determine multicollinearity two methods can be operated: usually, the first
one is correlation matrix of two or more constructs and the other one is estimation of
Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) and tolerance index (Field, 2009; Pallant, 2010; Hair
et al., 2010). The method used in this study that identifies the level of
multicollinearity is Tolerance index (TI) and Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) values.
According to Pallant (2010) the recommended range for TI value is less than 1 and
for VIF value is also below 10. However, the Table 4.5 presents the test for TI and
VIF and the results fall in the acceptable limit. So, no multicollinearity was found in
this model.
 152

Table 4.5: Multicollinearity test

Constructs Collinearity statistics

Tolerance VIF
Goal setting and purposes .403 2.481
Fairness of performance appraisal .435 2.301
Rating scale format .402 2.489
Rater training .543 1.843

4.7 PLS-SEM analysis

4.7.1 Measurement model assessment

Measurement model is referred to outer model in PLS-SEM. Measurement model

assists to investigate the relationship between the underlying construct and the
indicators. Outer model evaluation is conducted for examining reflective and
formative measured constructs (Hair et al., 2014). In reflective measurement model
assessment the basic provision is to inspect its reliability and validity (Henseler et al.,
2009). When an individual indicator has a factor loading above 0.7 for its construct it
means that it is appropriate for further analysis. According to Awang (2015) the
recommended value for each item factor loading must be above 0.6. In this study, all
the reflective indicator loadings fulfilled the requisite threshold values discussed
above. For establishing constructs reliability, four methods can be applied: composite
reliability, Fornell-Larcker criterion, Cronbach‘s alpha and HTMT. The threshold
value for both composite reliability and Cronbach‘s alpha is 0.7. Henseler et al.
(2015) documented that HTMT ratio has a standard value of 0.90. Based on the
above mentioned criteria all the reflective constructs of the study have satisfactory
reliability. Moreover, the construct validity was verified with the help of convergent
and discriminant validity. Convergent validity is determined through average
variance extracted (AVE). The acceptable limit for AVE value ranges above 0.5
level (Henseler et al., 2015). In this study, all the reflective constructs along with
their dimensions achieved the predefined limit of AVE values which is 0.5.
According to Picon et al. (2014) discriminant validity was determined based on
the Fornell-Larcker criteria and HTMT ratio which are discussed in detail in sections
 153

to follow. While, formative constructs are related to some multidimensional

constructs which is assumed as another concept. Multidimensional constructs are
consisted of more than one construct and are grouped due to having some conceptual
connection among them (Hensler et al., 2009). Formative constructs could be
analysed at the indicators level by applying multicollinearity test between items and
weights (Hensler et al., 2009). An outer weight shows the strength of the associations
between the assessed formative indicator variables and the exogenous latent variable.

4.7.2 Reliability analysis of reflective constructs

Reliability means consistency and stability in the research study (Krishna, 2013).
Reliability test is executed to minimize errors and biases in the model. Internal
consistency method is considered outmost for a reflective construct (Krishna, 2013).
For measuring internal consistency such as Cronbach‘s alpha technique was used to
check the reliability of the questionnaire (Picon et al., 2014; Hair et al., 2010;
Aimran et al., 2015). According to these researchers the threshold value for
Cronbach‘s alpha is 0.7. Cronbach‘s alpha value of 0.7 or more is suitable for social
studies research (Picon et al., 2014; Chaimongkonrojna et al., 2015). On the other
hand, Hair et al. (2010) suggest that Cronbach‘s alpha values are started from 0.7
leading to 0.9. Indicators having 0.7 or 0.8 Cronbach‘s alpha value represent average
and good internal consistency and reliability. While, above 0.80 values denote some
good reliability measures (Hair et al., 2010).
The accumulative cronbach‘s alpha value of performance appraisal (PA),
Goal setting and purposes, (GSP), Fairness of performance appraisal (FPA), Rating
scale format (RSF), Rater training (RT), Employee satisfaction (ES) and perceived
job performance (PJP) are 0.829, 0.873, 0.826, 0.867, 0.745, 0.891 and 0.881
respectively. These Cronbach‘s alpha values represent that all the variable items have
good reliability. In reflective model construct, the relationship between the
underlying construct and their items were tested. The Figure 4.1 indicates the
measurement model (first order reflective and second order formative construct
along with their indicators and loadings).
 154

Figure 4.1: Measurement model

In order to keep the factor loading in the measurement model it is essential that
the factor loading must be in the range of the recommended value i.e., 0.6 or 0.7 and
significant (Awang, 2015; Hair et al., 2013). Those indicators that occur below the
threshold value of 0.6 need to be deleted. All the indicators involved in this research
have outer loadings above the threshold value of 0.6, thus, all items were used in the
measurement model for further analysis.
 155

4.7.3 Reflective construct validity analysis

Construct validity is the degree to which a survey instrument measures what it means
to measure. To confirm validity the researcher took the prior steps i.e., the survey
items were investigated thoroughly regarding issues and, secondly, the items were
adopted from previous studies of different researchers for the same purpose. In fact,
all items have alpha value of greater than 0.7 and were found satisfactory (Hair et al.,
2010; Picon et al., 2014; Chaimongkonrojna et al., 2015). Composite reliability of all
variables recorded 0.8 which is also reflected well (Abdullah et al., 2015; Ramayah
et al., 2016). According to Saunders et al. (2009) face or content validity is referred
to a question, scale or measure that seems accurately to replicate what it was
supposed to measure. Construct validity was established by two methods in this
research.

i. Convergent Validity:

It is called as the degree to which indicator variable correlate positively to the other
indicator variable of the latent construct (Hair et al., 2014; Hoffman et al., 2013;
Sarstedt et al., 2014). In other words, convergent validity is recognized when the
latent variable share a greater percentage of variance in common (Hair et al., 2010,
2014). Convergent validity can be measured through assessing factor loadings,
average variance extracted (AVE) and composite reliability (CR). To have a
recommended value of convergent validity, factor loadings and AVE values should
be higher than 50% (0.5) and composite reliability of the construct should also be
greater than 0.7 (Hair et al, 2010; Awang, 2012; Awang, 2015; Ramayah et al.,
2016). An AVE value of 0.5 represents that enough convergent validity exists among
the items of the latent construct and shows beyond 50% of the variance of its items
on average (Hair et al., 2014). Conversely, if the AVE value lies below 0.5 it means
that there is still some error remaining in the items (Hair et al., 2014). Also in this
research all outer loadings are higher than 0.6. All variables achieved the average
variance extracted (AVE) value of 0.5 (refer to Table 4.6) in the first go of the
measurement model assessment.
So, based on the factor loadings, (AVE) value, composite reliability and
Cronbach‘s alpha values, sufficient convergent validity is established in this study
 156

(see Table 4.6). Though, assessment of formative construct has been established in
literature (Diamantopoulos et al., 2008). But there is no agreement upon such method
to give convergent and discriminant validity evidence for assessment of formative
constructs (Wang, 2015; Diamantopoulos et al., 2008). Researchers such as
Ramayah et al. (2016) opined that for formative constructs to be measured, the basic
provision is examining convergent validity, collinearity and significance level of
formative items in PLS-SEM.

Table 4.6: Constructs reliability and validity

Constructs Items Loadings AVE CR Cronbach‘s

alpha
Performance FPA 0.864 0.667 0.888 0.829
appraisal GSP 0.871
(PA) RSF 0.860
RT 0.650
Goal setting GSP1 0.836 0.666 0.908 0.873
and purposes GSP2 0.843
(GSP) GSP3 0.847
GSP4 0.840
GSP5 0.703
Fairness of FPA1 0.737 0.536 0.874 0.826
performance FPA2 0.746
appraisal FPA3 0.766
(FPA) FPA4 0.639
FPA5 0.765
FPA6 0.733

Rating scale RSF1 0.806 0.602 0.900 0.867

format (RSF) RSF2 0.844
RSF3 0.767
RSF4 0.688
RSF5 0.759
RSF6 0.783
Rater training RT1 0.808 0.663 0.855 0.745
(RT) RT2 0.846
RT3 0.787

Employee ES1 0.807 0.697 0.920 0.891

satisfaction ES2 0.859
(ES) ES3 0.878
ES4 0.824
ES5 0.805
Perceived PJP1 0.797 0.679 0.914 0.881
job PJP2 0.862
performance PJP3 0.862
(PJP) PJP4 0.783
PJP5 0.814
 157

ii. Discriminant Validity

Discriminant validity is established if there is less correlation between different

variable indicators. It is referred to the degree in which different items of different
variables diverge. Discriminant validity could be verified when the square root of
average variance extracted (AVE) value of a variable is higher than its corresponding
squared inter-constructs correlation (SIC) with all the other constructs (Fornell &
Larcker, 1981; Picon et al., 2014; Chaimongkonrojna et al., 2015). If the former
value is higher than the later one it means that discriminant validity exists. See Table
4.7 for the results of Fornell-Larcker criteria.
Researchers examine discriminant validity in variance-based structural
equation modelling i.e., Partial least squares through Fornell-Larcker criterion and
cross-loading of the reflective constructs (Sarstedt et al., 2014: Henseler et al., 2015).
Furthermore, Henseler et al. (2015) added that discriminant validity is known as one
of the key instruments of model assessment. In variance-based or PLS-SEM, one
cannot achieve the discriminant validity by using only Fornell-Larcker criterion and
measurement of cross loading (Henseler et al., 2015). But now a new technique has
been added to measure discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation
modelling which is Heterotrait-Monotrait (HTMT) ratio of correlations (Henseler et
al. 2015, 2016). Some authors suggest a recommended value of 0.85 for HTMT ratio
(Kline, 2010, 2015). Whereby, others define it below 0.90 (Henseler et al., 2015). If
there is inter-correlation between constructs less than 0.85 it means discriminant
validity exists. Nevertheless, like cross loading and Fornell-Larcker criterion, the
HTMT also applies to reflective constructs and is not valid for formative constructs
(Henseler et al., 2015). The author further opined that Fornell-Larcker criterion is a
prominent technique used for measuring discriminant validity in variance-based
SEM. In short, constructs of this study even qualify the HTMT ratio (see Table 4.8).
The HTMT table shows that all the values are ranging from 0.85 to 0.90. Cross
loadings values can be seen in Table 4.9 which exhibit that all the items were loaded
successfully in each column. It is evident from the results of Fornell-Larcker criteria,
HTMT ratio and cross loadings that all the constructs in the model exhibit sufficient
discriminant validity.
 158

Table 4.7: Fornell-Larcker criterion

ES FPA GSP PA PJP RSF RT

ES 0.835
FPA 0.717 0.830
GSP 0.693 0.776 0.880
PA 0.722 0.732 0.816 0.829
PJP 0.715 0.698 0.679 0.673 0.824
RSF 0.641 0.746 0.755 0.817 0.621 0.776
RT 0.603 0.559 0.518 0.560 0.527 0.480 0.814

Table 4.8: Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio

ES FPA GSP PA PJP RSF RT

ES
FPA 0.843
GSP 0.782 0.845
PA 0.831 0.788 0.900
PJP 0.805 0.814 0.771 0.834
RSF 0.725 0.731 0.881 0.813 0.708
RT 0.740 0.708 0.640 0.662 0.651 0.600

Table 4.9: Cross-loadings

PJP ES FPA GSP PA RSF RT

FPA 0.624 0.872 0.696 0.864 0.592 0.625 0.448
GSP 0.628 0.681 0.939 0.871 0.600 0.702 0.436
RSF 0.564 0.645 0.722 0.860 0.549 0.926 0.414
RT 0.541 0.484 0.468 0.650 0.445 0.421 0.832
ES1 0.807 0.560 0.594 0.569 0.593 0.496 0.494
ES2 0.859 0.614 0.618 0.634 0.629 0.570 0.496
ES3 0.878 0.633 0.620 0.649 0.604 0.575 0.555
ES4 0.824 0.605 0.541 0.589 0.611 0.529 0.496
ES5 0.805 0.582 0.517 0.570 0.546 0.504 0.474
FPA1 0.484 0.737 0.558 0.604 0.503 0.521 0.403
FPA2 0.478 0.746 0.548 0.594 0.486 0.531 0.387
FPA3 0.596 0.766 0.561 0.628 0.539 0.593 0.394
FPA4 0.436 0.639 0.461 0.501 0.411 0.437 0.310
FPA5 0.564 0.765 0.543 0.615 0.540 0.546 0.475
FPA6 0.575 0.733 0.709 0.683 0.569 0.626 0.467
GSP1 0.555 0.642 0.836 0.772 0.593 0.675 0.434
GSP2 0.612 0.691 0.843 0.752 0.559 0.698 0.437
GSP3 0.620 0.673 0.847 0.740 0.595 0.651 0.440
GSP4 0.578 0.634 0.840 0.725 0.572 0.639 0.460
GSP5 0.449 0.511 0.703 0.585 0.433 0.537 0.331
PJP1 0.542 0.566 0.571 0.557 0.797 0.530 0.444
PJP2 0.624 0.585 0.544 0.541 0.862 0.510 0.452
 159

Table 4.9: Continued

PJP3 0.645 0.608 0.556 0.568 0.862 0.500 0.458
PJP4 0.559 0.559 0.536 0.527 0.783 0.489 0.381
PJP5 0.570 0.558 0.591 0.582 0.814 0.535 0.435
RSF1 0.497 0.548 0.581 0.633 0.482 0.806 0.376
RSF2 0.591 0.662 0.732 0.744 0.563 0.844 0.408
RSF3 0.485 0.550 0.589 0.626 0.462 0.767 0.351
RSF4 0.383 0.527 0.463 0.566 0.377 0.688 0.423
RSF5 0.487 0.573 0.607 0.626 0.477 0.759 0.325
RSF6 0.523 0.600 0.667 0.650 0.512 0.783 0.355
RT1 0.498 0.454 0.421 0.510 0.420 0.380 0.808
RT2 0.488 0.449 0.432 0.527 0.409 0.392 0.846
RT3 0.487 0.463 0.412 0.495 0.460 0.400 0.787

4.7.4 Formative measures validity

Formative constructs are assumed to be free of errors as proposed by various

researchers (Hair et al., 2014). In addition, the author further investigated that
reflective and formative constructs should not be assessed in the same manner. This
study involves first order reflective and second order formative constructs. So the
second order formative construct used in this research is performance appraisal (PA),
while the dimensions of performance appraisal such as Goal setting and purposes
(GSP), Fairness of performance appraisal (FPA), Rating scale format (RSF) and rater
training (RT) will be assumed as reflective constructs. Formative construct can be
assessed by using three types of methods: (1) measuring the collinearity (2) assessing
the significance and relevance level of the formative indicators (3) observing the
convergent validity for formative measures (Hair et al, 2014; Ramayah et al., 2016).
In this research, formative measurement was examined with the help of the above
techniques i.e. measuring the convergent validity, collinearity issue and significance
level of the formative items.
If collinearity issue exists among formative items then definitely it will affect
weights and statistical significance of formative items (Hair et al., 2014). In
SmartPLS, the researcher can easily assess the extent of collinearity by determining
variance inflation factor (VIF) rate of the constructs. The threshold value for VIF is ≤
5.0, otherwise; the construct value exceeding this limit is a clear indicator of
collinearity issue (Hair et al., 2011; Ramayah et al., 2016). In this study, collinearity
was examined for all dimensions indicators of second-order formative construct i.e.,
 160

performance appraisal (PA) and were found correct and below the acceptable limit of
5.0, refer to Table 4.10.

Table 4.10: Collinearity values

Indicators VIF
FPA 2.190
GSP 2.407
RSF 2.352
RT 1.295
ES1 2.006
ES2 2.555
ES3 2.756
ES4 2.134
ES5 2.035
FPA1 1.626
FPA2 1.654
FPA3 1.770
FPA4 1.362
FPA5 1.758
FPA6 1.530
GSP1 2.211
GSP2 2.305
GSP3 2.310
GSP4 2.239
GSP5 1.569
PJP1 1.929
PJP2 2.647
PJP3 2.550
PJP4 1.845
PJP5 1.997
RSF1 2.052
RSF2 2.314
RSF3 1.819
RSF4 1.485
RSF5 1.793
RSF6 1.922
RT1 1.484
RT2 1.630
RT3 1.412
 161

In order to assess first-order reflective and second-order formative construct, all the
dimensions that are first-order reflective will be connected as formative indicators.
However, to reach the point, the latent second-order construct will be assumed as
dependent construct and the formative indicator (dimensions) as independent
construct. This procedure is suggested by Hair et al. (2014) in his studies. Another
important standard for examining formative items is to find out its outer weights and
significance level (Ramayah et al., 2016). Other researchers like Diamantopoulos et
al. (2001) propose that formative measure items can be examined through its outer
weights and relevance to its significance. It means that any item or indicator of
formative construct must be significant. But according to other researchers such as
Hair et al. (2013) and Ramayah et al. (2016), even if the formative indicator is not
significant, still it can be taken for further analysis because of its content validity.
The same researchers further extend that a formative indicator can only be deleted
from a study if it is insignificant.
The outer weight values and significance of all dimensions of performance
appraisal (GSP, FPA, RSF, RT) used as indicators for formative constructs were
accomplished by using bootstrapping method in SmartPLS. The findings in Table
4.11 represent outer weights and significance level which qualifies the criteria
mentioned for assessment of formative constructs.

Table 4.11: Outer weights and significance level for formative measures

Constructs Indicators Weights Mean Std.Deviation t-value

Performance Goal setting and 0.319 0.321 0.019 17.887
appraisal purposes
Fairness 0.337 0.340 0.016 19.457
Rating scale format 0.311 0.311 0.014 21.681
Rater training 0.252 0.253 0.024 10.312

4.8 Structural model measurement

After exhibiting the empirical results concerning the reliability and validity of
variables involved in measurement model of this study, the next step encompasses
the evaluation of the findings derived from the structural model. Structural model
shows the regression part of the model and exhibits the relationship present in the
latent constructs of the present study. More broadly, it identifies the direct or indirect
 162

variance in the values of other latent variables (Byrne, 1998). Henceforth, it

demonstrates the causal relationship among the latent construct of the model. Yet,
structural model analysis will report whether the underlying (proposed) theories
employed in this research have been supported by the empirical data or not (Hair et
al., 2013, 2014).
The basic metrics of structural model are coefficient of determination (R2),
significance of path coefficient; effect sizes (f2) and the predictive relevance (Q2)
while, according to Ramayah et al. (2016) q2 is not that much essential to be
reported. Hair et al. 2017 suggested of always reporting these basic metrics for
substantial explanation of the findings. In addition, mediating construct is also part of
the current study. The major purpose of the structural model evaluation is to answer
the research questions by measuring the proposed research hypotheses. This study
carries sixteen hypotheses which were formulated and clarified in chapter 3 and
based on the research framework.

Figure 4.2: Structural model

 163

4.8.1 Coefficient of determination (R2)

Coefficient of determination R2 is used to identify model‘s predictive accuracy. It

reflects the amount of variance that occurs in dependent variable due to the effect of
independent constructs (Hair et al., 2013). The recommended values for R2 are 0.67,
0.33 and 0.19 for dependent constructs and these values are designed as substantial,
moderate and weak respectively (Chin, 2010). While, according to Hair et al. (2013)
R2 values lie in the range of 0.75, 0.50 and 0.25 for dependent variables and
subsequently show strong, moderate and weak relationships.
Figure 4.1 illustrates the measurement model of this study having R2 values.
The R2 value noted for performance appraisal is 0.869 which can be reflected as very
strong and it implies that 86% variance is caused in the performance appraisal (PA)
due to the effect of goal setting and purposes of performance appraisal (GSP),
fairness of performance appraisal (FPA), rating scale format (RSF) and rater training
(RT). Whereas, R2 value recorded for employee satisfaction (ES) is 0.521 (moderate)
and signifies 52% variance in employee satisfaction (ES) is explained by
performance appraisal (PA). In the last, R2 value reported for perceived job
performance (PJP) is 0.563 (moderate) and shows that 56% variance is caused in
perceived job performance (PJP) by performance appraisal (PA). Refer to Table 4.12
for R-square values.
Table 4.12: R-square values

Constructs R2 values
Performance appraisal (PA) 0.869
Employee satisfaction (ES) 0.521
Perceived job performance (PJP) 0.563

4.8.2 Significance of path coefficients

Structural model shows the path coefficients of all the proposed paths in Figure 4.2.
The structural model is considered as an important tool for measuring the
significance level of path coefficients. Most researchers have recommended the
application of bootstrapping method in PLS-SEM to check the statistical significance
of path coefficients (Dijkstra & Henseler, 2015; Hair et al., 2016; Hair et al., 2013).
 164

After carrying out the structural model assessment, the path coefficients can be seen
in Figure 4.2 and their outcomes in Table 4.13 respectively. Since, path coefficients
or beta values are measured on the basis of their magnitude sign and significance
level. The acceptable value for path coefficient magnitude is between -1 to +1. The
path coefficient values occurring close to +1 specify strong positive relationship.
While on the other hand, the one close to -1 stand for strong negative relationship. In
the same way, its significance level is investigated on the basis of t-value (Hair et al.,
2014).
Table 4.13: Structural model (β-value and t-value)

β-value Standard Deviation t-value P Value

ES -> PJP 0.478 0.087 5.517 0.001
FPA -> PA 0.220 0.047 4.675 0.000
GSP -> PA 0.429 0.043 9.906 0.000
PA -> PJP 0.328 0.081 4.075 0.002
PA -> ES 0.722 0.054 13.300 0.000
RSF -> PA 0.249 0.041 6.141 0.012
RT -> PA 0.163 0.023 6.977 0.000
P < 0.005
The recommended t-value for path coefficient to be significant is 1.96 (Hair et
al., 2014). However, as presented in the above Table 4.13 that performance appraisal
has a strong effect on employee satisfaction (PA -> ES with beta value of 0.722, t-
value= 13.300) followed by goal setting and purposes effect on performance
appraisal (GSP -> PA having beta value of 0.429, t-value= 9.906) and so on. In the
last, no single relationship was noticed insignificant in this study.

4.8.3 Effect sizes (f2)

Effect size f2 is called as the estimation of R2 and measures the remaining variance of
R2 in a dependent construct. In recent past, effect size was measured when a given
independent variable was taken out from the research model and then the variance of
the excluded independent construct on the dependent variable was assumed as effect
size (Hair et al., 2013). But now the latest version of SmartPLS-3 eases this problem
and has a function which can automatically measure f2 and Q2 values.
 165

The recommended values of f2 are 0.02, 0.15 and 0.35 to report small, medium and
large effects respectively (Hair et al., 2012). Refer to Table 4.14 which presents the
effect size values. The f2 value of performance appraisal (PA) on perceived job
performance was (0.118) having medium effect size. While, the f2 value of employee
satisfaction (ES) on perceived job performance (PJP) was recorded (0.025) with
small effect size. And in the last, the f2 value of performance appraisal (PA) on
employee satisfaction (ES) was noted as (1.089) with having large effect size. Hence,
it can be summarized that the highest effect size value was examined of performance
appraisal on employee satisfaction (1.089) and the smallest effect size value was
reported of employee satisfaction on perceived job performance which is (0.025).

