Performance Appraisals and Workers’ Productivity in the University of Uyo, Uyo, Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria (2021-2023)

Prof. Gerald E. Ezirim

Department of Political Science,

Faculty of the Social Sciences,

University of Nigeria, Nsukka

Dr. Lawrence I. Edet

Department of Political Science & Public Administration,

Faculty of Social Sciences,

University of Uyo, Uyo

Abstract

Public and private organisations are increasingly appreciating the importance of employee performance evaluation as a tool for enhancing productivity in any organisation. Performance appraisal of employees has the propensity of re-positioning the organizational workforce on the jobs for which they are best suited, thus, leading to improved productivity and organizational profitability. Therefore, poorly and untimely appraisal of staff significantly leads to redundancy and low productivity in any organisation. The aim of this study is to appraise the effect of performance appraisal of workers in the University of Uyo, Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria. In addressing this, the study posed two research questions: (i). How effective is performance appraisals in determining workers’ promotion in the University of Uyo? (ii). How effective is feedback on performance appraisals in increasing workers’ productivity in the University of Uyo? The study adopted descriptive and survey research design. The study relied on the Theory of Organisational Justice as its theoretical framework. The population of the study is all the staff (academic and non-academic staff) of the 14 Faculties of the University (µ=5649). However, a sample of 374 respondents was drawn using simple random sampling technique from the population using Taro Yamane formula. Data collected using a structured questionnaire were analysed using Chi-square statistical test. The study revealed among others, that effective performance appraisal can lead to enhanced productivity through timely promotions of staff. The study recommended that staff of the University should be promoted as at when due, and that staff training and development needs to be given serious attention. The study further recommended that reports of performance appraisals should be communicated to staff concerned as well as using them to reward and compensate outstanding staff of the University by way of accelerated promotions and letters of commendation.

Keywords: Employee; employer; motivation; performance appraisal; productivity;                     promotion.

Background of the study

In any organization, performance appraisal represents the most importance process aimed at evaluating organizational achievements in relations to its objectives and goals, vis-à-vis, its workforce and administrative structures (Bratton and Gold, 1999). The long-term success of an organization directly relates to its ability to measure its employees’ performance within a particular time and how effective, it uses the information generated to ensure that performance align with the standards laid dawn and also improve them over the time. Grote (2012) refers to performance appraisal as directing and motivating employees to maximize their efforts on behalf of their organizations. Thus, it forms an essential component, if an organization must meet its strategic objectives. Atiomo (2000) avers that performance appraisal provides organizations with ways of ascertaining not only workers’ performance, but areas of their weaknesses.

According to Mullins (2012), the fundamental objectives of performance appraisal is to improve the performance of individual employee as a proclivity to the improvement of overall organization performance. It represents the effective tool that can be used to effectively evaluate organizational performance in relation to its set goals and objectives. It is an evaluative process relating to obtaining, analyzing and recording information or data about the role and impact of an employee to the entire organisation (Obisi, 2011 and Riggio, 2013). Performance appraisal, according to Mathis and Jackson (2014), is often related between additional pay, promotion and rewards that employees receive and their performance at work. It imperative to note that workers can improve their performance, if they are properly appraised, but if they are not, the outcome may lead to inefficiency, waste of resources, low productivity and overall poor performance of the organisation (Fisher, Schoenfeldt and Shaw, 2013; Mwema and Gachunga, 2014 and Onyije, 2015). For performance appraisal to be effective, it must rely on the performance criteria designed for the job evaluation. Riggio (2013) contends that the performance criteria serve as determining factor for successful or unsuccessful evaluation or appraisal of job performance, thus, the criteria involve spelling out the specific elements of a job as well as developing methods of evaluating levels of successful or unsuccessful job performance. Therefore, any appraisal method not based on the above elements can either be inappropriate or impartial, especially to the employee, whose performance is being appraised (Onyije, 2015).

According to Eldman, Manolova, Shirokova and Tsukanova (2016), the objective of performance appraisal is to estimate job performance of each worker towards the realization of organizational goals or objectives. They assert that performance appraisal is carried out for the purpose of promotion and transfer to new job positions and responsibilities within an organization or government establishments. Within this context, performance and productivity of each employee are evaluated in order to determine his or her contributions to the achievement of organization set goals and objectives. This process and its conclusion can be useful for both administrative and developmental purposes. Therefore, performance appraisal defines the procedures and processes used by organizations to improve work design, process and feedback (Werner, Schuler and Jackson, 2012). For instance, Atiomo (2000) submits that every organization should ensure that their workers are aware of their roles and tasks, if performance appraisal is to be effective and efficient.

According to Rao (1990), performance appraisal entails taking routine of manpower, capacity, interest of each worker, their strengths and weaknesses as well as their potentials for improvement. Therefore, data generated thereof, should be communicated to the workers for improvement. The major issue in performance appraisal, according to Rao is communication. If individual worker’s performance is not communicated to him or her, it would be difficult for the worker to improve his or her performance in subsequent future appraisal, thus, defeating the purpose of the performance appraisal. However, Atiomo (2000) agree that performance appraisal can serve a wider range of purposes, which includes: improving performance of employees for higher productivity, identifying training and development needs, enhancing workers’ potentials, enhancing communication and relationships, improving incentives and helps in salaries and wages determination.

According to Nwachukwu (2011), the major reason for performance appraisal is to give information for promotion, transfer, training, development and discharge of an employee. For Ubeke (2014), under good evaluation and appraisal, those who have contributed to the achievement of organizational goals should be rewarded adequately and promoted into higher tasks. Therefore, training and reward are basic components of performance appraisal process which enhance effectives, efficiency and productivity of employees (Armstrong, 2012 and Raji and Jackson, 2012). The above position accentuates the significance of human resources to the general functionality of any organization. It should be noted that within this context, for human resources in an organization to function effectively and efficiently, there is need for organisation to develop and activate a distinctive and strategic human resources development policy that will effectively improve the performance of their workforce.

According to Zahra and Nielsen (2012), organizational capability depends on human resource capacity which is crucial to the development of any organisation. An organizational competitive advantage can be realized if such organisation rewrite and maintain well-trained workforce and managers whose skills, knowledge abilities serve as a source of improvement. It is therefore, pertinent to have enabling environment for the employees to develop their full potentials capable of enhancing organizational productivity. This conducive or enabling environment plays an important role in enhancing skills, knowledge, abilities and other needed attributes by employees to retort to existing work demands and plan for the future tasks and challenges. The implication of this is that the proper working tools, equipment and facilities are made available in the work place.

Therefore, performance appraisal can improve organizational productivity through its workforce, but seemingly, that is not happening in many cases (Mooney, 2012). According to Elverfeldt (2015), most organisations normally conduct performance appraisal on its workforce, but the challenge has always been application of performance appraisal reports and appropriate feedback communication mechanism. It is against the background of the foregoing that this study examines the relationship between performance appraisal and workers’ productivity in the University of Uyo, Uyo, Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria (2021-2023).

