Using 360 Degree Feedback System to Complement the Malaysian Public Service Performance Appraisal System : An Exploratory Study on the Instruments of 360 Degree Feedback System in the National Institute of Public Administration (INTAN)

Using 360 Degree Feedback System to Complement the Malaysian Public Service Performance Appraisal System : An Exploratory Study on the Instruments of 360 Degree Feedback System in the National Institute of Public Administration (INTAN)

360-degree feedback is a appraisal tool designed to quantify the competencies and skills of fellow employees by tapping the collective experience of their superiors, subordinates, and peers. The Malaysian civil service has established and implemented performance appraisal system since 1992. Yet the...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Mohamed Nasser, Abdul Razak
Format: Thesis
Language:eng
eng
Published: 2004
Subjects:
HF5549-5549.5 Personnel Management
Employment
Online Access:https://etd.uum.edu.my/1319/1/MOHAMED_NASSER_B._ABDUL_RAZAK.pdf
https://etd.uum.edu.my/1319/2/1.MOHAMED_NASSER_B._ABDUL_RAZAK.pdf
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
id my-uum-etd.1319
record_format uketd_dc
institution Universiti Utara Malaysia
collection UUM ETD
language eng
eng
topic HF5549-5549.5 Personnel Management
Employment
spellingShingle HF5549-5549.5 Personnel Management
Employment
Mohamed Nasser, Abdul Razak
Using 360 Degree Feedback System to Complement the Malaysian Public Service Performance Appraisal System : An Exploratory Study on the Instruments of 360 Degree Feedback System in the National Institute of Public Administration (INTAN)
description 360-degree feedback is a appraisal tool designed to quantify the competencies and skills of fellow employees by tapping the collective experience of their superiors, subordinates, and peers. The Malaysian civil service has established and implemented performance appraisal system since 1992. Yet the system has been criticized because of several drawbacks namely rater bias and its reward system. Therefore, this study would like to benchmark at another innovative appraisal system to complement the existing performance appraisal called the 360 degree feedback system. This research will try to evaluate the effectiveness of its implementation in INTAN and if it could be proven that it could play a complementary role in improving the implementation of the performance appraisal system in INTAN. A total of 90 (71.4 per cent) INTAN officers (JZTSA, Grade 1,2 and 3) were rated by their 2 supervisors, 5 collei2gues, 13 subordinates and they themselves (n=605). A self-administered questionnaire consists of 45 observable performance behavior expectations item were grouped into 7 dimension, namely, managing the organization, managing self, managing resources, leadership, motivating people, developing people and teamwork. The 1 - 10 point Likert Scale was used ranging from 1 -poor to 10-excellent performance behavior. Frequency distribution of the responses of the raters and the mean, median and mode of seven variables were analysed by using the Microsoft Excel spreadsheets. The result showed overall mean scores of the entire seven dimension was 7.0, which means the overall ratees performance behavior expectations/competencies is good. The study also showed supervisors (mean score 6.7) and subordinates(mean score 6.3) rate lower than colleagues(mean score 7.0) and self rating(mean score 7.2). This showed that there is a lot of room the officers to further improve their performance behavior either with the help from the organization management or by self improvement. From the interview conducted indicated that many employees accept the mean score rating given by the ratees and committed to discuss and improve either by with the help of their supervisors or by self improvement. Finally, it is strongly suggested in this study that the Malaysian Public Sector should adopt the 360 degree feedback appraisal system to further improve their efficiency and effectiveness of Government’s delivery system.