Table 4.14: f-square values

Constructs f2
Performance appraisal Employee satisfaction (ES) 1.089
(PA)
Employee satisfaction Perceived job performance 0.025
(ES) (PJP)
Performance appraisal Perceived job performance 0.118
(PA) (PJP)

4.8.4 The predictive relevance (Q2)

Q2 value ―is a measure of predictive relevance based on the blindfolding technique‖

(Hair et al., 2013). Blindfolding technique can be considered as vital for reflective
dependent constructs in order to specify and remove data points of the indicators in a
systematic method to predict the measurement model (Hair et al., 2013). Though, Q2
values can only be extracted and calculated for reflective dependent variables.
According to Hair et al. (2010, 2014) the Q2 value should be greater than zero for a
satisfactory predictive relevance of a model. The Q-square value of performance
appraisal is 0.529, followed by employee satisfaction which is 0.330 and finally, the
Q-square value of perceived job performance was reported as 0.342. Table 4.15
demonstrates the findings of the Q-square briefly.
 166

Table 4.15: Q2 values

Dependent dimension Q2
Performance appraisal 0.529
(PA)
Employee satisfaction 0.330
(ES)
Perceived job 0.342
performance (PJP)

4.8.5 Goodness-of-fit model (GoF)

The goodness-of-fit (GoF) of the model would be the essential stage of model
evaluation. A global fit model was developed by Tenenhaus et al. (2005) which was
based on R-square values. The GoF was established on the square root of the product
of the average communality of all the variables and the average R2 values of
endogenous variables through which a fit measure between 0 and 1 is calculated.
Goodness of Fit criteria is measured as 0.1, 0.25 and 0.36 for small, medium and
large effect sizes (Alolah et al., 2014). When outer models are formative then the
suggested GoF is conceptually inadequate or otherwise, if single item variable is
included (Hair et al., 2012). Furthermore, Henseler et al. (2013, p.566) documented
that ―The GoF represents an operational solution to this problem as it may be meant
as an index for validating the PLS model globally‖. Various research studies of
empirical nature have used GoF in PLS (Henseler et al., 2013). Goodness of Fit
criteria has been proposed by Hensler et al. (2016) for the assessment of the model,
that is, Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR), the geodesic discrepancy
(dG), the unweighted least square discrepancy (dULS), root mean square error
correlation (RMStheta), and the normed fit index (NFI). So, both measurement model
and structural model misspecification can be identified through these indices.
In a nut shell, model fit are evaluated on the basis of the standardized root
mean square residual SRMR (Henseler et al., 2014, 2016; Hair et al., 2017).
According to the updated literature, it is essential to report SRMR in the evaluation
of GoF and its value must be lower than 0.1 (Henseler et al., 2014; Ramayah et al.,
2016; Hair et al., 2017), while Henseler et al. (2016) reported a value of 0.08 to be
more appropriate and acceptably fit for PLS path models. NFI value is also rounded
between 0 and 1. The closest the value of NFI to 1 appears to be better model fit.
 167

While, RMStheta is the co-variance matrix of the measurement model residuals, the fit
measures is only determined for fully reflective models (Ramayah et al., 2016). The
recommended value for RMStheta is yet to be determined in PLS path modeling and
this software is still short of implementing these fit-indices values (Henseler et al.,
2014, 2016). In conclusion, there is no logic to estimate and report them if the
researcher‘s purpose is to test or compare models (Henseler et al., 2016). Based on
the above criteria the current model of this study has subsumed to be good fit model.
And the values of SRMR, saturated and estimated models (0.064, 0.073) are less than
0.1 and 0.08 as well as the NFI value (0.827) is also close to 1. Refer to Table 4.16
for detailed results of the GoF indices.

Table 4.16: Goodness-of-Fit model

Fit summary
RMStheta 0.112
Saturated model Estimated model
SRMR 0.064 0.073
d_ULS 2.408 3.182
d_G 2.117 2.174
Chi-Square 2310.494 2374.867
NFI 0.827 0.817

4.9 Hypotheses testing

Partial least square structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) was utilized to test the
proposed hypotheses which describe the effects of independent and dependent
variables of the research. Independent and dependent variables are differentiated
through one sided arrow. A single headed arrow is employed to pinpoint the causal
effect of independent variable (arrow pointing out) on the corresponding endogenous
variable (arrow pointing in). Path analysis was done on the basis of direct and
indirect effects of independent variable on the corresponding dependent variable.
Hypotheses were established on the relationships of these different constructs. In
order to assess the hypothesized relationships of the constructs, two methods were
used for getting final results i.e., path model was tested collectively and individually.
 168

Findings of the formulated hypotheses of this research are illustrated below and see
the Table 4.18 for overall results.

H1: There is a significant and positive relationship between performance

appraisal and perceived job performance.
In hypothesis H1 we investigated the relationship between performance
appraisal and perceived job performance. The path coefficient of performance
appraisal to perceived job performance was noted as 0.675 and was found significant
with having t-value = 10.660. (Refer to Figure 4.3). Hence, it is determined that there
is positive relationship between performance appraisal and perceived job
performance. Consequently, H1 is strongly supported by the empirical data.

Figure 4.3: Findings of direct relationship between PA and PJP

H1a: Goal setting and purposes of the performance appraisal are significantly
and positively related to perceived job performance.
In the hypothesis (H1a) the association between goal setting and purposes of
performance appraisal and perceived job performance was examined. The findings of
this hypothesis reveal that path coefficient of 0.681 was recorded significant, t-value
= 11.853 (see figure 4.4). So, it is summarized that goal setting and purposes of
performance appraisal has a significant and positive association with perceived job
performance. Consequently, H1a hypothesis is also strongly supported by the
empirical data.
 169

Figure 4.4: Findings of direct relationship between GSP and PJP

H1b: Fairness of the performance appraisal is significantly and positively

related to perceived job performance.
Hypothesis H1b evaluated the relationship between fairness of performance
appraisal and perceived job performance. The findings of this hypothesis show that
path coefficient was reported 0.699 and was also found significant, t-value = 14.512
(see Figure 4.5). In the last, it is derived that fairness of performance appraisal has a
significant and positive relation with perceived job performance. Consequently, H1b
hypothesis is also strongly supported by the empirical data.

Figure 4.5: Findings of direct relationship between FPA and PJP

H1c: Rating scale format of the performance appraisal is significantly and

positively related to perceived job performance.
Hypothesis H1c assessed the relationship of rating scale format with
perceived job performance. From the results it is indicated that path coefficient of
 170

rating scale format to perceived job performance was found 0.624 with t-value =
9.520 (see Figure 4.6). Hence, it is summarized that rating scale format is
significantly and positively related to perceived job performance. Subsequently, H1c
is strongly verified by the empirical data.

Figure 4.6: Findings of direct relationship between RSF and PJP

H1d: Rater training of the performance appraisal is significantly and positively

related to perceived job performance.
In hypothesis H1d the relationship of rater training of the performance
appraisal and perceived job performance was studied. From the results it is indicated
that path coefficient of rater training to perceived job performance was found 0.531
with t-value = 8.554 (see Figure 4.7). Hence, it is concluded that rater training has a
significant and positive relationship with perceived job performance. Subsequently,
H1d is strongly confirmed by the empirical data.

Figure 4.7: Findings of direct relationship between RT and PJP

 171

H2: There is a significant and positive relationship between performance

appraisal and employee satisfaction.
In the hypothesis (H2) the relationship of performance appraisal and
employee satisfaction was examined. The path coefficient of performance appraisal
to employee satisfaction was noted as 0.725 and was found significant with having t-
value = 15.485 (see Figure 4.8). Hence, it is summarized that performance appraisal
is significantly and positively linked with employee satisfaction. Consequently, this
hypothesis H2 is strongly supported by the empirical data.

Figure 4.8: Findings of direct relationship between PA and ES

H2a: There is a significant and positive relationship between goal setting and
purposes of performance appraisal and employee satisfaction.
Hypothesis (H2a) assessed the relationship of goal setting and purposes with
employee satisfaction. From the results it is indicated that path coefficient of goal
setting and purposes to employee satisfaction was reported as 0.696 and was found
significant with t-value = 12.284 (see Figure 4.9). Hence, it is concluded that there is
positive and significant association, existing between goal setting and purposes of the
performance appraisal and employee satisfaction. Subsequently, H2a is strongly
supported by the empirical data.
 172

Figure 4.9: Findings of direct relationship between GSP and ES

H2b: There is a significant and positive relationship between fairness of

performance appraisal and employee satisfaction.
Hypothesis (H2b) evaluated the relationship of fairness of the performance
appraisal with employee satisfaction. From the results it is indicated that path
coefficient of fairness of the performance appraisal to employee satisfaction is 0.720
with t-value = 14.170 (see Figure 4.10). Hence, it is summarized that fairness of the
performance appraisal is significantly and positively related to employee satisfaction.
Subsequently, H2b is strongly supported by the empirical data.

Figure 4.10: Findings of direct relationship between FPA and ES

H2c: There is a significant and positive relationship between rating scale format
and employee satisfaction.
Hypothesis (H2c) evaluated the relationship of rating scale format of the
performance appraisal with employee satisfaction. From the results it is indicated
 173

that path coefficient of rating scale format of the performance appraisal to employee
satisfaction is 0.643 with t-value = 9.340 (see Figure 4.11). Hence, it is summarized
that a positive and significant relationship has been verified between rating scale
format of the performance appraisal and employee satisfaction. Subsequently, H2c is
strongly supported by the empirical data.

Figure 4.11: Findings of direct relationship between RSF and ES

H2d: There is a significant and positive relationship between rater training of

performance appraisal and employee satisfaction.
Hypothesis (H2d) evaluated the relationship of rater training of the
performance appraisal with employee satisfaction. From the results it is indicated
that path coefficient of rater training of the performance appraisal to employee
satisfaction was found as 0.604 with t-value = 10.603 (see Figure 4.12). Hence, it is
summarized that rater training of the performance appraisal is significantly and
positively related to employee satisfaction. Subsequently, H2d is strongly verified by
the empirical data.
 174

Figure 4.12: Findings of direct relationship between RT and ES

H3: There is a positive and significant relationship between employee

satisfaction and perceived job performance.
Hypothesis (H3) evaluated the relationship of employee satisfaction with
perceived job performance. From the results it is indicated that path coefficient of
employee satisfaction to perceived job performance is 0.716 with t-value = 13.793
(see Figure 4.13). Hence, it is summarized that employee satisfaction is significantly
and positively related to perceived job performance. Subsequently, H3 is strongly
verified by the empirical data.

Figure 4.13: Findings of direct relationship between RSF and ES

In the last but not the least, all the research hypotheses having direct effect were
supported in the present study. The detail of the direct relationship existed between
different constructs i.e., path coefficient along with its significance level (beta value,
t-value), standard deviation and P-values as given in Table 4.17.
 175

Table 4.17: Hypotheses testing (β-value and t-value)

Standard
β-value Deviation t-value P Value
PA -> PJP 0.675 0.063 10.660 0.001
GSP -> PJP 0.681 0.057 11.853 0.012
FPA -> PJP 0.699 0.048 14.512 0.000
RSF -> PJP 0.624 0.066 9.520 0.000
RT -> PJP 0.531 0.062 8.554 0.002
PA -> ES 0.725 0.047 15.485 0.000
GSP -> ES 0.696 0.057 12.284 0.001
FPA -> ES 0.720 0.051 14.170 0.000
RSF -> ES 0.643 0.069 9.340 0.011
RT -> ES 0.604 0.057 10.603 0.021
ES -> PJP 0.716 0.052 13.793 0.000
P<0.005
While, in Table 4.18 the overall summary of the proposed research
hypotheses including direct relationship of performance appraisal along with its
dimensions on perceived job performance and the direct relationship of performance
appraisal along with its dimensions on employee satisfaction is also enumerated in
the table 4.17. All these proposed hypotheses of the study were supported by the
empirical data.
Table 4.18: Summary of the direct hypotheses

Hypotheses β-value t-value p-value Results

HI: Performance appraisal is significantly and

positively related to perceived job performance
0.675 10.660 0.001 Supported
H1a: Goal setting and purposes of the
performance appraisal is significantly and
positively related to perceived job performance
0.681 11.853 0.012 Supported
H1b: Fairness of the performance appraisal is
significantly and positively related to perceived
job performance 0.699 14.512 0.000 Supported
H1c: Rating scale format of the performance
appraisal is significantly and positively related
to perceived job performance 0.624 9.520 0.000 Supported
H1d: Rater training of the performance appraisal
is significantly and positively related to
perceived job performance 0.531 8.554 0.002 Supported
 176

Table 4.18: Continued

H2: There is a significant and positive
relationship between performance appraisal and
employee satisfaction 0.725 15.485 0.000 Supported
H2a: There is a significant and positive
relationship between goal setting and purposes
of the performance appraisal and employee
satisfaction 0.696 12.284 0.001 Supported
H2b: There is a significant and positive
relationship between fairness of the performance
appraisal and employee satisfaction 0.720 14.170 0.000 Supported
H2c: There is a significant and positive
relationship between rating scale format of the
performance appraisal and employee satisfaction 0.643 9.340 0.011 Supported
H2d: There is a significant and positive
relationship between rater training of the
performance appraisal and employee satisfaction 0.604 10.603 0.021 Supported
H3: There is a significant and positive
relationship between employee satisfaction and
perceived job performance 0.716 13.793 0.000 Supported

4.10 Mediation analysis

This research study has to emphasize on both the direct and indirect effect as it
examines the mediator. The direct effect can be explained as it goes directly from
independent variable to dependent variable. While, indirect effect is the one which
goes to dependent variable from an independent variable through a mediator in the
model. In this study, employee satisfaction acts as a mediator on the relationship of
performance appraisal along with its dimensions and perceived job performance. The
mediation analysis was conducted through PLS-SEM by using bootstrapping
method. The last five hypotheses were analysed to examine the mediating effect of
employee satisfaction. The use of bootstrapping assists to test the mediation
hypotheses (Picon et al., 2014; Edwards et al., 2016). This method produces 95%
confidence intervals (percentile) for the mediators. Refer to Table 4.29 for the
summary of hypotheses assessed through mediating effect of employee satisfaction.
The researcher followed the various steps in overall mediation analysis of the
proposed hypotheses. There are two steps to confirm mediation between the
constructs. In the first step it is necessary to find out the significance of the direct
effect and in the second step the significance of the indirect effect and the strength of
mediating construct would be assessed as the final step. Eventually, if both direct and
indirect effect is found to be significant it means that mediation has occurred.
Unlikely, if the indirect effect is not significant it means that no mediation occurs. It
 177

is also worthy to understand that if the sign of confidence intervals (LCI and UPCI)
have the same sign (both are either positive or negative) it shows mediation.
Conversely, if one sign is positive and the other is negative it reveals no mediation at
all (Picon et al., 2014; Edwards et al., 2016). Additionally, to identify whether it is
full mediation among the constructs or partial mediation, the researcher has used a
new technique called as variance accounted factor (VAF).

Figure 4.14: General mediation model (Nitz et al., 2016)

Full mediation can only be established if the direct effect (c) is not significant
and the indirect effect (a× b) is significant, which shows only the indirect effect
through mediator. Simply, full mediation occurs in the case when the effect of
independent construct to dependent construct is transmitted through mediator (Nitz et
al., 2016). On the other hand, partial mediation can be recognized when both the
direct affect (c) and indirect effect (a× b) are significant; it means that partial
mediation exists (Nitz et al., 2016). Additionally, no effect is identified in the case
when both the direct and indirect effect is found to be insignificant. The rule of the
thumb is, if the VAF is less than 20% it means zero mediation existed, a case in
which VAF is higher than 20% and below 80% can be classified as a typical partial
mediation and if a VAF value is greater than 80% it shows a full mediation (Hair et
al., 2016; Nitz et al., 2016). So, in this study all the hypotheses based on mediation
were found to be partially mediated. The formula for variance accounted factor is:

(Refer to Figure 4.14)

 178

H4: Employee satisfaction mediates the relationship between performance

appraisal and perceived job performance.
In hypothesis H4 the researcher examined the mediating effect of employee
satisfaction on the relationship between performance appraisal and perceived job
performance. The criteria used in this study are calculating total effect which means
the sum of direct and indirect effects. By looking at the Table 4.19, it can be
concluded that all the three constructs have direct effect on each other. performance
appraisal (PA) to perceived job performance (PJP) has a path coefficient or β-value
of 0.328 and was found significant, t-value = 3.964, followed by the β-value of
performance appraisal (PA) to employee satisfaction (ES) was examined as 0.724
and was found significant with t-value = 14.651, And finally employee satisfaction
(ES) to perceived job performance (PJP) has a path coefficient of 0.477 that was
found significant with t-value = 5.514 (see the Figure 4.15). Hence, it can be
concluded that this hypothesis is partially mediated as its value falls above 20% and
below 80%.
VAF = 0.724×0.477 / 0.724×0.477+0.328=0.55 ×100 = 55% (c)

Figure 4.15: Mediation effect of ES on PA and PJP

 179

Table 4.19: Specific direct effect of PA on ES and PJP

β-value t-value P Value

PA -> PJP 0.328 3.964 0.012
PA -> ES 0.724 14.651 0.000
ES -> PJP 0.477 5.14 0.001
P<0.005
While, specific indirect effect with confidence intervals was also examined
for mediation analysis. So, according to Table 4.20 it is revealed that employee
satisfaction mediates the relationship of performance appraisal with perceived job
performance having path coefficient or β-value of 0.346 that was found significant, t-
value = 5.025. It was also noted that the upper confidence interval (UCI) and lower
confidence interval (LCI) values are positive. This indicates that there is mediation
between the two constructs i.e., performance appraisal (PA) and perceived job
performance (PJP) due to employee satisfaction (ES).

Table 4.20: Specific indirect effect of PA on ES and PJP

LCI UCI
2.50% 97.50%
β-value t-value P Value
PA -> ES -> PJP 0.346 5.025 0.001 0.217 0.482
P<0.005

H4a: Employee satisfaction mediates the relationship between goal setting and
purposes of performance appraisal and perceived job performance.
In hypothesis H4a the researcher examined the mediating effect of employee
satisfaction on the relationship of goal setting and purposes of performance appraisal
and perceived job performance. The same criteria was followed as employed in the
previous hypothesis. By looking at the Table 4.21, it can be concluded that all the
three constructs directly affect each other. Goal setting and purposes (GSP) to
perceived job performance (PJP) β- value = 0.352 was found significant, t-value
4.736, followed by goal setting and purposes (GSP) to employee satisfaction (ES)
has a path coefficient of 0.695 and is also significant, t-value = 11.652. And finally
the path coefficient (β-value) of employee satisfaction (ES) to perceived job
performance (PJP) was examined which is 0.470 and is significant with t-value =
 180

6.393 (see the Figure 4.16). If we look into the value of VAF it is clear that partial
mediation exists on the basis of VAF value which ranges above 20% and below 80%.
VAF = 0.695×0.470 / 0.695×0.470+0.352=0.57 ×100 = 57% (d)

Figure 4.16: Meditation effect of ES on GSP and PJP

Table 4.21: Specific direct effect of GSP on ES and PJP

β-value t-value P Value

GSP -> PJP 0.352 4.736 0.011
GSP -> ES 0.695 11.652 0.000
ES -> PJP 0.470 6.393 0.000
P<0.005
While, specific indirect effect with confidence intervals was also examined
for mediation analysis. So, according to the results given in Table 4.22 employee
satisfaction mediates the relationship between goal setting and purposes of the
performance appraisal and perceived job performance, having path coefficient or β-
value of 0.327 and was found significant, t-value = 5.179. It was also noted that the
upper confidence interval (UCI) and lower confidence interval (LCI) values are
positive. This indicates that there is mediation between the two constructs i.e., GSP
and PJP due to employee satisfaction (ES).
 181

Table 4.22: Specific indirect effect of GSP on ES and PJP

LCI UCI
β-value t-value P Value 2.50% 97.50%
GSP -> ES -> PJP 0.327 5.179 0.002 0.218 0.450
P<0.005

H4b: Employee satisfaction mediates the relationship between fairness of

performance appraisal and perceived job performance.
In hypothesis H4b the researcher examined the mediating effect of
satisfaction on the relationship of fairness of performance appraisal and perceived
job performance. The same criteria were followed as employed in the previous
hypothesis. By looking at the Table 4.23, it can be concluded that all the three
constructs have a direct effect on each other. Fairness of performance appraisal
(FPA) to perceived job performance (PJP) has a β-value of 0.382 and is found
significant, t-value = 5.719, followed by β-value (0.719) of fairness (FPA) to
employee satisfaction (ES) and was also found significant, t-value 14.760. And
finally the β-value (0.441) of employee satisfaction (ES) to perceived job
performance (PJP) was found significant, t-value = 6.020 (see the Figure 4.17). The
VAF value of this hypothesis also indicates clearly the presence of partial mediation
as its value is above 20% and below 80%.
VAF = 0.719×0.441 / 0.719×0.441+0.382=0.57 ×100 = 57% (e)

Figure 4.17: Mediation effect of ES on FPA and PJP

 182

Table 4.23: Specific direct effect of FPA on ES and PJP

β-value t-value P Value

FPA -> PJP 0.382 5.719 0.002
FPA -> ES 0.719 14.760 0.000
ES -> PJP 0.441 6.020 0.001
P<0.005
While, specific indirect effect with confidence intervals was also examined
for mediation analysis. So, according to Table 4.24 it is revealed that employee
satisfaction mediates the relationship between fairness and perceived job
performance having β-value of 0.317 and is found significant, t-value = 5.013. It was
also noted that the upper β-value confidence interval (UCI) and lower confidence
interval (LCI) values are positive. This indicates that employee satisfaction (ES)
mediates the relationship between fairness of performance appraisal (FPA) and
perceived job performance (PJP).

Table 4.24: Specific indirect effect of FPA on ES and PJP

LCI UPCI
β-value t-value P Value 2.50% 97.50%
FPA -> ES -> PJP 0.317 5.013 0.012 0.205 0.439
P<0.005

H4c: Employee satisfaction mediates the relationship between rating scale

format of the performance appraisal and perceived job performance.
In hypothesis H4c the researcher examined the mediating effect of employee
satisfaction on the relationship of rating scale format of the performance appraisal
and perceived job performance. The same criteria were followed as employed in the
previous one. By looking at the Table 4.25, it can be concluded that all the three
constructs have directly affected each other. Rating scale format (RSF) to perceived
job performance (PJP) has a path coefficient or β-value of 0.278 and is found
significant, t-value = 4.277, followed by β-value of Rating scale format (RSF) to
employee satisfaction (ES) which is 0.643 and was also found significant, t-value
9.037. And finally the β-value of employee satisfaction (ES) to perceived job
performance (PJP) was examined which is 0.537 and was found significant, t-value =
8.279 (see the Figure 4.18). A partial mediation is also present in this hypothesis
 183

which is determined on the basis of VAF value because it is above 20% and below
80%.
VAF = 0.643×0.537 / 0.643×0.537+0.278=0.56 ×100 = 56% (f)

Figure 4.18: Mediation effect of ES on RSF and PJP

Table 4.25: Specific direct effect of RSF on ES and PJP

β-value t-value P Value

RSF -> PJP 0.278 4.277 0.012
RSF -> ES 0.643 9.037 0.000
ES -> PJP 0.537 8.279 0.000
P<0.005
While, specific indirect effect with confidence intervals was also examined
for mediation analysis. So, according to Table 4.26 it is revealed that employee
satisfaction mediates the relationship of rating scale format of the performance
appraisal with perceived job performance having β-value of 0.345 and significant, t-
value = 5.543. It was also noted that the upper confidence interval (UCI) and lower
confidence interval (LCI) values are positive. This indicates that there is mediation
between the two constructs i.e., RSF and PJP due to employee satisfaction (ES).
 184

Table 4.26: Specific indirect effect of RSF on ES and PJP

LCI UCI
β-value t-value P Value 2.50% 97.50%
RSF -> ES -> PJP 0.345 5.543 0.000 0.231 0.467
P<0.005
H4d: Employee satisfaction mediates the relationship between rater training
and perceived job performance
In hypothesis H4d the researcher examined the mediating effect of employee
satisfaction on the relationship of rater training of the performance appraisal and
perceived job performance. The same criteria were followed as employed in the
previous hypothesis. By looking at the Table 4.27, it can be concluded that all the
three constructs have directly affected each other. Rater training (RT) to perceived
job performance (PJP) has a β-value of 0.152 and is found significant, t-value =
3.281, followed by β-value of rater training (RT) to employee satisfaction (ES)
which is 0.604 and was found significant, t-value= 9.419. And finally the β-value of
employee satisfaction (ES) to perceived job performance (PJP) was examined being
0.623 and significant, t-value = 10.071 (See the Figure 4.19). The VAF value of this
hypothesis explicitly shows partial mediation because the value is above 20% and
below 80%.
VAF = 0.604×0.623 / 0.604×0.623+0.152=0.54 ×100 = 54% (g)

Figure 4.19: Mediation effect of ES on RT and PJP

 185

Table 4.27: Specific direct effect of RT on ES and PJP

β-value t-value P Value

RT -> PJP 0.152 3.281 0.021
RT -> ES 0.604 9.419 0.000
ES -> PJP 0.623 10.071 0.000
P<0.005
While, specific indirect effect with confidence intervals was also examined
for mediation analysis. So, according to Table 4.28 it is revealed that employee
satisfaction mediates the relationship of rater training with perceived job
performance having β-value of 0.376 that is significant, t-value = 6.976. It was also
noted that the upper confidence interval (UCI) and lower confidence interval (LCI)
values are positive. This indicates that there is mediation between the two constructs
i.e., RT and PJP due to employee satisfaction (ES).