Statement of the problem

Performance appraisal offers a good opportunity for organizations to formally evaluate their employees’ contributions and achievements towards the organizational goals and objectives. This can be done or achieved through maintaining a clear link between reward, compensation and productivity. Most organizations both in public and private sector perform abysmally because their workers are not encouraged to work harder. Thus, the chief executives and employees of organizations are the life blood of such organizations. Therefore, if the management of such organizations do not prioritize welfare of their employees, the resultant effect will show in low commitment to work, morale and productivity. Generally, workers in many organizations are usually dissatisfies over lack of motivation, ill treatment, poor welfare schemes, delay in promotions and rewards as well as poor or absence of proper feedback to them arising from their performance appraisals. Sometimes, organizations select some job elements for evaluation and give preference or higher points above others in which the employee was engaged during the evaluation period. Within this context, performance appraisal may not necessarily produce anticipated results, because the management of the organisation may appraise staff performance concerns that have no direct impact on what motivate them to increase their productivity.

In the University of Uyo, staff appraisal becomes a yearly ritual, where staff members are given forms to fill every year without proper assessment with commensurate rewards and compensation system to the performing or outstanding ones as a way of motivating them for greater productivity. Hence, this process has a significant effect on staff productivity in relation to the achievements of the institutional objectives and goals. Delays in promotion of staff of the University as at when due, absence of appropriate reward or compensation system such as lack of issuance of commendation letters to performing staff, accelerated promotions as well as lack of payment of entitlements/arrears of promotions to affected staff has the propensity of de-motivating the staff. As these continue, the effectiveness, efficiency and productivity of staff of the University dwindles posing a threat to the achievement of the institutional goals and objectives.

However, the studies carried out to examine the effect of performance appraisal on workers’ productivity in the University system failed to acknowledge certain elements raised above, particularly, issues relating to feedback, hence, this study to fill the identified gaps in the current literature.

It is based on the above, that this study posed the following research questions:

1. How effective is performance appraisals in determining workers’ promotion in University of Uyo?
2. How effective is feedback on performance appraisals in increasing workers’ productivity in University of Uyo?

Objectives of the study

            The objectives of the study are to:

1. Establish if performance appraisals are effective in determining workers’ promotion in University of Uyo.
2. Ascertain if feedback on performance appraisals increases workers’ productivity in University of Uyo.

Significance of the study

This study has both theoretical and practical significance. Theoretically, the study will contribute to the scholarly debate on effect of performance appraisal on workers’ productivity. This study has shown that effective performance appraisal has propensity of engendering workers’ productivity. The revelation of this study will create adequate knowledge and awareness about the impact of performance appraisal on workers’ productivity, as it will serve as relevant material to other researchers who may wish to conduct further research on the subject area.

Practically, the study will be of immense benefit to managers and administrators of both public and private organizations, heads of government units, departments or institutions as well as public policy analysts on how best the reports of performance appraisal can be handled to engender workers’ productivity with an organization. The study will advance the frontiers of knowledge by providing workable solutions to the challenges facing workers’ promotions and productivity in University of Uyo, Uyo.

Finally, the study will enlighten both the employer and employees in the University on the effective ways of conducting performance appraisals and achieve the desired goals/results.

Literature Review

To properly review the existing literature on the subject matter, the review will be carried out under some related sub-heads.

Performance Appraisals and Workers’ Reward System

According to Jamieson (2011), performance appraisal started in early third century in the Wei dynasty in China, where performance of members of the royal family were appraised. Likewise, legislators in Dublin, Ireland were appraised using a rating scale based on personal qualities in 1648 (Jamieson, 2011). However, Wren (2012) avers that Robert Owen first use performance appraisal to evaluate workers’ performance in cotton mills in Scotland and according to him, it was mainly deployed for punishing poor performance. But, as time goes on, organisations modify performance appraisals and thus, associating its effect to rewards, trainings, promotions, etc. The implication was that workers’ achievements should not only be measured but assessed and managed (Kennedy and Dresser, 2011). Performance appraisal has become inescapable means of evaluating workers’ performance and sustaining organizational efficiency, productivity and effectiveness. The techniques used in performance appraisal includes: secret appraisal, graphic rating scale, ranking method, essay method, management by objectives, etc. Performance appraisal is the regular assessment of individual job performance and their prospect for development. Young (2010) conceptualizes performance appraisal as assessment exercise carried out by an organization on its workers periodically or annually or performance based on work content requirements and behaviour. At the centre of this evaluation are efficiency, effectiveness and productivity.

According to Nwachukwu (2011), the essence of performance appraisal is to generate information for transfer, pay increase, training and staff development, promotion and dismissal of employee. The primary purpose of evaluating workers’ performance for a particular period is to assess their contributions to the organizational growth. Dessler (2012) contends that assessing workers job implies supervisor-subordinate relationship that has to do with the situation of an organization and what may be needed to enhance its achievement of goals. According to Stone (2012), in a competitive environment, and if organizations must survive, it must appraise the performance of its staff. In addition, the current realities and demands for improved workers’ accountability, more emphasis is placed on performance appraisal. Levine and Juan (2010) and Huber (2015) argue that performance appraisal is indispensable in any organizations that aim to achieve its objectives and goals.

On the other hand, workers’ productivity, according to Bernadin (2010) implies the effect of labour in relations to organization’s goals, economic contributions and customer’s satisfactions. Bela (2010) states that productivity encompasses both behaviour and consequences, thus, results, outcomes and consequences are physical effort put to activities and may be evaluated independently. In the words of Mihaiu (2014), employee productivity represents a combination of employee’s ability, motivation and the environment he or she works. Okereke and Daniel (2010) suggest that workers’ productivity entails a consequence of efficiency and effectiveness on the part of the workers. Aydogdu and Asikgil (2011) aver that job attendance, responsibilities and organizational behaviour can be used to assess performance of workers in an organisation. Bhatia and Jain (2013) contend that workers’ productivity is directly related to quality of service, contributions over time and job completed. For Wasiu and Adebajo (2014), workers’ productivity implies collection of actions and behaviours of workers that may be examined, evaluated and considered in terms of individual achievements.

Performance appraisal in the public service represent a system of setting targets for each employee, monitoring those targets, assessing the results through evaluation and reward the performing workers while at the same time, correct the underperforming ones. It is therefore process of assessing employees’ contributions to organizational goals and objectives (Obisi, 2011).

In Nigerian public service, workers are appraised using the Annual Performance Evaluation Report (APER). It is based on the worker’s overall contributions to the organisations on a yearly basis. According to Gilbert (2006) and Obisi (2011), the annual APER is divided into five segments:

i.          Segment 1 covers employee’s personal record and leave records;

ii.         Segment 2 comprises responsibilities and targets set, work description, major             achievements, course/trainings attended in the year under evaluation and work             performance.

iii.        Segment 3 assesses character traits, performance assessment by superior, job ethics,             leadership qualities, training requirements and collaboration.

iv.        Segment 4 stipulates next year’s responsibilities and targets, comments by the worker on the appraisal, affirmation through signing by the employee and evaluating officer. 

v.         Segment 5 encompasses the counter-signing officer’s evaluation. The counter-signing officer creates room for feedback and monitoring.

