DEFINITION OF TERMS
Performance measurement
Harrington (1995) said "to measure is to understand, to understand is
to gain knowledge. To have knowledge is to have power. Since the
beginning of time, the thing that sets humans apart from the other
animals is our ability to observe measure, analyze and use this
information to bring about change". Cronje et al (2005, P274) mentioned
that the main instrument used to control organizations human resources
is performance measurement. This entails evaluating employees and
managers in the performance of the organization mainly assessing the
individuals and groups performance with predetermined standards. Zairi
(2003) suggests a TQ – based performance measurement implementation
"EYE" model – a framework by which measures are cascaded throughout the
organization
MEANING OF OPRAS
The Open Performance Review and Appraisal System (OPRAS) is an open,
formal, and systematic procedure designed to assist both employers and
employees in planning, managing, evaluating and realizing performance
improvement in the organization with the aim of achieving organizational
goals. OPRAS has the following unique features that can be
differentiated from the previous confidential appraisal system:
((Johnsen,2000).
NEW PUBLIC MANAGEMENT (NPM) AND PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL
The public sector reform drive was initiated under several names, one
of which is New Public Management (NPM). These reforms came into
existence during the 1980s in the advanced capitalist democracies as a
response to the economic constraints. Gregory (2001) highlighted five
main factors that have led to this change in perspective. They are
rebureaucratization; lack of trust in government; lack of legitimacy of
the government; politicization of public administration; and redefining
the recipients of service as customer of citizen. In addition to this,
Lane (1997:2) has expressed on how the growing size of the public
service contributes to these changes. According to him "in the early
1980s there was a realization that the public sector had a profound
problem in relation to how well its various programmes were operating.
The adoption of NPM means the application of private sector practices
and solutions to the problems of the public sector.
With the growing number of challenges faced today, there are now,
more than ever, increased demands on managers and all other staff
members to achieve higher levels of efficiency and productivity. The
continuously changing nature of most public services today and the high
expectations from the general public have increased pressure on public
servants to re-evaluate their contributions in the workplace and the way
in which they work. The introduction of performance appraisal systems
has been one strategy adopted to meet these challenges
TANZANIA PUBLIC SECTOR EXPERIENCE
The Government introduced the use of Open Performance Review and
Appraisal System (OPRAS) in July 2004, through Establishment Circular
No.2 of 2004. OPRAS replaced the Confidential Performance Appraisal
System which was characterized by absence of feedback and poor help in
the identification of the training needs of the employees. Hence, failed
to promote performance improvement and accountability in the Public
Service.
These changes in appraising performance of Public employees are in
line with Public Service Management and Employment Policy (PSMEP) of
1998 and the Public Service Act No. 8 of 2002, which both emphasizes on
institutionalization of result oriented management and meritocratic
principles in the Public Service.
Introduction of OPRAS is a key part of the Government's commitment to
improve performance and service delivery to the public. It is a key
accountability instrument for individual employees that emphasize the
importance of PARTICIPATION, OWNERSHIP AND TRANSPARENCY through
involving employees in objectives setting, implementing, monitoring and
performance reviewing process. This way there is continuous
communication between supervisors and employees; and understanding on
the linkage between organizational objectives and individual
Objectives.
RATIONALE OF INTRODUCING OPRAS IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
Like the private sector, public sector organisations around the world face pressure to
improve service quality, lower their costs, become more accountable, customer focused and
responsive to stakeholders' needs.And at another side to ensure every Individual is contributing to 2025 vision MDAs.
THE PURPOSES OF OPRAS
According to Gibson, C. L. (2004) , appraisals are conducted for two
major reasons: evaluation and feedback. When used for evaluation, the
appraisal provides input for decisions on promotions, transfers,
demotions, terminations, and compensation (salary increases). When used
for feedback purposes, the appraisal focuses on the development of the
individual, including the identification of coaching and training needs.
The job analysis process determines standards of performance, which are
clearly communicated to the employees and used as the basis of
evaluation in the performance appraisal process.
