360 Degree Performance Appraisal within IKH ZASAG University of Mongolia - Coursework Example

360 Degree Performance Appraisal within IKH ZASAG University of Mongolia CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Introduction It is vital for any organization to focus on its key resource—human resource—to increase productivity. The performance appraisal system not only evaluates the employees' efficiency, but also expectations and satisfaction regarding the various aspects of their job. Going by the 360° performance appraisal, questionnaires a feedback procedure encompassing the individual employees, their peers and superiors are carried out where an employee is evaluated from all sides. The capabilities and execution with regard to business acumen, customer focus, values and ethics, vision and purpose, bias for action, commitment, teamwork, innovation, developing people performance and decision making were considered. It is essential for all institutes to value the appropriate aspects of certain insights because the significance of this awareness can be implicit only in a real circumstance. Not all feedback is effective in improving performance. Despite being positive or negative, feedback can be detrimental to performance. The 360-degree feedback must not be applied only for appraisal, but can also help in the improvement of employees along with the progress of the institute. This will help the employee to understand the feedback and further use it for performance improvement. 360-degree system should be an ongoing activity, rather than one time one. 360-degree feedback creates a culture, which engages everyone in the development process and helps in building a system to align individual performance with organizational expectations. This leads to improvement in organizational performance, as well as employee development. In today's changing and volatile world, organizations are continually looking for ways to improve performance and satisfy the demands of all stakeholders. Achieving this position inevitably involves change, which then becomes the pivotal dynamic for success. An organization's success depends on the people it employs and whether they adopt innovative changes. They should know their level of current performance and improvements needed in it. This is the area where 360° feedback plays a vital role in organizations. It has the ability to provide structured and in depth information about current performance and the required performance of an individual in future. The worth of effectual performance appraisal systems, especially360° feedback method, might be related to the overall progress of the firms and its importance is being appreciated by leaders and managers of topical times. The 360-degree feedback is well reputed as the "multi-rater feedback," or "multisource feedback," process. This procedure of obtaining feedback centers on an employee and feedbacks are derived from his surroundings. The people receiving the feedback to sketch their training and development, career objectives of the employees, and to organize a performance development graph often find the results from 360-degree method quite helpful. Outcomes of such appraisals are applicable by the firms in deriving administrative conclusions, with respect to remuneration and promotion. However, a lot of controversies arise with respect to applicability of 360-degree feedback - whether it should be used solely for expansion purposes, or even applied for appraisal process. This paper focuses on varied applications of 360-degree feedback from appraisal to development. In operational businesses, there is a authorized and ethical demand to assess employees in an purposeful, reliable and reasonable way (Bacal, 2000; Greenberg, 1986). In order to complete this, and to get rid of bias in assessment, experts came up with the idea of 360-degree appraisal. 360-degree feedback has brought large scale changes in performance management. 360-degree techniques are not novel to firms. Despite the popularization of the technique after 1940 in Western nations, a disagreement still lies with respect to the origin of the method. It has chronological roots in the military perspective. In 1950s and 1960s, it has been widely used inside military service academy in the US firms; for instance, Bank of America and Bell Labs adopted this practice in the 1960s. General Electric applies the same and also extends entire support required by the employees through conduct of seminars and resolution of individual problems. Research Background The current policy of the Mongolian government is that public or state universities should be helped and encouraged to become relatively independent "autonomy universities" under the supervision of the government. The major goal is that these institutions not to become wholly independent profit-making bodies but within a framework provided by the government to work as efficient as possible; that is to make the fullest use of modern management techniques and practices. The most important of these resources almost certainly are the staffs of the university who need to exert their effort towards the objectives. They, by their proceedings and approach, may play the role of 'stimulators' for developments parallel to their administration. Off course, without the back up of all the staffs the government policies like 'autonomous universities’ are unlikely to be successful. This fact revealed as the study was conducted at a state university in Mongolia and among other universities that the government wants to make more freedom. Some of the employees are from this institution, both academic and administrative, particularly those clerical staff and academic support staff who appeared anecdotally to be worried and concerned that they would not be treated fairly by the appraisals, which in turn could affect their status as employees negatively. When we give importance to present study, it is very common among staff to resist a change in general since they tempt to believe that any alterations in their work situation would have negative impact on them. Due to this, it is necessary to have a proper plan that is systematically developed and carefully implemented. When it come the subjects like appraisals it is supposed that the scheme is simple to understand and could apply in order to be acceptable to entire staff of the institution. Besides, the objectives of the system or scheme should correspond with those of the organization. In brief, people fetch in what and how they themselves are evaluated, so that they can improve themselves. In general, it is recommended that 360-degree Appraisal Process, where managers, the self and colleagues could assess the work of employees should be applicable. Should such a scheme or system 'work' for the behavior of employees? We ought to improve their confidence and their morality since these are all certainly benefited both the organization and management. Statement of the Problem Universities and colleges progressively face the strain to be answerable to their stakeholder as the work composed by business people, academicians and administrators have deeply blamed relevance of business education to the business itself and the overall public. The quickly developing disputes of private universities and business schools are required to expand the current goals of the performance assessment to answer to the up-and-coming wants of stakeholders. From the 1990s onwards, responsibility in the area of higher education has turned into a tough aspect to deal with (Stewart & Carpenter-Hubin, 2001, p. 37). The conversion is highly challenging, as pertinent stakeholders in a university comprise staff, management, students, parents’ alumni, employers, the public and reputation of the institution (Dorweiler & Yahhou, 2005, pp. 140-143). This is not only a problem for the overseas universities, but even for firms as they seek for enhanced performance and optimistic consequences. We have observed near the beginning of seventies and eighties that the hassles were faced by the United States against growing Japanese firms and the US was compelled to take radical and instant actions to oppose the Asian attack and have offered us many inventiveness and improvements towards productivity. Private and public sector both are feeling the pinch and thus the author implies that times has changed; organizations require employees to go beyond efficient and effective but rather to distinguish them. Although the field of Human Resource Management has given birth to many empirical and theoretical studies through which advocated the need of "People first" as valuable resources for business success and can be the source of sustainable competitive advantage of the firm (Schuler & MacMillian, 1984; Ulrich, 1991; Wright & MacMillan, 1992). The discipline has provided the strategic component to the human resource management subject by associating Human Resource Management processes with business approaches and a connection is obtained where both disciplines hold up and gain fulfillment, which in turn furthers the indispensable dynamic force for realizing the success of the business in general. The west has brought many changes and previous research has focused on developed nations and which is still the case. It is very much the need to refocus attention to the