However, the APER form is structured and all-inclusive. It consists of important aspects that are to be assessed in terms of work description and performance. The form makes it easier for workers to identify their future training needs that can enhance their job, and facilitate effective and efficient human resource development through proper trainings (Obisi, 2011). But Gilbert (2006), submits that as a result of the format of APER forms, marks scored are awarded rather than earned thereby making the evaluation to be impractical in an objective situation, hence, no clear evidence of high performance or excellence with commensurate reward exist in Nigeria’s public service.

Performance Appraisal, Feedback and Workers’ Productivity in Nigerian Universities

According to Boice and Kleiner (1997), workers’ assessment is vital to organizational operation as well as advancement of workers’ productivity, Workers’ evaluation is necessary in any organisations because it helps the organisations to identify people for leading positions in the organisations. To achieve this, a proper job review of the employees is necessary to help reward them where necessary. Therefore, the implementation of performance appraisal report may be complex since it entails correct and fair evaluation of workers’ performance, but it surely yields positive results. Ubeda and Almada (2007), while commenting on the implementation of performance assessment, noted that it is pertinent to inform the worker(s) appraised which skills, attitudes or knowledge needs to be developed in order to contribute substantially to organizational improvement. When workers get feedback on their appraisals, it motivates them to do more for the good of the organization.

Therefore, feedback from workers if properly managed, not only help in identifying area of needs, but also in distributing professional tasks to workers in the organisations. More so, Caruth and Humphreys (2008) argues that to appraise the performance of workers, the appraiser should rely only on those factors relating to the job rather than general traits and effective assessment of workers has direct implications on workers’ commitment and motivations. Therefore, effectiveness, efficiency and clearly defined/frequent evaluation of performance has propensity for increasing workers’ productivity.

In Nigerian Universities, performance appraisal is a process of assessing and summarizing work performance of staff in the University, both academic and non-academic. Every staff of Universities in Nigeria including University of Uyo gets an appraisal form yearly from his/her University for a performance appraisal and the appraisal process justifies management promotions, reward or discipline toward staff (Okafor, 2015). This form comprises a self-appraisal section for staff to fill and on completion sent to the respective Heads of Departments who make their comments. The completed forms are then forwarded to the Dean and then to the Appointments and Promotions Committee (Academic) chaired by the Vice Chancellor in case of academic staff. In case of Senior Administrative and Technical Staff, the completed forms passed through the Head of Department/Reporting Officer to the Appointments and Promotions Committee of Senior Administrative and Technical Staff (SATS) chaired by the Vice Chancellor. And for the Junior Staff, the completed forms go through to the Head of Department/Reporting Officer to the Appointments and Promotions Committee of Junior Staff, chaired by the Registrar. The various appointments and promotion committees re-assessed those forms and made recommendations for further actions. The consequences therefore could be used for promotion, query, warning, training, termination, etc. The behaviour standards that form the core components of performance appraisal in University of Uyo are spelt out in University of Uyo Regulations Governing Staff Conditions of Service (as amended) (2016) and these regulations relates to responsibilities that enhance excellence and productivity. Therefore, evaluation of staff performance in the University environment is based on qualification, task performed, capacity to assume higher responsibilities, professional experience/creativity, teaching experience, research/ publications, community services, administrative experiences, etc.

In summary, the justifications for performance appraisal in University of Uyo and other Universities in Nigeria include:

1. Administration: For promotion, warning, query, dismissed and organizational               planning;

ii.         Developmental: For identification of training needs;

iii.        Motivational:  For rewards, incentives and compensation and

iv.        Performance enhancement: This is achieved through management by objective            (MBO), participatory goal setting and adequate workplan processes.

Performance appraisal occurs yearly and it is the period staff of an institution begins to document proper performance, inconsistencies and deals with performance deficit. However, conducting the appraisal on a particular time of the year places more emphasis on promotion than improvement (Okafor, 2015). According to Jabeen (2011), performance assessment relates the performance of workers with already established procedures and places emphasis on them for promotions and/or rewards or disciplines. Assessment of workers’ performance has the propensity of discovering what type of trainings and skills needs by workers within the organisation, hence, it results in quality improvement (Walklin, 2013). The evaluation of staff performance in University system seems to pay much attention to promotion related-issues rather than physical evaluation of individual staff performance in relation to the organizational goals. Therefore, during the appraisal process, the information, supplied does not provide necessary facts on effective teaching, effective discharge of responsibilities, good character, personal integrity and loyalty to the institution (Nakpodia, 2011). For instance, Bernett (2012) maintains that evaluation of proficiency or performance based on publications is not sufficient to determine competence of the lecturers. Also, some University staff, particularly, lecturers are employed seemingly to teach on the assumption that their performance in their first or second or third degrees will enhance them to teacher effectively. These assumptions may not be tenable because knowledge of subject matter is different from method/skills of teaching. Therefore, a good appraisal process should make provision for the management of the University to advise its staff on how to improve their teaching, administrative and technical competence.

Moses (2012) submits that appraisal of staff performance in the University should include measurement of competence, communication skills, commitment to institutional goals and the degree of concern to assign tasks. It is on this note that it could be deduced that performance appraisal does not provide information about staff emotional, mental and moral stability in relation to its organisation. However, the role and impact of feedback on staff productivity in the University system cannot be over-emphasized.

Marsor (2011) examined the workers’ performance in relations to productivity and submits that performance appraisal affords organisations to reposition itself for higher productivity, hence, boosting the general output of workers. Odunayo, Salau, Fadugba and James (2014) modelled relationship between performance appraisal and organizational productivity in government sector of Nigeria corporations. Their result showed a significant relationship between performance appraised and workers’ productivity. Using supermarkets in Nkuru town in Kenya, Gichuhi, Abaja and Ochieng (2014) discovered performance appraisal has a significant influence in employees’ performance. In similar vein, Onyije (2015) conducted investigations into the effect of performance appraisal on workers’ productivity and concluded that there exists a strong relationship between them.

Homayounizadpanah and Baqerkord (2012) discovered that performance appraisal is strategic to advancing employees and organizational productivity if properly carried out. In a study conducted by Peleyeju and Ojebiyi (2013) to assess workers’ productivity in public Universities in South-Western Nigeria, using lecturers’ performance, it was discovered that there exists a significant relationship between performance evaluation and employees’ productivity in the institutions. For Chetana, Pattnaik and Mohpatra (2015), performance appraisal is not only connected with organizational productivity, but it represents the basis for career and organizational development. Therefore, creativity, professionalism, organizational and management skills constitute the core public measurement indicators in public service. In a study conducted by Vivekananda and Mohan (2015), it was revealed that performance appraisal practice in private sector differs from that of the public sector. The study showed that workers in private sector focus more on career development and training unlike in the public sector where employees are expected to develop the expertise and knowledge continually in order to accomplish their job requirements.

Mello (2015) observed that effectiveness, efficiency and performance of public sector workers rely on skills and qualifications of the workers. However, the study did not account for effect of feedback on performance because the performance of workers not communicated to them can affect their subsequent performance, not necessarily qualification and skills. However, Singh and Vadivelu (2016) submit that there exists difference between performance measurement in private and public sectors in Nigeria. According to them, public sector organisations rely on experience in terms of seniority, knowledge and skills, while private sectors organisations measure both tangible and intangible actions. These may include: level of efficiency, effectiveness, timeliness and cost of operations, level of customer satisfaction etc.