Table 4.28: Specific indirect effect of RT on ES and PJP

LCI UCI
β-value t-value P Value 2.50% 97.50%
RT -> ES -> PJP 0.376 6.976 0.001 0.260 0.478
P<0.005
Lastly, summary of the hypotheses testing including mediation is illustrated
in Table 4.29. Results show that all hypotheses formulated on mediation were
supported and were found significant.

Table 4.29: Summary of the mediation hypotheses

Mediation hypotheses Results

H4: Employee satisfaction mediates the relationship between performance appraisal Supported
and perceived job performance
H4a: Employee satisfaction mediates the relationship between goal setting and Supported
purposes of performance appraisal and perceived job performance
H4b: Employee satisfaction mediates the relationship between fairness of performance Supported
appraisal and perceived job performance
H4c: Employee satisfaction mediates the relationship between rating scale format of Supported
the performance appraisal and perceived job performance
H4d: Employee satisfaction mediates the relationship between rater training and Supported
perceived job performance
 186

4.11 Summary of the chapter

This chapter enumerated the research data analysis by showing the data preparation
and the evaluation of multivariate assumptions. It further explained the validity and
reliability of all constructs included in this study. Furthermore, this chapter also
briefly explained the tests of assumptions required for multivariate analysis. In
addition, this chapter described the details regarding data analysis by using Partial
Least Square Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM) through which four main
hypotheses and twelve sub-hypotheses were tested by using structural model
assessment. And all the hypotheses were accepted and supported with empirical
evidences. After that, partial least square structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM)
was applied to assess the reflective constructs reliability and second-order formative
construct measures with confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Then, the mediation
analysis was also done through PLS-SEM along with variance accounted factor
(VAF) method to examine the mediating effect of employee satisfaction on the
relationship of performance appraisal along with its dimensions and perceived job
performance. The next chapter will highlight the discussion on research findings,
conclusion and limitations of the study and future research recommendations.
 CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Introduction

This chapter concludes and explains the results of the analyzed data. The results of
this research are highlighted in the light of the recommendations of conceptual
framework and literature review. This chapter mainly involves the discussion on
research results, conclusions and limitations of the study. Moreover, the implications
of the research and future research recommendations are also included in this
chapter.

5.2 Review of the study

The main aim of this study is to investigate the effects of employee satisfaction and
performance appraisal on perceived job performance among the academics in public
universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. This study carries four main
objectives. The first objective of this research was to investigate the relationship of
performance appraisal and its dimensions with perceived job performance in public
universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Followed by the second objective,
which was to investigate the relationship of performance appraisal and its dimensions
with employee satisfaction among the academics. The third objective was to examine
the relationship of employee satisfaction with the perceived job performance among
the target population. And the last one was to evaluate the mediating effect of
 188

employee satisfaction on the relationship of performance appraisal and its

dimensions with perceived job performance among the target population.
To accomplish these objectives, this research has been framed to investigate
the following four research questions: (1) Is there any relationship of performance
appraisal and its dimensions with perceived job performance among the academics in
public universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. (2) Is there any relationship of
performance appraisal and its dimensions with employee satisfaction among the
target population (3) Is there any relationship between employee satisfaction and
perceived job performance among the target population. (4) Is there any mediating
effect of employee satisfaction on the relationship of performance appraisal and its
dimensions with perceived job performance among the target population? This
chapter has been designed to track the sequence of research objectives and empirical
findings of this study already derived from the earlier chapter.
Based on the research objectives, this research study has examined the
relationship between performance appraisal and perceived job performance with the
mediating role of employee satisfaction. This research was performed in three phases
to satisfy the research questions, accomplish the research objectives and empirically
test and confirm the hypotheses. From earlier literature, research gaps were
identified, and subsequently, a research framework was designed. From the content
examination, performance appraisal along with its dimensions is found to be the most
suitable factor that can have an impact on perceived job performance. Based on the
literature and previous researchers' arguments, this study framed a research
framework that shows the respective relationships among different research
variables. The findings of this study found a substantial positive correlation between
performance appraisal and its dimensions (goal setting and purposes, the fairness of
performance appraisal, rating scale format and rater training) and perceived job
performance among academics of public universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa,
Pakistan. It states that when the academics of public universities are offered with a
performance appraisal which ensures fairness, goal-oriented and purposeful, the rater
is trained with knowledge and skills and rating scale format is reliable and valid,
resultantly, perceived job performance will be increased in particular and
institutional performance in general. The multivariate data analysis of this research
has also indicated that all the four dimensions of performance appraisal (goal setting
and purposes, fairness, rating scale format, and rater training) are found to be
 189

substantial predictors of perceived job performance among the academic staff in

public universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Furthermore, this research also
established the mediating effect of employee satisfaction on the relationship between
performance appraisal and its dimensions with perceived job performance. Findings
of the study exhibited that employee satisfaction positively and significantly
mediated the relationship between performance appraisal and its dimensions with
perceived job performance in the target population.
Lastly, the final phase concentrates on the research design and data analysis.
This research is quantitatively based on a deductive approach. SPSS-23 software was
used to organize data and examined all the preliminary assumptions, i.e.,
Examination of outliers, descriptive statistics and multicollinearity issues for further
data analysis. More importantly, PLS-SEM was used to analyze the measurement
model and structural model of the data and to evaluate the research hypotheses and
give empirical answers to the research questions. Finally, the structural model results
validated a positive and significant relationship between performance appraisal and
its dimensions with perceived job performance and employee satisfaction. A partial
mediation was found in testing the mediating effect of employee satisfaction on the
relationship of performance appraisal and its dimension with perceived job
performance among the academic staff in the target population. The findings of this
study present that all research hypotheses (direct or indirect) were supported, refer to
Tables 4.18 and 4.31 respectively and are considered to be favorable in the sense that
it has added up to both theoretical and practical contributions. The findings of this
study have also assisted to identify the factors of performance appraisal system in
resolving the issues of employee satisfaction, unfairness, rater errors and weak job
performance of academics in universities. The next part will define the results in
more detail.

5.3 Discussion of research findings

In this section, relationships among different constructs of this study, i.e.,

performance appraisal, employee satisfaction, and perceived job performance are
highlighted in detail including the mediating role of employee satisfaction on the
 190

relationship of performance appraisal and its dimensions with perceived job

performance.

5.3.1 Relationship of performance appraisal and perceived job

performance

The researcher assumed a two-way approach to evaluate the association of

performance appraisal and its dimensions with perceived job performance among the
academics. Thus, in the first step, the researcher measured the unidimensionality,
reliability, and validity for all variables of the study in the measurement model
through PLS-SEM. While in the second step the direct relationship of performance
appraisal and its dimensions with perceived job performance was examined using
structural model through PLS-SEM. It was hypothesized in the research that
performance appraisal has a significant and positive relationship with perceived job
performance. The results of the study indicated that there is a positive and significant
relationship existing between performance appraisal and perceived job performance
among academics in public universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. And this
prediction was duly confirmed by the findings of this research. Also, this study
confirms the positive and significant relationship between the dimensions of
performance appraisal, i.e., goal setting and purposes, fairness, rating scale format
and rater training with perceived job performance.
The findings of this study supported the opinions of the previous researchers
about the relationship between performance appraisal with perceived job
performance. According to the earlier researchers (Bowra, Sharif, Saeed, & Niazi,
2012; Jabeen, 2011; Meysen, Mohammad, & Ebrahim, 2012; Rahman & Shah, 2012;
Prowse & Prowse, 2009; Zeb et al., 2018) performance appraisal has a positive and
significant relationship with perceived job performance. According to Rehman
(2012) and Ahmad and Ghani (2018), most of the academics of universities in
Pakistan referred that performance appraisal is the mixture of contaminations and
deficiencies and has almost no focus on enhancing job performance of academic
staff. During the study, the note of attention was what a large number of academics
expressed in their views for bringing positive changes in the existing performance
appraisal system in universities of Pakistan by concentrating on goal-setting aspects,
 191

fairness, utilizing valid rating scale format and trained evaluators; and have re-
confirmed the arguments of the previous scholars in such contexts (Iqbal et al., 2013;
Karimi et al., 2011; Othman, 2014; Getnet et al., 2014). This study statistically
confirmed that if these factors are considered effectively in the current system it will
enhance the job performance of the academic staff and subsequently institutional
success can also be accomplished.
This study empirically validates the findings of the previous researchers in
explaining such relationship. It is evident from the results that if academics of the
selected universities perceive fairness in the performance appraisal procedures,
ratings and outcome distribution, they are more likely to focus their effort in the
workplace and subsequently their job performance will be increased. According to
Rehman and Shah (2012) performance appraisal needs to be used as a source to
enhance the job performance of academics in the universities. Karugaba (2015)
proposes that goals oriented and purposeful performance appraisal system provides
an opportunity for an individual academic to improve their job performance and
grow in an institution. This research confirms statistically the arguments of Saetang
and Sulumnad (2010) that goal setting has a significant positive association with
perceived job performance. Academic staff perceived that goals are challenging and
connected to performance appraisal system. They understood that through
performance appraisal system, institutions offer provision for accomplishing all
individual, departmental and institutional goals, would have high motivation and
willingness to perform because their directions are clear and fair for everyone. Goal
oriented performance appraisal system organize identification of roles, jobs, targets
and training strategies for rater and individual academics which support institutional
goals and objectives. Organizations such as universities need fair and reasonable
performance appraisal system to encourage and improve job performance of
academic staff (Agyan-Gasi, 2015). Such enhancement in academic performance
leads to high institutional performance (Elnaga & Imran, 2013, Sultana et al., 2012;
Khan et al., 2016). To accomplish the effective job performance of academics in
public universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan, it is essential that there must
be a high-quality performance appraisal system which is based on goal-setting and
fairness aspects. By using valid and reliable rating scale format in assessing job
performance of the academics, eventually they would perceive accuracy and exert
more effort to enhance their job performance. Besides, trained raters can also
 192

improve the job performance of the academics by minimizing the errors in assigning
performance ratings.
Academic‘s assessment is a good step in the drive to develop the efficiency of
teaching and learning and enhance educational performance as well. In Pakistan,
particularly in universities, it is assumed that performance appraisal is used only for
promotion purposes and has no option for academic development and improving job
performance (Rasheed et al., 2011; Ahmad & Ghani, 2018). The poor performance
of academics also stains the image of the institutions, maximizes the cost of
production and discourages the hard-working members of the institutions (Hlengane
& Bayat, 2013). If the academics of the universities are provided an effective
performance appraisal system, i.e., based on clear goals and purposes, fairness,
having an accurate rating system with trained rater; resultantly, they would be
satisfied and will put more effort to improve their own and institution‘s performance.
These findings support the significance and application of procedural justice theory
in this study which stresses on fairness dimension which is positively associated with
performance appraisal satisfaction and motivation to enhance perceived job
performance of academics. Organizations such as universities should train their raters
to enhance accuracy and fairness factor in their performance appraisal system.
Training can also be conducted from time to time to sharpen the raters‘ skills,
knowledge, attitude, aptitudes, abilities and competencies (Iqbal, 2015; Ahmad &
Bujang, 2013). In line with these concepts, Heather et al. (2009) argued that the
perceptions of procedural fairness are of a more significant impact amongst raters if
they employ a BOS format rather than a trait-based scale. It means that procedural
justice theory is explicitly clarifying the relationship of performance appraisal and its
dimensions such as (Goal-setting and purposes, fairness, rating scale format, and
rater training) with perceived job performance of academics in the public universities
of KP, Pakistan. Likely academics would enhance their job performance if they
perceive fair treatment in performance appraisal system procedures, performance
ratings, and outcomes within their university. On the contrary, if they are mistreated,
particularly in their job performance measurement, they get dissatisfied and
frustrated.
Expectancy theory of Vroom (1964) on the other hand, also strengthens the
importance of building academics‘ attitude and behavior e.g., academics will be
motivated and will put more effort if they feel that their efforts will lead to higher
 193

performance (expectancy) and then higher performance will result into rewards
(instrumentality) and rewards are worthy to academics (valence). Expectancy theory
signifies the notion of performance appraisal as it is assumed that perceived job
performance of the academics in the universities is impacted by the expectations
regarding career development and high job performance recognition. This theory
shows that if academic expectation of fair and goal achiever performance appraisal is
fulfilled in the universities, ultimately academics will be motivated and exert extra
effort and strength to improve their job performance and achieve institutional goals
and objectives.
Taking into account the answers of majority of the academics in the study,
they still believe that performance appraisal plays a substantial role in enhancing job
performance if the dimensions of the performance appraisal system (fairness, goal-
setting and purposes, rating scale format and rater training) are addressed carefully. It
was the central concept of this study which has been supported by the empirical
results. It seems accurate that performance appraisal can also be one of the main
causal factors in the improvement of academics‘ perceived job performance in public
universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan.

5.3.2 Relationship of performance appraisal and employee satisfaction

The second objective of this research was to examine the relationship between
performance appraisal and its dimensions with employee satisfaction among the
target population. To obtain this objective a research question has also been
developed, i.e., is there any relationship of performance appraisal and its dimensions
with employee satisfaction among the academics in public universities of Khyber
Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. This relationship of constructs was also evaluated and
validated in the same manner as aforementioned. The reliability and validity of the
constructs were confirmed in the measurement model, and the direct relationship of
performance appraisal and its dimensions with employee satisfaction was measured
respectively by using PLS-SEM. It was hypothesized in the study that performance
appraisal has a positive and significant relationship with employee satisfaction
among academics in public universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Results of
this study are in line with the findings of previous researchers which support this
 194

hypothesis (Qamar & Asif, 2016; Dusterhoff et al., 2014; Poornima & Manohar,
2015; Karimi et al., 2011; Ahmed et al., 2013). Previous studies have also
documented a positive and significant relationship between performance appraisal
dimensions and employee satisfaction (Ikramullah et al., 2011, 2012; Kompketter,
2014; Tool, 2012; Kumar, 2005).
The findings of the study also reveal that if performance appraisal system has
goal-setting approach for evaluation of academic staff‘s perceived job performance,
in response they will show satisfaction with the system which affects job
performance positively. This study empirically confirms that a reliable rating scale
format and trained rater can enhance academic satisfaction by perceiving fair and
accurate ratings. If rating errors minimize to a greater extent, employees feel satisfied
while show dissatisfaction and frustration if treated unfairly. Goal-setting and clear
purposes also motivate an academic to pursue the goal. Academic satisfaction comes
directly with achieving the goals and objectives of the performance appraisal system.
Academic satisfaction has a direct effect on the perceived job performance if
academic is satisfied of the performance appraisal system he/she will give fruitful
results in terms of their job performance. Othman (2014) added that the most
common issue related with the performance appraisal system is the lack of employee
satisfaction. While in Pakistani universities the same issue still exists and most of the
academic staff shows dissatisfaction and frustration with the current performance
appraisal system (Rehman, 2012; Akhtar & Khattak, 2013; Karimi et al., 2011;
Sherwani, 2015; Ahmad & Ghani, 2018). The academic staff still believes that
performance appraisal system is used only for promotion purposes and has no
concern with enhancing academic satisfaction and job performance.
Employee satisfaction is an assessment of how an employee feels about his or
her job responsibilities, working condition, compensation, and fair rating system
within the organization (Akdol & Arikboga, 2015). Generally, a performance
appraisal system in universities can achieve a high level of recognition and employee
satisfaction through fair, unbiased and objective measurement methods. If academics
perceive that an organization is investing on them in terms of providing a fair, just,
purposeful, goal achiever and career development based performance appraisal
system, in turn academics feel better and get satisfied and motivated to perform high
job performance. Locke and Latham (2013) further elaborate such relationship by
applying goal setting theory that how an academic‘s perceived job performance can
 195

be maximized by goals and how high performance leads to external and internal
rewards and is considered as a source of employee satisfaction with performance
appraisal. The reason behind goal oriented performance appraisal system is specific
high goal effect choice, effort, and consistency. Expectancy theory of Vroom (1964)
also endorsed the relationship of performance appraisal and its dimensions with
employee satisfaction. The expectation of fair and good performance appraisal
system results in a higher level of satisfaction. In a nutshell, academics in universities
change their attitudes by pleasure and therefore strive to improve their job
performance.
Goal setting theory of Latham and Locke (1979) is one of the most
imperative theories of this research and emphasizes that goals are found to be an
effective strategy to motivate academics for gaining superior job performance.
Academics' job performance can be improved if they pursue these predefined goals.
Universities have their own clear and specific goals. This theory urges on the
positive and significant relationship of clear goals and purposes of performance
appraisal system and academic satisfaction and job performance. The findings of this
study are in line with this theory in such a way that if performance appraisal goals
are clear and challenging, academics will be motivated and put extra effort in
attaining these goals. Once they accomplish these goals their satisfaction and job
performance level would be definitely up to the mark.
Procedural justice theory of Thibaut and Walker (1975) also fit well to this
study and strengthen the relationship of performance appraisal and employee
satisfaction among the target population in public universities of KP, Pakistan. If
universities ensure fairness in their performance appraisal system in the evaluation of
academic's perceived job performance, their level of satisfaction and job performance
can be enhanced. Goal setting aspect of the performance appraisal system has been
related to higher appraisal satisfaction and increased job performance. Goal setting
theory suggests that appraisal criteria and goals of performance appraisal must be
clear and understandable to motivate and satisfy academics. The findings of this
research indicated that if the management of universities evaluates their academics
through fair and goal oriented performance appraisal system having valid and
reliable rating scale format, in turn academics would be satisfied and perform better.
 196

5.3.3 Relationship of employee satisfaction and perceived job

performance

The third objective of this study was to determine the relationship between employee
satisfaction and perceived job performance in the target population. To obtain this
objective a research question had also been developed, i.e., Is there any relationship
between employee satisfaction and perceived job performance in the target
population. It was hypothesized in this research that employee satisfaction is
positively and significantly related to perceived job performance. Empirical data
verified this prediction. The findings of this study elaborated that employee
satisfaction has a positive and significant relationship with employee perceived job
performance among academics. The results of the present study are in congruence
with the previous researchers‘ results (Ghauri, 2012; Bakotic & Babic, 2013;
Weerakkody & Mahalakamge, 2013; Dusing, 2017; Asrar-ul-Haq, Kuchinke &
Iqbal, 2017; Felder, 2018).
According to Ghauri (2012) fair, accurate and unbiased performance
appraisal in institutions increase employee satisfaction levels, which in response,
ultimately results into high job performances from academics. While on the other
hand, when academics perceive unfair treatment regarding performance evaluation,
performance-based ratings, outcome distribution and recognition of high and low job
performer; they are likely to respond with negative behavior and attitudes (Rehman,
2015). Another research was conducted by Mir (2017) on the academic staff which
found out that satisfied employees have been identified as high performers,
supportive and motivated rather than those who are dissatisfied. This study presented
empirically that if academics are satisfied with their performance appraisal system in
universities, its outcome will be in the form of high perceived job performance.
It is evident from the previous studies that higher levels of employee
satisfaction result in high levels of academic and institutional performance (Edmans,
Li & Zhang, 2015; Melian-Gonzalez et al., 2015; Dusing, 2017). This study also
attests the views of the previous researchers that satisfied academics in universities
not only improve their own job performance but likely enhance institutional
performance and success. According to Saleem and Imran (2014) private universities
academic staff are found to be high job performers than the public one. The same
issue can be tackled in the public universities through enhancing academic
 197

satisfaction. Satisfied academics show high job performance in their institution and it
can be directly reflected from their behaviors and attitudes in the workplace. Highly
satisfied academics are more committed to their institutions and perform at high
level. Researchers opine that job performance of academics can be increased by their
fairness evaluation and satisfaction (Asrar-ul-Haq, Kuchinke & Iqbal, 2017).
Literature is replete on the impact of employee satisfaction on perceived job
performance of academics and the satisfaction of academics is necessary in
institutions because it embarks positive or negative employee attitudes and
behaviours. If an academic is satisfied with a performance appraisal system he/she
will be more motivated to produce high job performance in their position. This study
addresses the gap identified in the previous study of Asrar-ul-Haq, Anwar and
Hassan (2017) regarding examining the relationship of employee satisfaction and
perceived job performance in academic settings and found significant results for such
relationship.
The procedural justice theory of Thibaut and Walker (1975) confirm the
findings of this study and underscore the relationship between employee satisfaction
and perceived job performance. This theory signifies the fairness factor of the
performance appraisal system. If academic's perceived fairness in their evaluation
and procedures entails within universities, they will be satisfied and tend to be a high
job performer, more supportive and diligent. According to Thibaut and Walker
(1975), fairness is an essential factor that is positively correlated with employee
satisfaction and motivation to enhance job performance. Academics are satisfied and
motivated to perform at a high level when they find that they are dealt with fairly in
promotion, compensation, and there is accuracy in their assessment. Goal setting
theory of Latham and Locke (1979) also emphasizes the positive relationship
between employee satisfaction and academics‘ perceived job performance. This
theory explains further that if an academic has attained the specified goals and
purposes of their performance appraisal system, definitely he/she will be satisfied
and get motivated and this satisfaction will eventually lead him/her to better and
improved job performance. The findings of this research indicate that if academics
are offered with fair and goal oriented performance appraisal system having valid
rating scale format and trained rater, in turn, academics will be satisfied, and this
satisfaction provokes high perceived job performance accordingly.
 198

5.3.4 Mediating effect of employee satisfaction

The previous literature presented that various studies had been carried out on the
association of employee satisfaction to other behavioural outcomes. Literature has
also documented that employee satisfaction has been used as a dependent variable
(Naji et al., 2015; Othman, 2014; Jaksic & Jaksic, 2013), or an independent variable
(Dusing, 2017; Katavich, 2013; Odette & Kabagambe, 2012; Weerakkody &
Mahalakamge, 2013), in a relationship with performance appraisal system and other
significant variables. The connection of performance appraisal was found to be
prominent with fairness factor (Sudin, 2011), performance management (Jaksic &
Jaksic, 2013) and organizational performance (Dusing, 2017). But astonishingly, less
focus has been given in the literature to the indirect effect (mediating effect) of this
variable, i.e., employee satisfaction in such relationship. But so far, to the best of the
researcher‘s knowledge, less appropriate focus has been acknowledged by employee
satisfaction in the relationship of performance appraisal system and perceived job
performance.
Only few studies were found in literature which used this variable as a
mediator. Stimulating research has been performed by Mir, Sharif and Naqvi (2017)
to evaluate the mediating effect of employee satisfaction in the relationship of HR
practices and organizational productivity and found reliable results for employee
satisfaction as a mediator. Ding, Song and Lu (2012) used employee satisfaction as a
mediator in the relationship of servant leadership and employee loyalty and found
significant findings for employee satisfaction as a mediator in their study. While
James (2013) also used employee satisfaction as a mediator in the study of the
perceived fairness of performance appraisal and its influence on teacher commitment
towards school. The present study has also developed the fourth objective on
examining employee satisfaction as a mediator in the relationship of performance
appraisal and its dimensions with perceived job performance in the target population.
And to answer the research question based on the above objective, i.e., Is there any
mediating effect of employee satisfaction on the relationship of performance
appraisal and its dimensions with perceived job performance in the target population.
Therefore, the findings of this research support the hypotheses that employee
satisfaction mediates the relationship of performance appraisal and its dimensions
with perceived job performance. This study also verified the argument of Decramer
 199

et al. (2013) that academic satisfaction could mediate the relationship between
performance appraisal system and high job performance in higher education sector.
The results of the study attested it empirically that employee satisfaction is one of the
crucial aspects in enhancing job performance of academic staff in the selected
universities. The findings also reveal that if performance appraisal dimensions are
incorporated amicably in the current system it will not only increases academic
satisfaction but improve their job performance too. If an academic in a university
meets performance appraisal system goals and objectives and is treated with fair
procedures in response, he/she will show high level of satisfaction and job
performance. Effective performance appraisal system maximizes academic staff
motivation and satisfaction for accomplishing institutional goals and objectives.
Academic satisfaction is connected with fairness, clear goals and purposes and the
usage of valid and reliable rating scale format and trained rater in a performance
appraisal system. Academic job performance can only be enhanced with satisfaction
from the system. Academic satisfaction and high job performance comes on through
significant and considerable focus on such factors such as rating errors, recognition
of high and low job performers, rating accuracy, fairness procedures in outcome
distribution and goal-setting aspects in the performance appraisal system in the
selected universities. The study also justified the usage of goal-setting theory (1979)
because goal-setting has an enormous effect on academic satisfaction in
accomplishing institutional goals and objectives. This theory is clearly elaborating
the relationship of goal-setting, employee satisfaction and perceived job
performance. Expectancy theory of Vroom (1964) underscores that academic staff is
always expecting for the fulfillment of fair and good performance appraisal system in
the universities. Greater expectancy leads to higher job performance and higher
performance turns to higher satisfaction.
This study supports the significance of procedural justice theory of Thibaut
and Walker (1975) which stresses on fairness dimension which is positively
associated with academic satisfaction and motivation to enhance perceived job
performance. Although the relationship among performance appraisal, employee
satisfaction, and perceived job performance may not be a direct and causal one, their
impact on perceived job performance may be attributed to their ability to enhance:
goal-setting, valid rating scale, trained rater, expectancy and perceptions of fairness.
The same is true for the academics of public universities that when they are highly
 200

satisfied with the performance appraisal system, such satisfaction pays back in the
form of high job performance. The findings of this study demonstrate that selected
public universities need to keep their academic staff satisfied through an effective
performance appraisal system; in turn, they will display importance and excel more
effort towards institutional success.

