Application of performance appraisal system (PAS) attributes among first rater officers (FRO’s): Issues and Implication

  • Jakheus Limasan UNIMAS
  • Rusli Ahmad UNIMAS
  • Nur Fatihah Abdullah Bandar UNIMAS

Abstract

This study aims to explore the first rater officers’ perspectives on the application of performance appraisal attributes in performance appraisal system in a higher education institution in Sarawak. Six attributes were focused on the study namely clarification of the system, justification of the system, control criteria, employee participation, system management, and credibility of the assessor. The study uses a qualitative methodology using semi-structured interview techniques and data analysis in thematic approach. Three common issues are the limitation of the system’s availability, insufficient scoring distribution towards lecturers who are involved in administrative work and limited capability of the server. Along with that, two critical issues are the subjective judgment of personality traits and limited utilization of the system. The implication raised based on the issues is work processes are interrupted, employee dissatisfaction and organizational image are affected. In conclusion, the issues within the performance appraisal system need to be taken seriously to avoid conflicts.  

Keywords: Performance appraisal system attributes; General issues; Critical issues; First rater officer

References

Ahmad, R., & Shamsuddin, S. (2011). Pengurusan dan penilaian prestasi pekerja. Kuching, Sarawak: RS Publication.

Asiimwe, E. N., & Lim, N. (2010). Usability of government websites in Uganda. Electronic Journal of e-Government, 8(1), 1-12.

Ahmad, R., Ali, N. A., Ismail, W. K. (2007). Sistem penilaian prestasi sektor awam Malasia: Pemikiran semula terhadap peranan dan tanggungjawab pegawai penilai prestasi. Jurnal Kemanusian, 1(3), 67-23.

Ahmad, R., & Ismail, A. (2007). Sistem penilaian prestasi di sektor awam di Malaysia: Pemikiran semula terhadap peranan dan tanggungjawab pegawai penilai prestasi. Jurnal Kemanusiaan, 10(1) 90-100.

Abdullah, A. S. (2004). Kepimpinan unggul tonggak pengurusan pendidikan cemerlang. Jurnal Pengurusan dan Kepimpinan Pendidikan, 14(7), 18-32.

Brooks, A. (2006). Dispelling HR’s fear of technology takeover. Employee Benefit Plan Review, 60(10), 6-10.

Berita Harian (2018). CEUPACS rayu kerajaan laksanakan KGT. Kuala Lumpur: Jabatan Percetakan Negara.

Barbour, R. S. (2000). The role of qualitative research in broadening the evidence base for clinical practice. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 6(2), 155-163.

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Qualitative, quantitative and mixed method (3th ed.). California: SAGE Publication. Inc.

Denscombe, M. (2007). The good research guide (3th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.

Fugarda, A. J., & Potts, H. W. (2015). Sup- porting thinking on sample sizes for thematic analyses: a quantitative tool. International Journal of Social Re- search Methodology, 8(2)1-16.

Fejgin, N., Ephraty, N., & Kben-sira, D. (1995). Work environment and burnout of physical education teachers. Journal of Teaching Physical Education, 15(9), 64-78.

Folger, R. & Kanovsky (1989). Effect of procedural and distributive justice on reaction to pay raise decision. Academy of Management Journal, 32(1), 115-130.

Kuvaas, B. (2006). Different relationships between perceptions of developmental performance appraisal and work performance. Personnel Review, 36(3), 378–397.

Kosasi, S. (2002). Peranan teknologi informasi dalam pengembangan organisasi. Article Sekolah Tinggi Manajemen Informatika dan Komputer, 8(1), 0854-9524.

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: a methods sourcebook (3 rd ed.). Thou- sand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Markom, M., Abdul, N. A., Ariffin, A. K., Wahab, D. A., Husain, H., & Ramli, N. F. L. (2011). Seminar Pendidikan Kejuruteraan dan Alam Bina. Kongress pengajaran dan pembelajaran UKM.

Maykut, P., & Morehouse, R. (2005). Beginning Qualitative Research: A Philosophic and Practical Guide. London: The Falmer Press (Taylor & Francis Group).