According to Tailor (2017), performance of each worker can be measured with their effectiveness and efficiency at their place of work. Within this context, the purpose of performance appraisal is to enhance productivity in organisations. Mollel-Eliphaz, Mulongo and Razia (2017) uses Muheza district in Tanzania to conduct an investigation into the influence of performance assessment on employees’ productivity and discovered that employees’ performance and productivity in an organisation is directly related to recognition of achievements and feedback. However, various studies such as those of: Obiora (2002), Ajayi (2011), Onusuebe and Kimcnichege (2013), and Hayford, Boakye and Ovusu (2016) strongly submits that performance appraisal correlates with workers’ productivity. The major gap in the above studies is that it failed to account how effective is feedback on performance appraisal in increasing workers’ productivity hence, this study.

According to Banjoko (2002), who conducted a study on performance appraisal of workers and its effect on productivity, which data were draw from primary and secondary sources, performance appraisal assist organisations to assign tasks to workers based on their capability and capacity. Adopting descriptive method, the study concluded that effective workers’ assessment determines the type of training and development needed as well as designing programs aimed at correcting deficiencies identified. The study then recommended that organizations should establish and conduct effective performance appraisal on its employees that would offer opportunities for the management to identify training and development needs of the organisation.

Cook and Crossman (2004) adopted a survey and descriptive research design to conducted investigation on performance appraisal and job satisfaction in Nigeria, with data drawn from both primary and secondary sources. The study concluded that employee job satisfaction is determined by organizational evaluation system, hence, when the evaluation is unbiased, improvement in workers’ productivity is inevitable. Their study recommended unbiased, transparent and impartial appraisal of workers to enhance their effectiveness, efficiency and high productivity.

Lindsey (2005) investigated performance evaluation, using management basic for libertarians. The study used descriptive and survey research design, with data drawn from primary and secondary sources. The study revealed that effective performance evaluation aids the management of organization to find out training needs of workers as well as how to motivate them with best talents to enhance organizational collective goals. As part of the findings, the study concludes that actions and behaviours of employees significantly contribute to the overall organizational output. However, the study recommended the setting up of regulatory agencies to perform oversight functions on issues relating to performance appraisals both in private and public sector organizations.

Kane and Lawler (2009) adopted historical and descriptive method to assess performance appraisal effectiveness. The study discovered that organizational reward system has an important impact on workers’ productivity. Accordingly, when workers are regularly promoted, with all entitlement and benefits paid, it will stimulate them for higher efficiency and productivity. Based on the findings, the study recommended that organizations should prioritize rewards, promotions and commendations to workers who are exceptional in their tasks or responsibilities.

Grote (2012) utilizes primary and secondary sources of data to evaluate performance appraisal in relation to effectiveness, efficiency and productivity. The revelations of the study showed that performance appraisal aid in rewards, compensation, decision-making, employee motivation, organizational planning, etc. which if properly conducted and executed, has propensity of enhancing evokers’ productivity. The study recommended proper appraisal of workers’ performance to identify their strengths and weaknesses.

According to Gichuhi, Abaja and Ochieng (2014), in their historical and descriptive studies on effective performance appraisal and employees’ efficiency in Nigeria’s public service, performance appraisal represents evaluation of both mental and physical health for each worker and their contributions to the organization. The study revealed that workers’ morale is focused towards high productivity when they are appraised timely, promoted when due and rewarded when exceptional. The study also revealed that poor appraisal of performance and promotion results directly in poor attitude to work. The study later recommended timely staff assessment, promotion as well as thorough implementation of evaluation reports.    

Similarly, Lithakong (2014) choose selected steel organizations to conduct research on evaluating the effectiveness of a 360-degree performance appraisal and feedback, using survey research design, with data drawn from primary and secondary sources. The study discovered that the level to which workers perform in steel organizations is depended on the efficiency of the evaluating system used by their organizations. Therefore, workers’ performance, efficiency, effectiveness and productivity tend to reduce if the appraisal systems or method is faulty or ineffective. The study, based on investigations, recommended the use of effective evaluation systems or methods in order to generate adequate feedback that will aid the organizations to enhance its productivity of workers.

In a study carried out by Oravee, Hangeior and Solomon (2017) to examine the effect of performance appraisal on employees’ productivity in Plateau State Internal Revenue Service, using descriptive and survey research design, with data gathered from primary and secondary sources. The study revealed that poor appraisal methods/s/systems and inadequate rewards system implemented by the Plateau State Government results in poor workers’ productivity. As a result of the revelations, the study strongly recommended the adoption of management by objectives (MBO) method of appraising workers of the revenue service to allow workers to partake in organizational goal setting as well as understanding areas of task for the purpose of improving productivity within the service.

Binta, Muhammad, Ahmed, Bazza and Magaji (2019) used the Federal Ministry of Education, Abuja to conduct a study on the effect of performance appraisal on employees’ productivity. The authors adopted survey research design, with sample size of 400 respondents, which was determined using Taro Yamane formula on population of 1797 employees. The data for the study were collected using structured questionnaire. The study established that performance appraisal improves workers’ productivity in Federal Ministry of Education. According to the study, performance appraisal represents the core indices for enhancement of productivity as well as identifying areas of deficiencies in the performance of workers. The study ended with recommendation that multiple appraisal system should be introduced to reduce bias and boost fairness in the assessment of workers in the Ministry.

Gap in the Literature

In the literature reviewed, little attention has been given to the role the feedback on performance appraisals plays on workers’ productivity, hence, this study. Therefore, this study aims to fill the identified gap in the existing literature.

Theoretical Framework

This study adopted the Organizational Justice Theory by Jerald Greenberg propounded in 1987. The theory holds that the way a worker view organizational attitude, may affect the employee’s contribution to the organization. This theory relies on three assumptions: impartial outcomes (distributive justice), fairness of procedures in allocating results (procedural justice) and courtesy of interpersonal relations (interactional justice). Distributive justice assumes that individuals having recognized a choice of social exchange, perceive their commitments to the organization as reward oriented. Procedural justice typifies equitable procedures used in deciding several consequences because it assumes that fair evaluation of workers may cause positive responses from the workers. The implication is that unbiased assessment of actions and behaviours of workers is accompanied by corresponding commitment to organizational goals (Al-Zubi, 2010). Interactional justice symbolizes equal interpersonal activities.

Therefore, in applying Organizational Justice Theory to performance appraisal and workers’ productivity, it could be deduced that workers are likely to contribute their best towards achieving organizational goals and objectives when they view organizational attitude towards them as fair, just and impartial. Essentially, if employers conduct fair and impartial performance appraisals on their employees, they are most likely to enhance their productivity towards their organisations. For instance, performance appraisal exercises often turn out to be mere annual ritual in universities, where staff (particularly academic) are appraised without commensurate rewards, promotions when due or clear feedback communication processes. This, to a considerable extent is viewed by workers as injustice. Performance appraisal reports in many organisations do not translates to rewards or promotions for staff appraised, and such actions may de-motivate the hard-working/performing staff, thereby leading to low productivity, inefficiency and ineffectiveness of staff of such organizations.