format Thesis
qualification_name masters
qualification_level Master's degree
author Mohamed Nasser, Abdul Razak
author_facet Mohamed Nasser, Abdul Razak
author_sort Mohamed Nasser, Abdul Razak
title Using 360 Degree Feedback System to Complement the Malaysian Public Service Performance Appraisal System : An Exploratory Study on the Instruments of 360 Degree Feedback System in the National Institute of Public Administration (INTAN)
title_short Using 360 Degree Feedback System to Complement the Malaysian Public Service Performance Appraisal System : An Exploratory Study on the Instruments of 360 Degree Feedback System in the National Institute of Public Administration (INTAN)
title_full Using 360 Degree Feedback System to Complement the Malaysian Public Service Performance Appraisal System : An Exploratory Study on the Instruments of 360 Degree Feedback System in the National Institute of Public Administration (INTAN)
title_fullStr Using 360 Degree Feedback System to Complement the Malaysian Public Service Performance Appraisal System : An Exploratory Study on the Instruments of 360 Degree Feedback System in the National Institute of Public Administration (INTAN)
title_full_unstemmed Using 360 Degree Feedback System to Complement the Malaysian Public Service Performance Appraisal System : An Exploratory Study on the Instruments of 360 Degree Feedback System in the National Institute of Public Administration (INTAN)
title_sort using 360 degree feedback system to complement the malaysian public service performance appraisal system : an exploratory study on the instruments of 360 degree feedback system in the national institute of public administration (intan)
granting_institution Universiti Utara Malaysia
granting_department Sekolah Siswazah
publishDate 2004
url https://etd.uum.edu.my/1319/1/MOHAMED_NASSER_B._ABDUL_RAZAK.pdf
https://etd.uum.edu.my/1319/2/1.MOHAMED_NASSER_B._ABDUL_RAZAK.pdf
_version_ 1747827120709566464
spelling my-uum-etd.13192022-07-27T01:20:08Z Using 360 Degree Feedback System to Complement the Malaysian Public Service Performance Appraisal System : An Exploratory Study on the Instruments of 360 Degree Feedback System in the National Institute of Public Administration (INTAN) 2004 Mohamed Nasser, Abdul Razak Sekolah Siswazah Graduate School HF5549-5549.5 Personnel Management. Employment 360-degree feedback is a appraisal tool designed to quantify the competencies and skills of fellow employees by tapping the collective experience of their superiors, subordinates, and peers. The Malaysian civil service has established and implemented performance appraisal system since 1992. Yet the system has been criticized because of several drawbacks namely rater bias and its reward system. Therefore, this study would like to benchmark at another innovative appraisal system to complement the existing performance appraisal called the 360 degree feedback system. This research will try to evaluate the effectiveness of its implementation in INTAN and if it could be proven that it could play a complementary role in improving the implementation of the performance appraisal system in INTAN. A total of 90 (71.4 per cent) INTAN officers (JZTSA, Grade 1,2 and 3) were rated by their 2 supervisors, 5 collei2gues, 13 subordinates and they themselves (n=605). A self-administered questionnaire consists of 45 observable performance behavior expectations item were grouped into 7 dimension, namely, managing the organization, managing self, managing resources, leadership, motivating people, developing people and teamwork. The 1 - 10 point Likert Scale was used ranging from 1 -poor to 10-excellent performance behavior. Frequency distribution of the responses of the raters and the mean, median and mode of seven variables were analysed by using the Microsoft Excel spreadsheets. The result showed overall mean scores of the entire seven dimension was 7.0, which means the overall ratees performance behavior expectations/competencies is good. The study also showed supervisors (mean score 6.7) and subordinates(mean score 6.3) rate lower than colleagues(mean score 7.0) and self rating(mean score 7.2). This showed that there is a lot of room the officers to further improve their performance behavior either with the help from the organization management or by self improvement. From the interview conducted indicated that many employees accept the mean score rating given by the ratees and committed to discuss and improve either by with the help of their supervisors or by self improvement. Finally, it is strongly suggested in this study that the Malaysian Public Sector should adopt the 360 degree feedback appraisal system to further improve their efficiency and effectiveness of Government’s delivery system. 