rapidly emerging nations and the case Mongolian, is the new rising economy, the new competition. Mongolian companies are upcoming world brands and cooperation with Chinese companies will make them really a brand. Mongolia has 110th rank in business rate. This makes Mongolian the recipient to have competent persons not only foreigners, but also Mongolian nationals themselves too. The concept of 360 degree envisages raising individual and team performance levels but caution is needed to initiate; it is very much needed to develop and implement a strategic 360 Degree Performance Appraisal System. This tool encourages staff to develop in all sense and the argument put forwarded is that all the employees grow in skills and competencies; the organization will thus too and this will be its edge it has to outperform its competitors. A 360° performance appraisal system appears to be an ideal performance assessment that fits the modern time’s scenario for assessment, as it helps in deriving appraisal/feedback from all viewpoints, e.g. employee, manager, customer and others. The traditional appraisal system generally allows bias and personal influences the researcher wanted to provide the appraisal within IKH ZASAG University of Mongolia with a model of 360° appraisals that gives a feedback from all angles. It is possible to analyze the performance of employees from various perspectives. Hence, the study on 360° performance appraisal is important to an educational institution like IKH ZASAG University of Mongolia. Research Objectives The study is meant to show a clear idea about the functioning of an innovative 360-degree appraisal system among a sample of 230 employees at IKH ZASAG University of Mongolia. The information was obtained form supervisors, colleagues, clients and junior workers along with the individual employees. There are two goals when it comes about this research study. The first and foremost thing is to develop and implement a 360degree Appraisal Process to evaluate the job performance of academic support staff, administration, clerical and employees at IKH ZASAG University of Mongolia. Secondly, to assess the competence of the evaluation process and to gauge the degree to which it brought about the improvement in performance of the staffs. This study takes a look at how universities can implement a 360-degree appraisal system into their annual performance review for academics and administrative staff with some modifications of the process, which can be extended to include multinational companies in Mongolia. Firstly, the initial study was undertaken within the author's own institution as part of a wider modular based study and afterwards; later it was extended to include Mongolian-based foreign enterprises, a clearer definition with at their core expatriates. In this particular case, it includes the foreign universities setting up in Mongolia and the ongoing foreign direct investment, with expatriate executives. Research Method The research investigation can be divided into two phases. Phase 1: The development of the 360-degree Appraisal Process. First step is to be maintained by mustering and analyzing the data held by the institution in accordance with the previous attempts to evaluate job performance of the academic supporting personnel and clerical staff. Secondly, following recommended procedures-360-degree Appraisal System was developed. At last, a series of appraisal forms were designed and distributed, comprising the evaluation forms used by supervisors, colleagues and subordinates as well as the staff themselves, in addition to an attitude scale to measure attitudes towards the 360degree. For each employee, 5 supervisors were taken for their evaluation. In total 18 supervisors were taken. So every single employee is gauged by himself/herself, by his supervisors and by customers. Twenty customers are taken to evaluate each employee. For simplicity of our analysis, under each question the answers of the supervisors are averaged to arrive at a single figure for each category. So the questionnaire is developed at three levels. The first set of 15 questions is developed for self-appraisal, second for the supervisor’s feedback and third for the customer’s feedback. In each set of 15 questions the last three questions capture the way the employees, the supervisors and the customers evaluate the 360-degree appraisal system. Appraisal System itself The development stage of the instrument is as follows: (1) Designing the survey questionnaire: The items examined were those relevant to the qualifications of personal staff and those about Division of Human Resources Management Department, their working process and performance. (2) Constructing the survey questionnaire to investigate attitudes towards the 360-degree Appraisal System from that developed by within the context of their behavioral reasoning theory (Fishbein and Aizen 1980). Phase 2: To study the efficiency of the 360-degree Appraisal System. The research sample consisted of clerical staff and academic supporting staff at the institution. There were employees from the Division of Human Resources Management obtained by purposive sampling. The sources of data about the performances of the employees were the employees themselves, their supervisors, colleagues and subordinates and those who received service from the Division. There was a self-assessment form and evaluation forms which completed by supervisors, colleagues, and those coming for services. Guidelines were developed for interviewing the sample population as well as for the relevant individuals who would investigate the attitudes of the sample toward the 360-degree Appraisal System. At last, there was the actual inventory for assessing attitudes and satisfaction with the 360-degree Appraisal System. The content validity of this inventory which is extent to five experts; they felt the items in the scale were representative of the larger domain of possible items. The employees were evaluated according to their way of response in different situation (that formed the performance criteria) that comprised effective job performance, on a five point scale, ranging from one to five, with (1) 1.00-1.99 'least often' (2) 1.50-2.4 'hardly often' (3) 2.50-3.49 'from time to time' (4) 3.50-4.4 'quite often' and (5) 4.50-5.00 'most often'. A preliminary meeting was held with the staff of the Division of Human Resource Management to explain the aims and methods of the investigation especially the fact that it was designed to improve performance in the division. After data had been analyzed detailed feedback of the results was given to the staff in order hopefully to improve their performance. After the data is collected there is a need to tabulate and graphically represent some of the information in order to analyze the results obtained. For the purpose of quantitative analysis three questions have been selected from each of the supervisor’s and employee’s self appraisal sets of questions. The data has been tabulated as per scale category. The values taken for the scale options are 1, 1.25, 1.5, 1.75, 1.99, 2, 2.25, 2.5, 2.75, 2.99, 3, 3.25, 3.5, 3.75, 3.99, 4, 4.25, 4.5, 4.75, & 5. If the value chosen by an individual lay between 1-1.125, it has been approximated as 1 and anything lying between 1.125 and 1.25 is taken as 1.25. For the rest of the values categorization has been done similarly. After listing down the frequencies for each option (total =230, i.e. the number of employees to be evaluated), the weighted value is taken in two different columns by multiplying the value of scale with that of the frequency for each category. We get two different columns for the supervisor and the employer. These weighted values are taken for our further analysis (tables given in Appendix B). Limitations and scope: The basic limitation to the study is that pertaining to the common problems in case of primary surveys and close-ended questionnaires. Firstly, the 230 employees have been taken to represent the total number of employees in the University and the selection process has been a purposive sampling in order to include all the four departments as mentioned in the research methodology. Secondly in case of close-ended questions the problem is that obtaining the viewpoints of the evaluators is limited in scope. Open-ended discussions often bring out small issues, which are perhaps not covered by the likert scale system adequately. Apart from these limitations the study also leaves us with further scope for analysis. For instance the study can be extended to other organizations and a comparison between business organizations and educational institutes can be made. Before moving on to the analysis it is important to obtain a basic overview about the organization under study. This will be addressed in the following section. CHAPTER II ORGANISATIONAL PROFILE The present study is undertaken at IKH ZASAG University of Mongolia. The employees (both teaching and non-teaching staff) at the University constitute the population of the study. The population of the present study is heterogeneous and therefore, an appropriate sampling method has been suggested. The population is first divided into two groups such as Teaching and Non-teaching staff. Ikh Zasag University was founded in 1994 by the admission of Khunnu Co., Ltd and its founder Namsrain