However, according to this theory, poor feedback mechanism and procedures involved in assessing workers progress in an organization affects workers’ productivity, because the satisfaction of performance evaluations procedure by workers can be achieved, when it integrates the principles of fairness, impartiality, equity and justice. Therefore, according to Greenberg (1987), effective and efficient performance appraisal is not only just, fair and impartial, but provides clear feedback to workers appraised, which invariably leads to job satisfaction and enhances productivity.

Hypotheses

            The hypotheses below are articulated to provide this study with an analytical guide:

1. Effective performance appraisals tend to determine workers’ promotion in University of Uyo.
2. Feedback on performance appraisal tends to increase workers’ productivity in University of Uyo.

Research Design

This study adopted descriptive and survey research design and relied on both primary and secondary data. This research design adopted helps the researcher to elicit information from a subset of the entire population. This research design involves the use of questionnaire to gather and analyse sample data from the population and draw inferences. According to Flink (2002b), survey represents a strategy for collecting information for description, comparison or explanation of attitudes and actions. As Sapsford (2006) points out, survey is a comprehensive and quantified description of a population, and it entails a systematic collection of data either through interview, questionnaire or observation.

However, the questionnaire generated the primary data while the secondary data were collected from textbooks, journals, unpublished works and official document. The data collected were analyzed descriptively and quantitatively using chi-square statistical technique at 0.05 level of significance.

The population of the study comprises of all academic and non-academic staff in the 14 faculties of the University of Uyo. The faculties are: Agriculture, Arts, Basic Medical Sciences, Business Administration, Clinical Sciences, Communication Arts, Education, Engineering, Environmental Studies, Law, Pharmacy, School of Continuing Education, Sciences and Social Sciences.

According to 2021/2022 appraisal report, the total academic and non-academic staff of the University is put at one thousand, five hundred and twenty-one (1,521) and four thousand, one hundred and twenty-eight (4,128) respectively.

Method of data collection

The study used documentary and survey methods. Using Taro Yamane formula for the population of five thousand, six hundred and forty-nine (5,649), that is (1521+4128 = 5649), the sample size of three hundred and seventy-four (374) were chosen. Copies of questionnaire were distributed to each of them, selected through simple random technique to avoid bias. A total of two hundred and ten (210) copies of questionnaire were distributed equally (15 each) to academic staff in the fourteen (14) faculties that make up the University. Also, sixteen (16) copies each of questionnaire were distributed to non-academic staff of faculties of Education and Sciences because of large numbers of staff there and eleven (11) each to the remaining twelve (12) faculties, bringing the total distributed to non-academic staff to one hundred and six-four (164). However, of the total of 374 questionnaire distributed, 348 were retrieved, representing 93.05 response rate. This data for the study comes from both primary and secondary sources.

The study adopted a 5-point Likert scale structured questionnaire with 7 statements. The response option is: Strongly Agree (SA), Agree (A), Disagree (D), Strongly Disagree (SD) and Undecided (UN). The research design used has help in advancing tangible insight into performance appraisal and workers’ productivity in University of Uyo.

Method of data analysis

The study used qualitative and quantitative methods of data analysis. Qualitatively, the study employed deductive-inductive logical reasoning and qualitative descriptive methods of content analysis. Quantitatively, the study used chi-square statistical technique to test the formulated hypotheses at 0.05 level of significance. Therefore, the data so collected were analyzed descriptively and quantitatively. The empirical verification carried out to validate the hypotheses helps in achieving valid, reliable and verifiable conclusio

Empirical Verification

            Empirical verification was undertaken to validate the formulated hypotheses for the study. This has help in achieving reliability and verifiable conclusion for the study. However, this section handled socio demographic characteristics of respondents, distribution of responses to the statements on the questionnaire, testing and validation of the two hypotheses formulated of the study.

Table 1: Socio-demographic Characteristics of Respondents

Characteristics	Frequency (N = 348)	Percentage (%)
Sex: Male Female	196 152	56.3 43.7
Age:
18 – 27 28 – 37 38 – 47 48 and above	88 97 104 59	25.3 27.9 29.9 16.9
Educational Qualification:
SSCE OND/HND BSc MSc and above	68 78 99 103	19.5 22.4 28.5 29.6
Staff:
Academic Non-academic	200 148	57.5 42.5
Respondents’ Faculty:
Agriculture Arts Basic Medical Sciences Business Administration Clinical Sciences Communication Arts Education Engineering Environmental studies Law Pharmacy School of Continuing Education Sciences Social Sciences	24 25 24 24 25 25 27 25 25 24 24 25 26 25	6.9 7.2 6.9 6.9 7.2 7.2 7.7 7.2 7.2 6.9 6.9 7.2 7.4 7.2

Source: Field work (2023).

In Table 1 above, the sex distribution of the respondents shows that 196 (56.3%) were males, while 152 (43.7%) were females. The table also shows that 18-27 age range of respondent were 88 (25.3%), 28-37 were 97 (27.9%), 38-47 were 104 (29.9%) and 48 and above were 59 (16.9%). On educational qualification, 68 (19.5%) had SSCE, 78 (22.4) had OND/HND 99(28.15%) had BSc. and 103 (29.6%) obtained MSc and above. The table further shows that 200 (57.5%) were academic staff while 148 (42.5%) were non-academic staff. The table also revealed that respondents from the faculties were as follows: Agriculture 24 (6.9%), Arts 25 (7.2%), Basic Medical Sciences 24(6.9%), Business Administration 24 (6.9%), Clinical Sciences 25 (7.2%), Communication Arts 25 (7.2%), Education 27 (7.7%), Engineering 25 (7.2%), Environmental Studies 25 (7.2%), Law 24 (6.9%), Pharmacy 24 (6.9%), School of Continuing Education 25 (7.2%), Sciences 26 (7.4%) and Social Sciences 25(7.2%).

Table 2: Frequency Distribution of Responses

S/N	Statement (s)	SA	A	D	SD	UD	Total
1.	Effective performance appraisals help in determining workers’ promotion and productivity in University of Uyo	167	120	21	30	10	348
2.	Motivations, timely promotions, rewards and compensations increases workers’ productivity in University of Uyo.	162	105	35	26	20	348
3.	Effective feedback on performance appraisals helps in increasing workers’ productivity in University of Uyo.	150	103	39	29	27	348
4.	Conducive working environment may influence how workers perform in any organisation	139	127	36	28	18	348
5.	When workers are informed of their performance, they are likely to improve on their performance.	170	124	26	19	09	348
6.	Effective performance appraisals help in the achievement of organizational goals and objectives	173	121	26	10	18	348
7.	Proper implementation of performance appraisal reports has propensity of improving workers’ productivity in University of Uyo.	148	130	27	30	13	348
	Total	1048	831	250	192	115	2436

Sources: Field work (2023)

Testing and validation of hypothesis 1

Table 3:  Chi-square test of hypothesis

Hypothesis 1	Df	P	Critical value	ꭓ2	Decision
Effective performance appraisals tend to determine workers’ promotion in University of Uyo	8	0.05	15.51	19.12	Reject Ho Accept H1