5.4 Contributions of the research

The results of this study have both theoretical and practical contributions. In this
study, the researcher has investigated the mediating effect of employee satisfaction
on the relationship of performance appraisal and perceived job performance among
academics in public universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. The outcomes of
the research were discussed in the preceding chapter, and both the theoretical and
practical implications are as under:

5.4.1 Theoretical contributions

The results of this research have various contributions on theory. Nowadays, job
performance is considered as a major problem in institutions and academics in
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan (Irfan, 2018). There are many factors involved in low
job performance of academics in workplace. Low levels of academic satisfaction,
fairness, and goal-setting approach in a performance appraisal system have become
major challenges for institutions to overcome in a performance appraisal system and
enhance academics job performance (Othman, 2014, Royes, 2015; Okechukwu,
2017). The research model exhibits a vivid picture of some significant variables that
can affect the job performance of academic staff and influence HR leaders and
university management to consider best practices of Human Resource Management
in the academic settings. The findings of the study highlight, with the help of
underpinning theories, that if the dimensions of performance appraisal (goal-setting
and purposes, fairness, rating scale format and rater training) are carefully managed
and addressed in the existing performance appraisal system, it will increase the
perceived job performance of academics. This research was based on multi-theoretic
(goal-setting, procedural justice and expectancy theories) perspective to examine
 201

thoroughly into the relationship between performance appraisal and perceived job
performance. The central theoretical contribution of the study is to give a more
nuanced elaboration of how academic satisfaction leads to high job performance
through the vigor of the HR process approach and its link to the performance
appraisal model. This study addresses the call for using goal-setting and expectancy
theory in the such relationship to understand the phenomenon of goal-setting,
academic satisfaction and job performance (Decramer et al., 2013; Islami, Mulolli &
Mustafa, 2018; Culibrk, Delic, Mitrovic & Culibrk, 2018). The goal-setting theory,
procedural justice theory and expectancy theory act as theoretical lenses and enable
the researcher to investigate the link of performance appraisal system, academic
satisfaction and perceived job performance at the individual and institutional levels
in the public universities of KP, Pakistan. This analysis was provisioned by using
various theories, but goal-setting theory was given the most robust lens to investigate
the issue. It is extensively seen in literature that little research has been conducted so
far in developing countries, e.g., Pakistan on such relationship (Shehzad, Bashir &
Ramay, 2008; Ahmad & Shahzad, 2011; Rehman, 2012; Abbas, 2014). While most
of the previous researchers also call for conclusive empirical studies on the problem
of low job performance among academic staff in the target population (Syed et al.,
2012; Hashim et al., 2017; Irfan, 2018).
This study bridges the gap in the context of academic settings in Pakistan and
has found significant results for the said relationship. Goal-setting approach in
performance appraisal system can be a source of enhancing academics‘ job
performance and satisfaction (Islami, Mulolli & Mustafa, 2018; Culibrk, Delic,
Mitrovic & Culibrk, 2018). The HR competency in formulating, illuminating and
translating performance appraisal model is rare in Pakistan (Rehman, 2012; Mangi et
al., 2012; Aycan et al., 2000). However, it joins the handful of researches that have
strived to examine both the content and process of performance appraisal process in a
developing country like Pakistan. This research contributes to the body of knowledge
by incorporating constructs, i.e., performance appraisal, employee satisfaction and
perceived job performance into one research framework for evaluating the direct and
indirect relationship among them. These three constructs have been studied by past
researchers independently and briefly to assess human behavior, satisfaction, and
performance (Mir, 2017; Kumari, 2015). But in this study, combining these three
constructs have collectively given a more comprehensive meaning of the cognitive
 202

processes and behaviors linked to performance appraisal, employee satisfaction and

academics‘ perceived job performance in the universities. This analysis shows the
relationship of performance appraisal and its dimensions (goal setting and purposes,
fairness, rating scale format and rater training) with employee perceived job
performance and maximizes our understanding regarding the effect and significance
of performance appraisal in connection with workplace outcomes among the
academics in public universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. This study has
investigated the mediating effect of employee satisfaction and performance appraisal
along with its dimensions on perceived job performance among academic staff in the
target population, adding theoretical knowledge to the existing body of literature.
This work has also acknowledged the recommendations of Decramer et al. (2013) to
test the mediating effect of employee satisfaction in a connection of performance
appraisal and academics‘ perceived job performance in higher education sector and
has also performed an effort to enlarge its mediating role to other links.

5.4.2 Managerial/ practical contributions

The practical contributions will possibly be more useful from the perspective of a
developing nation, such as Pakistan. For stakeholders, it expounds the significance of
seeing at the whole performance appraisal model and not just embarking of its single
elements. Likewise, introducing fairness, goal-setting approach, usage of valid and
reliable and rating scale format and training programs for rater may be laudable
efforts that have a significant effect on enhancing job performance in the target
population. Similarly, focusing on one dimension of this model without
commensurate concentration on other dimensions of the performance appraisal
system is useless and counterproductive. For example, having trained rater but weak
academic satisfaction and goal-setting approach, diminishes the effectiveness of the
overall performance appraisal system and affect perceived job performance as well in
the universities. Hence, it is vital to establish the practical implications flowing from
the theoretical underpinnings and results of this research study.
The practical contribution is initiated with the comparison between which
performance appraisal system is significant for public universities of KP, Pakistan.
Hence, these results are vital for those as well who are performing performance
 203

appraisal practices in the universities and higher education institutions. Based on the
findings, some recommendations can be provided to managers and stakeholders
(Administrators) of the public universities in KP, Pakistan, who are seeking to
improve academic‘s perceived job performance and development of the sector. Thus,
this research indicates assistance to the administration of the universities to devise
such a performance appraisal system which provides an opportunity for academics‘
development and satisfaction. So, it is essential that managers, supervisors, HR
specialists, and head of the departments and people, in general, must be alarmed on
how to enhance academics‘ perceived job performance in their respective
institutions. The findings of this research will also assist leaders, researchers and
government officials to emanate with such a performance appraisal system which is
fair, just and purposeful, and backed with academic development programs that can
fairly contribute to higher education sector, particularly in developing countries like
Pakistan.
This research conveys some other practical implications for realizing the
mediating effect of employee satisfaction on the relationship between performance
appraisal and academics‘ perceived job performance. The hypotheses developed on
such relationship were found significant and supported, explaining to the
stakeholders of higher education sector regarding its prominent role in improving
academics‘ perceived job performance through an effective and viable performance
appraisal system in public universities of KP, Pakistan. The success of universities is
not only based on human resource utilization; instead, it is connected with the
institutional capability to encourage such a performance appraisal system which
gives preference to academic's development and satisfaction. Hence, these findings
would further advocate that high level of satisfaction could be driven in the
academics of universities by the provision of goal-oriented, just, fair and career
development and capacity building opportunities through an effective performance
appraisal system. It also portrays an appropriate message for the management of the
universities that if they plan to reduce dissatisfaction and improve low job
performance of their academics, they would require to give them maximum possible
options and open up for their improvement and development. This research has
developed a comprehensive research framework which signifies the relationship of a
performance appraisal from the broader perspective by evaluating the relationship of
its different dimensions (goal setting and purposes, fairness, rating scale format, and
 204

rater training) with academics‘ perceived job performance with the mediating effect
of employee satisfaction. It was found significant to test this framework among the
academics of the higher education sector of Pakistan. The choosing of academics in
universities counter a considerable value to bring quality and success in the higher
education sector of Pakistan as well as positive changes in their attitudes and
behaviors regarding their perceived job performance. The findings of this study
would be integrating to a present body of knowledge on the part of performance
appraisal in academia both in developed and developing countries.
The results of this research also demonstrate to the stakeholders in the higher
education sector that performance appraisal is highly crucial to affect human
behavior, satisfaction and performance. It is evident from these findings that
performance appraisal has a substantial impact on academic satisfaction and
perceived job performance. As it is understood that this is a primary duty of
universities in Pakistan to offer higher education, taking care of academics regarding
development, and therefore, it must have core importance and priority in the setup of
policymakers. No doubt, that pay, bonuses, allowances, and other fringe benefits
mean a lot in the current financial restraints but not at the cost of academic high job
performance. In other words, this is realized by the management of universities that
an effective and acceptable performance appraisal is inevitable for both the
academics and institutions. It is safely predicted that the results of this study have an
extreme significance for both the universities management in broader perspective
and academics in particular. This research also gives an understanding to the
policymakers in the higher education sector of Pakistan to formulate such a
performance appraisal system, which influences the job performance of academics
positively and in turn also affects the universities efficiency. If universities intend to
make their academics high job performers and efficient, they need to incorporate the
development programs, minimize unfairness and reduce rater errors. Institutions like
universities can minimize the effect of potential biases by providing proper training
to their raters and use of accurate rating scale formats for evaluating academics‘
perceived job performance. Besides, universities need to use performance appraisal
not only for promotion purposes but also, to consider it for evaluative and
developmental goals. In the last, academics‘ weaknesses should be openly discussed
with the concerned ones to get rid of them in time. In turn, academics will be
satisfied and get motivated to enhance their skills and job performance and bear more
 205

responsibilities. So, this research made an enormous contribution to the practice by

establishing relationships among performance appraisal, employee satisfaction, and
academics perceived job performance and such relations further facilitate institutions
to adopt it and get the benefit of it in future.

5.5 Limitations and future research

The results of this research are encouraging and promising as it has accomplished all
its relevant objectives. But still, there are certain limitations which would be
considered useful for future study. Firstly this study is only concentrated on the
selected public universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan; thus, to extend the
empirical results further, it is required to be carried out with a larger sample, taken
from both public and private sector universities across Pakistan. Secondly, as this
research takes on the academic staff perceptions only, hence, future researchers
might also add administrative staff views, to cross validate the results of this study.
Thirdly, this study has used subjective measure of academic staff through perceived
job performance. Whereas, the future researchers might include objective
measurement of the academic staff, or might employ the combination of both
measures. Fourth limitation is that this research has analyzed the central and
mediating role among the constructs, while the reciprocal links among the constructs
have not been examined. Furthermore, this study has used a quantitative approach,
so, it is suggested that future scholars and practitioners should carry out research on
similar constructs by employing the qualitative mode of study or follow mix mode of
analysis to achieve in-depth results. In the last, to validate the existing model of the
present study, it is recommended that this study should also be tested in various other
settings.

5.6 Conclusion

The present research sets out to investigate the effects of employee satisfaction,
performance appraisal on perceived job performance, and to identify the predictive
power of performance appraisal system dimensions on perceived job performance
among the academic staff in public universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan.
 206

All the hypothesized relationships (direct and indirect) were supported by the
empirical data. Employee satisfaction implied that if the academics have high job
satisfaction, they would be content and exert more strength to perform with higher
levels. To the contrary, if academics have low satisfaction, they would be bored,
have high conflict, absenteeism and show lack of willingness to work. This would
ultimately influence their job performance. It is obvious from the findings of the
study that without enhancing job performance of academics, we cannot improve the
higher education sector in Pakistan. In this regard, a number of studies were carried
out (Rehman, 2012; Ashraf et al., 2014; Hashim et al., 2017; Ahmad & Ghani, 2018)
but their vision seemed to be narrow, and thereby, they failed to make any significant
impact on the quality and enhancement of academic staff job performance in the
universities of Pakistan. It is summarized from these findings that fair procedures and
ratings in performance appraisal system are more likely to satisfy them with the
system in turn; they become more motivated to achieve high job performance and get
the goals of the institution. The novelty of this study is that it is based on the
development of a multi-dimensional proposed research framework that investigates
the dimensions and factors that affect the performance appraisal system at the
individual level in the public universities in KP, Pakistan. Earlier studies in the field
of performance appraisal and management were mainly carried out in the western
world, and this is the first research study of its nature in Pakistan, specifically in the
higher education sector, adding empirical work and multiple data analysis by using
PLS-SEM.
Furthermore, regarding the difference between this study and previous
studies, it can be explained that along with the results of investigation on many
previous studies related to the topic, there is no comprehensive study found on the
effect of performance appraisal on perceived job performance, mediated by
employee satisfaction among academics in the public universities of Khyber
Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Based on the findings of investigation, this study was carried
out by adding the variables of employee satisfaction, performance appraisal and
perceived job performance into a complete model of study.
This study would be valuable for academics working in the target population
and the country as a whole. At the academic level, this study would be ready to lend
a hand in enhancing academic job performance. Additionally, this research gives
directions to change the behaviors and attitudes of an academic towards work in an
 207

effective manner, in such a way that it provides more satisfaction to the academics in
the universities. Universities in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and higher education sector
would be benefited from this research. They can apply the results of this study to
increase job performance of their academics and the entire performance of the
institution through the new understandings provided in the study to shape the
academic job performance attitudes towards more positive ones. The higher
education sector would have to learn from these findings that an effective
performance appraisal system can solve the low job performance issue to a greater
extent by focusing on academic satisfaction and dimensions of the system. This study
also underscores the role of HR activities in the higher education sector and attached
institutions to undertake such measures in order to bring quality and enhance the job
performance of the academics. The study elaborates how the linkage of performance
appraisal and its dimensions can exactly perform more to enhance an academic‘s
satisfaction with the system.
Since, this research engenders a proposed model of performance appraisal
and it can be termed as a worthy model for policy makers and decision makers.
Previous literature has postulated that a series of researches have been made in the
developed countries of America and European nations in industrial organizational
settings and very nominal researches have been undertaken on such relationship in
developing countries like Pakistan in academic settings (Rehman, 2012; Decramer et
al., 2013; Rehman, 2012; Okechukwu, 2017; Hashim et al., 2017). This research
validates the results of the earlier scholars on such relationship and strengthens the
current literature. Regarding HR practices, an integrated view of performance
appraisal model has been grasped for exploring the relationship of performance
appraisal and its dimensions with academics‘ perceived job performance. In this
study an integrated approach of performance appraisal model has been employed and
has been found to be influential predictor of the academic job performance. By using
this model the HR leaders can strategize their future polices and rules for enhancing
low job performance of academic staff in higher education sector specifically and
their attached higher education institutions in general. The researcher believes that
the results of this research have practical implications to the selected universities
where the research is conducted. So the recommendations would be useful to
management and higher education commission in exceling its performance appraisal
practices in fruitful decisions. In order to get institutional goals and objectives, there
 208

should be involvement of academics‘ job performance to achieve the targeted goals

and objectives. This research recommends that the HR leaders in higher education
sector and universities management need to revamp the existing performance
appraisal system critically. There should be a great commensuration provided on
training raters about performance appraisal practices such as accuracy of ratings,
clarifying expectation standards by having goal-setting approach, fair rating decision
about low job performers and high job performers.
Another important recommendation suggested in this study is that the rater of
performance appraisal needs to be trained to have sufficient information regarding
the academic job duties and functions and academics must be rated on reliable, valid
and established rating scale format (Ikramullah et al., 2011). The rater must avoid
rating errors, i.e., halo effect, horns effect and central tendency during measuring
academics‘ perceived job performance (Tool, 2012; Kumar, 2005). In a rating scale
technique, an employee's attribute, i.e., skills, creativity, knowledge, punctuality,
abilities, competence, adaptability, assertiveness, presentation skills, co-operation at
work, problem solving approach and leadership qualities are being rated in a
sequence, which can be categorized in numbers from poor to excellent (Karugaba,
2015). Besides, academicians‘ perceived job performance cannot be judged with
only one rater but it can be extended to multiple raters, i.e., 360-degree method for
avoiding rating errors and establishing employee's satisfaction and acceptance
regarding performance appraisal system. The results of this study would not merely
shed light on the grey areas of existing performance appraisal systems prevailing in
the public universities but also motivate the organizational scholars and practitioners
to select this field for further research and come up with innovative understandings
and insights that can assist and benefit the higher education sector. This is one of the
few research studies that have examined such relationship from the HR philosophy
and performance appraisal practice nexus involving the goal-setting approach of the
system. To sum up, this study gives new insight and new knowledge about
academics perceived job performance.
 REFERENCES

Akhtar, T., & Khattak, S. (2013). Employee acceptability of performance appraisals:

issues of fairness and justice. World Applied Sciences Journal, 24(4), 507-
518.
Abdullah, A., Doucouliagos, H., & Manning, E. (2015). Does education reduce
income inequality? A meta‐regression analysis. Journal of Economic Surveys,
29(2), 301-316.
Abu Bakar, Z. B., Yun, L. M., Keow, N. S., & Li, T. H. (2014). Goal-Setting
Learning Principles: A Lesson from Practitioner. Journal of Education and
Learning, 8(1), 41-50.
Aleassa, H. M. (2014). Performance appraisal satisfaction and counterproductive
behaviors: Direct and moderating effects. International Journal of Business
Administration, 5(1), 76.
Adler, S., Campion, M., Colquitt, A., Grubb, A., Murphy, K., Ollander-Krane, R., &
Pulakos, E. D. (2016). Getting rid of performance ratings: Genius or folly? A
debate. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 9(2), 219-252
Abbas, S. M. S. (2012). Women of Islamic faith in trade and commerce: An
economic sociological study. VSRD-IJBMR, 2(3), 102-13.
Anjum, A., Yasmeen, K., & Khan, B. (2011). Performance appraisal systems in
public universities of Pakistan. International journal of human resource
studies, 1(1), 41.
Ahmad, R., & Bujang, S. (2013). Issues and Challenges in the practice of
Performance Appraisal Activities in the 21st Century. International Journal
of Education and research, 1(4), 1-8.
Asrar-ul-Haq, M., Anwar, S., & Hassan, M. (2017). Impact of emotional intelligence
on teacher‫ ׳‬s performance in higher education institutions of Pakistan. Future
Business Journal, 3(2), 87-97.
 210

Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl

& J. Beckmann (Eds.), Action Control: From Cognition to Behavior (pp. 11-
39): Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Arshad, M. A., Masood, M. T., & Amin, G. (2013). Effects of performance appraisal
politics on job satisfaction, turnover intention and loyalty to supervisor: Study
with reference to the telecom organizations of Pakistan. International Review
of Management and Business Research, 2(3), 653.
Armstrong, M., & Taylor, S. (2014). Armstrong's handbook of human resource
management practice. Kogan Page Publishers.
Awadallah, E. A., & Allam, A. (2015). A critique of the balanced scorecard as a
performance measurement tool. International Journal of Business and Social
Science, 6(7), 91-99.
Ahmed, Shaheen, Fais Bin Ahmad, and Mohd Hasanur Raihan Joarder. (2016).
"HRM Practices-Engagement-Performance Relationships: A Conceptual
Framework for RMG Sector in Developing Economy." Mediterranean
Journal of Social Sciences 7, no. 4: 87.
Ahmed, R. R., Vveinhardt, J., Ahmed, M., & Hemani, K. R. (2016). Determinants of
faculty Performance of business schools: empirical evidence from Pakistan.
In Proceedings of EDULEARN16 Conference 4th-6th July 2016,
Barcelona (pp. 4219-4228).
Aycan, Z., Kanungo, R., Mendonca, M., Yu, K., Deller, J., Stahl, G., & Kurshid, A.
(2000). Impact of culture on human resource management practices: A 10‐
country comparison. Applied Psychology, 49(1), 192-221.
Arshad, M. A., Masood, M. T., & Amin, G. (2013). Effects of performance appraisal
politics on job satisfaction, turnover intention and loyalty to supervisor: Study
with reference to the telecom organizations of Pakistan. International Review
of Management and Business Research, 2(3), 653–673.
Arbuckle, J. (2003). Amos 5.0 update to the Amos user's guide. Marketing
Department, SPSS Incorporated.
Apak, S., Gümüş, S., Öner, G., & Gümüş, H. G. (2016). Performance Appraisal and
a Field Study. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 229, 104-114.
Azma, F. (2010). Qualitative Indicators for the evaluation of universities
performance. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 5408-5411.
Alan, B. (2008). Social research methods. Book Second edition (p 1-577).
 211