Characteristic of good performance appraisal (strength of OPRSA)
Under OPRAS the characteristics and qualities of Public service
employees are evaluated under "attributes of good performance" aspect.
Attributes of good performance aim to motivating and instilling positive
work behaviours while discouraging actions that come into conflict with
established rules of good conduct and values of the public service.
Among the notable values are integrity, commitment, discipline, ability,
teamwork and effectiveness in establishing good relationship with
fellow employees within public service and outside organisations.
Openness; allows both employee and employer discuss
and agree on the organisational and individual objectives to be achieved
during the year; this Provides an opportunity for the supervisor and
employee to discuss and agree on measure to improve weaknesses so as to
prepare the employee for future organizational responsibilities. also it
guide career decision in organisation
Participation; involve employees in the process of
setting objectives, performance targets and criteria as well as
determining, assessing and recording performance;
Accountability; individual employees are required to sign annual
performance agreements and account for performance against agreed
targets and resources allocated for each activity;
Ownership; shows linkage between individual
objectives and the overall organizational objectives in a given period.
This helps the employee understand own role and contribution thus
creating commitment in achieving organizational goals.
Opportunity to appeal: Another new
element introduced in the OPRAS is an appeal mechanism in case of
disagreement of evaluation scores between individual employee and
immediate supervisor
Clear objectives/goals in which Performance is
measured against. This help in the established comprehensive standards
which are written in a clear and explicit style and communicated to the
employee at entry on the job and at the beginning of the appraisal
period.
OPRAS are very effective in providing the data which is very
objective, reliable, and valid
as possible. there is a long history in the industry of subjective,
standardized performance review documents. These tend to rely heavily on
the subjective opinions of the manager who is reviewing the employee.
OPRAS is different because both manager and employees opinion are
considered. Something with makes it bias free in measuring employees
performance.
Feedback. Employees are kept informed about methods
and purposes of appraisals. Employees are promptly notified in writing
and preferably orally, too, of the results of their performance
appraisal. To prevent misunderstanding about whether the appraisal was
given or what the appraisal contained,
With all those qualities of effective evaluation OPRAS if well
implemented can provides an opportunity to measure the aggregate of
achievement by individual employee in a given year. Emphasis is on
quantity, quality and efficiencies and effectiveness in utilization of
resources.
The appraisal process:
Performance appraisal is "the process of identifying, evaluating and
developing the work performance of employees in the organization, so
that the organizational goals and objectives are more effectively
achieved, while at the same time benefiting employees in terms of
recognition, receiving feedback, catering for work and offering career
guidance". (Lansbury, 1988:46)
The appraisal process therefore involves:
- Assessing the employee's actual performance relative to these standards; and
- Providing feedback to the employee with the aim of motivating that
person to eliminate performance deficiencies or to continue to perform
above par. (Dessler, 2000)
ADVANTAGES OF USING OPRAS
Neely, A. (1995) identifies the following as distinguished advantages
of OPRAS if well implemented in public sector in developing world.
To the Organization
The job of the person being appraised may be clarified and better
defined. Since it require the the employer as well as employees to sit
together and to set the expected outcome based on organization
objectives
Valuable communication can take place among the individuals taking
part (that also include communication between the subordinate and the
superior. This is due to the nature of the performance appraisal used.
The person whose performance is appraised may develop an increased
motivation to perform effectively.
OPRAS tend to develop the self-esteem of the person being appraised
particularly good performers since it demand the use of various
strategies such as feedback, rewards recognition etc ,this helped a lot
to develop self esteem of the employees within organization.
Through the effective use OPRAS, Rewards such as pay and promotion
can be distributed on a fair and credible basis. Although the appraisal
system in the Tanzania Public Service has yet not been linked to any
formal reward under the current system
OPRAS require both the employees and employers to know the objective
of organization clearly before setting any performance standards, this
helped to make Organizational goals clearer, well known sense they can
be they more readily accepted by both parties.