Statements 1, 2 and 6 were used to test hypothesis 1

ꭓ² = 19.12

P    = 0.05

Critical value = 15.51

Degree of freedom =8

The result of the chi-square test of hypothesis 1 validates the hypothesis. The analysis revealed that effective performance appraisals can improve workers’ productivity through timely promotions of staff in University of Uyo. The outcome of the analysis revealed that performance appraisal allows management of organizations to decide which worker is to be promoted, which worker has contributed much to the organizational growth and those that needs to be trained. From the analysis, it could be deduced that motivations, timely promotions, rewards and compensations in organization can enhance the performance of workers in the organization. This finding supports the views of Armstrong (2012) and Raji and Jackson (2012) who emphasized that rewards are basic components of performance appraisal process if effectiveness, efficiency and productivity is to be enhanced. According to them, effective training can reduce costs, enhance individual team spirit and corporate performance in terms of output, improve productivity, increase level of competence, enhance workers’ skills and development prospects, etc.

The result of the analysis also aligns with Atiomo (2000) who posits that performance appraisal can serve a wider range of purposes, including improving performance of workers for higher productivity in organization, promoting deserving workers as at when due, identifying training and development needs of workers, enhancing workers’ potentials, enhance communication and relationship, improving incentives as well as help in salaries and wages determination. This study’s finding further supports Danvila-delvalle, Mignel and Antonio (2011) work as they conclude that training and promotion of employees facilitates their contributions to overall organizational objectives and empowers them to perform their assign task effectively. They contended that training of workers by their organizations gives them confidence to contribute more efforts as well as giving their best towards the overall effectiveness, efficiency and productivity of the organization. Similarly, the validated hypothesis supports Dessler and Akram (2012) study, as they averred that training, motivation, rewards as well as promotion of workers empowers them to imbibe skills required for performance of organizational tasks. According to Armstrong (2003), training represent deliberate and systematic modification of behaviour through learnings, programmes and instructions which facilitates individuals’ accomplishment of tasks, attainment of goals, increase in skills, knowledge and competence needed to effectively discharge assigned responsibilities.

Javadein (2011) contends that one of the major objectives of performance appraisal is to identify the personnel’s educational, promotion and training needs. In terms of training, it will afford the employees the opportunity to access latest technological skills similar to other organizations, identifying latest strategies and operational skills needed in the organization to achieve effectiveness. Therefore, organizations engaging in identifying these potentials will definitely succeed in any competitive environment.

Lending credence to the above, Abedi (2014) avowed that performance appraisal if not properly conducted may result in poor productivity, inefficiency and in effectiveness in the organization. The revelation of the analysis also showed that effective performance appraisal translates to positive impact on workers’ job improvement and promotion. Generally, achievement of organizational goals and objectives depends on how performances of workers in organisations are appraised; hence, majority of the respondents declared that effective performance appraisals help in the achievement of organizational goals and objectives. Sometimes, performance appraisal does not really translate to personnel job output as a result of maintaining same instruments and standards of appraising staff over the years. Thus, this may have little impact or on impact on workers’ productivity.

Sorush (2011) avowed that performance appraisal in Nigeria Universities failed to impact meaningfully on promotion and productivity of staff, since the exercises are only carried out for mere formality without corresponding effects. This is so because performance appraisal reports need to generate appreciable impact in terms of resulting in workers’ rewards, promotions, productivity, effectiveness and efficiency. However, despite, consistent performance appraisals in the University of Uyo, workers’ promotions are still delayed, showing the exercise has little or no effect on personnel efficiency, promotion and training. It is on this note that this study has found that proper or effective performance appraisal can generate positive impact on workers’ promotion, productivity and training in University of Uyo.

According to Sorush (2011) and Rostami, Bahramzadeh and Saedii (2015), adequate, timely and effective performance appraisal of workers as well as timely release of promotions will make the workers to exhibit their talents and to be more productive and committed. However, this finding aligns with the views of Muya and Nganga (2012) who stated that regardless of the substantial wage increase, promotion of staff acts as strong incentives and motivators to workers as it offers them opportunity to attain higher position. Thus, the delay in promotion of workers may cause them not to contribute their best towards organizational growth. According to them, timely promotion and training enhances workers’ productivity.

In support of the findings of this study, Jabeen (2011) and Binta et al. (2019) stated that promotion, motivations and other incentives increase the level of work performance and commitment to organizational goals and objectives. Accordingly, career advancement, incentives and motivation promote workers’ productivity.

The analysis and facts supplied have strongly validates hypothesis 1

Testing and validation of hypothesis II

Table 4: Chi-square test of hypothesis II

Hypothesis II	Df	P	Critical value	χ2	Decision
Feedback on performance appraisals tends to increase workers’ productivity in University of Uyo.	8	0.05	15.51	21.92	Reject Ho Accept H1

Statements 3, 5 and 7 were used to test hypothesis II

χ² =21.92

P = 0.05

Critical value = 15.51

Degree of freedom = 8

The result of the analysis of hypothesis II revealed that feedback on performance appraisals can increase workers’ productivity in University of Uyo. This finding suggests that there is a significant relationship between rewards, motivation, feedback and workers’ productivity. Thus, feedback on performance appraisals may come by way of promotions, rewards, compensations and commendations, and the importance of these indices is that they can predict performance. Therefore, improvement in rewards and motivations of workers results in quality performance as well as commitment to assigned tasks.

The result of the analysis of hypothesis II aligns with Mottaz (2011) who says that value place on feedback and/or motivation boast workers’ morale and enhance their productivity. When workers are informed of their performance, may be through rewards, compensations, commendations and promoting, they are most likely to improve on their performance. According to Mihaiu (2014), workers’ productivity encompasses combination of employee’s ability, motivation and the environment he or she is working. In other words, proper implementation of performance appraisal reports has propensity of improving of improving workers’ productivity in University of Uyo. Therefore, commitment to staff welfare by the organisation contributes largely to staff output and/or performance. The amount of money staff is paid, delay in promotion, unconducive working environment, lack of risk allowance, etc. contributes to poor productivity and efficiency of workers (Mihaiu, 2014).

The findings of this study revealed that the result of performance appraisal in the University of Uyo has not really contributed to rewards, promotions and training needs, thus rendering the appraisal exercises as yearly ritual that does not translate to effective workers’ productivity booster. In support with the study findings through hypothesis II testing, Lithakong (2014) submits that the level to which workers perform in steel organisations is dependent on the efficiency and effectiveness of the evaluating system used by the organisation. Therefore, workers’ performance, efficiency, productivity and effectiveness tend to reduce if the appraisal system or method is faulty or ineffective.

Generally, respondents for the study opined that training and development, promotion through effective performance assessment can assist organisations in cutting administration and operational costs as well as boast the strength and quality of human resources. Therefore, effective performance assessment has positive effect on organization’s job performance. The implications of the tested hypotheses II are that when workers in any organization are satisfied with the processes and procedures of evaluation, they will endeavour to contribute their best towards increasing productivity in the organisation.