Norsidah, T. (2014). Garis Panduan Kebolehgunaan Praktikal Bagi Pembangunan Laman Web e-Kerajaan. Tesis Sarjana. Fakulti Teknologi dan Sains Maklumat, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.

Othman, M. A., & Halim, F. W. (2014). Pengaruh personaliti terhadap penilaian prestasi kerja berkesan kakitangan akademik UKM. Jurnal Psikologi Malaysia, 28(2), 63-84.

Public Service Department (2011). (Pekeliling Perkhidmatan Bilangan 4/2011).

Public Service Department (2010). (Pekeliling Perkhidmatan Bilangan 13/2010).

Public Service Department Malaysia (2009). HRMIS tranformasi pengurusan sumber manusia sektor awam Malaysia abad ke-21. Kuala Lumpur: MPH Group Printing (M) Sdn Bhd.

Public Service Department (2005). (Pekeliling Kemajuan Pentadbiran Awam Bilangan 2/2005).

Piaw, C. Y. (2006). Kaedah penyelidikan. Malaysia: McGraw-Hill Malaysi Sdn. Bhd.

Rahman, R., Basri, M., Husain, K., Shamsul, C. W., Ahmad, B. C. W., & Danuri, M. S. N. (2017). Teknologi maklumat dan komunikasi (ICT) dalam kehidupan insan: Integrasi konsep dualiti (Konvensional dan Islam) dalam silibus kursus pengantar IT. Jurnal Sultan Alauddin Sulaiman Shah, 4(1), 2289-8042.

Rusdi, R., Ashaari, N. S., & Noor, S. F M. (2017). Usability guidelines for elderly website interface. Journal of Information Technology and Multimedia, 6(2), 228-2192.

Robert, G. (1992). Linkages between performance appraisal effectiveness. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 12(3), 19-15.

Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research Methods for Business Students (Fifth ed.). Essex, England: Pearson Education Limited.

Saldaña, J. (2009). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Shaari, A. S., Tang, S. W., Lim, K. T., Yusof, A. A., & Khan, M. K. J. (2008). Keadilan penilaian prestasi dalam kalangan guru dan hubungannya dengan motivasi kerja dan prestasi akademik sekolah. International Journal of Management Studies, 15(9), 159-176.

Soete, L. L. (2001). ICTs, knowledge work and employement: The challenge to Europe. International labour Review, 140(8), 43-163.

Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2016). Research method for business students (7th ed.). United Kingdom: Pitman publishing imprint.

Saljo, R. (1982). Learning and understanding: A study of different in constructing meaning from a text. (Gotoborg Studies in Educational Sciences 41). Gotoborg: Acta Universtitatis Gothoburgensis.

Tripathi, P., & Pandey, M. (2010). Towards the Identification of Usability Metrics for Academic Web-sites. The 2nd International Conference on Computer and Automation Engineering (ICCAE), 26-28 February 2010, Singapore.

Veloo, A., & Zolkepli, W. H. (2011). Atribut sistem penilaian prestasi dengan kepuasan kerja dalam kalangan guru. International Journal of Management Studies, 18(1), 197-216.

Yazid, Z., Abdullah, N. A., & Baharom, R. (2017). Konflik dalam penilaian proses penilaian prestasi dalam organisasi. Jurnal Pengurusan, 49(7) 41-52.

Wiese, D. S., & Buckley, M. R. (1998). The evolution of performance appraisal process. Journal of Management History, 4(3), 233-249.

Zulbasri, Z. A., & Bakar, N. R. A. (2017). Keadilan dalam penilaian prestasi dan komitmen kerja di kalangan kakitangan akademik di sebuah IPTS. International Conference on Management and Muamalah, 2017(4), 978-967.

Published
2019-09-30
How to Cite
Limasan, J., Ahmad, R., & Abdullah Bandar, N. F. (2019). Application of performance appraisal system (PAS) attributes among first rater officers (FRO’s): Issues and Implication . Journal of Cognitive Sciences and Human Development, 5(2), 66-77. https://doi.org/10.33736/jcshd.1920.2019