Nyam-Osor. The University has developed appreciably from the former Ikh Zasag law convention to one of the better and a lot of acknowledged universities in Mongolia. Founder and President of Ikh Zasag University of Mongolia, Meritorious teacher of Mongolia, doctor (Sc.D). prof. Namsrain Nyam-Osor is a affiliate of Council for Scientists and Experts of the President of Mongolia and the Chairman of Academy of Nomadic Culture and Civilization, a affiliate of Council for Minister of Education, Culture and Science of Mongolia and a affiliate of National Council on Educational Ikh Zasag University has been accustomed on its educational and analysis activities in fifteen years back its foundation. Currently, the University consists of 2 campuses and 9 professional schools. Therefore, about 6000 acceptances including all-embracing acceptance are studying in over 30 majors of alum and undergraduate programs at the Ikh Zasag University. Over 3000 acceptance accelerating from the University in 10 able training fields for the accomplished period. About 90 percent of the graduates are already employed. The Faculty Much of Ikh Zasag University backbone comes from the out-standing faculty, admiring by the University bookish excellence, its amusing ethics and students intellectual encouragement. Both acclaimed chief advisers and accomplished adolescent agents have recognized Ikh Zasag University as an academy with aggregate of attitude and innovation. About 400 advisers and advisers are active at the University and over 90 percent of the advisers authority bookish degrees in their field. 15 percent of the all adroitness are international advisers who are arrive to advice at the University from Russia, China, Japan and Korea. Additionally, the University hosts an ample amount of out-standing visiting advisers from our allied adopted and calm universities who advise and give lectures and seminars to students. Conclusion Before moving on to the analysis section a review of existing literatures need to be conducted in order to gain a grip on the subject under discussion, that is, the different aspects of the 360 degree appraisal system. CHAPTER III REVIEW OF LITERATURE The following literatures will provide an overview of the 360-degree appraisal system and their importance to different kinds of organisations along with the way this system helps in improving overall performance. Discussing the topic of performance appraisal, the noted definition of Cardy and Dobins (1994) implies it as the process of identifying, observing, measuring and developing human resources in organizations. When we consider it from the perspective of an employee and a supervisor, it is a two way communication process between them keeping in mind the importance of focusing on three main areas which are development, motivation and recognition of achievement (Smith and Rupp, 2003). Performance appraisals have always been associated with criticism. A famous comment on criticism - 'Supervisors do not like to give them and employees to do not like to receive them' (Ford, 2004, p. 551). This paper discusses the possibility of accomplishing 360 Degree appraisals. This performance appraisal method was actually in use when it’s developed and has diminished its value over a period of time. 360 degree appraisal is bouncing back now by being adopted by top companies in the world to medium companies and even government departments have started adopting this method. Even though the 360-degree appraisal method is an effective tool in recognizing parameters like employee strength and weakness by gathering information from a variety of sources to provide accurate information on performance, it has not been recognized and gained popularity as a management tool (Gregurus et al., 2001). In order to make a performance management system more powerful, foolproof and positive, the management firms should also consider implementing the 360-degree appraisals properly with suitable training, the right personnel and sources of aid. To make commercial sense by applying it, the 360 degree appraisals should not be considered as quick win but understand it as a support to the overall strategic aims of the organization and as scale to the company’s accomplishments in the big and the long term scenario (Newbold, 2008, pp. 38-39). When using a 360 degree appraisal, organizations should prepare thoroughly and the usage of a strong process and a chosen team of appropriate qualified individuals to help, implement it and to make sure measures are in place to provide enough resources to aid the development needs that come out of it and use it as part of an overall performance strategy will yield maximum results. Even though feedback within organizations is one of the most important things in managing employee behaviour, studies explain that the process of getting feedback in organizations is rather constrained (Ashford, 1989). As already discussed, feedback is an unavoidable process for an organization to perform well and here we consider why the 360-degree is important to Mongolian based enterprises. The major reasons are, improvement efforts needs to be measured continuously, to provide job-related feedback for employees who have concerns with career plateau, maximize the potential of an employee when there is a technological change, to generate a competitive workforce to face challenges and to increase workforce diversity (Nowack, 1993). Since every perspective provide additional value to the organization and increase its competitive advantage, the process includes the feedback from supervisors, peers, subordinates, employees themselves and even from customers as significant elements (Tornow, 1993; London and Beatty, 1993). Examining the usage of 360 degree appraisal from two perspectives (a) Organizational: From the organizational perspective it can be used as an input to the performance appraisal by facilitating cultural change, which is used only for the developmental purposes, succession planning system, executive development, make employees follow the core values and business strategies. (b) Individual: From this perspective, its used solely for the purpose of the individual development by aiding to improve or even unsatisfactory performance, to make an employee understand his defensiveness against weaknesses, a convincing way of providing negative feedback and make an employee confident about his own abilities hence increase the overall performance. Benadin et al. (1993) report found that most supervisors agree that the subordinates are able to identify certain aspects job performance and evaluate it better. They analyze that the attitude of employees towards the appraisal system and its measuring parameters can have major effects on its effectiveness, which means if the employees are convinced about the appraisal system it can have a positive effect. On the other hand the negative attitude of managers towards employee’s appraisal actually has the exact opposite effect or the value of it deteriorates. London and Beatty (1993) suggests that when the feedback is used as an effective developmental tool, a company should not just issue the questionnaire just before the performance appraisal interview. Bracken (1994) recommends the policy of incorporating employees in the preparation and design of the questionnaire, would actually help the employees understand and practice the appropriate behaviour statements. When the employees participate in the process of developing and designing the feedback questionnaire, they tend to be committed to it at a later stage. Forming a committee to write the items and pilot the process is also recommended. Hazuch et al. (1993) mention that the popularity of the 360 degree appraisal program can easily be identified by the no. of benefits it adds to the development of an organization. (1) Organizational: the 360 degree appraisal program facilitates a two way communication by increasing employee participation and demands respect by showing that the opinions of the employees are counted and they help themselves for better working relationships. (2) Individual: the feedback is not considered personally as it is sourced from numerous resources, which increases the reliability, fairness and it is formally approved as invested with authority. Since the data is anonymous it acts as an opportunity to praise or criticize coworkers and helps uncover and resolve conflicts by acting as motivational dimension which serves the directional purpose. In the employee development context, the 360 degree appraisal program proved to be a useful application as far as literature is concerned. The literature suggests that the 360 degree appraisal program is specifically beneficial for executive development, career development and remedial training as it is for self-development purposes. The following issues are to considered when it is used to prepare employee development plans. It should go hand in hand with other training and development systems of the organization. The employee should be clearly explained the content in which the feedback is given The training and development programs should be supporting the core values of the organization It should also be integrated as a part of the organizational learning philosophy to be useful The questionnaire should be designed keeping the employee in mind, the