Conclusively, Onyije (2015) submissions aligned with the finding of this study, when he concludes that effective, efficient and adequate performance appraisal facilitates the placement of the right people at the right time for the right job in a changing environment. Therefore, the organizational performance depends on effectiveness and efficiency of human resources working in the organization.

The above arguments and submissions validate hypothesis II.

Summary and Conclusion

This study focuses on performance appraisal and workers’ productivity and Nigerian public service; with special interest in University of Uyo, Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria, 2021-2023. Every organization relies on its workforce for productivity and effectiveness. Therefore, improving the performance of academic and non-academic staff of universities in terms of output becomes the utmost importance to the University Governing Council and the Management.

However, performance appraisal is one of the major human resource exercises undertaken by the Universities which have implications for workers’ motivations, performance and productivity in the Universities. The primary goals of this study were to examine how effective is performance appraisals in determining workers’ promotion as well as how effective is feedback on performance appraisals in increasing workers’ productivity in University of Uyo. In Nigeria, various public sector organizations have been faced with productivity challenges and that gives attention to various public sector reforms in the country. Therefore, performance appraisal has been an essential tool for enhancing productivity. The productivity-related challenges include, poor reward system, poorly defined human resources objectives, lack of motivation, and delay in promotion, low budgetary allocation for staff training and development as well as poor/lack of feedback on staff performance appraisals.

The springboard of this study was background of the study, statement of the problem (research questions), objectives and significance of the study. The study reviewed relevant literature and adopted the organizational justice theory as its theoretical framework as well formulated two hypotheses. The study employed descriptive and survey research design. The population of the study was made up academic and non-academic across the 14 faculties of the University (5649), but a sample of 374 respondents was drawn using Taro Yamane formula through a simple random process. Chi-square statistical technique was used to test the two formulated hypotheses.

The empirical verification conducted for the study revealed that effective performance appraisals can improve workers’ productivity through timely promotions of staff. The study further revealed that feedback on performance appraisals can increase workers’ productivity in University of Uyo, Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria.

This research has addressed the gap in the literature regarding performance appraisal and workers’ productivity in Nigerian public service, with focus on University of Uyo. The research design adopted for this study helps in gathering survey opinion on the subject matter. Finally, the study in line with its objective and significance delves into providing and recommending some policy alternatives for effective and efficient performance appraisal in public service and in University of Uyo. Therefore, the revelations of this study have important policy implications.

Recommendations

The following recommendations were put forward based on the analysis of the literature and empirical verification:

i.          Staff of University of Uyo should be promoted as at when due as well promotion            issues given serious attention.

ii.         Reports of performance appraisals should be communicated to staff concerned as well as using them to reward and compensate outstanding staff of the University of Uyo by way of accelerated promotions and letters of commendations.

Bibliography

Abedi, M. (2014). Performance appraisal and evaluation model: Issues and prospects. Delhi:             Rajkamal Electric Press.

Ajayi, S. (2011). Capital flight and economic development in Africa. Oxford: Oxford            University Press.

Al-zubi, H. (2010). A study of relationship between organizational justice and job            satisfaction. International Journal of Business and Management, 5(12), pp.102-109. 

            appraisal. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Armstrong, M. (2003). Strategic human resources management: A guide to action. United             Kingdom: Kogan Page.

Armstrong, M. (2012). Management performance in action. United Kingdom: CIPD      Publishing.

Atiomo, A.C. (2000). Practical human resource management. Lagos: Longman Plc.

Aydogdu, S. and Asikgil, B. (2011). An empirical study of the relationship among job   satisfaction, organizational commitment and turnover intention. International Review  of Management and Marketing, 1(4) pp.43-53.

Banjoko, K. (2010). Employee performance and its effects on productivity. Pennant, July-            September, 8(3), pp.71-88.

Bela, E. (2010). Constraints on effective workers training and development in organisation in            Nigeria. Owerri: Imo State University Press.

Bernadin, J. (2010). Human resource management: An experimental approach. USA:            McGraw-Hill Irwin.

Bernett, P. (2012). Challenges and problems of library and information science education in             selected African countries. Educational Research International, 108(1), pp. 55-78.

Bhatia, M. and Jain, A. (2013). Green marketing: A study of consumer perception and preferences in India. Electronic Green Journal, 1 (36), pp.73-87.

Binta, M., Muhammad, I., Ahmed, Z., Bazza, A. and Magaji (2019). Effects of performance             appraisal on employee productivity in federal ministry of education headquarters,            Abuja, Nigeria. Asian Journal of Contemporary Education, 3(2), 121-131.

Bratton, J. and Gold, J. (1999). Human resource management: Theory and practice. USA:             Macmillan Press.

Caruth, L. and Humphreys, H. (2008). Performance appraisal: Essential characteristics for       strategic control. Measuring Business Excellence, 12(3), pp.24-32.

Chetana, L., Pattnaik, O. and Mohpatra (2015). Determinants of performance appraisal: An             empirical study. International Journal of Advance Research in Computer Science and            Management Studies, 3(11), pp. 365-379.

Cook, L. Crossman, K. (2004). Performance appraisal systems and job satisfaction in            Nigeria: Issues and way forward. Calabar: University of Calabar Press.

Danvila-delvalle, I., Mignel, C. and Antonio (2011). The effect of training on performance in             service company panel study. International Journal of Manpower, 30(4), pp.393-410.

Desseler, G. and Akram, A. (2012). Human resource management request. Arab World:             Pearson Publisher.

Dessler, G. (2012). Human resource management. London: Pearson.

Eldman, L., Manolova, T., Shirokova, G. and Tsukanova, T. (2006). The impact of family            support in young entrepreneurs start up activities. Journal of Business            Venturing, 31(4), pp.428-448.

Elverfeldt, K. (2015). How to manage 360-degree feedback. Delhi: Prentice Hall.

Fisher, L., Schoenfeldt, M. and Shaw, A. (2013). Performance evaluation: A    management basic for librarians. Phoenix: Oxyx Press.

Flink, A. (2002b). The survey handbook, 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Gichuhi, W., Abaja, O. and Ochieng, I. (2014). Effect of performance appraisal on employee             productivity: A case study of supermarkets in Nkuru Town, Kenya.Asian Journal of             Business and Management Sciences, 2(1), pp.42-58.

Gilbert, N. (2006). Depression from psychology to brain state. London: Erilbaum.

Greenberg, J. (1987). A taxonomy of organizational justice theory. Academy of Management   Review, 12(1), pp.9-22.

Grote, D. (2012). Performance appraisal reappraised. Harvard Business Review, 78(1),          pp.21-30.

Hayford, V., Boakye, L. and Ovusu, O. (2016). Is performance appraisal system anachronistic in tertiary institutions in Ghana? Evidence from the University of Cape      Coast. Journal of Business and management, 18(4), pp.55-62.

Homayounizadpanah, M. and Baqerkord, L. (2012). Effect of implementing performance             management on the productivity, efficiency and effectiveness. Research Journal of            Allied Sciences, Engineering and Technology, 12(4), pp.1767-1784.

Huber, L. (2013). Applying educational psychology in organizational appraising method.            United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.