Valuable appraisal information can allow the organization to do
better manpower planning, test validation, and development of training
programmes. This can be done Through identification of performance gap
within organization, the information which can help managers to make
proper human resource decisions such as coaching, guidance, recruitment,
firing etc.
Better and timely service provision, is another strength of the
effective use of OPRAS. Through the use of it the public service
provision can be made within well known stipulated time bound .this
minimize unnecessary delays in public service deliveries, Enables the
employees to know what is expected of them within a limited time, thus
greater citizen satisfaction. Example is the speed Migration department
of in processing its customer's passport application.
Making bureaucrats more accountable for their actions is another
advantage of using OPRAS in public sector because Appraisal System has
the benefit of making individual Officers accountable for their job. It
offers an opportunity to both Officers and employees to make a proper
assessment of their work and evaluate their contribution in fulfilling
the overall mission of the organization. So it is a change of attitude
from the old notions of public administration.
To the Employee
- Motivated to perform effectively and continuously improve performance
due to recognition;
- Empowered through resources provided to implement planned and agreed
activities;
- Informed of skill gaps and measures for improvement
- Guided and focused in the execution of duties and responsibilities;
- Improved working relations
- Improves transparency; and
- Enables the employees to know what is expected of them.
Consequences of performance appraisal
There are several consequences of performance appraisal system.
Mohrman Jr. et al (1989) has explained a number of such consequences.
- The self-esteem of the person being appraised and the person doing the appraisal may be damaged.
- Large amount of time may be wasted if not well designed.
- The relationship among the individuals involved may be permanently worsened thereby creating organizational conflicts.
- Performance motivation may be lowered for many reasons, including
the feeling that poor performance measurement means no rewards for
performance (i.e. biased evaluation including favoritism towards some
employees).
- Money may be wasted on forms, training, and a host of support services.
EXPANSION OF OPRAS
In April 2004 all government organizations was directed to implement
the system across the board. The objective of that scheme has been
laudable, yet it has not met with the same success that was originally
expected. Indeed, this system was faced with many difficulties and
challenges, it is beyond doubt that the current scheme will face
fundamental obstacles to be effective institutionalized in the public
service(Cutler and Waine, 2005). and in one word, we may say that it has
not been to the expectation of its promoters.
The main reasons for that are:
Powell, S. (2004) comment "From the experience of years, it was evident that
inadequate and unsustained training
offered to public servant. Those who have been trained have been not
able to deliver the good. As the result acted as the obstacles to
institutionalize the OPRAS in the whole of public service". In other
words, the institutionalization process of the appraisal system was
facing Poor knowledge particularly from public sector beurecrats on how
to conduct effective evaluation through OPRSAS .This meant that the
ongoing efforts to improve the services provided to the public and
making the public service ‘mission-oriented' were not being properly
evaluated in the form of individual performance appraisal.
Another barrier is the
culture of Tanzanian society
which poses unique challenges for the Performance Appraisal System.
According to the system, there needs to be close and continuous
communication between the subordinate and the superior. As Asim (2002:4)
has mentioned, due to the nature of the Tanzanian Public Service it may
"lead to difficulty in making objective assessments in the work place,
and the reluctance of managers in taking any action that may disappoint
fellow employees". In other words, it could be generalized that the
public service is arguably based on the principles of conflict-avoidance
among the subordinate and the superior.
Intellectualise; The Performance Appraisal System
has been perceived as an intellectual exercise and thus appears not to
be simple to certain categories of employees especial to those who are
not well educated. Too many management terms have been used which lacks
simplicity and clarity and which "frighten" Public servants .This made
the majority of lower or middle cadre employees not to conversant with
the scheme this is due to the nature of public servant in Tanzania which
involves lower or middle educated individual.
One of the stereotypes about public sector organization in Tanzania are
unclear objectives
,poor interpreted goal as well as frequency interruption from
politicians this generally reduce the effectiveness of OPRAS ,sense they
making public sector employees not in a position to know what exactly
their efforts are directed. This brings a lot of confusions on what and
when to be archived and to what level. This poses a number of challenges
in the institutionalization of the performance appraisal system. For
the example is clash program for teacher training which was a hard hoc
decision and it was out of well known plans.