crucial factors are employee participation, the length of the questionnaire, types of measurements and whether its computer based or paper. This type of a preparation is evidently getting a more balanced feedback from the employees. The most important thing about getting feedback is to understand the gaps in the perception and determine what measures could be taken to bring it into an alignment with the performance expected by the organization and the perception of others. (Wilson, 1997, p. 44). The feedback sourced from customers, direct reports and colleagues enrich the process of adding different perspectives. By the proper usage of the 360 degree appraisal system with an existing effective appraisal system, it can add multiple benefits like helping to gain agreement on expectations as it is reached on agreement by using a large range of information collected from different resources and from open discussions. (Lepsinger and Lucia, 1997, pp. 62, 66). There are some basic requirements to establish an effective 360 degree appraisal system like a culture that supports open, honest feedback, performance measures and behaviors clear and agreed, a proper system to eliminate irrational feedbacks and a system which has a built in method to identify untrustworthy ratings. A sound 360-degree appraisal system requires people who are ready to spend their time required for it to work and support. Organizational change interventions can be identified by the unique information about the performance provided the by 360 degree appraisal system and the organization should determine on how to maximize their effects. Horizontal links within organization is required to do this well and peer evaluation can be a useful tool here. These links should be considered very important and it requires to be strengthened by the participants (Peiperl, 1999, p. 453). Any department can adjust the objective and confidentiality of the process, as they need. In order to ensure they are current with this tool, competencies should be reviewed periodically and the peer reviews and student evaluations needs to be administered annually. For a higher assignment, the assessment skills will be based on their successful efforts to improve their relevant formal professional qualifications, which includes career training and other proper study or training programs, the research done when he/she was studying and published research papers and training programs undergone at the time of study leaves as reflecting in their CV. The assessment tests the actual performance rather than the mere no. of completed training programs and research papers. People tend speak about what others like to hear about, no what they really wanted to tell or feel. As people go ahead in their positions in an organization, they tend to be away from the previous co-workers and be a part of a new of their level. They become alienated from the employees and this decreases the communication between managers and employees. Even if a manager errs no employees would like to provide a feedback as most of them afraid of the managerial positions in most appraisal methods and leads to one way communication. Many appraisal methods become mechanical and only numbers are considered for appraisals without noticing the human factors. These tendencies results in employee dissatisfaction, negligence of feedback given, discouraging and most managers tend to provide only positive feedback to make a feel good environment. All these actions adversely affect the long term organizational developments and individual performance. A 360 degree appraisal system also known as multi rater assessment uses feedback from different sources like, bosses, subordinates, peers and even from customers for assessment. Multiple techniques like role play, Business games, Interviews and In-Basket exercises are also used for the sole purpose of eradicating various errors and bias that can harm the assessment process. A 360-degree appraisal system is considered to be a chance to see ourselves and let other see us from the personal development perspective. At organizational levels it is a tool to encourage openness and develop a culture of honesty. The fundamental reason behind this is simple: Derive unique and valuable information that helps to add incremental validity to the process of assessment of individual performance by Different evaluation perspectives (Borman, 1998). The 360-degree appraisal method is based on the principles of transparency, open communication, trust, sharing and learning. Enhanced managerial and leadership effectiveness is one of the most counted effects of this appraisal system. Jim Gemmell of Mobil Oil accepts the process willingly "Until we implemented 360-degree feedback, we were only focusing on issues related to managing upwards. We would typically neglect other critical aspects of our business objectives. Currently, with 360-degree feedback we show concern for employees at all levels, in addition to emphasizing the external client focus of Mobil." (Hoffman, 1995) Organizations, which would like to use the 360-degree appraisal method, needs vigilant preparation to implement the program and will have many options too. It is quite common for organizations to avoid discussion on intangible soft issues, and concentrate more on technical issues and knowledge based issues on completion of projects. This tendency terminates the chance to provide fruitful feedback to employees by managers. Appraisal or Development? The 360-degree appraisal method can be used for various purposes including appraisal, development of employee and organization. There could be two purposes for using The 360 degree appraisal method in an organization which are either for appraisal where the purpose is decision making or for the development of employee and organization where the purpose is development. Two major achievements using the 360-degree appraisal method are assessment of performance, which is done by 360-degree appraisal, and personal development is achieved by the 360-degree development process. Development model is considered to be better than the appraisal model of The 360 degree appraisal because of the following attributes. Ability to select respondents, Control and confidentiality The freedom to choose the respondents enables managers to choose respondents of their choice. The participants are given basic simple guidelines to follow which give them the freedom to choose their friends, role models, mentors of any of their choice, whose opinions they value and prefer. Even though the immediate manager gives suggestions, it is up to the employees to take the final decision about the respondents. There is only a minimal role is required from the immediate manager in nominating respondents. The second attribute, confidentiality is well maintained in the developmental model and the reports get to see only by the employee and not even the immediate manager has access to it. The 360-degree appraisal model demands the participation of all employees but the developmental model it is not a necessity. In case of an appraisal model the manager has access to the reports of the employee but in developmental model, the employee can decide if he needs to share it with his manager or not. While agreement on the assessment of the current performance is the main focus of the 360-degree appraisal method, the 360-degree developmental plans are prepared for the development of individual and organization. The final objective of the 360-degree development program is to foster growth by improving employee weaknesses through providing constructive feedback. There are many problems associated with the 360-degree appraisal programs when used for the purpose of appraisal. Since different raters use different parameters for assessment, the accuracy of the data is always in question and might not be accurate. The difference in creativity of one manager varies from the other hugely. Mostly ratings are only an indication of the how the person uses what criteria to reach the feedback. The assessment, mostly occurs in the mind of a person cannot always be subjective and all assessments in most contexts and types occur in the cognitive processing of an individual human being. Multiple raters are being used in order to bring objectivity in appraisal and the results are affected by the rater’s perception, personalities and previous experiences. The following idea shows how it is used. Subjectivity + Subjectivity + Subjectivity + …..