Jabeen, M. (2011). Impact of performance appraisal on employees’ motivation. European            Journal of Business and Management, 3(4), pp.22-90.

Jamieson, O. (2011). Intimacy as a concept: Explaining social change in the context of             globalization or another form of ethnocentrism. Sociological Journal of Development, 3(4), pp.23-31.

Javadein, R. (2011). The role of internal marketing in creation of sustainable competitive             advantage. Trends in Applied Science Research, 6(4), pp.364-376.

Kane, S. and Lawler, E. (2009). Performance appraisal effectiveness: Its assessment and            determinants. USA: JAI Press.

Kennedy, W. and Dresser, G. (2011). Appraisal and paying performance: Another look at an age-old problem. Employee Benefits Journal, 26(4), pp.8-14.

Levine, E. and Juan, S. (2010). The rise and fall of job analysis and the future of work    analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 63 (1), pp. 397-425.

Lindsey, A. (2005). Performance evaluation. Phoenix: Oxyx Press.

Lithakong, E. (2014). Evaluating effectiveness of a 360-degree performance

Marsor, R. (2011). Influence of prior acquaintance with the rate on rater accuracy and halo.             Journal of Management Development, 26(8), pp.790-799.

Mathis, R. and Jackson, J. (2014). Human resource management, 13^th edn. USA:            Southwestern Cengage Learning Publishers.

Mello, A. (2015). Strategic human resources management, 4^th ed. USA: CT.

Mihaiu, D. (2014). Measuring performance in the public sector: Between necessity and difficulty. Studies in Business and Economics, 9(2), pp. 40-50.

Mollel-Eliphaz, R., Mulongo, L.S. and Razia, M. (2017). The influence of performance            appraisal practices on employee productivity: A case of Muheza District, Tanzania.            Issues in Business Management and Economics, 5(4), pp.45-59.

Mooney, L. (2012). A solution to the performance appraisal feedback in organisation. United             Kingdom: London University Press.

Moses, O. (2012). Performance evaluation and workers’ productivity in public institutions.   Uyo: Robert Minder Publishers.

Mottaz, J. (2011). The relative importance of intrinsic and extrinsic rewards as determinants            of work satisfaction. Social Quarter Review, 26(6), pp.365-385.

Mullins, J. (2012). Management and organizational behaviour, 10^th edn. London: Pearson.

Mwema, N. W. and Gachunga, H. G. (2014). The influence of performance appraisal on             employee productivity in organisations: A case study of selected WHO offices in East             Africa. International Journal of Social Sciences and Entrepreneurship, 1(11),

Nakpodia, E. (2011). Working environment and productivity among primary schools in            Nigeria. African Research Review, 5(5), pp. 26-47.

Nwachukwu, C. (2011). Measuring workers’ performance. The appraisal exercises. Enugu:            Joebet Books.

Obiora, A. (2002). Employee performance management in tertiary institutions. A case study            of Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka. An Unpublished M.Sc. Thesis submitted to            Department of Political Science, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka.

Obisi, C. (2011). Employee performance appraisal and its implication for individual and             organizational growth. Australian Journal of Business and Management Research,        1(9), pp.92-97.

Odunayo, P., Salau, O., Fadugba, O. and James, O.A. (2014). Modelling relationship between            performance appraisal and organizational productivity in Nigerian public sector.             Economic Management Innovation, 6(1), pp. 2-16.

Okafor, P. (2015). Relationship between home experience and academic performance of            students in Ilorin East L.G.A., Kwara State. An Unpublished Undergraduate Projects            submitted to the Department of Curriculum and Educational Technology, University       of Ilorin, Ilorin.

Okereke, C. I. and Daniel, A. (2010). Staff welfare and productivity in Patani Local         Government             Council, Delta State, Nigeria. Journal of Economic and International   Finance, 2(12), pp.             313-320.

Omusuebe, H. and Kimcnichege, T. (2013). Satisfaction with performance appraisal systems.            Journal of Managerial Psychology, 19(5), pp.526-541.

Onyije, C. (2015). Effect of performance appraisal on employee productivity in a Nigerian            Universities. Journal of Economic and Business Research, 21(2), pp. 65-81.

Oravee, A., Hangeior, A. and Solomon, Z. (2017). Performance appraisal and employee            productivity in Plateau State Internal Revenue Service, Nigeria. Jos: Express            Publisher.

Peleyeju, J. and Ojebiyi, O. (2013). Lecturers’ performance appraisal and total quality            management of public Universities in South-western Nigeria. British Journal of            Education, 1(2), pp.41-47.

pp.1-13.

Raji, K. and Jackson, M. (2012). Training and workers’ performance: A measuring  framework. Onitsha: Africana Academic Books.

Rao, T. V. (1990). Performance management and appraisal systems:  Human resource tool       for global competitiveness. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 40 (2), pp.292-296.

Riggo, R. (2013). Leading groups: Leadership as a group process/group processes and inter-            group relations. Washington: Wageninger Academic Publishers.

Rostami, H., Bahramzadeh, H. and Saedi, P. (2015). The relationship between employees’            empowerment with job performance at red crescent society of North Khorasan.            International Journal of Basic Science and Applied Research, 4(6), pp. 320-322.

Sapsford, R. (2006). Survey research, 2nd edn. London: Sage.

Singh, H. and Vadivelu, B. (2016). Performance appraisal in India: A review. International            Journal of Applied Engineering Research, 11(5), pp.121-136.

Sorush, L. (2011). Performance evaluation and its roles. Zavvarzadeh: Tadbi Publications.

Stone, D. (2012). Transfer and translation of policy. Policy Studies, 33(6), pp.1-17.

Tailor, R. K. (2017). Performance appraisal systems: A way of employee’s growths. Journal            of Modern Management and Entrepreneurship, 7(2), pp.165-179.

Ubeda, C. and Almada, S. (2007). Staff development and performance appraisal in Brazilian         research centre. European Journal of Innovation Management, 10(1), pp.109-125.

Ubeke, B. (2014). Psychometric theory. London: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

University of Uyo (2016). University of Uyo Regulations Governing Staff Conditions of            Service (as amended).

Vivekananda, K. and Mohan, L. (2015). 360-degree appraisal system and its suitability for             Indian private sector banks: An empirical study. International Journal of Science,             technology and Management, 4(1), pp.78-91.

Walklin, L. (2013). Teaching and learn in further and adult education. Cheltenham: Stanley             Thomes.

Wasiu, O. and Adebajo, S. (2014). Reward systems and employee performance in Lagos  State: A study of selected public secondary schools. Arabia Journal of Business and         Management Review, 3(8), pp.14-25.

Werner, S., Schuler, R. S. and Jackson, S. E. (2012). Human resource management, 11th edn.             Canada: South Western Congage Learning.

Wren, M. (2012). Performance appraisal and review system: The identification, measurement             and development of performance in organisations. Global Journal of Administration,            5(3), pp.62-73.

Young, W. (2010). Performance appraisal and management of public organisation in Africa.             New York: Basic Books.

Zahra, A. and Nielsen, P. (2012). Corporate entrepreneurship, knowledge and competence             development. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 24(1), pp.169-189.