Alvi, M., Surani, M., & Hirani, S. (2013). The Effect of Performance Evaluation on
Employee‘s Job Satisfaction in Pakistan International Airlines Corporation
(2013).
Alam, Anwar. (2006). Social Science Research Methodology Department of
Sociology. Peshawar Cantt: Saif Printing Press.
Ansari Tabara, Charkhajy Kashani A, Sarafraz Z. (2010). Staff attitudes toward
annual evaluation of Kashan University of Medical Sciences. Homaye
Saadat;41
Alreck, P. L., & Settle, R. B. (2004). The Survey Research. Handbook (3 Ed.) New
York: McGraw-Hill Irwin. Page-191.
Asamu, F. F. ( 2013). Perception Of Performance Appraisal And Workers‘
Performance In Wema Bank Headquarters, Lagos. Global Journal of Arts,
Humanities and Social Sciences. 1(4), 89-101.
Aslam, H. D., & Sarwar, S. (2010). Improving performance management practices in
IT firms of Pakistan. Journal of Management Research, 2(2), 1.
Asplund, J., & Blacksmith, N. (2012). Strength-based goal setting. Gallup
Management Journal Online, 1.
Ashraf, I., Ashraf, F., Saeed, I., Gulzar, H., Shah, K., Azhar, N., ... & Anam, W.
(2015). Reasons for Low Performance of Teachers: A Study of Government
Schools operating in Bahawalpur City, Pakistan. International Journal of
Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 4(2), 105-
117.
Annamalai, T., Abdullah, A. G. K., & Alazidiyeen, N. J. (2010). The mediating
effects of perceived organizational support on the relationships between
organizational justice, trust and performance appraisal in Malaysian
secondary schools. European Journal of Social Sciences, 13(4), 623-632.
Ahmad, R., Paya, L., Baig, A., Mansor, N.N.A., and Ismail, W.K.W. (2012), ―The
relationship between selected factors of rating dissatisfaction and employees‘
satisfaction on the appraisal decisions‖, International Journal of Innovation
and Business Strategy, Vol. 1, pp 1-32.
Ahmed, I., Sultana, I., & Paul, S. K. Employee performance evaluation: A fuzzy
approach (2013). International Journal of Productivity and Performance
Management, 62(7), 718-734.
 212

Agyen-Gyasi, K., & Boateng, M. S. (2015). Performance appraisal systems in

academic and research libraries in Ghana: a survey. Library Review, 64(1/2),
58-81.
Ashraf, S., Hussain, I., & Malik, M. A. (2014). Making the Best of It? Human
Resource Management Practices in Universities of Azad Jammu &
Kashmir. International Journal of Human Resource Studies, 4(4), 48-60.
Al-Ashqar, W. M. A. (2017). Faculty Members‘ Attitudes towards the Performance
Appraisal Process in the Public Universities in Light of Some
Variables. International Education Studies, 10(6), 135.
Ahmad, S. H., & Ghani, U. (2018). Managing Human Resource in Public universities
of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan: Problems and Prospects. Dialogue
(Pakistan), 13(3).
Armstrong, M., & Taylor, S. (2014). Armstrong's handbook of human resource
management practice. Kogan Page Publishers. 13th edition. PP. 1-801.
Arif, S., & Ilyas, M. (2013). Quality of work-life model for teachers of private
universities in Pakistan. Quality Assurance in Education, 21(3), 282-298.
Amin, H., Rahim Abdul Rahman, A., & Abdul Razak, D. (2014). Consumer
acceptance of Islamic home financing. International Journal of Housing
Markets and Analysis, 7(3), 307–332.
Alolah, T., Stewart, R. A., Panuwatwanich, K., & Mohamed, S. (2014). Determining
the causal relationships among balanced scorecard perspectives on school
safety performance: Case of Saudi Arabia. Accident Analysis &
Prevention, 68, 57-74.
Awang, Z. (2012). Structural equation modeling using AMOS graphic. Penerbit
Universiti Teknologi MARA. A Handbook, Page 40-56
Awang, Z. (2015). SEM made simple: A gentle approach to learning Structural
Equation Modeling. A handbook on SEM. page 1-21.
Aimran, A. N., Afthanorhan, W. M. A. W., & Razali, N. H. M. (2015). Moderated
Mediation Using Partial Least Square Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-
SEM). International Journal of Engineering & Technology Research Volume
3, Issue 2, March-April, 2015, pp. 01-10.
Akdol, B., & Arikboga, F. S. (2015). The effects of leader behavior on job
satisfaction: A research on technology fast50 turkey companies. Procedia-
Social and Behavioral Sciences, 195, 278-282.
 213

Akareem, H. S., & Hossain, S. S. (2016). Determinants of education quality: what

makes students‘ perception different?. Open Review of Educational
Research, 3(1), 52-67.
Aurelien, H. A. (2014). Public Sector Employees‘ Perceptions Of Fairness And
Performance Evaluations By Their Supervisors In St. Lucia And The Effects
On Commitment. (PhD) Dissertations, Capella University, USA.
Baruch, Y. and Holtom, B.C. (2008) ‗Survey response rate levels and trends in
organizational research‘, Human Relations, Vol. 61, pp. 1139–60.
Baran, B. (2012). Employee Motivation: Goal-Setting Theory [Web Video].
Bekele, A. Z, Shigutu, A. D., & Tensay, A.T. (2014). The Effect of Employees‘
Perception of Performance Appraisal on Their Work Outcomes. International
Journal of Management and Commerce Innovations 2(1),136-173.
Behery, M. H., & Patron, R. A. (2008). Performance Appraisal-Cultural Fit:
Organisational Outcomes within the UAE. Education, Business and Society:
Contemporary Middle Eastern Issues. 1(1), 34- 49.
Bhat, S. A., & Beri, A. (2016). Development and validation of Teachers Perceived
Job Performance Scale (TPJP) in higher education. Man in India, 96(4), 935-
944.
Bhat, S. A., & Naikoo, B. A. (2017). Contribution Of Ict Orientation In Predicting
Perceived Job Performance Of Teaching Professionals. Post-graduate
Department of Education, 335.
Blau, Peter Michael. (1964). Exchange and power in social life: Transaction
Publishers.
Boström, G., Hallqvist, J., Haglund, B. J. A., Romelsjö, A., Svanström, L., &
Diderichsen, F. (1993). Socioeconomic differences in smoking in an urban
Swedish population. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 21(2), 77–82.
Bloom, Kathaleen C, & Trice, Lucy B. (2012). Sampling. In B. S. Cannon (Ed.),
Introduction to Nursing Research (pp.180-202): Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Bilal, H., Shah, B., Qureshi, Q. A., & Khan, I. Impact of Performance Appraisal on
Perceived job performance of Employees in Private Sector Universities of
Developing Countries. Public Policy and Administration Research, Vol.4,
No.7, 2014
 214

Bidabadi, N. S., ISFAHANI, A. N., Rouhollahi, A., & Khalili, R. (2016). Effective
teaching methods in higher education: requirements and barriers. Journal of
advances in medical education & professionalism, 4(4), 170.
Babbie, E. R. (1990). Survey research methods Wadsworth Pub. Co Belmont, Calif,
78-82.
Babbie, E. R. (1990). Survey research methods Wadsworth Pub. Co Belmont, Calif,
3(9).
Babbie, E. R. (1973). Survey research methods. Wadsworth. The Hague (Holanda).
1992. 44 p.
Ben-Gal, I. (2005). Outlier detection. In Data mining and knowledge discovery
handbook (pp. 131-146). Springer, Boston, MA.
Bafna, P., Pillai, S., & Pramod, D. (2016). Quantifying Performance Appraisal
Parameters: A Forward Feature Selection Approach. Indian Journal of
Science and Technology, 9(21).
Boswell W.R and Boudreau J.W. (2000). Employee satisfaction with performance
appraisals and appraisers: The role of perceived appraisal use of Human
Resource Development Quarterly. 11(3), 283.
Bakotic, D., & Babic, T. (2013). Relationship between working conditions and job
satisfaction: The case of croatian shipbuilding company. International
Journal of Business and Social Science, 4(2).
Benson, J., Debroux, P., Yuasa, M., & Zhu, Y. (2000). Flexibility and labour
management: Chinese manufacturing enterprises in the 1990s. International
Journal of Human Resource Management, 11(2), 183-196.
Brata, H., & Juliana, L. (2014). Performance-Based Reward Systems and Perceived
Justice: A Case Of Motorbike Dealer In Pontianak. International Journal of
Business & Society, 15(2).
Brennan, J., Broek, S., Durazzi, N., Kamphuis, B., Ranga, M., & Ryan, S. (2014).
Study on innovation in higher education.
Bryman, A., Becker, S., & Sempik, J. (2008). Quality criteria for quantitative,
qualitative and mixed methods research: A view from social
policy. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 11(4), 261-
276.
Böckerman, P., & Ilmakunnas, P. (2012). The job satisfaction-productivity nexus: A
 215

study using matched survey and register data. Industrial & Labor Relations
Review, 65, 244-262.
Breuer, K., Nieken, P., & Sliwka, D. (2013). Social ties and subjective performance
evaluations: an empirical investigation. Review of managerial Science, 7(2),
141-157.
Bartlett, K. R. (2005). Survey research in organizations. Research in organizations:
Foundations and methods of inquiry, 97-113.
Bol, J. C. (2009). The determinants and performance effects of supervisor bias.
Unpublished working paper, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
Bento, R.F., White, L.F., and Zacur, S.R. (2012), ―The stigma of obesity and
discrimination in performance appraisal: a theoretical model‖, The
International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 23 No. 15, pp.
3196-3224.
Bol, J.C. (2011), ―The determinants and performance effects of managers'
performance evaluation biases‖, The Accounting Review, Vol. 86 No. 5, pp.
1549-1575.
Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural equation modeling: Perspectives on the present and
the future. International Journal of Testing, 1(3-4), 327-334.
Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS, EQS, and LISREL:
Comparative approaches to testing for the factorial validity of a measuring
instrument. International journal of testing, 1(1), 55-86.
Byrne, B. M. (1998). Structural equation modeling with LISREL. Prelis, and
Simplis, 196-199.
Bowra, Z. A., Sharif, B., Saeed, A., & Niazi, M. K. (2012). Impact of human
resource practices on employee perceived performance in banking sector of
Pakistan. African Journal of Business Management, 6(1), 323.
Camp, H. (2017). Goal Setting as Teacher Development Practice. International
Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 29(1), 61-72.
Calvo-Mora, A., Picón, A., Ruiz, C., & Cauzo, L. (2013). The relationships between
soft-hard TQM factors and key business results. International Journal of
Operations & Production Management, 34(1), 115-143.
Cook, M. (1995). Performance appraisal and true performance. Journal of
Managerial Psychology, 10(7), 3-7.
 216

Council, C. L. (2012). Improving employee performance in the economic downturn.

Four cost-effective strategies to improve employee outcomes. Corporate
executive board.
Campbell, A., & Tawadey, K. (2016). Mission and business philosophy. Elsevier, 6
Jun 2016 - Social Science - 366 pages.
Chalmers, D., Lee, K., & Walker, B. (2008). International and national quality
teaching and learning performance models currently in use. Carrick Institute
for Learning and Teaching in Higher Education. Pp 1-78.
Chang, C. S. (2015). Relationships of organizational justice and organizational
constraints with performance: A meta-analysis (Doctoral dissertation).
Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (UMI No.
1699306790)
Colquitt, J., Lepine, J. A., Wesson, M. J., & Gellatly, I. R. (2011). Organizational
behavior: Improving performance and commitment in the workplace (Vol.
375). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Irwin.
Chen, C. H. V., Yuan, M. L., Cheng, J. W., & Seifert, R. (2016). Linking
transformational leadership and core self-evaluation to job performance: The
mediating role of felt accountability. The North American Journal of
Economics and Finance, 35, 234-246.
Ćulibrk, J., Delić, M., Mitrović, S., & Ćulibrk, D. (2018). Job satisfaction,
organizational commitment and job involvement: the mediating role of job
involvement. Frontiers in psychology, 9, 132.
Chiang, F. F., & Birtch, T. A. (2010). Appraising Performance across Borders: An
Empirical Examination of the Purposes and Practices of Performance
Appraisal in a Multi‐Country Context. Journal of Management Studies,
47(7), 1365-1393.
Cintrón, R., & Flaniken, F. (2011). Performance Appraisal: A Supervision or
Leadership Tool?. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(17
Clarke, C., Harcourt, M., and Flynn, M. (2013), ―Clinical Governance, Performance
Appraisal and Interactional and Procedural Fairness at a New Zealand Public
Hospital‖, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 117 No. 3, pp. 667-678.
Campbell, D.J., Campbell, K.M., and Chia, H.B. (1998), ―Merit pay, performance
appraisal, and individual motivation: An analysis and alternative‖, Human
Resource Management, Vol.37 No. 2, pp. 131.
 217

Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation

modeling. Modern methods for business research, 295(2), 295-336.
Cooper, D. R., Schindler, P. S., & Sun, J. (2006). Business research methods (Vol.
9). Business Research Methods (7th ed.) pp 798.
Campbell, J.P (1990) ‗Modeling the performance prediction problem in industrial
and organizational psychology‘ in Dunnette, M.D. and Hough, L.M. (eds.)
Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 1, 2nd ed., Palo
Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, pp. 687-732.
Cunningham, S., Gunn, T., Alladin, A., & Cawthorpe, D. (2008). Anxiety,
depression and hopelessness in adolescents: a structural equation model.
Journal of the Canadian Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 17(3),
137.
Culbertson, S. S., Henning, J. B., & Payne, S. C. (2013). Performance appraisal
satisfaction. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 12(4), 189-195.
Cunningham, J. B., & McCrum-Gardner, E. (2007). Power, effect and sample size
using GPower: practical issues for researchers and members of research
ethics committees. Evidence-Based Midwifery, 5(4), 132-137.
Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., Gutmann, M. L., & Hanson, W. E. (2003).
Advanced mixed methods research designs. Handbook of mixed methods in
social and behavioral research, 209, 240.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. Sage
Publications. Pp, 1-43.
Creswell, J. W. (2018). Educational research. Planning, conducting, and evaluating
quantitative and qualitative research. SAGE Publications Inc. 5th Revised
edition, 275 pages.
Chaimongkonrojna, T., & Steane, P. (2015). Effectiveness of full range leadership
development among middle managers. Journal of Management Development,
34(9), 1161-1180.
Chin, W. W. (2010). How to write up and report PLS analyses. In Handbook of
partial least squares (pp. 655-690). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
Dang, G., & Pheng, L. S. (2015). Research methodology. In Infrastructure
Investments in Developing Economies (pp. 135-155). Springer, Singapore.
 218

Dauda, Y. (2018). A Review of Performance Appraisal Systems in Different

Countries: The UK, India, South Africa and Ghana. International Journal of
Applied Environmental Sciences, 13(2), 203-221.
Dierdorff, E. C., & Surface, E. A. (2007). Placing peer ratings in context: Systematic
influences beyond ratee performance. Personnel Psychology, 60(1), 93-126.
De Vries, J (2010), ‗Is new public management really dead?‘ OECD Journal of
Budgeting, 10, 1, pp. 87-91.
Dickeson, R. (2006). The need for accreditation reform: A national dialogue. The
Secretary of Education‗s Commission on the Future of Higher Education.
RetrievedMarch8,2007from:http://www.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/hiedfutur
e/reports/dicke
DeNisi, A. S., Cafferty, T. P., & Meglino, B. M. (1984). A cognitive view of the
performance appraisal process: A model and research propositions.
Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 33, 360-396.
Dipboye, R. L., & de Pontbriand, R. (1981). Correlates of employee reactions to
performance appraisals and appraisal systems. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 66(2), 248-251
Dusterhoff, C., Cunningham, J. B., & MacGregor, J. N. (2014). The effects of
performance rating, leader–member exchange, perceived utility, and
organizational justice on performance appraisal satisfaction: Applying a
moral judgment perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 119(2), 265-273.
DeNisi, A. S., & Pritchard, R. D. (2006). Performance appraisal, performance
management and improving individual performance: A motivational
framework. management and Organization Review, 2(2), 253-277.
DeNisi, A. S., & Murphy, K. R. (2017). Performance appraisal and performance
management: 100 years of progress?. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(3),
421.
DeNisi, A. S., & Stevens, G. E. (1981). Profiles of performance, performance
evaluations, and personnel decisions. The Academy of Management Journal,
24(3), 592-602.
DeNisi, A. S. (2011). Managing performance to change behavior. Journal of
Organizational Behavior Management, 31(4), 262-276.
 219

Djurdjevic, E., & Wheeler, A. R. (2014). A dynamic multilevel model of

performance rating. In Research in Personnel and Human Resources
Management (pp. 147-176). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
DuBrin, A. J. (2012). Management essentials. South-Western Cengage Learning.
edition (2012), 670 pages.
Dusing, R. P. (2017). Examining the Relationship between Employee Satisfaction
and Organizational Performance in Higher Education (Doctoral dissertation,
North central University).
Decramer, A., Smolders, C., and Vanderstraeten, A. (2013). Employee performance
management culture and system features in higher education: Relationship
with employee performance management satisfaction. The International
Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(2), 352-371.
Ding, D., Lu, H., Song, Y., & Lu, Q. (2012). Relationship of servant leadership and
employee loyalty: The mediating role of employee satisfaction. iBusiness,
4(03), 208.
Dillman, D.A., Smyth, J.D. and Christian, J.M. (2014) Internet, Phone, Mail and
Mixed Mode Surveys: The Tailored Design Method (4th edn). Hoboken, NJ:
Wiley.
Diamantopoulos, A. (1999). Viewpoint–export performance measurement: reflective
versus formative indicators. International marketing review, 16(6), 444-457.
Diamantopoulos, A., Riefler, P., & Roth, K. P. (2008). Advancing formative
measurement models. Journal of business research, 61(12), 1203-1218.
Dijkstra, T. K., & Henseler, J. (2015). Consistent Partial Least Squares Path
Modeling. MIS quarterly, 39(2).
Daoanis, L. E. (2012). Performance Appraisal System: It‘s Implication to Employee
Performance. International Journal of Economics and Management Sciences,
2(3), 55-62.
David, E.M. (2013), ―Examining the role of narrative performance appraisal
comments on performance‖, human performance, Vol. 26 No. 5, pp. 430-450.
Davis, d., & Cosenza, R. M. (2005). business research for decision making, Book
edition 2. (no. HD30. 4. D38 1988.).
Davis, Duane. (2005). Business Research for Decision Making:
Thomson/Brooks/Cole, Book.
 220

Embi, M. A., & Choon, L. K. (2014). Rater‘s intention towards appraising

accurately. Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan: Journal of Government and Politics,
5(2).
Espinilla, M., de Andrés, R., Martínez, F. J., & Martínez, L. (2013). A 360-degree
performance appraisal model dealing with heterogeneous information and
dependent criteria. Information Sciences, 222, 459-471.
Esposito Vinzi, V., Chin, W. W., Henseler, J., & Wang, H. (2010). Handbook of
partial least squares: Concepts, methods and applications. Heidelberg,
Dordrecht, London, New York: Springer. 850 p.
Edmans, A., Li, L., & Zhang, C. (2014). Employee satisfaction, labor market
flexibility, and stock returns around the world. National Bureau of Economic
Research. Pp 1-42.
Elnaga, A., & Imran, A. (2013). The effect of training on employee performance.
European Journal of Business and Management, 5(4), 137-147.
Enkhjin Chuluunkhuu. (2010). Effectiveness of Performance Appraisal. A
dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment for a MA in Human Resource
Management. National College of Ireland 2010.
Eriksson, P., & Kovalainen, A. (2008). Qualitative research evaluation. Book
Qualitative methods in business research.
Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R., & Jackson, P. R. (2012). Management research.
Sage. Business & Economics - 392 pages
Evans, A. N., & Rooney, B. J. (2010). Human characteristics; evolutionary
perspectives on human mind and kind. SciTech Book News, 1.
Fayyaz, H., Rauf, Z., & Samin, T. (2014). Major Issues of Education Sector in
Pakistan. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive
Education and Development, 3(4), 361-376.
Farrell, A. (2013). An investigation into Performance Appraisal effectiveness from
the perception of Employees in an Irish Consumer Services Company
(Doctoral dissertation, Dublin, National College of Ireland).
Farooqui, M. S., & Nagendra, A. (2014). The impact of person organization fit on
job satisfaction and performance of the employees. Procedia economics and
Finance, 11, 122-129.
 221

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G* Power 3: A flexible
statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical
sciences. Behavior research methods, 39(2), 175-191.
Falola, H. O., Abasilim, U. D., & Salau, O. P. (2016). Strategic human resource
development for enhanced job performance and universities‘
competitiveness. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 7(3), 89.
Felder Jr, E. L. (2018). Higher Education Nonacademic Staff Job Performance and
Job Satisfaction: Pillars of Feedback Interdependency (Doctoral dissertation,
University of South Dakota).
Festing, M., Knappert, L., Dowling, P. and Engle, A. (2010), ―Country specific
profiles in global performance management: a contribution to balancing
global standardization and localadaptions in MNEs‖, 11th Conference on
International Human Resource Management, Aston Business School,
Birmingham, June. PP 1-31.
Flaniken, F. W. (2009). Performance appraisal systems in higher education: An
exploration of Christian institutions. Doctoral dissertations, University of
Central Florida.
Fisicaro, S. A. (1988). A re-examination of the relation between halo error and
accuracy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73(2), 239-244.
Folger, R., & Konovsky, M. A. (1989). Effects of procedural and distributive justice
on reactions to pay raise decisions. Academy of Management journal, 32(1),
115-130.
Fryer, K., Antony, J., and Ogden, S. 2009. ―Performance Management in the Public
Sector,‖ international journal of public sector management 22 (6): 478-498.
Ferreira, R. R., da Silva Abbad, G., & Mourão, L. (2015). Training Needs Analysis
at Work. The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of the Psychology of Training,
Development, and Performance Improvement, 32-49.
Fakharyan, M., Jalilvand, M. R., Dini, B., & Dehafarin, E. (2012). The effect of
performance appraisal satisfaction on employee‘s outputs implying on the
moderating role of motivation in workplace. International Journal of
Business and Management Tomorrow, 2(4), 1-9.
Freinn-von Elverfeldt, A. C. (2005). Performance appraisal: how to improve its
effectiveness (Bachelor's thesis, University of Twente).
Fink, A. (2003). The survey handbook (Vol. 1). Sage.
 222

Fink, A., & Litwin, M. S. (2003). How to assess and interpret survey
psychometrics (Vol. 8). Sage.
Fink, A.A. (2010), ―New trends in human capital research and analytics‖, People and
Strategy, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 14-21.
Fink, A., & Litwin, M. S. (2003). How to assess and interpret survey psychometrics
(Vol. 8). Sage.
Frimpomaa, P. (2014). An evaluation of employees satisfaction with performance
appraisal system: A case study of Vodafone Ghana (Kumasi-Adum and
Accra-Head Office. (Doctoral dissertation).
Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS. Sage publications.
Fu, W., and Deshpande, S. P. (2014). The impact of caring climate, job satisfaction,
and organizational commitment on perceived job performance of employees
in a China‘s insurance company. Journal of Business Ethics, 124(2), 339-349.
Gaba, A. K., & Mishra, S. (2015). Training needs assessment of teaching staff in
open universities and dual-mode higher education institutions in Asia. Studies
and practices for advancement in open and distance education, 60.
Gauri, P., Gronhaug, K., & Kristianslund, I. (1995). Research methods in business
studies. Research Methods in Business Studies.
Greenberg, J. (1986). Determinants of perceived fairness of performance evaluations.
Journal of applied psychology, 71(2), 340.
Ghauri, E. (2012). Improving performance appraisal practices: a multiple case study
of the Pakistan pharmaceutical industry. Doctoral thesis, Southern Cross
University.
Groves, R.M. and Peytcheva, E. (2008) ‗The impact of nonresponse rates on
nonresponse bias‘, Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 72, No. 2, pp. 167–89.
Guerra-Lopez, I. J. (2009). Performance evaluation: Proven approaches to improving
program and organizational performance. New York, NY: Wiley. 304 pages,
Gorman, C. A., & Rentsch, J. R. (2009). Evaluating frame-of-reference rater training
effectiveness using performance schema accuracy. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 94(5), 1336.
Güngör, P. (2011). The relationship between reward management system and
employee performance with the mediating role of motivation: A quantitative
study on global banks. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 24, 1510-
1520.
 223