+….. = Objectivity. To make the performance appraisals rational, the feedback is not only depended or collected from a single source but from different sources of individuals, supervisors, peers, subordinates and customers. In order to add incremental validity to the assessment of individual performance, the unique and valuable information is sourced using different evaluation perspectives of various types of individuals. (Borman, 1998) Ashridge Management Research for 360-degree feedback reaches the following conclusions: 360-degree feedback is solely used to support learning and development by seventy one percent To support a number of HR processes such as appraisal, resourcing and succession planning by twenty three percent To support pay decisions by six percent The Problems Associated with 360-Degree Feedback They have also identified a no. of drawbacks associated with 360-Degree Feedback Juggling happens between the roles of both peers and judges in the context paradox of roles Since a team does most of the work, providing individual feedback might not be great idea in modern organizations. Useful appraisals are not generated due to impaired rating scales. Qualitative feedbacks should be generated to improve performance even if its time consuming and difficult to generate. It is very important to implement the feedback given for constructive purposes of the individual and organization rather than the reward a feedback provides. Research from the Institute of Personnel and Development (IPD) identifies that the culture of an organization can be understood by the failure or success of the 360-Degree Feedback as the successfully implemented 360-Degree Feedback means that the organization actually gets feedback from all the people they work with. How to Use 360-Degree Feedback Effectively? Be realistic Explicit and realistic objectives should be ensured by organizations for implementing the 360-Degree Feedback. The entire process works on the feedback collected from reliable sources regarding the individual performance on a variety of activities and behaviors from a variety of perspectives. The major idea behind collecting the feedback is positive discussion on how to improve the performance and it should never be turned as negative discussion on bad performance. During the feedback interview for a sales executive who has underperformed last month, the discussion and instructions should be on how to improve the performance next month rather than condemning for the last month’s poor performance. Immediate development is what the managers should aim at by identifying and targeting the key activities and behaviors of the employees. Setting up goals that are unreal can create a negative feeling in the employees, which could result in poorer performance. When setting up the goals, the manager should try to keep the goals small and realistic in order to improve the employee. Personal development contract are another step toward improving performance. There should be an agreement regarding the competencies needs to be developed by the employee and it should be prepared by the employment of perceptions of competencies between the employee and his immediate supervisor in the beginning of the calendar year. The contract will make the employee conscious about his responsibility in developing competencies that are agreed and it will make the supervisors understand the importance of providing support for their subordinates by giving them enough time, facilities and resources to develop. This will help the employees estimate and understand what is being expected from and how to achieve it in future. These discussions will make them confident and encouraged. Coaching Positive feedback generates motivation and negative feedback initiates threat. Those employees who have received positive feedback will be motivated to perform better and those who have been given negative feedback will be discouraged and threatened. The feedback is manipulated by managing their immediate supervisor’s views on performance. But it is not the case with multi rater feedback as the employees are being evaluated by different raters with their own opinion about employees and can end up in conflicting feedback about their performance. A personal coach can interpret different feedbacks given to an employee and prepare a plan for the future developmental plans thus becoming a key in 360-Degree Feedback. Use of experts The use of expertise of every rater should be considered before getting him or her to rate on employees. Nobody is an expert in all fields. Raters who have expertise in particular area should be made available to rate that particular field of the employee’s performance. It will avoid the confusion which can be arisen by everybody comments on all aspects of employee performance. The raters should be given proper guidance and training to evaluate. The raters must be trained on identifying and describing major competencies expected from the key roles of employees (Solid knowledge of Competency mapping and role analysis are essential). The rating biases should be made understood by every rater before going live on rating employees. Focus on Task performance The feedback process should focus on the task and the task performance, not on the person who performs it. The main aim of the performance review meeting is to facilitate the organizational development and individual development, which are complementary. These review meeting should never be chance to criticize a person but an option to discuss the developmental issues. The feedback should not concentrate on personal traits like aggression, submission and other personality traits and it should not reflect threats that hurt the ego of an individual. One of the best approaches towards giving feedback is to present it in a very informal and casual method, so as to imply the real message on where to improve but not in way that threats the employee. This method has been adopted by many managers and found to be highly successful in many organizational settings. Be Proactive It is very important have a culture developed where the employees are given feedback whenever they need it. The feedback should not be a particular event that happens once in year at the time of annual performance review. This culture can be developed through the following steps. Self assessment External feedback Grasping the feedback and taking necessary action towards changing it. In order to create a better working atmosphere for employees, the organizational goals should be aligned with individual objectives. The 360-degree developmental model helps employees to take criticism in a positive way by encouraging them to ask and get feedback on a regular basis. To help the organizations work better and create an atmosphere of open communications and sharing of ideas across levels, the 360-degree developmental system transforms the feedback adverse environment into a more honest and liberal one as the number of employees asking for feedback increases in modern organizations. The personal life of the employees also gets better as the development model enables them to introspect themselves regularly, the are able to understand themselves and other better which leads to improved relationship with their family members and friends. The management should be able to make their employees understand that their personal life, performance and healthy family relationships are improved as a reward of continuous feedback and implementation. The ability to adapt with the changes, develop as per the changes and improve job performance along with cultural awareness and sensitivity is required by the complex and ever evolving world of international management in modern organizations (Luthans, 2002, p. 780). Understanding how the evaluation process works for foreign nationals through well-known levels of reaction in various situation, learning, behavioral changes and performance improvement is the major aim (Kirkpatrick, 1994). For various reasons discussed above the 360 degree system has widely been used in many organizations and there is a tremendous increase in the number of organizations, adopting it. One of major reasons for this change is the nature of the jobs, which are becoming complex and the traditional methods of feedback process where a supervisor directly rate a report’s performance proves to be inadequate in providing enough quality information to improve performance. One smooth reason could be the empowerment of employees and downsizing that happen these days, require the employees to take the burden of personal development on their own (Braken et al., 2001). Increased information to all, management and staff alike help them improve their performance is quite surprising factor which is explained by social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986; Stajkovic and Luthans, 1998a) in particular dimension of self-awareness. There are cultural issues associated with both 360-degree designs in international human resources management and it’s very important to consider and understand the interpretation of the results. Leslie et al. (1998) interprets five different cultural assumptions on implementation of the 360 degree programs which are, Different cultures takes the value of developing managers/staff dramatically different, developmental feedback from peers, bosses, and customers are considered to be both valuable and acceptable. Since the 360-degree data are kept confidential and the raters are guaranteed anonymity that the questionnaires that are given to them are reliable and validly measure individual differences, the results are accepted as truthful and accurate. The theoretical foundation and implementation issues across various cultures in different countries associated with the 360 methods discussed above act as the basis of the proposed 360-degree system for foreign nationals. Vallance (1999) comments that the organizational culture plays an important role in performance appraisal methods by describing the performance appraisal methods used in Singapore, Mongolia and Philippines to evaluate the role of organizational culture on the appraisal process in these countries. The