2004 Thesis https://etd.uum.edu.my/1319/ https://etd.uum.edu.my/1319/1/MOHAMED_NASSER_B._ABDUL_RAZAK.pdf text eng public https://etd.uum.edu.my/1319/2/1.MOHAMED_NASSER_B._ABDUL_RAZAK.pdf text eng public masters masters Universiti Utara Malaysia Antonioni, D. (1996). Designing an effective 360-degree appraisal feedback process. Organizational Dynamics, 25(2). 24-38. Atwater, L. E., Ostroff, C., Yammarino, F. J., & Fleenor, J. W. (1998). Self-other rating agreement: Does it really matter. Personnel Psychology, 51,576-597. Atwater, L., Roush, P., & Fischthal, A. (1995). The influence of upward feedback on self- and follower ratings of leadership. Personnel Psychology. 48.35-59. Atwater, L., & Waldman, D. (1998). Accountability in 360 degree feedback. HRMagazine, 43. 96-104. Austin, M. L. (1992, November). Updating the performance review. Working Woman, 17(II), 32-35. Atwater, L. E., Ostroff, C., Yammarino, F. J., & Fkeenor, J. W. (1998). Self-other agreement: Does it really matter? Personnel Psychology, 5 1,577-598. Atwater, L. E., Roush, P., & Fischthal, A,, (1095). The influence of upward feedback on self and follower ratings of leadership. Personnel Psychology, 48,35-59. Atwater, L. E., & Yammarino, F. J. (1992). Does self-other agreement on leadership perceptions moderate the validity of leadership and performance predictions? Personnel Psychology, 45, 141-164. Bass, B. (1990). Bass and Stolidity's handbook handbook of leadership. New York: Freepress. Bernardin, H. J., & Beatty, R. W. (1987). Can subordinate appraisals enhance managerial productivity? Sloan Management Review, 63-73. Bernardin, J. H., & Beatty, R. W. (1987). Can subordinate appraisals enhance managerial productivity?Sloan management Review, 28(4), 63-74. Bernardin, J. H., Dahmus, S. A., & Redmon, G. (1993). Attitudes of firstline supervisors toward subordinate appraisals. Human Resource Management,32, 315-324. Bruzzese, A. (1996). Rave reviews. Human Resource Executive. 57-59. Church, A. H. (1995, August). First rate multi-rater feedback. Training & Development,49, (8), 42-43. Church, A. H. (2000). Do higher performing managers actually receive better ratings? A validation of multirater assessment methodology. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 52,99-116. Dalton, M. (1 996). Multirater feedback and conditions for change. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 48, 12-16. DeNisi, A. S. & Mitchell, J. H. (1978). in Fedor & Bettenhausen, Group and Organizational Studies, 14 (2), June 1989, 182-197 Einstein, W. O., & LaMere-LaBonte, J. (1989). Performance appraisal: Dilemma or design? Advanced Management Journal, (2), 26-30,99-101,129-131. Edwards, M. R. (1983). "Productivity Improvement through Innovations in Performance Appraisal." Public Personnel Management, 12(1),13-24. Edwards, M. R. (1989). "Making Performance Appraisals Meaningful and Fair." Business, 17-24. Edwards, M. R. (1991). "Accurate Performance Measurement Tools."HRMagazine, 36(6), 95-98. Edwards, M. R., and Ewen, A. J. (1996). 360-degree Feedback: The Powerful New Model for Employee Assessment and Performance Improvement. NY: Amacom Books. Fox, C. J. (1991). "Employee Performance Appraisal: The Keystone Made of Clay." Pp. 58-72 in C. Ban and N. Riccucci (eds.),Public Personnel Management: Current Concerns Future Challenges. White Plains, NY: Longman Publishing Group. Harris, M., & Schaubroeck, J., (1988). A meta-analysis of super-supervisor, selfpeer, and peer-supervisor ratings. Personnel Psychology, 41,43-62. Heera SinghMcEvoy, G. M., and Beatty, R. W. (1989). "Assessment Centers and Subordinate Appraisals of Managers: A Seven Year Examination of Predictive Validity." Personnel Psychology, 42, 37-52. Murphy, K. R., and Cleveland, J. N. (1991). Performance Appraisal: An Organizational Perspective. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Nalbandian, J. (1981). "Performance Appraisal: If Only People Were Not Involved." Public Administration Review, 4 1(3), 392-96. Hegarty, W. H. (1974). Using subordinate ratings to elicit behavioral changes in managers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 764-766. Hoffman, R. (1995). Ten reasons you should be using 360-degree feedback. HR Magazine, 40, 82-85. Ilgen, D. R., Fisher, C. D. & Taylor, S. M. (1979). Consequences of individual feedback on behavior in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, (4), 349-371. Jawahar & Williams (1997). Personnel Psychology, 50(4), 905-925. Nagel, R. (2000) The 360-degree Feedback Avalanche, International Personnel Management Association Johnson, J. F., & Ferstl, K. L. (1999). The effects of interrater and self-other agreement on performance improvement following upward feedback. Personnel Psychology, 52, 271-303. Lepsinger, R., & Lucia, A. D. (1997, September). 360 degree feedback and perfonnance appraisal. Training, 34, 62-70. Lepsinger, Richard and Antoinette D. Lucia. The Art and Science of 360 Degree Feedback. Pfeifferl Jossey-Bass Inc., San Francisco, 1997. Latham, G. P., and Wexley, K. N. (1994). Increasing Productivity through Performance Appraisal. (2nd Ed. ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. London, M., & Beatty, R. W. (1993). 360-degree feedback as a competitive advantage. Human Resource Management, 32,32-373. London, M., & Smither, J. W. (1995). Can multi-source feedback change perceptions of goal accomplishment, self-evaluations, and performance related outcomes? Theory-based applications and directions for research. Personnel Psychology, 48, 803-839. London, M., Wohlers, A. J., & Gallagher, P. (:1990). A feedback approach to management development. Journal of Management Development, 9(6), 17-31. McEvoy, G. M., & Buller, P. F. (1987). User acceptance of peer appraisals in an industrial setting. Personnel Psychology, 40, 785-797. Moravec, M., Gyr, H., & Friedman, L. (1993, July). A 21st century communication tool. HR Magazine, 38, 77-431. Mount, M. K., Judge, T. A., Scullen, T. E., Sytsma, M. R., & Hezlett, S. A. (1998). Trait, rater and level effects in 360-degree performance ratings. Personnel Psychology, 51, 557-576. McEvoy, G. M., and Beatty, R. W. (1989). "Assessment Centers and Subordinate Appraisals of Managers: A Seven Year Examination of Predictive Validity. " Personnel Psychology, 42, 37-52. Murphy, K. R., and Cleveland, J. N. (1991). Performance Appraisal: An Organizational Perspective. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Nalbandian, J. (1981). "Performance Appraisal: If Only People Were Not Involved." Public Administration Review, 4 1 (3), 392-96. Roberts, G. E. (1995a). "Developmental Performance Appraisal in Municipal Government." Review of Public Personnel Administration, 15(3), 17-43. Roberts, G. E. (1995b). "Municipal Government Performance Appraisal System Practices: Is the Whole Less Than the Sun1 of Its Parts?" Public Personnel Management, 24(2), 197-222. Schmidt & Hunter (1998) Psychological Bulletin, 124(2), 262-274. Wells, S. J.(Sept 1999). Traveling beyond 360-degree evaluations. HR Magazine, 44(9). Smither, J. W., London, M., Vasilopoulos, N. L., Reilly, R. R., Millsap, R. E., & Salvemini, N. (1995). An examination of the effects of an upward feedback program over time. Personnel Psychology, 48,1-34. Tuckrnan, B.W. & Oliver, W.F. (1968). Effectiveness of feedback to teachers as a function of source. Journal of Educational Psychology, 59,297-301. Tornow, W. W. (1993a). Editor's note: Introduction to special issue on 360-degree feedback. Human Resource Management, 32, 211-219. Tornow, W. W. (1993b). Perceptions of reality: Is multi-perspective measurement a means or an end? Human Resource Management, 32, 221-230. Ulrich, D. (1993). Editors Note. Human Resource Management, 32 (2&3), 209. Vinson, M. N. (1996). The pros and cons of 360-degree feedback: Making it work. Training & Development, 50, 11-12. Waldman, D. A., Atwater, L. E., & Antonioni, D. (1998). Has 360 feedback gone amok? Academy of Management Executive, 12, 86-94. Walker, A. G., & Smither, J. W. (1999). A five-year study of upward feedback: What managers do with their results matters. Personnel Psychology, 52, 393-423. Waldman, D. A., Atwater, L. E. & Antonioni, D. (1998). Has 360 degree feedback gone amok? Academy of Management Executive, 12, 86-94.

Similar Items