Getnet, B., Jebena, T., & Tsegaye, A. (2014). The effect of employee‘s fairness
perception on their satisfaction towards the performance appraisal practices
(A case study of University of Gondar). International Journal of
Management and Commerce Innovations, 2(1), 174-210.
Martella, R. C., Nelson, J. R., Morgan, R. L., & Marchand-Martella, N. E.
(2013). Understanding and interpreting educational research. Guilford Press.
666 pages.
Govt, KP. (2013-2014). Educational Emergency and KP‘s Education Budget.
RetrievedMay,20,2017 from
http://www.financekp.gov.pk/FD/budget/budget-at-a-glance/297-budget-
2015-16.html
Grund, C., & Przemeck, J. (2012). Subjective performance appraisal and inequality
aversion. Applied Economics, 44(17), 2149-2155.
Govaerts, M. J. B., Van de Wiel, M. W. J., Schuwirth, L. W. T., Van der Vleuten, C.
P. M., & Muijtjens, A. M. M. (2013). Workplace-based assessment: raters‘
performance theories and constructs. Advances in Health Sciences
Education, 18(3), 375-396.
Grabner, I., Künneke, J., & Moers, F. (2016). How to mitigate bias in performance
evaluations: An analysis of the consequences of supervisors’ evaluation
behavior. Working paper, Maastricht University.
Graf, E. R. (1992). Relationship of External-Rated Job Performance to Nurse Self-
Perceived Performance and Self-Competence. Ph. D, Thesis, Virginia
Commonwealth University.
Greenberg, J., & Cropanzano, R. (1993). The social side of fairness: Interpersonal
and informational classes of organizational justice. Justice in the workplace:
Approaching fairness in human resource management, Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.
Getnet, B., Jebena, T., & Tsegaye, A. (2014). The effect of employee‘s fairness
perception on their satisfaction towards the performance appraisal practices
(A case study of University of Gondar). International Journal of
Management and Commerce Innovations, 2(1), 174-210.
Hassan, S. (2016). Impact of HRM Practices on Employee‘s Performance.
International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and
Management Sciences, 6(1), 15-22.
 224

Hassel, S., & Ridout, N. (2018). An Investigation of First-Year Students' and

Lecturers' Expectations of University Education. Frontiers in psychology, 8,
2218.
Harsch, C., & Martin, G. (2012). Adapting CEF-descriptors for rating purposes:
Validation by a combined rater training and scale revision
approach. Assessing Writing, 17(4), 228-250.
Hunnes, A., Kvaløy, O., & Mohn, K. (2012). An empirical study of performance
appraisal and career opportunities. International journal of business and
management, 7(1), 22.
Harari, M. B., & Rudolph, C. W. (2017). The effect of rater accountability on
performance ratings: A meta-analytic review. Human Resource Management
Review, 27(1), 121-133.
Hashim, M. (2013). Change management. International Journal of Academic
Research in Business and Social Sciences, 3(7), 685.
Haenlein, M., & Kaplan, A. M. (2004). A beginner's guide to partial least squares
analysis. Understanding statistics, 3(4), 283-297.
Hussain, A., Yusoff, R. M., Banoori, S. A., Khan, A., & Khan, M. A. (2016).
Enhancing effectiveness of employees through training and development in
the health care department of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Pakistan: A Literature
Review. International Review of Management and Marketing, 6(4).
Hooft, E. A. J., Flier, H., & Minne, M. R. (2006). Construct Validity of Multi Source
Performance Ratings: An Examination of the Relationship of Self ,
Supervisor , and Peer Ratings with Cognitive and Personality Measures.
International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 14(1), 67-81.
Hyde, A. C. (2005). The new environment for compensation and performance
evaluation in the public sector. Public Personnel Management, 17(4), 351-
358.
Haque, M. A. (2012). Performance Appraisal System of Bangladesh Civil Service:
An Analysis of Its Efficacy. International Public Management Review, 13(1),
38-60.
Haider, A., ul Husnain, M. I., Shaheen, F., & Jabeen, S. (2015). Quality Assurance of
Higher Education in the Context of Performance Models: The Case of
Pakistan. Elixir Soc. Sci. 85 (2015) 34201-34209.
 225

Hodgson, K., & Whalley, G. (2006). Quality, the enhancement of a university's

teaching and learning and the role of quality officers. Teaching in Higher
Education, 11(4), 509-513.
Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. (2008). Structural equation modelling:
Guidelines for determining model fit. Articles, 2. PP 1-11.
Huffman, C., & Cain, L. B. (2000). Effects of considering uncontrollable factors in
sales force performance evaluation. Psychology & Marketing, 17(9), 799-
833.
Hung, L. N. Q. (2013). A social cognitive and cross cultural investigation of
performance appraisal in Australian and Vietnamese universities. Doctoral
dissertation University of Wollongong.
Heslin, P. A., & VandeWalle, D. (2011). Performance appraisal procedural justice:
The role of a manager‘s implicit person theory. Journal of Management,
37(6), 1694-1718.
Husin, N. H., & Gugkang, 2017, high performance work systems and employee
perceived job performance: evidence from banking sector in malaysia.
Journal of Global Business and Social Entrepreneurship (GBSE) Vol. 1: no. 3
(2017) page 62–74|.
Hashim, M., Rafi, S., Kazmi, S. S. A., Ullah, M., & Kee, D. M. H. (2017). Impact of
human resource practices on perceived performance: A study of teaching
faculty in private universities of Peshawar, Pakistan. City University
Research Journal (Special Issue), 120–129.
Hettiararchchi, H. A. H., & Jayarathna, S. M. D. Y. (2014). The effect of Employee
Work Related Attitudes on Employee Perceived job performance: A Study of
Tertiary and Vocational Education Sector in Sri Lanka. Journal of Business
and Management (IOSR-JBM) Volume 16, Issue 4. PP 74-83.
Hatch, M. J., & Cunliffe, A. L. (2006). Organization Theory: Modern, Symbolic and
Postmodern Perspectives,(Oxford: Oxford University Press). 440 pages.
Harrington, J.R., and Lee, J.H. (2015), ―What Drives Perceived Fairness of
Performance Appraisal? Exploring the Effects of Psychological Contract
Fulfillment on Employees‘Perceived Fairness of Performance Appraisal in
US Federal Agencies‖, Public Personnel Management, Vol. 44 No. 2, pp.
214-238.
 226

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006).
Multivariate data analysis (Vol. 6): Pearson Prentice Hall Upper Saddle
River.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (1998).
Multivariate data analysis (Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 207-219). Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Prentice hall.
Hair Jr, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., & Christian, M. (2010). William C. Black, Barry J.
Babin, Rolph E. Anderson, and Ronald L. Tatham. Multivariate Data
Analysis.
Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet.
Journal of Marketing theory and Practice, 19(2), 139-152.
Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Pieper, T. M., & Ringle, C. M. (2012). The use of partial
least squares structural equation modeling in strategic management research:
a review of past practices and recommendations for future applications. Long
range planning, 45(5-6), 320-340.
Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2013). Partial least squares structural
equation modeling: Rigorous applications, better results and higher
acceptance. Long Range Planning, Volume 46, Issues 1-2, pp. 1-12.
Hair Jr, J., Sarstedt, M., Hopkins, L., & G. Kuppelwieser, V. (2014). Partial least
squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) An emerging tool in
business research. European Business Review, 26(2), 106-121.
Hair Jr, J. F., Wolfinbarger, M., Money, A. H., Samouel, P., & Page, M. J. (2015).
Essentials of business research methods. Routledge. second edition. PP 1-
475.
Hair Jr, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2016). A primer on partial
least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage Publications.
Sage Book. pp-10-275
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., & Thiele, K. O. (2017).
Mirror, mirror on the wall: A comparative evaluation of composite-based
structural equation modeling methods. Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, 45(5), 616-632.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sinkovics, R. R. (2009). The use of partial least
squares path modeling in international marketing. In New challenges to
international marketing (pp. 277-319). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
 227

Henseler, J., & Chin, W. W. (2010). A comparison of approaches for the analysis of
interaction effects between latent variables using partial least squares path
modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 17(1), 82-109.
Henseler, J., & Sarstedt, M. (2013). Goodness-of-fit indices for partial least squares
path modeling. Computational Statistics, 28(2), 565-580
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing
discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal
of the academy of marketing science, 43(1), 115-135.
Henseler, J., Hubona, G., & Ray, P. A. (2017). Partial least squares path modeling:
Updated guidelines. In Partial Least Squares Path Modeling (pp. 19-39).
Springer, Cham.
Henseler, J., Hubona, G., & Ray, P. A. (2016). Using PLS path modeling in new
technology research: updated guidelines. Industrial management & data
systems, 116(1), 2-20.
Hertzog, M. A. (2008). Considerations in determining sample size for pilot
studies. Research in nursing & health, 31(2), 180-191.
Hlengane, N. A., & Bayat, M. S. (2013). Poor Employee Work Performance-A Case
Study-Cambridge Police Station. Kuwait Chapter of the Arabian Journal of
Business and Management Review, 2(12), 80.
Hoffman, A. J., & Georg, S. (Eds.). (2013). Business and the Natural Environment.
Routledge. PP 1-53.
HEC. (2014-2015a). Full time faculty of Pakistani universities/dais and constituent
colleges.RetrivedMay,18,2018fromhttp://www.hec.gov.pk/english/universitie
s/Pages/Full-time-Faculty.aspx
HEC. (2014-2015b). university wise full time faculty and PhD faculty of year 2015-
16.RetrivedMay,18,2018fromhttp://www.hec.gov.pk/english/universities/Pag
es/AJK/Full-time-Faculty.aspx
HEC. (2016). Master trainer faculty development program. Retrieved May, 12, 2018,
http:/hec.gov.pk/english/services/faculty/FPDP/pages/introduction.aspx
Hii, L. (2010). Rater Competency and Compliance to Accuracy in Conducting
Performance Appraisal in the Malaysian Public Sector. In Asia Pacific
Business Innovation & Technology Management Society. PP 1-6.
Iqbal, N., Ahmad, N., & Haider, Z. (2013). Impact of Performance Appraisal on
Employee's Performance Involving the Moderating Role of Motivation\Oman
 228

Chapter of Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review.-2013, Vol.

3, No. 1. Sohar University.
Ikramullah, M., Van Prooijen, J. W., Iqbal, M. Z., & Ul-Hassan, F. S. (2016).
Effectiveness of performance appraisal: developing a conceptual framework
using competing values approach. Personnel Review, 45(2), 334-352.
Ishaq, H. M., Iqbal, M. Z., & Zaheer, A. (2009). Effectiveness of performance
appraisal: Its outcomes and detriments in Pakistani Organizations. European
journal of social sciences, 10(3), 479-85.
Ikramullah, M., Shah, B., Khan, S., Hassan, F. S. U., & Zaman, T. (2012). Purposes
of Performance Appraisal System: A Perceptual Study of Civil Servants in
District Dera Ismail Khan Pakistan. International Journal of Business and
Management, 7(3), 142.
Ikramullah, M., Shah, B., Hassan, F. S. U., Zaman, T., & Khan, H. (2011). Fairness
perceptions of performance appraisal system: An empirical study of civil
servants in district Dera Ismail Khan, Pakistan. International Journal of
Business and Social Science, 2(21).
Ivancevich, J.M. 2001. Human resource management. 8th Ed. New York: McGraw-
Hill Irwin.
Islami, X., Mulolli, E., & Mustafa, N. (2018). Using Management by Objectives as a
performance appraisal tool for employee satisfaction. Future Business
Journal, 4(1), 94-108.
Idowu, A. (2017). Effectiveness of Performance Appraisal System and its Effect on
Employee Motivation. Nile Journal of Business and Economics, 3(5), 15-39.
Igbojekwe, P. A., Ugo-Okoro, C. P., & Agbonye, C. O. (2015). Performance
evaluation of academic staff in universities and colleges in Nigeria: The
missing criteria. International Journal of Education and Research, 3(3), 624-
640.
Inuwa, M. (2016). Job satisfaction and employee performance: An empirical
approach. The Millennium University Journal, 1(1), 90.
Ikemefuna, C. O., & Chidi, C. O. (2012). Workers‘ perception of performance
appraisal in selected public and private organizations in Lagos metropolis,
Nigeria. International Journal of Human Resource Studies, 2(3), 80–97
 229

Ibeogu, P. H., & Ozturen, A. (2015). Perception of Justice in Performance Appraisal

and Effect on Satisfaction: Empirical Findings from Northern Cyprus Banks.
Procedia Economics and Finance, 23, 964-969.
Iqbal, M. Z. (2012). Expanded dimensions of the purposes and uses of performance
appraisal. Asian Academy of Management Journal, 17(1).
Iqbal, M. Z., Akbar, S., & Budhwar, P. (2015). Effectiveness of performance
appraisal: An integrated framework. International Journal of Management
Reviews, 17(4), 510-533.
Islam, R., & bin Mohd Rasad, S. (2006). Employee performance evaluation by the
AHP: A case study. Asia Pacific Management Review, 11(3), 163-176.
Jannoo, Z., Yap, B. W., Auchoybur, N., & Lazim, M. A. (2014). The effect of
nonnormality on CB-SEM and PLS-SEM path estimates. International
Journal of Mathematical, Computational, Physical and Quantum
Engineering, 8(2), 285-291.
Javidmehr, M., & Ebrahimpour, M. (2015). Performance appraisal bias and errors:
The influences and consequences. International Journal of Organizational
Leadership, 4, 286-302
Judge, T.A., Hulin, C.L. (1993), ―Job satisfaction as a reflection of a disposition:
amultiple source causal analysis‖, Organizational Behavior and Human
Decisions Processes, Vol. 56, pp. 388-421.
Jaksic, M., & Jaksic, M. (2013). Performance management and employee
satisfaction. Montenegrin journal of economics, 9(1), 85.
Joint Committee on Higher Education (2000) Retrieved 3rd March, 2007 from:
http://www.mceetya.edu.auHigherEducationofCommissionPakistan.http://ww
w.hec.gov.pk/InsideHEC/Divisions/Finance/Documents/Funding%20policy%
20of%20Public%20sector%20HEIs%20in%20Pakistan%20(Final).pdf
Jalagat, R, (2016). Perceived job performance, Job Satisfaction and Motivation: A
Critical Review of their Relationship. International Journal of Advances in
Management and Economics (IJAME), 5 (6): 36-43
Joiner, T. A., & Bakalis, S. (2006). The antecedents of organizational commitment:
the case of Australian casual academics. International Journal of Educational
Management, 20(6), 439-452.
Johns, R. (2010). Likert items and scales. Survey Question Bank: Methods Fact
Sheet, 1, 1-11.
 230

Jabeen, M. (2011). Impact of performance appraisal on employees motivation.

European Journal of Business and Management, 3(4), 197-204.
Jenkins, J. R. D. (2015). Antecedents and consequences of rater goals in the
performance appraisal process (Doctoral dissertation, The George
Washington University).
James, (2013) K. K. Relationship between performance appraisal and teacher
commitment in Kenya (case study of public schools in Nakuru).
Karimi, R, Malik, M, & Hussain, S. (2011) 'Examining the Relationship of
Performance Appraisal System and Employee Satisfaction', International
Journal Of Business & Social Science, 2(22): 243-247,
Karugaba, A. (2015). Effectiveness of teachers performance appraisal feedback in
secondary education performance: the case of selected public secondary
schools in Bukoba Municipal council (Doctoral dissertation, Mzumbe
University).
Kehoe, R.R and Wright, P.M (2013) ‗The impact of high-performance human
resource practices on employees‘ attitudes and behaviours‘, Journal of
Management, Vol. 39 No 2, pp. 366-391.
Kumar, D. (2005). Performance appraisal: The importance of rater training. Journal
of the Kuala Lumpur Royal Malaysia Police College, 4, 1-16.
Khan, M. F. U. (2013). Role of performance appraisal system on employees
motivation. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 8(4), 66-83.
Kellough, J. E., & Nigro, L. G. (2002). Pay for performance in Georgia state
government: Employee perspectives on GeorgiaGain after 5 years. Review of
Public Personnel Administration, 22(2), 146-166.
Kamau, F. (2015). Enhancing job motivation to improve employee performance.
Case Study Company X. Master thesis. Vaasan Ammat tikorke akoulu,
University of Applied Sciences.
Khan, A. (2007). Performance appraisal‗s relation with productivity and job
satisfaction. Journal of Managerial Sciences, 99-114.
Khoury, G.C and Analoui, F (2004) ‗Innovative management model for performance
appraisal: The case of Palestinian public universities‘, Management Research
News, Vol. 27, No: 1 / 2 pp. 56-73.
Khan, M. A. (2010). Effects of human resource management practices on
organizational performance–an empirical study of oil and gas industry in
 231

Pakistan. European Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative

Sciences, 24(157-174), 6.
Khan, M. K. (2010). Indigenous Model of Higher Education Reforms in Pakistan:
Higher Education Quality Assurance Initiatives (Doctoral dissertation,
Quaid-e-Azam Campus, University of the Punjab Lahore-Pakistan).
Khan, K. (2013). The analysis of impact of training on employee development: a
case of public accountant trainees in Khyber pakhtunkhwa: A thesis
submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Doctor of
Philosophy to NUML University Islamabad Pakistan.
Khan, I. U. (2018). The Role Of Organizational Justice And Culture In Relationships
Between Leadership Styles And Employees’ performance (Doctoral
Dissertation, Gomal University, Dera Ismail Khan.).
Kuyumcu, D., & Dahling, J. J. (2014). Constraints for some, opportunities for
others? Interactive and indirect effects of Machiavellianism and
organizational constraints on task performance ratings. Journal of Business
and Psychology, 29(2), 301–305
Khan, R. (2014). The Impacts of Goal Setting and Curiosity on the Employee Job
Performance: A Perspective from NGO Sector of Pakistan. Management
Studies and Economic Systems, 54(1398), 1-8.
Khan, Z., Khan, A. S., & Khan, I. (2017). Impact of performance appraisal on
employee's performance including the moderating role of motivation: A
survey of commercial banks in Dera Ismail Khan, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa,
Pakistan. Universal journal of industrial and business management, 5(1), 1-9.
Khan, I., Ghauri, T. A., & Akram, K. (2012). Relationship between job satisfaction
and HR practices, an empirical research of different sectors of university
teachers in Pakistan. International Journal of learning and
Development, 2(3), 25-33.
Khan, R., Naseem, A., & Masood, S. A. (2016). Effect of continuance commitment
and organizational cynicism on employee satisfaction in engineering
organizations. International Journal of Innovation, Management and
Technology, 7(4), 141.
Kuvaas, B. (2011). The interactive role of performance appraisal reactions and
regular feedback. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 26(2), 123-137.
 232

Kolawole, T. O., Komolafe, I. T., Adebayo, A. A., & Adegoroye, A. A. (2013).

Appraisal system: A tool for performance in selected organizations in
Nigeria. International Journal of Sociology and Anthropology, 5(7), 249.
Koopmans, L., Bernaards, C. M., Hildebrandt, V. H., de Vet, H. C., & van der Beek,
A. J. (2014). Measuring individual work performance: Identifying and
selecting indicators. Work, 48(2), 229-238.
Kothari, C.R. (2004) Research Methodology 2nd Ed. New Age International (P) Ltd.
Publishers: Jaipur (India)
Klassen, A. C., Creswell, J., Plano Clark, V. L., Smith, K. C., & Meissner, H. I.
(2012). Best practices in mixed methods for quality of life research. Quality
of Life Research, 21(3), 377–380.
Kolawole, T. O., Komolafe, I. T., Adebayo, A. A., & Adegoroye, A. A. (2013).
Appraisal system: A tool for performance in selected organizations in
Nigeria. International Journal of Sociology and Anthropology, 5(7), 249.
Kondrasuk, J. N. (2011). So what would an ideal performance appraisal look like?.
The Journal of Applied Business and Economics, 12(1), 57.
Kalof, L., Dan, A., & Dietz, T. (2008). Essentials of social research. McGraw-Hill
Education (UK).
Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research
activities. Educational and psychological measurement, 30(3), 607-610.
Kirch, W. (Ed.). (2008). Encyclopedia of Public Health: Volume 1: A-H Volume 2: I-
Z. Springer Science & Business Media.
Kim, P. S. (2011). Performance management and performance appraisal in the public
sector. 10th Session. UN Committee of Experts on Public Administration. Pp
1-1.
Kampkötter, P., & Sliwka, D. (2014). The Role of Differentiation in Performance
Evaluations-Theory and Evidence. University of Cologne Working Paper.
Khedkar, D. E. (2016). Analysis of Performance Appraisal Systems in Education
Sector. International Journal of Management Sciences and Business
Research. Vol-4, Issue 6, 6 Pages.
Khine, M. S. (Ed.). (2013). Application of structural equation modeling in
educational research and practice. SensePublishers.
Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling:
Methodology in the social sciences.
 233

Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford

publications.
Kline, R. B. (2010). Promise and pitfalls of structural equation modeling in gifted
research.
Krishna, A. (2013). Addressing the critical issues for successful international market
penetration by Malaysian telecommunications firms. PhD dissertation,
Southern Cross University, Australia
Kim, S.E., and Rubianty, D. (2011), ―Perceived fairness of performance appraisals in
the federal government: Does it matter?‖, review of public personnel
administration, Vol. 31, pp. 329-348.
Krishnan, R., binti Ahmad, N. A. F., & Haron, H. (2018). The Effect of Employees‘
Perceived Fairness of Performance Appraisal Systems on Employees‘
Organizational Commitment. International Journal of Academic Research in
Business and Social Sciences, 8(3), 448-465.
Koster, F., De Grip, A., & Fouarge, D. (2011). Does perceived support in employee
development affect personnel turnover?. The International Journal of Human
Resource Management, 22(11), 2403-2418.
Landy, F. J., Barnes, J. L., & Murphy, K. R. (1978). Correlates of Perceived Fairness
and Accuracy of. Journal of Applied psychology, 63(6), 751-754.
Landy, F. J., & Farr, J. L. (1980). Performance rating. Psychological Bulletin, 87(1),
72-107.
Landy, F. J., Barnes, J. L., & Murphy, K. R. (1978). Correlates of Perceived Fairness
and Accuracy of. Journal of Applied psychology, 63(6), 751-754.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal
setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey. American psychologist,
57(9), 705.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (Eds.). (2013). New developments in goal setting and
task performance. Routledge.
Locke, E. & Latham, G. (2006). New directions in goal-setting theory, Association
for Psychological Science, vol. 15, no. 5, p. 265-268.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2015). Breaking the rules: a historical overview of
goal-setting theory. In Advances in motivation science (Vol. 2, pp. 99-126).
Elsevier.
 234