criteria for appraisal in Singapore counts the individuals ability to count all the important factors when examining a problem or an issue, intellectual qualities such as power of analysis, imagination and sense of reality, result oriented working and leadership qualities such as motivation, delegation and communication. The Mongolian criteria for appraisal counts the ability to deliver the output in terms of quality, quantity and the methods used to output the work, planning and implementation used to manage and perform the work, the ability to take crucial decisions and direct to meet the deadlines, take the control when necessary, and coordinate efforts with other organizations to deliver products, accomplish the goals of the organization by solving problems and resolving conflicts, then comes the ability to improve work and services by demonstrating innovative ideas and solutions, recognizing and rectifying problems and efficient and effective work performance is also expected. In Philippines the appraisal criteria vary a little as they count the effectiveness of management of peers, subordinates and bosses, management of work, management of resources, management of linkages, management of constraints and innovativeness. When preparing the questionnaire for the raters to assess the employees for developmental and appraisal purposes the six dimension or scales should be included; the raters should evaluate the abilities of an employee on the basis of technical competence, management skills, interpersonal skills, confidence/efficacy, leadership effectiveness and cultural fit (Luthans, 2002, p. 784). Confidentiality is one of the major things to be maintained when implementing the assessment process and then communicate through a packet with cover letter, which aims to deal with the purpose of the programs and the directions (Luthans, 2002, pp. 789-90). The authors further provide advice on following factors; Does cultural training really work? How can it be improved? In helping evaluate and development of foreign nationals, the proposed EMEQ and process of implementation seems to be effective and offers considerable promise (Luthans, 2002, p. 791). Sometimes a manager can act in regard to the top management and it can be seen as ineffective by the employees and it can happen vice versa too, wherein the upward appraisal using the 360 degree system is useful in gaining a complete picture; argues Curtis (1996). Also getting information on the current performance of an employee can be the starting point to provide support and develop those staff that is showing higher potential to perform a better job says Randell et al. (1984). The entire aim of the study in a big picture is to understand how to initiate, develop and implement a strategic appraisal system. A result becomes more convincing and can add confidence when the same result is attained by different methods and the process is called as the triangulation method or cross-examination, which is followed by the 360 appraisal method. The triangulation method or cross examination is initiated and is being used in the process because the performance evaluation systems are one of the most important human resource components which is considered to be the single most powerful tool in organizational development and it demands the essentiality of assessing the their qualities critically (Cleveland et al., 1989; Judge and Ferris, 1993; Smith et al., 1996). Evaluate employees in an objective, consistent and fair way (Bacal, 2000; Greenberg, 1986) is one of the major concerns for working organizations as there is legal and moral pressure "establish people's view of what they think, believe, value or feel" (Jankowicz, 2000, p. 222) on every organization. Organizations are compelled to gain "access to different levels of reality" (Bryman, 1989, p. 176). Adequate explanation of the purpose of the research should be provided to the heads of the department, as it required gaining access to the staff (Hussey and Hussey, 1997). Performance appraisal is one of the most powerful tools to identify the potentiality of an employee as the performance appraisals can provide access to the employee work history and it gives accurate data over the change in the performance of the employee over a period of time (Deadrick and Madigan, 1990). The aim of the study was to analyze and develop and performance appraisal system that offers a solution to the management problem of choosing the appropriate one, which effectively and fairly interpret the contributions by the employee to the organizational effectiveness and the demands of the social change. In order to provide accurate information and reduce errors, the researcher has used both the government and private organizations, which have or are using the 360-degree appraisal program (Morgan, 1998). Mayer and Davis (1999) found that the appraisal programs considered to be acceptable and useful resulted in better trust and encouragement from the top management. The 360-degree appraisal system can also help organizations to stay from legal problems by utilizing effective multi rater feedback process. By using the job analysis helps organizations stay within the legal guidelines for selecting employees and promoting them by avoiding potential problems that may come up by using arbitrary or discriminatory criteria. Improving the chances of an organization to support its personnel decisions without challenging the court can be achieved by using multi rater feedback system which is built to avoid rating issues like personal biases and errors (Spector, 2003). Adamik (2003) found that competencies like external awareness, HR management, financial, communication and interpersonal skills which come under managerial effectiveness are improved dramatically over a period of two years by successfully using the 360 degree feedback evaluation system. An advantage of 360 degree feedback process over supervisor only rating system is its ability in gathering information across distinct environments, small teams and individuals which comprises an organization. The traditional supervisor rating system fails to gather information from a variety of sources hence reflect only one these dimensions (Adamik, 2003). A multi-rater feedback or 360° feedback is proven to be one of the most effective, commonly used tools for employee development and performance appraisal. In a larger picture, the employee development plans may include one or many of these assessments and may overlap or diverge to outline a complete employee development plan (Maylett, 2005). The significance of the 360 degree feedback system increases as the organization are evolving in terms of downsizing, merging and reengineering which requires different set of skills to manage it effectively. These latest requirements or changes happen in the organizations across the globe increased the need to identify behavioral process, which affects the occupational effectiveness happening in work settings. This research have analyzed the effectiveness of 360 degree feedback system as an effective metric in measuring manager competency in the public sector to supply and use specific employee feedback from supervisors, peers, subordinates and customers against ones own perceptions of his competency (Adamik, 2003). To conclude, as the literature review states that for every new proposal there would be supporters and followers as it is a common fact that no person does like changes. To overcome the problems due to change, the organizations should plan the feedback well in advance and facilitate more cooperation from all the staff by educating them about the benefits and the feedback structure should be planned before put it into practice. The participation of senior management is crucial to all stages of the implementation and evaluation processes of the 360-degree feedback system and employee participation should follow. Roberts (2003) has come up with the necessity of making an employee understand the importance of the feedback process and ensuring his participation because if an employee thinks that the feedback process is unfair, not systematic and thorough, it is unlikely they will accept the outcome of the process and participate effectively. The case studies, which exemplify the effectiveness of the feedback evaluation, should be applied to universities and industrial environments so as to generate awareness of the benefits and motivate to participate. It is proven that the 360-degree appraisal system is more effective and provides a complete picture at all levels of organizational and personal development. The only drawback it has is the high administration workload and it should be resolved by either by adding manpower to the administrative department or splitting the feedback process into different departments and the human resources team acts as coordinator for team leaders and managers who have received proper training in this regard and that makes it a continuous practice in regard to management development. After gaining an insight from the above discussion it is now time to move on to the analysis of the data obtained from the survey. This is presented in the following section. CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS AND DICUSSION The results obtained by the primary survey method using the questionnaire as the