Poor participation is Among the above mentioned
factors, Tangen, S. (2004) noted the nature of most of public sector
institution in Tanzania doesn't allow the effective participation of the
both employers and employees and other stakeholder in equal basis in
planning, designing bargaining of what to be done and to what extent.
This makes the public administrators themselves to set some unrealistic
objectives and performance to be achieved on behalf of employees .this
makes the whole process invalid to measure employees performance.
Budgetary constraints and poor prioritization is
another factor which makes OPRAS to fail in Tanzania The state of
available resources in implementation OPRAS in Tanzania was less
convincing to be sufficient as Neely, A. (1995) noted. It is obvious
that, resources were needed to support organization and employees
objectives set .due to this the most of managers employees fail to
achieve their expected outcome as agreed, hence poor performance
The openness nature of the system also posed another
challenge regarding formal personal as well as professional
relationships. Performance Appraisal, being a ‘open' considered to be as
a "western product" , facing difficulties to be implemented in more
collectivist cultures like Tanzanian, As Vallance (1999:81) has
mentioned, in most non-western societies "it is important that an
individual be allowed to save ‘face' and to be protected from
criticism". The need to save individual "face"To a certain extent lead
to its failure.
The
concept of time is also a factor that
influences the unsuccessful of OPRAS in Tanzania. Not most of us spend
as much time planning as we know we should, even though planning is
crucial to using time effectively. The world is witnessing fast-moving
change, and people's attitude towards time is not an exception given the
changing roles of public administration. Performance Appraisal could be
time-consuming for most as it requires considerable time to plan work.
However, that occurs when the recipients see the appraisal work as
something that is separate from their daily routine work.
Lack of Specificities; it appears that the open
Performance Appraisal System cannot be carried out in certain
Ministries/Departments because of their specificities. For example, in
service offered department like education or health services, The
experience shown that it is very difficult to set expected goal to be
evaluated this is due to the nature of responsibility which require more
time and special measurement elements for effective measurement.
Poor communication system is another obstacles for
effective implementation of OPRAS need the government to establish
effective communication system between the individual within the centre
of government and the periphery so as the feedback can be sent on
time,in Tanzanian experience things are total different, the information
system is not well formulated to allow the quickly transfer of
information.
Poor Public Relations; The new system has been
wrongly sold out. Indeed, the Public Relations of this system has not
been done in an effective manner so that those who are concerned have
not been able to know its real objective and how it will affect their
performance and work situation. this lead to the Reluctant,
conservativeness of public servant towards the scheme ,this attitude
made it to fail despite some efforts government puts to implement it for
the better public service system. This contributes to inefficiency of
the OPRAS in measuring employees performance.
Consensus on Agreement; the introduction of OPRAS
has failed to gain the consensus of the different stakeholders. For
example, the Trade Unions have always been against this system.
Consequences of OPRAS itself pose another challenge the public sector in
Tanzania particularly after experiencing the pains caused by impact of
structure adjustment program such as retrenchment. Its introduction
create a sense fearing the consequences of OPRAS which can result to
punishment in term of displinary action or even to be fired based on
OPRAS feedback.
CONCLUTION
One may conclude by saying that despite the Government efforts to
introduce OPRAS it has not been in a position to develop a real and
effective Open Performance Appraisal System. It is true to say that an
effective Performance Appraisal System demands a thorough reform process
which can only be achieved by a paradigm shift in organizational
culture and mindset which would be supported by both senior management
and political heads with the collaboration of the all potential
stakeholders. Therefore there is need for the Government of Tanzania
through the coordinating Ministry, to prepare physical and human
resource with expertise in Human Resource Management and wide experience
preferably in the field of Performance Evaluation/Performance
Management to enable it to pro-act and respond positively in to the
needs of organizations. At another hand contextualization of the scheme
to Tanzania situation would ensure its smooth implementation.