Latham, GP 2004, ―The motivational benefits of goal-setting‖, The Academy of

Management Executive, Vol. 18, No.4, pp. 126.
Lawler III, E. E. (1986). High-Involvement Management. Participative Strategies for
Improving Organizational Performance. Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers, 350
Sansome Street, San Francisco, CA 94104.
Lawler, E. E., Benson, G. S., & McDermott, M. (2012). Performance management
and rewardsystems.WorldatWork Journal, 21(4), 19–28.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). Work motivation and satisfaction: Light at the
end of the tunnel. Psychological science, 1(4), 240-246.
Latham, G. P., & Locke, E. A. (1979). Goal setting—A motivational technique that
works. Organizational Dynamics, 8(2), 68-80.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (Eds.). (2013). New developments in goal setting and
task performance. Routledge.
Landy, F.W. (1985). The psychology of work behaviour (3rd ed.). Homewood, IL:
Dorsey Press
Lahap, J., S. Z. Ibrahim, N. M. Said, A. Azmi, and M. N. Syuhirdy. "Training and
development program as a source of improving employee perceived job
performance." (2015): 167.
Lillian, G. O., Mathooko, P., & Sitati, N. (2011). The effects of performance
appraisal system on civil servants. In Kabarak University First International
Conference,(pp: 1-17).
Lunenburg, F. C.(2011). Goal-setting theory of motivation. International Journal of
Management, Business, and Administration, 15(1), 1-6.
Latham, G. P. (2003). Goal Setting:: A Five-Step Approach to Behavior Change.
Organizational Dynamics, 32(3), 309-318.
Latham, G. P., Borgogni, L., & Petitta, L. (2008). Goal setting and performance
management in the public sector. International Public Management Journal,
11(4), 385-403.
Levy, P.E and Williams, J.R (2004) ‗The social context of performance appraisal: A
review and framework for the future‘, Journal of Management, 30: pp.881-
905.
Ladley, Daniel, Wilkinson, Ian, & Young, Louise. (2015). The impact of individual
versus group rewards on work group performance and cooperation: A
 235

computational social science approach. Journal of Business Research, 68(11),

2412-2425.
Lee, C., Bobko, P., Christopher Earley, P., & Locke, E. A. (1991). An empirical
analysis of a goal setting questionnaire. Journal of Organizational Behavior,
12(6), 467-482.
Landy, F.J., and Farr, J.L. (1983). The measurement of work performance. New
York: Academic Press.
Landy, F. J., & Conte, J. M. (2016). Work in the 21st Century, Binder Ready
Version: An Introduction to Industrial and Organizational Psychology. John
Wiley & Sons.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1984). Goal setting: A motivational technique that
works!. Prentice Hall.
Lin, C. W., Chen, S. L., & Wang, R. Y. (2011). Savouring and Perceived Job
Performance in Positive Psychology: Moderating role of positive affectivity.
Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 14(3), 165-175.
Lu, C. S., Lai, K. H., & Cheng, T. E. (2007). Application of structural equation
modeling to evaluate the intention of shippers to use Internet services in liner
shipping. European Journal of Operational Research, 180(2), 845-867.
Mangi, R. A., Jhatial, A. A., Shah, S. A. A., & Ghumro, I. A. (2012). Human
resource management practices in private sector organisations in Pakistan:
study of cultural influences. Global Journal of management and business
research, 12(7), 20-30.
Majid, J. (2016). Effectiveness of Performance Appraisal Methods–An Empirical
Study of the Telecommunication Sector. International Journal of Trend in
Research and Development, 3(3), 10-17.
Malik, M. I., & Sajjad, M. (2015). Workplace Fun as Determinant of Teachers‘
Performance in Pakistani Universities. VFAST Transactions on Education
and Social Sciences, 7(1).
Munisamy, S. (2013). Identifying factors that influence job performance amongst
employees in oil palm plantation-FASS Final Project (Psychology).
Mehrad, A., Hamsan, H. H. B., & Abdullah, H. (2015). The role of personality
factors on job satisfaction among academic staff at public research
university. Journal of Educational, Health and Community Psychology, 4(1),
16-24.
 236

Mueller-Hanson, R. A., & Pulakos, E. D. (2015). Putting the ―performance‖ back in

performance management. SHRM-SIOP Science of HR White Paper Series,
1-25.
McEwan, D., Harden, S. M., Zumbo, B. D., Sylvester, B. D., Kaulius, M., Ruissen,
G. R. & Beauchamp, M. R. (2016). The effectiveness of multi-component
goal setting interventions for changing physical activity behaviour: a
systematic review and meta-analysis. Health psychology review, 10(1), 67-
88.
Mawoli, M. A., & Babandako, A. Y. (2011). An evaluation of staff motivation,
dissatisfaction and job performance in an academic setting. Australian
Journal of Business and Management Research, 1(9), 1.
Minbaeva, D. B. (2013). Strategic HRM in building micro-foundations of
organizational knowledge-based performance. Human Resource Management
Review, 23(4), 378-390.
Memon, M. A., Nor, K. M., & Salleh, R. (2016). Personality Traits Influencing
Knowledge Sharing in Student–Supervisor Relationship: A Structural
Equation Modelling Analysis. Journal of Information & Knowledge
Management, 15(02), 1650015.
McFillen, J. M., & New, J. R. (1979). Situational determinants of supervisor
attributions and behavior. The Academy of Management Journal, 22(4), 793-
809.
Meysen, F, Mohammad, R. J., & Ebrahim, D. (2012). The Effect of Peformance
Appraisal on Employee‘s Output Implying on the Moderating Role of
Motivation in Workplace. Internation Journal of Business and Management
Tomorrow. 2(4), 1-9.
Morris, L., Stanton, P., & Mustard, J. (2011, January). Rhetoric and reality: an
examination of performance management in australian universities. In
AIRAANZ 2011: Proceedings of the 25th Conference of the Association of
Industrial Relations Academics of Australia and New Zealand (pp. 1-13).
MacDonald, H. A., & Sulsky, L. M. (2009). Rating formats and rater training redux:
A context-specific approach for enhancing the effectiveness of performance
management. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne
des sciences du comportement, 41(4), 227.
 237

Mazhar-ul-Haq. (1977). A Short History of Islam: From the Rise of Islam to the Fall
of Baghdad, 571 AD to 1258 AD. Lahore: Bookland.
Mitchell, T. R. (1983). The effects of social, task, and situational factors on
motivation, performance, and appraisal. Performance Measurement and
Theory, 39, 29-59.
Maji, R. O. (2006), ―Evaluating Manpower Training and Development in the
Banking Industry: A Case Study of First Bank of Nigeria Plc‖ MBA Thesis,
University of Ilorin
Maas, V.S., and Torres-González, R. (2011), ―Subjective performance evaluation
and gender discrimination‖, journal of business ethics, Vol. 101 No. 4, pp.
667-681.
Muchhal, D. S. (2014). HR practices and Perceived job performance. IOSR journal
of humanities and social science (IOSR-JHSS), 19(4), 55-61.
Muhammad M. E., G. M. (2011). Far East Journal of Psychology and Business, 2,
37-48.
Mafini, C., & Pooe, D. R. (2013). The relationship between employee satisfaction
and organisational performance: Evidence from a South African government
department. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 39(1), 00-00.
Mir, Muhammad Masood, and Muhammad Hina Aminn. "The Influencing Factors of
Employee Performance and its effects on Performance Appraisal of the
Employees on Higher Education Sectors of Karachi, Pakistan." KASBIT
Journal of Management & Social Science 9, no. 1 (2016): 31-62.
Mir, M. M., Sharif, H. M., & Naqvi, N. A. (2017). Evaluating HR Practices on
Organizational Productivity with the Mediation Effect of Employee
Satisfaction Evidences from Higher Education Sectors of Karachi Pakistan.
KASBIT Journal of Management & Social Science, 10(Special Issue), 50-76.
Messah, O.I, and Kamencu, S.M. (2011). The Effect of Performance Appraisal
Systems on Employees in Kenya Tea Development Agency: A Survey of
Selected Tea Factories in Meru County-Kenya, Research Journal of Finance
and Accounting, 2(3):16-34.
Maley, J. (2013). Hybrid purposes of performance appraisal in a crisis. Journal of
Management Development, 32(10), 1093-1112.
Murphy, K.R., & Cleveland, N.J. (1995). Understanding performance appraisal –
Social, organisational and goal based perspective. Thousand Oaks: Sage
 238

Publications Nurse, L. (2005). Performance appraisal, employee development

and organizational justice: exploring the linkages. The International Journal
of Human Resource Management, 16(7), 1176-1194.
Matlala, M. M. (2011). Employee fairness perceptions of a performance management
system (Doctoral dissertation).
Mathis, R. L., & Jackson, J. H. (2011). Human resource management: Essential
perspectives. Cengage Learning.
Matolo, A. P. (2015). Job satisfaction: Its determinants and relationship with
employee performance in the Tanzanian banking sector (Doctoral
dissertation, The Open University Of Tanzania).
Monis, H., & Sreedhara, T. N. (2010). Correlates of Employee Satisfaction with
Performance Appraisal System in Foreign MNC BPOs Operating in India.
Annals of the University of Petroºani, Economics, 10(4), 215-24.
Maiga, A. S., & Jacobs, F. A. (2005). Antecedents and consequences of quality
performance. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 17(1), 111-131.
Maley, Jane. "Hybrid purposes of performance appraisal in a crisis." Journal of
Management Development 32, no. 10 (2013): 1093-1112.
Melián-González, S., Bulchand-Gidumal, J., & González López-Valcárcel, B.
(2015). New evidence of the relationship between employee satisfaction and
firm economic performance. Personnel Review, 44(6), 906-929.
Mollel Eliphas, R., Mulongo, L. S., & Razia, M. (2017). Perception of public service
employees on performance appraisal management in Muheza District,
Tanzania. Busin Manage Econ, 5(4), 60-9.
Muhammad, S.M., & Surayya, A. (2013). Performance Appraisal and Employee‘s
Motivation: A Comparative Analysis of Telecom Industry of Pakistan.
Pakistan Journal of Social Sciences . 33(1), 179-189
Muhammad Zohaib Abbas. (2014). Effectiveness of performance appraisal on
performance of employees. IOSR Journal of Business and Management
(IOSR-JBM) e-ISSN: 2278-487X, p-ISSN: 2319-7668. Volume 16, Issue 6.
Ver. II (Jun. 2014), PP 173-178.
Muijs, D. (2004). Introduction to quantitative research. Doing quantitative research
in education with SPSS, 1-12.
 239

Moradi, T., Mehraban, M. A., & Moeini, M. (2017). Comparison of the perceptions
of managers and nursing staff toward performance appraisal. Iranian Journal
of Nursing and Midwifery Research, 22(2), 128.
Merchant, K. A., Theivananthampillai, P., & Stringer, C. (2010). Relationships
between objective and subjective performance ratings. Department of
Accountancy and Business Law, Working paper series number 17, July 2010,
pp 1-37.
McShane, S. L., & Von GLinow, M. A. (2004). Organizational Behavior: Emerging
Realities for The Workplace Revolution. Mcgraw-Hill (Tx); 3rd edition
(January 2004). 688 pages.
Naing, N. N. (2003). Determination of sample size. The Malaysian journal of
medical sciences: MJMS, 10(2), 84. dissertation, Louisiana State University
and Agricultural and Mechanical College, United States -- Louisiana.
Naqshbandi, M. M., Singh, S. K. G., & Ma, P. (2016). The link between
organisational citizenship behaviours and open innovation: A case of
Malaysian high-tech sector. IIMB Management Review, 28(4), 200-211.
Naqshbandi, M. M., Tabche, I., & Choudhary, N. (2019). Managing open innovation:
The roles of empowering leadership and employee involvement
climate. Management Decision, 57(3), 703-723.
Naqshbandi, M. M., & Tabche, I. (2018). The interplay of leadership, absorptive
capacity, and organizational learning culture in open innovation: Testing a
moderated mediation model. Technological Forecasting and Social
Change, 133, 156-167.
Noe, R. A., Hollenbeck, J. R., Gerhart, B., & Wright, P. M. (2003). Gaining a
competitive advantage. Irwin: McGraw-Hill.
Naji, A., J. Mansour, and A. Leclerc. "Performance Appraisal System and Employee
Satisfaction: The role of trust towards supervisors''Journal of Human
Resources Management and Labor Studies June 2015." (2015): 40-53.
Nayar, R., & Raja, N. (2012). The impact of impression management behavior on
organizational politics among male and female employees in organic and
mechanistic organizational systems of Pakistan telecommunication sector.
Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 3(9), 914-
924.
 240

Neely, A. D., Adams, C., & Kennerley, M. (2002). The performance prism: The
scorecard for measuring and managing business success. London: Financial
Times/Prentice Hall. Pearson Education 2002, 377 pages.
Nyaoga, R. B., Kipchumba, S., & Magutu, P. O. (2010). The effectiveness of
performance appraisal systems in private universities in Kenya: An
assessment of Kabarak University. African Journal of Business and
Management, 1.
Neuberg, S. L., & Fiske, S. T. (1987). Motivational influences on impression
formation: outcome dependency, accuracy-driven attention, and individuating
processes. Journal of personality and social psychology, 53(3), 431.
Newstrom, J. W., & Davis, K. (1986). Human behavior at work. New York, NY. 12th
edition. P 1-8.
Niki, N., & Nili, M. (2012). Designing Distribution system of rewards and influence
on employees satisfaction case study: Hamgamkhodro Asia factory.
International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(12).
Nitzl, C., Roldan, J. L., & Cepeda, G. (2016). Mediation analysis in partial least
squares path modeling: Helping researchers discuss more sophisticated
models. Industrial management & data systems, 116(9), 1849-1864.
Neuman, L. W. (2011). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative
approaches.(3rd ed.): Pearson Education, Limited
Neuman, William Lawrence. (2005) social research methods: quantitative and
qualitative approaches (Vol 13): Allyn and bacon Boston. MA
Neuman, W.L. (2014) Social Research Methods (7th edn). Harlow: Pearson.
Nardi, P. (2003). Doing survey research: A guide to quantitative research. Boston,
MA.
Nowotniak, P. C. (2005). Relationship Between Supervisor Locus Of Control And
Employee Satisfaction In A Residential Care Facility. Doctoral Dissertation
University of Central Florida.
Oshode, A. A., Alade, O. S., & Arogundade, K. K. (2014). Performance appraisal in
the Nigerian banking sector: The individual and joint variables
analyses. European Journal of Business and Management, 6(5), 140-147.
Okechukwu, W. (2017). Influence Of Training and Development, Employee
Performance On Job Satisfaction Among The Staff. Journal of Technology
Management and Business, 4(1).
 241

Ojo, O., Oyeniyi, O., & Adeniji, A. A. (2007). Assessment of the Impact of
Compensation on Employees Performance. Journal of Business
Administration and Management, 2(1), 11-16.
Othman, N. (2014). Employee Performance Appraisal Satisfaction: The Case
Evidence from Brunei's Civil Service. Doctoral Dissertation. University of
Manchester.
Ohland, M. W., Loughry, M. L., Woehr, D. J., Bullard, L. G., Felder, R. M., Finelli,
C. J., & Schmucker, D. G. (2012). The comprehensive assessment of team
member effectiveness: Development of a behaviorally anchored rating scale
for self-and peer evaluation. Academy of Management Learning & Education,
11(4), 609-630.
Opatha, H. H. D. N. P. (2013). Towards a Sound Performance Appraisal System: An
Agenda for Action. Sri Lankan Journal of Human Resource Management,
4(1).
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2007). Sampling designs in qualitative
research: Making the sampling process more public. The qualitative report,
12(2), 238-254.
Odette, K. J. B. M., & david Kabagambe, J. (2012). employees‘satisfaction with
performance appraisal. International Journal of Information Technology and
Business Management. Vol.28 No.1. pp 1-25.
Okwuazi, J. I. (2014). A correlation analysis of employee satisfaction and
management practices in US organizations (Doctoral dissertation, University
of Phoenix).
Palaiologos, A., Papazekos, P., & Panayotopoulou, L. (2011). Organizational justice
and employee satisfaction in performance appraisal. Journal of European
Industrial Training, 35(8), 826-840.
Petrovsky, N., and Ritz, A. (2014). Public service motivation and performance: A
critical perspective. Evidence - Based HRM, 2(1), 57-79.
Poornima, V., & John Manohar, S. (2015). Performance Appraisal System and
Employee Satisfaction among its Employees in Bangalore. International
Journal of Science and Research, 4(3), 1169-1174.
Pituch, K. A., & Stevens, J. P. (2015). Applied multivariate statistics for the social
sciences: Analyses with SAS and IBM‘s SPSS. Routledge.
 242

Pallant, J. (2010). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using
SPSS . Maidenhead.
Pallant, J. (2013). SPSS Survival Manual: A Step by Step guide to data analysis
using IBM SPSS.. Berkshire, England.
Pallant, J. (2016). SPSS survival manual: a step by step guide to data analysis using
IBM SPSS, 6. th edn.
Picón, A., Castro, I., & Roldán, J. L. (2014). The relationship between satisfaction
and loyalty: A mediator analysis. Journal of Business Research, 67(5), 746-
751.
Punch, K. F. (2013). Introduction to social research: Quantitative and qualitative
approaches. Sage.
Patten, T. H. (1977). Pay: Employee Compensation and Incentive Plans: Free Press.
Prowse, P., & Prowse, J. (2009). The dilemma of performance appraisal. Measuring
Business Excellence, 13(4), 69-77.
Pettijohn, L. S., Parker, R. S., & Pettijohn, C. E. (2001). Performance appraisals:
usage, criteria and observations. Journal of Management Development, 20(9),
754-771.
Pichler, S. (2012), ―The social context of performance appraisal and appraisal
reactions: A metaanalysis‖ human resource management, Vol. 51 No. 5, pp.
709.
Priya, S. (2011). A factor analysis of performance management system in a public
sector organization and its impact on job satisfaction among employees.
Abhigyan, 29(3), 22-32.
Preizer, A. E. (2014). Do ratee's perceptions about performance evaluations matter?
The antecedents and consequences of ratee's perceptions about effective
performance evaluations (Doctoral dissertation, TUI University).
Pearce, J. L., & Porter, L. W. (1986). Employee responses to formal performance
appraisal feedback. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(2), 211.
Pakpakistan. (2016, May, 13, 2017). Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (NWFP) – the land of
Pakhtoons. From http://www.Pakpakistan.org/Khyber-paktunkhwa-nwfp-the-
land-of-pakhtoons
Quresh, T. M., Akbar, A., Khan, M. A., Sheikh, R. A., & Hijazi, S. T. (2010). Do
human resource management practices have an impact on financial
performance of banks?. African Journal of Business Management, 4(7), 1281.
 243

Qamar, A., & Asif, S. (2016). Performance Management: A Roadmap for

Developing Implementing and Evaluating Performance Management
Systems. South Asian Journal of Management, 23(2), 150.
Ramayah, T., Cheah, J., Chuah, F., Ting, H., & Memon, M. A. (2016). Partial Least
Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM) using SmartPLS 3.0: An
Updated Practical Guide to Statistical Analysis (Basic Level).
Rönkkö, M., & Evermann, J. (2013). A critical examination of common beliefs about
partial least squares path modeling. Organizational Research Methods, 16(3),
425-448.
Rashid, K., & Mukhtar, S. (2012). Education in Pakistan: Problems and their
solutions. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social
Sciences, 2(11), 332.
Roine, A. (2018). Employee perceptions of performance appraisal (Master's thesis).
Royes, G. (2015). Performance appraisal process, job satisfaction, and job
performance: Case study of employee perceptions of fairness (Doctoral
dissertation, Capella University).
Retelsdorf, J., & Gunther, K. (2011). Achievement goals for teaching and teachers‘
reference norms. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(7), 1111-1119.
Rahyuda, A., Syed, J., & Soltani, E. (2014). The role of relapse prevention and goal
setting in training transfer enhancement. Human Resource Development
Review, 13(4), 413-436.
Rasli, A. (2006). Data analysis and beyond: A practical guide for post-graduate
social scientists. Skudai, Malaysia: Penerbit UTM.
Raza, A. World University Rankings: Only 7 Pakistani institutions among top 980
universities [Online]. 2016 Sep 23 [Cited 2017 March 14].
Rasheed, M. I., Yousaf, H. D. A. S., & Noor, A. (2011). A critical analysis of
performance appraisal system for teachers in public universities of Pakistan:
A case study of the Islamia University of Bahawalpur (IUB). African Journal
of Business Management, 5(9), 3735.
Rana. R.A. and Reid, (2008). Dimensions Quality Assurance in Higher Education:
Challenges for Future in and International Conference on Assessing Quality
in Higher Education, 2008‖. Lahore Pakistan.
 244

Reisinger, Y., Mavondo, F., Moutinho, L., & Rita, P. (2006). Structural equation
modeling: Critical issues and new developments. Journal of Travel &
Tourism Marketing, 21(4), 41-71.
Roberson, Q. M. & Stewart, M. M. (2006). Understanding the motivational effects of
procedural and informational justice in feedback processes. British Journal of
Psychology, 97(3), 281-298.
Roch, S. G., Woehr, D. J., Mishra, V., & Kieszczynska, U. (2012). Rater training
revisited: An updated meta‐analytic review of frame‐of‐reference training.
Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 85(2), 370-395.
Roch, S. G., McNall, L. A., & Caputo, P. M. (2011). Self-judgments of accuracy as
indicators of performance evaluation quality: Should we believe them?.
Journal of Business and Psychology, 26(1), 41-55.
Rothwell, W. J. (2012). Encyclopedia of human resource management set-3 volumes.
New York, NY: Wiley
Rehman, C. A., & Hameed, A. HR PRACTICES AND PERFORMANCE AMONG
TEACHERS IN PAKISTAN. International Journal of Management
Research and Emerging Sciences. Volume 1 Issue 1 (2011) PP. 01-20
Richter, N. F., Cepeda, G., Roldán, J. L., & Ringle, C. M. (2015). European
management research using partial least squares structural equation modeling
(PLS-SEM). European Management Journal, 33(1), 1-3.
Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2016). Gain more insight from your PLS-SEM
results: The importance-performance map analysis. Industrial Management &
Data Systems, 116(9), 1865-1886.
Rubin, A., & Babbie, E. R. (2012). Brooks/Cole Empowerment Series: Essential
research methods for social work. Cengage Learning.
Roscoe, J.T. (1975) Fundamental Research Statistics for the Behavioural Sciences,
2nd edition. New York: Holt Rinehart & Winston.
Redmond, B. F. (2010). Self-efficacy theory: Do I think that I can succeed in my
work? Work attitudes and motivation. The Pennsylvania State University,
World Campus.
Rahman, W. (2012). The Relationship of Attitudinal and Behavioral Outcomes with
Employee Development in the Context of Performance Appraisal in Public
Universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (Doctoral dissertation, National
University of Modern Languages, Islamabad).
 245

Rahman, W., & Shah, B. (2012). The mediating effects of perceived employee
development on the relationships between performance appraisal and
perceived job performance in public universities of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa,
Pakistan. Business and Management Review, 2(1), 11-26.
Rahman, M. (2015). Approaches to Managing Costs in American Higher Education.
Journal of Knowledge Globalization, 8(1), 1-33.
Rashid, S. (2011). Trends in Access and Quality of Higher Education in Pakistan: A
Research based on three Case Studies (Master's thesis).
Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Will, A. I. H. W. S. D. (2005). SmartPLS release: 2.0
(beta). SmartPLS, Hamburg, Germany. URL http://www. smartpls. de.
Rubel, M. R. B., & Kee, D. M. H. (2014). Quality of work life and employee
performance: Antecedent and outcome of job satisfaction in Partial Least
Square (PLS). World Applied Sciences Journal, 31(4), 456-467.
Saetang, J., Sulumnad, K., Thampitak, P., & Sungkaew, T. (2010). Factors affecting
perceived job performance among staff: A case study of Ban Karuna Juvenile
Vocational Training Centre for boys. The Journal of Behavioral
Science, 5(1), 33-45.
Sageer, A., Rafat, S., & Agarwal, P. (2012). Identification of variables affecting
employee satisfaction and their impact on the organization. IOSR Journal of
business and management, 5(1), 32-39.
Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., Smith, D., Reams, R., & Hair Jr, J. F. (2014). Partial
least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM): A useful tool for
family business researchers. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 5(1), 105-
115.
Saqib, S. I. (2017). Human Capital Resources, Human Resource Management
Policies, and Employee Perceptions: An Investigation of Young Professionals
in the Banking Sector of Pakistan (Doctoral dissertation, MANCHESTER
BUSINESS SCHOOL).
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2016). Research Methods for Business
students. (ed.th) Harlow.
Saunders, M. N., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2015). Research Methods for Business
Students EBook. Pearson Australia Pty Limited
 246