tool can be summarized according to some elements under the five basic categories (as per the likert scale) in the multi-rater system. Employees' Self Appraisal Analysis To conduct the self-appraisal analysis of the employees pertaining to the different departments like Human Resources, Campus Development, Registry and Student Services a sample population of 230 students was chosen from 400 people. Questionnaires were developed and results were obtained on a five-point scale. The scale will bear ranges on five points 1,2,3,4 and 5. The ranges are (1) 1.00-1.99 'least often' (2) 1.50-2.4 'hardly often' (3) 2.50-3.49 'from time to time' (4) 3.50-4.4 'quite often' and (5) 4.50-5.00 'most often'. Shouldering the right Responsibility The analysis made on the basis of results received in regards to the first question shows that 35 people out of 230 people opined on the parameter of ‘least often’, which in terms of percentage stands out to be 15 percent. Again, 42 people out of the total sample population of 230 people opined on the parameter of ‘hardly often’, which in terms of percentage stands out to be 18 percent. In regards to the third parameter of ‘from time to time’, 55 people were found to cast their opinion, which in terms of percentage stands out to be 24 percent. A group of 66 people out of the total 230 people supported the parameter of ‘quite often’, which in terms of percentage stands out to be 29 percent. However, a small population of 32 people was found to render support to the last parameter of ‘most often’, which in terms of percentage stands out to be 14 percent. Thus, it is found that the status of the results obtained reflects that there is a mixed view of the people in regards to the issue of shouldering the right amount of duties and responsibilities. To this end, it is viewed that though some of the people are satisfied with the amount of responsibilities they ought to shoulder others do not. The above information can be shown in a graphical basis as follows. Training and Induction Programs In regards to the question on training and induction programs the 230 respondents cited mixed views and opinions. It is found that around 32 respondents out of the total 230 respondents opined on the parameter of ‘least often’, which stands out to be 14 percent. Again,. 25 respondents were found to support the parameter of ‘hardly often’, which in terms of percentage stands out to be around 11 percent. In regards to the parameter of ‘from time to time’, 37 respondents were found to support the view. Percentage wise it stands out to be 16 percent. 61 respondents from the 230 respondents were however found to opine on the parameter of ‘quite often’, which stands out to 27 percent. Finally, a group of 75 employees out of 230 employees supported the view on ‘most often’. Percentage wise their view stands out to be 33 percent. The above information can be shown in a graphical fashion as follows. Reward and Criticism In regards to the opinion drawn to the question on whether the superiors aptly reward and criticize the performance of the employee, mixed views are obtained from the group of 230 respondents. It was found that out of the total 230 respondents 21 employees responded to the parameter of ‘least often’. Again, in regards to the second parameter of ‘hardly often’ it was found that 28 respondents supported their view. In regards to the third parameter of ‘from time to time’ it was found that 49 respondents came out with their support. However, 62 respondents supported the view of getting rewarded and criticized in the parameter of ‘quite often’. Finally, a group of 70 respondents supported the parameter of ‘most often’ in regards to the stated cause. In terms of percentage the number of views obtained for each of the several parameters of ‘least often’, ‘hardly often’, ‘from time to time’, ‘quite often’ and ‘most often’ stands out to be 9 percent, 12 percent, 21 percent, 27 percent and 30 percent respectively. The above information can be shown through a graphical process as follows. Growth Opportunities In regards to the question framed to cite the growth opportunities of the employee in the current profession the group of 230 respondents were found to cite mixed views. It is found that 23 respondents out of the total of 230 respondents gave support to the parameter on ‘least often’. Again, 27 respondents cited support to the parameter of ‘hardly often’. However, 42 respondents gave their opinion to the view on ‘from time to time’. 65 respondents were found to render support to the view ‘quite often’ in regards to the issue of considerable growth opportunities. Finally, a group of 73 respondents weer found to support the view of ‘most often’ in regards to the stated issue. In terms of percentage the above rate of responses received stands out to be 1 percent, 12 percent, 18 percent, 28 percent and 32 percent in regards to the parameters of ‘least often’, ‘hardly often’, ‘from time to time’, ‘quite often’ and ‘most often’ respectively. The above observation is shown graphically as follows. Performance Appraisal through the 360 Degree Approach In regards to the question on the necesssisity of the 360 degree approach in rendering an effective performance appraisal system separate views were obtained from the employee groups participated in the interview process. It is found that 20 respondents out of 230 respondents cited support to the parameter of ‘least often’ in regards to the cause. In terms of percertage it stands out to be 9 percernt. Again, a group of 26 respondents gave support to the view of ‘hardly often’ . Percentage wise it stands out to be 11 percent. However, 44 respondents weer found to render support to the view of ‘from time to time’. In terms of percentage the result stands out to be 19 percent. The parameter of ‘quite often’ was found to have been supported by a group of 65 respondents. Percentage wise th rersult stands at 28 percent. Finally, 75 respondents were observed to render support to the view of ‘most often’. The above information can be shown in the form of a graph as follows. Superiors’ Opinion About Their Subordinates The superiors view in regards to the performance parameters of their subordinates is analysed by interviewing a group of 18 respondents. However, the opinions given by the superiors are analysed as per their evaluation about the 230 respondents. For the interview purpose separate questions were developed to understand the level of opinions cited by the superiors. The opinions are measured based on a five-point scale. The scale will bear ranges on five options 1,2,3,4 and 5. The ranges are (1) 1.00-1.99 'least often' (2) 1.50-2.4 'hardly often' (3) 2.50-3.49 'from time to time' (4) 3.50-4.4 'quite often' and (5) 4.50-5.00 'most often'. Shouldering the right Responsibility The opinions of the employee group were already observed in regards to the stated issue. In this section the opinions of the superiors is cited to understand whether the employee has rightly appraised himself on the issue. It is found that by talking the average opinion of the 18 managers the opinion for the parameter of ‘least often’ arrived at around 4 percent. Again, the average opinion cited of the 18 managers showed a 7 percent support to the view of ‘hardly often’. However, in regards to the view of ‘from time to time’ the average view of the managers showed support to around 18 percent. In regards to the parameter of ‘quite often’ the average view of the 18 managerial respondents suggested a support for 32 percent. Finally, in regards to ‘most often’ the average view given by the managers showed a support of 38 percent. The same can be shown in a graphical manner as follows. Training and Induction Programs Taking the average views of the 18 respondents of the managerial team with respect to the issue of employee reaction to the training programs it is found that the managers have aptly rated the different parameters. In regards to the parameter of ‘least often’ it is found that it has obtained a rating of 7 percent. The managerial team by rated the parameter of ‘hardly often’ by 8 percent. However, the managers have given a 13 percent rating to the parameter of ‘from time to time’. Further, a 34 percent rating is observed in regards to the parameter of ‘quite often’. Finally, the average viewpoint taken of the managerial team has rendered a 39 percent rating to the parameter of ‘most often’. The above observation can be shown graphically as follows. Reward and Criticism In regards to the issue of the frequency of the events in which the employee was rewarded or critized on his performance the average views of 18 respondents in the managerial circle was taken. It was noted that in regards to the first parameter of ‘least often’ the average view centered around 7 percent. Again, for the second parameter of ‘hardly often’ the average views of the managers represented around 8 percent. For the parameter of ‘from time to time’ the managerial view centered around 16 percent. However, for the parameter of ‘quite often’ the average managerial view was found to represent 32 percent of the employees. Finally, for the last parameter of ‘most often’ the managers were found to rate 37 percent of the employees under the category (‘most often’). The above observation can be graphically represented as follows. Performance