Saleem, M. A., & Imran, M. (2014). Relationship between job satisfaction and Job
Performance: A case study of Universities of Peshawar District (KPK)
Pakistan. European Journal of Business and Management, 6(31), 314-323.
Shumi, R. A., & Begum, S. (2017). 1. Department of Human Resource Management,
Jatiya Kabi Kazi Nazrul Islam University, Trishal, Mymensingh-2200 2.
Department of Public Administration and Governance Studies, Jatiya Kabi
Kazi Nazrul Islam University, Trishal, Mymensingh-
2200. Management, 9(19).
Sonnentag, S., & Frese, M. (2002). Performance concepts and performance
theory. Psychological management of individual performance, 23(1), 3-25.
Shukla, S., & Adhikari, B. (2017). The Study On Employee Perception Of
Performance Appraisal System. Gurukul Business Review-Gbr, 13, 66-72.
Sherwani, N. S. (2010). The study of Workplace Learning and Performance
competencies among Pakistani practitioners.
Sattar, A. & Nawaz, A. (2011). Investigating the demographic impacts on the job
satisfaction of district officers in the province of KPK, Pakistan. International
Research Journal of Management and Business Studies, 1(3):68-75.
Saif, S.K., Nawaz, A., Jan., F.A., & Khan M.I. (2012). Synthesizing the theories of
job satisfaction across the cultural/attitudinal dimensions. Interdisciplinary
journal of contemporary research in business, 3(9):1382-1396.
Sarwar, S., Aslam, H. D., & Rasheed, M. I. (2010). Hindering Factors of Beginning
Teachers' High Performance in Higher Education Pakistan (Case Study of
IUB-The Islamia University of Bahawalpur). International Journal of
Education, 2(1), 1.
Sudin, S. (2011). Fairness of and satisfaction with performance appraisal process.
Journal of Global Management, 2(1), 66-83.
Sherwani, K. H. (2014). Development of Performance Management Concept in
Higher Education Context. International Journal of Social Sciences &
Educational Studies, 1(3), 46-54.
Smith, P. C., & Kendall, L. M. (1963). Retranslation of expectations: An approach to
the construction of unambiguous anchors for rating scales. Journal of applied
psychology, 47(2), 149.
 247

Shahzad, K., Bashir, S., & Ramay, M. I. (2008). Impact of HR practices on perceived
performance of university teachers in Pakistan. International review of
business research papers, 4(2), 302-315.
Sulsky, L. M., Skarlicki, D. P., & Keown, J. L. (2002). Frame of Reference Training:
Overcoming the Effects of Organizational Citizenship Behavior on
Performance Rating Accuracy. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(6),
1224-1240.
Sultana, A., Irum, S., Ahmed, K., & Mehmood, N. (2012). Impact of training on
employee performance: A study of telecommunication sector in Pakistan.
Interdisciplinary Journal of contemporary research in business, 4(6), 646-
661.
Shrestha, S., & Chalidabhongse, J. (2006, June). Improving employee satisfaction on
performance appraisal: a case study on Thai companies. In Management of
Innovation and Technology, 2006 IEEE International Conference on (Vol. 1,
pp. 106-110). IEEE.
Spence, J. R., & Keeping, L. M. (2013). The road to performance ratings is paved
with intentions: A framework for understanding managers‘ intentions when
rating employee performance. Organizational Psychology Review, 3(4), 360-
383.
Schachter, H. L. (2010). Objective and subjective performance measures: A note on
terminology. Administration & Society, 42(5), 550-567.
Stone, RJ 2010, Managing Human Resources, 3rd edn, John Wiley and Sons,
Sydney,Australia.
Selden, S., & Sowa, J. E. (2011). Performance management and appraisal in human
service organizations: Management and staff perspectives. Public Personnel
Management, 40(3), 251-264.
Samad, S. (2011). The effects of job satisfaction on organizational commitment and
perceived job performance relationship: A case of managers in Malaysia's
manufacturing companies. European Journal of Social Sciences, 18(4), 602-
611.
Scholl, R. W. (2002). Motivational processes: Expectancy theory. Retrieved May, 14,
2005.
 248

Selden, S. C., Ingraham, P. W., & Jacobson, W. (2001). Human resource practices in
state government: Findings from a national survey. Public Administration
Review, 61(5), 598-607.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Understanding research
philosophies and approaches. Research methods for business students, 4, 106-
135.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., Thornhill, A., & Bristow, A. (2015). Understanding
research philosophy and approaches to theory development. M. Saunders, P.
Lewis, & A. Thornhill, Research Methods for Business Students, 122-161.
Saunders, M. (2004). Lewis P & Thornhill A.(2007): Research Methods for Business
Students. England: Printhall.
Salaman, G., Storey, J., & Billsberry, J. (Eds.). (2005). Strategic human resource
management: Theory and practice. Sage Book. pp-1-10
Sekaran, U. (2005). Research Method for business: A skillfull Aproach.
Scheuren, F. (2004, June). What is a Survey?. American Statistical Association.
Book, PP 1-68.
Schneider, B., Ashworth, S. D., Higgs, A. C., & Carr, L. (1996). Design, validity,
and use of strategically focused employee attitude surveys. Personnel
Psychology, 49(3), 695-705.
Schumacher, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (1996). A beginner‘s guide to SEM. New
Jersey: Mahwah.
Sekaran, U. (2003). Research Methods for Business (4th ed.), Hoboken, NJ: John
Wiley & Sons.
Sonal Agarwal, & Isaac Doku, (2016). Performance Appraisal on Perceived job
performance in the Tema Metropolitan Mutual Health Insurance Authority.
The International Journal Of Business & Management (ISSN 2321–8916)
Soltani, E. (2005). Conflict between theory and practice: TQM and performance
appraisal. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 22(8),
796-818.
Sajuyigbe, A. S. (2017). Impact of Performance Appraisal on Employee
Performance in Nigerian Telecommunication Industry (A study of MTN,
Nigeria). International Journal of Economics and Business Management
ISSN 2489-0065 Vol. 3 No. 1 2017, pp 1-11.
 249

Shaout, A., & Yousif, M. K. (2014). Performance evaluation–Methods and

techniques survey. International Journal of Computer and Information
Technology, 3(05), 2279-0764.
Sharma, A., & Sharma, T. (2017). HR analytics and performance appraisal system: a
conceptual framework for employee performance improvement. Management
Research Review, 40(6).
Selvarajan, R., & Cloninger, P. A. (2009). The influence of perceived job
performance outcomes on ethical assessments. Personnel Review, 38(4), 398-
412.
Selvarajan, T.T., and Cloninger, P.A. (2012), ―Can performance appraisals motivate
employees to improve performance? A Mexican study‖, The International
Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 23 No. 15, pp. 3063-3084.
Sharma, N. P., Sharma, T., & Agarwal, M. N. (2016). Measuring employee
perception of performance management system effectiveness:
Conceptualization and scale development. Employee Relations, 38(2), 224-
247.
Spagnoli, P., Caetano, A., & Santos, S. C. (2012). Satisfaction with job aspects: Do
patterns change over time? Journal of Business Research, 65, 609-616.
Taylor, P. (2013, February). Performance management and the new workplace
tyranny: A report for the Scottish Trades Union Congress. Scottish Trades
Union Congress.
Tekalegn Girma, Solomon Lemma Lodesso, Gebre Sorsa. (2016).The Effect of
Performance Appraisal On Employee Performance: A Survey On
Administrative Staff Of Hawassa Univesity. Journal of Business and
Management (IOSR-JBM), Volume 18, Issue 3 .Ver. II (Mar. 2016), PP 36-44
Thurston Jr, P. W., & McNall, L. (2010). Justice perceptions of performance
appraisal practices. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 25(3), 201-228.
Toppo, L., & Prusty, T. (2012). From performance appraisal to performance
management. Journal of Business and Management, 3(5), 1-6.
Türk, K. (2008). Performance appraisal and the compensation of academic staff in
the University of Tartu. Baltic Journal of Management, 3(1), 40-54.
Terpstra, DE & Rozell, EJ 1994, ―The relationship of goal setting to organisational
productivity‖, Group & Organisation Management, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 285-
294.
 250

Tenenhaus, M., Vinzi, V. E., Chatelin, Y. M., & Lauro, C. (2005). PLS path
modeling. Computational statistics & data analysis, 48(1), 159-205.
Teo, T. C., & Low, K. C. P. (2016). The Impact of Goal Setting on Employee
Effectiveness to Improve Organisation Effectiveness: Empirical Study of a
High-Tech Company in Singapore. Journal of Business & Economic Policy
Vol. 3, No. 1, PP-201-216
Tziner, A., & Rabenu, E. (2018). Ways to improve the performance appraisal system
2: Alternative strategies for assessing and evaluating performance.
In Improving Performance Appraisal at Work. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Tziner, A., & Levy, S. (2017). Examination of Performance Appraisal Behavior
Structure. Frontiers in psychology, 7, 2075.
Tahir, Amin. (2014). Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Budget 2014-15 KP allocates highest
percentage to education. Retrieved May, 25, 2017 from
http://www.brecorder.com/business-economy/189:pakistan/1193455:khyber-
pakhtunkhwa-budget-2014-15-kp-allocates-highest-percentage-to-education/
Tool, H. R. (2012). Performance management and appraisal. A Handbook.
Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1978). A theory of procedure. Cal. L. Rev., 66, 541.
Tien, F. F. (2000). To what degree does the desire for promotion motivate faculty to
perform research? Testing the expectancy theory. Research in Higher
Education, 41(6), 723-752.
Teare, M. D., Dimairo, M., Shephard, N., Hayman, A., Whitehead, A., & Walters, S.
J. (2014). Sample size requirements to estimate key design parameters from
external pilot randomised controlled trials: a simulation study. Trials, 15(1),
264.
Torabi, A., & Setodeh, S. (2010). Employees‘ attitude about the annual performance
evaluation of faculties affiliated to Ahvaz University of Medical Sciences in
2007, Iran. Journal of Health Administration, 12(38), 17-22.
Usmani, S., & Jamal, S. (2013). Impact of distributive justice, procedural justice,
interactional justice, temporal justice, spatial justice on job satisfaction of
banking employees. Review of integrative business and economics
research, 2(1), 351.
Usman, H. (2016). Homeowners’ perception on mortgage financing: a case of
Bauchi metropolis Nigeria (Doctoral dissertation, Universiti Tun Hussein
Onn Malaysia).
 251

Umair, T., Javaid, M. F., Amir, H., & Luqman, M. K. (2016). Effect of Perceived
Appraisal Fairness on Job Satisfaction. Journal of Applied Environmental
and Biological Sciences, 6(2), 12-20.
Vasset, F., Marnburg, E., & Furunes, T. (2011). The effects of performance appraisal
in the Norwegian municipal health services: a case study. Human resources
for health, 9(1), 22.
Verma, S. (2014). Teacher‘s Job Satisfaction & Job Performance. Global Journal of
Multidisciplinary Studies, 2(2).
Vinzi, V. E., Trinchera, L., & Amato, S. (2010). PLS path modeling: from
foundations to recent developments and open issues for model assessment
and improvement. In Handbook of partial least squares (pp. 47-82). Springer,
Berlin, Heidelberg.
Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. new york: John willey & sons. Inc.
VroomWork and Motivation1964.
Vansteenkiste, V., Lens, W., Witte, H., & Feather, N. T. (2005). Understanding
unemployed people's job search behaviour, unemployment experience and
well‐being: A comparison of expectancy‐value theory and self‐determination
theory. British journal of social psychology, 44(2), 269-287.
Verbeeten, F. H. (2008). Performance management practices in public sector
organizations: Impact on performance. Accounting, Auditing &
Accountability Journal, 21(3), 427-454.
Van Thiel, S., & Leeuw, F. L. (2002) The performance paradox in the public sector.
Public Performance & Management Review, 25(3), 267-281.
Wahab, A. (2016). Factors determining perceived job performance of University
leaders in Pakistan (Doctoral dissertation, Universiti Utara Malaysia).
Walsh, Marie Burns (2003). Perceived fairness of and satisfaction with employee
performance appraisal. Ph.D.
Watts, T., & McNair-Connolly, C. J. (2012). New performance measurement and
management control systems. Journal of Applied Accounting Research,
13(3), 226-241.
Wainaina, A. (2014). Factors affecting perception on job performance in the Kenya
financial sector A case study of an international bank with substantial
operations in Kenya(Doctoral dissertation, United States International
University-Africa).
 252

Woehr, D. J., & Huffcutt, A. I. (1994). Rater training for performance appraisal: A
quantitative review. Journal of occupational and organizational psychology,
67(3), 189-205.
Woehr, D. J. (1994). Understanding frame-of-reference training: The impact of
training on the recall of performance information. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 79(4), 525.
Weerakkody, W. A. S., & Mahalakamge, W. G. S. (2013). The Relationship between
Performance Appraisal Satisfaction and Employee Outcomes: With Special
Reference of Bank of Ceylon Head Office. Kelaniya Journal of Human
Resource Management, 8(2).
Waruguru, M. E, (2016). Influence Of Performance Appraisal On Employee Job
Performance In State Corporations In Kenya: A Case Of Kenya Revenue
Authority, Nairobi County.
Warokka, A., Gallato, C. G., Thamendren, A., & Moorthy, L. (2012). Organizational
justice in performance appraisal system and work performance: evidence
from an emerging market. Journal of Human Resources Management
Research, 2012, 1.
Whitehead, D., & Whitehead, L. (2016). Sampling data and data collection in
qualitative research. Nursing and Midwifery Research: methods and
appraisal for evidence-based practice, Edition: 5th, Chapter: 7, Publisher:
Elsevier, pp.111-123.
Westover, J. H. (2011). The Relationship between Job Satisfaction and Other
Important Individual, Organizational, and Social Outcomes. International
Journal of Science in Society, 2(1), 63-76.
Wahyuni, D. (2012). The research design maze: Understanding paradigms, cases,
methods and methodologies. Journal of applied management accounting
research, vol. 10, no. 1, Winter 2012, pp. 69-80.
Wong, K. K. K. (2013). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-
SEM) techniques using SmartPLS. Marketing Bulletin, 24(1), 1-32.
Wong, Y. T., Wong, Y. W., and Wong, C. S. (2015), ―An integrative model of
turnover intention: Antecedents and their effects on employee performance in
Chinese joint ventures‖, Journal of Chinese Human Resource Management,
Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 71-90.
 253

Ying, Z. Y. (2012). The Impact of Performance Management System on Employee

performance. Unpublished master thesis.
Yusoff, R. B., Ali, A. M., & Khan, A. (2014). Assessing reliability and validity of
job performance scale among university teachers. Journal of Basic and
Applied Scientific Research, 4(1), 35-41.
Yurtkoru, E. S., Bozkurt, T., Bekta, F., Ahmed, M. J., & Kola, V. Application of
goal-setting theory. Global Business Research Congress (GBRC), May 24-25,
2017, Istanbul, Turkey.
Yi, H., & Jianqiao, L. (2005, July). A Four-component Conceptual Model of
Perceived job performance. In Proceedings of2005International Conference
on Management Science & Engineering (pp. 1621-1626). Incheon, R. Korea:
Harbin Institute of Technology, PR China.
Zafarullah, S., & Pertti, V. (2017). Factors affecting job satisfaction of teacher
educators: empirical evidence from the Universities of Sindh Province of
Pakistan.
Zakaria, N., Zainal, S. R. M., & Nasurdin, A. M. (2011). Investigating the role of
human resource management practices on the performance of SME: A
conceptual framework. Journal of global management, 3(1), 74-92.
Zeb, A., Abdullah, N. H., & Javaid, M. (2018, July). Impact of Human Capital
Management Practices on Employees‘ Perceived job performance. In Journal
of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1049, No. 1, p. 012020). IOP Publishing.
Zingheim, P. K., & Schuster, J. R. (2007). Measuring and rewarding customer
satisfaction, innovation and workforce engagement. WorldatWork Journal,
16(4), 08.
Zia-ur-Rehman, M., Faisal, H., & Khan, R. A. (2015). In Public Sector
Organizations, how the Performance of Employees is influenced by the HR
Practices-Analyzing the Perspective. Journal of Managerial Sciences, 9(1).
Zheng, W., Zhang, M., & Li, H. (2012). Performance appraisal process and
organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Managerial
Psychology, 27(7), 732-752.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2013). Theories of self-regulated learning and academic
achievement: An overview and analysis. In Self-regulated learning and
academic achievement (pp. 10-45). Routledge.
 254

APPENDIX A
 255

Part one: Items of research instruments

Strongly Disagree

Somewhat Agree

Strongly Agree
Disagree
Sr.

Agree
Item

Section 1: Performance Appraisal

Goal setting and purposes of performance appraisal
1 An important aspect of performance appraisal is goal- setting 1 2 3 4 5
2 It is important to be aware of the goal-setting and purposes of the performance
appraisal system
3 Performance appraisal purposes should be employee development oriented
4 The current performance appraisal system is very effective in its intended
purposes
5 The current performance appraisal system in my organization is employee
development oriented
Fairness of the performance appraisal
1 A good performance appraisal needs to be fair 1 2 3 4 5
2 The appraisal criteria (general) of my university are fair
3 The appraisal system of a university needs to be transparent
4 The performance appraisal criteria of my university are clear
5 Performance measurement criteria of my university are subjective in assessing
the performance of the employees
6 Performance measurement criteria of my university are objective in assessing
the performance of the employees
Rating scale format
1 If performance is appraised by several sources (rater, peers, superiors) they 1 2 3 4 5
would enhance the accuracy of performance appraisal
2 The format of rating scales used in my university for appraising employee‘s
working behaviour, are measurable
3 Performance ratings should be based on how well I do my work
4 The performance criteria used in the rating scale format actually measure my
real performance
5 The format of rating scale is important to measure the accuracy of individual
performance
6 Being appraised by several sources (supervisor, peers, superiors) would provide
me with valuable information about important aspects of my performance
Rater training
 256

1 Rater needs more training in conducting performance appraisal interview to get 1 2 3 4 5

its intended goals
2 Rater must be sufficiently trained in all skills needed in appraising performance
3 Rater appraisal skills are regularly refreshed through training
Employee satisfaction
1 I am satisfied with the working environment of my university 1 2 3 4 5
2 My university takes me as an asset and I am satisfied with the progress I have
made
3 I think performance appraisal is valuable to me as well as to my university as it
affects my performance in the university
4 I think my performance is affected by my overall satisfaction keeping in view
all the present and potential benefits that the university offers
5 I am satisfied with my working relationship with the management
Perceived job performance
1 I think I have improved my job performance during my service 1 2 3 4 5
2 The current performance appraisal system in vogue in my university has
helped me in improving my job performance
3 I think an effective performance appraisal system is an important indicator of
the effectiveness of academic perceived job performance
4 Institutional support assessed me to enhance my perceived job performance
5 The institutional environment is conducive for improved job performance
 257

Part two: Demographic information

We are interested in getting a little information about you. It is assured that your
responses will be kept confidential.
1) What is your gender? Female Male
2) What is your age?
Below 25 26 to 30 31 to 35 36 to 40 above 40
3) What is your marital status?
Single Married
4) What is your education level (highest level completed)
Master Degree MS/M.phil
Doctorate
5) What is your designation?
Professor Associate Professor
Assistant Professor Lecturer
6) What is your university name?
University of Peshawar
University Of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
KP Agriculture University Peshawar
Khyber Medical University Peshawar
Islamia College University Peshawar
Institute of Management Sciences Peshawar
7) How long have you been working for this organization?
1-3 years 4 to 6 years
7 to 10 years More than 10 years
8) What is your faculty?
Natural sciences Medical sciences Social sciences
Engineering sciences Management sciences
 APPENDIX B

Exploratory factor analysis

KMO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .963

Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 6608.620
Df 528
Sig. .000

Communalities
Initial Extraction
GSP1 1.000 .661
GSP2 1.000 .682
GSP3 1.000 .664
GSP4 1.000 .711
GSP5 1.000 .543
FPA1 1.000 .583
FPA2 1.000 .650
FPA3 1.000 .675
FPA4 1.000 .519
FPA5 1.000 .611
FPA6 1.000 .619
RSF1 1.000 .715
RSF2 1.000 .710
RSF3 1.000 .600
RSF4 1.000 .690
RSF5 1.000 .567
RSF6 1.000 .621
RT1 1.000 .620
RT2 1.000 .714
RT3 1.000 .573
ES1 1.000 .653
ES2 1.000 .701
ES3 1.000 .752
ES4 1.000 .689
ES5 1.000 .681
 259

PJP1 1.000 .651

PJP2 1.000 .744
PJP3 1.000 .757
PJP4 1.000 .626
PJP5 1.000 .652
Extraction Method: Principal
Component Analysis.
 260

Total Variance Explained

Extraction Sums of Squared Rotation Sums of Squared
Initial Eigenvalues Loadings Loadings
% of Cumulative % of Cumulative % of Cumulative
Component Total Variance % Total Variance % Total Variance %
1 15.496 46.957 46.957 15.496 46.957 46.957 4.505 13.652 13.652
2 1.873 5.677 52.634 1.873 5.677 52.634 4.385 13.287 26.940
3 1.376 4.171 56.805 1.376 4.171 56.805 3.946 11.958 38.898
4 1.094 3.314 60.119 1.094 3.314 60.119 3.205 9.711 48.609
5 .985 2.984 63.103 .985 2.984 63.103 3.113 9.435 58.044
6 .855 2.590 65.693 .855 2.590 65.693 2.524 7.649 65.693
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Rotated Component Matrixa

Component
1 2 3 4 5 6
GSP1 .605
GSP2 .605
GSP3 .624
GSP4 .705
GSP5 .648
FPA1 .504
FPA2 .641
FPA3 .567
FPA4 .590
FPA5 .553
FPA6 .601
RSF1 .726
RSF2 .544
RSF3 .597
RSF4 .672
RSF5 .525
RSF6 .503
RT1 .701
RT2 .775
RT3 .647
 261

ES1 .600
ES2 .636
ES3 .673
ES4 .655
ES5 .696
PJP1 .672
PJP2 .737
PJP3 .722
PJP4 .665
PJP5 .666
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
 LIST OF PUBLICATIONS

1. Khan, M.A., Ismail, F., Rosman, M.D.Y., Hussain, A. The impact of

performance on employee job performance in Public sector universities of
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. (PUBLISHED) in International Journal of Engineering &
Technology, 7 (3.25) (2018) 544-548 Scopus Indexed)
2. Khan, M.A., Rosman, M.D.Y., Hussain, A. Ismail, F. The mediating effect of
job satisfaction on the relationship of HR practices and employee job
performance. Empirical evidence from higher education sector. (PUBLISHED)
in International journal of organizational leadership, 8 (2019), 78-94 (IJOL) (ISI
indexed).
3. Hussain, K, Wahab, E, Zeb A, Khan, M.A., et al. Examining the relationship
between learning capabilities and organizational performance: The mediating
role of organizational innovativeness. MATEC Web of Conferences 150, 06027
(2018) MUCET 2017 (ISI Indexed)
4. Zeb, A, N H., Abdullah, Javaid, M, Khan, M.A.,.Impact of Human Capital
Management Practices on Employees‘ job Performance. IOP Conf. Series:
Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1049 (2018) (Scopus Indexed)
 VITA

Muhammad Asad Khan is an Assistant secretary in KP Board

of Technical Education Peshawar. He obtained his Bachelor of
Business Administration degree (BBA-Hons) in Human
Resource Development from Institute of Management Studies,
University of Peshawar in 2003-2007. He later obtained
Master (MBA) degree in Human Resource Management from
the same institute and University, Pakistan in 2008. He worked with the Khyber
Pakhtunkhwa Board of Technical Education from May 2010 to September 2016 as
an Assistant secretary. He pursuit his PhD in the Faculty of Technology Management
and Business, Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia (UTHM) in the area of
performance appraisal and employee perceived job performance. His general
research interest is in Human Resource Management issues in Pakistani Universities,
especially academician‘s perceived job performance, Leadership, employee
satisfaction and quantitative analysis.