Appraisal through the 360 Degree Approach In a similar manner the average responses of the 18 managers were drawn in regards to issue refelecting the need of the 360 degree evaluation approach in performance appraisal systems. It is observed that the average view of the managers rated the parameter of ‘least often’ at 4 point. The parameter of ‘hardly often’ as rated by the managers came to 7 percent of the employees. The parameter of ‘from time to time’ was rated as 17 percent representation of the employees by the managers. However, for the parameters ‘quite often’ and ‘most often’ the ratings given represented 33 percent and 39 percent respectively. Students' Opinions on University Employees A sample of 20 students was taken for the interview process. Their opinions were rated on a five point scale having parameters (1) 1.00-1.99 'least often' (2) 1.50-2.4 'hardly often' (3) 2.50-3.49 'from time to time' (4) 3.50-4.4 'quite often' and (5) 4.50-5.00 'most often'. Workshops and Conferences The students’ views were observed in regards to the different parameters like ‘least often’, ‘hardly often’, ‘from time to time’, ‘quite often’ and ‘most often’ as 1 percent, 2 percent, 3 percent and 4 percent and 5 percent respectively. The same can be shown in a graphical basis. Professor Interaction with Students In regasrds to the above issue the students views were observed in regards to the different parameters like ‘least often’, ‘hardly often’, ‘from time to time’, ‘quite often’ and ‘most often’ as 2 percent, 1 percent, 2 percent, 3 percent and 4 percent respectively. The same can be shown in a graphical basis. Visits by foreign professors In responding to the above issue the students’ views were observed in regards to the different parameters like ‘least often’, ‘hardly often’, ‘from time to time’, ‘quite often’ and ‘most often’ as 1 percent, 2 percent, 3 percent, 2 percent and 4 percent respectively. The same can be shown in a graphical basis. An observation made on the issues highlighted in regards to growth opportunities, rewards and criticisms and fostering of training programs it is found that organization has the right climate for the same. It helps in conducting research activities, and helps its professors to teach at foreign universities. Thus, the academicians can earn a global image through the university global programs. With respect to the customers’ and students’ viewpoint, the organization helps in bringing in foreign professors who can develop their expertise. Further, the organization with its expert professors helps the students to gain a stand in the professional world. The professors by giving vocational training to the students make them ready to face the competitive world. (Ikh Zasag University, 2010). Statistical analysis For the purpose of statistical analysis, we have categorized the information for questions 5, 9 and 10 under each of the two categories (self appraisal and supervisor’s appraisal) as explained under the research methodology section. The tables pertaining to the results and analysis have been represented under Appendix B, and C. in the first table under Appendix C we find that the t-test for means and variance yield insignificant results (p-value > .05 for both cases). Therefore under the evaluation element of meeting deadlines, the managers and the employees have given their feedbacks (managers gave feedback on each of 230 employees), which have been summarized as explained earlier under research methodology. For the t-test the null hypotheses were difference in means equal to zero and difference in variance equal to zero. This is accepted as per the result derived (insignificant t-test). Therefore the difference between means and variances for the two groups or variables are not significant. The regression analysis shows that the level of association between the two variables is insignificant and therefore the feedbacks of the employees during self-appraisal and that of the supervisors during employees’ appraisal are independent of one another (in the regression result p-value >0.05). The null hypothesis is accepted and the coefficient of regression is insignificant. For the next element of evaluation, that is, taking part in organization’s decision making (the frequencies represented under Appendix B and results of analysis under C), the pattern of results are similar in nature and same with the other parameter of evaluation, that is, ‘increment necessary on current pay scale’. Therefore one may say that the 360-degree appraisal method is a rational and effective approach to be adopted for this University. From the t-values we may suggest that the employees are more or less honest in rendering their opinions and their feedbacks about themselves are not significantly different from those given by their superiors. The following section will therefore conclude regarding the feedback procedure followed at the Mongolian University along with the performance evaluation of the 230 employees selected in the sample and hence provides recommendations. CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The Ikh Zasag University operating in the region of Mongolia is observed to encourage both professional and research based activities. It has the state-of-the-art educational branches imparting training in different vocational fields. However, the University is found to have countered a problem in not being able to effectively communicate with the lower level staffs consisting of the academicians and research scholars. Hence, there is an increased threat of the educational staff of the University to get demoralised. Thus, in this regard the use of a 360-degree performance appraisal system is recommended for the University. Through the incorporation of the 360-degree performance appraisal system the University can address several staff and employee issues in a more in-depth fashion. It is found that the 360-degree appraisal system helps in conducting of employee appraisal in a three-way basis. Firstly, it helps in making the employee self-assess himself. Secondly, the employee’s superiors assess the employee. Finally, the employee is assessed from the viewpoint of customers. The employee in the process of self-assessment tends to create a favourable image of him. Such image is then counter checked by the assessment conducted by the superiors and customers. This practice renders further effectiveness to the model of performance appraisal. Further, with the help of the 360-degree performance appraisal approach many issues like rendering rewards and criticisms are resolved. The employee in an organisation would feel motivated if given proper attention by his superiors. Thus events like rewarding the best employee on his performance would certainly help the other employees to gain motivation to perform better. Similarly, the employee must get adapted to facing of criticism from their supervisors. It would help the employee to increase his attention to perform the job in a better way. A proper 360-degree appraisal system also helps the managers and supervisors understand effectively the needs of the employee. Thus, they can effectively design training modules to help the employee gain more expertise in their related field. Moreover, the supervisor can justify the level of responsibilities and expectations in regards to the employee’s role through the incorporation of the 360-degree approach. It is found in this regard that the employee often complains about increased load being given to him and thus desires to shift to areas of lower stress. This often creates a disturbance in the work atmosphere. Moreover, the customers’ evaluation on the employee performance helps in making the employee get knowledge on the areas where he needs to counter a change. The customer’s evaluation of the employee would also help the organization to create more effective training modules to better train their employee in order to meet the growing demands of the market. Moreover, the use of the 360-degree appraisal method also helps the supervisors to get effective feedback from the employee in regards to certain activities. Thus, activities like inviting professors from international arena to teach in the University premises may excite conflicts in the mind of the indigenous base of academicians. Thus, a proper feedback from the employee circle needs to be taken to reduce the chances of conflicts. The incorporation of the 360-degree approach also helps in cultivating newer growth opportunities for the employee in the organization. Thus, a steady approach must be taken to rightly inculcate the 360-degree performance appraisal system to promote organizational effectiveness. APPENDICES Appendix A. Questionnaire (the highlighted questions are picked for the analysis) 1. Employees' Self Appraisal Analysis The Employees Self-Appraisal analysis was conducted over a sample of 230 respondents from different departments like Human Resources, Campus Development, Registry and Student Services were chosen through random selection from a group of 400 employees. Questions were given to rate their individual liking of the job environment and growth expectations. The opinions cited for the questions will be rated on a five-point scale given as follows. The scale will bear ranges on five points 1,2,3,4 and 5. The ranges are (1)1.00-1.99 'least often' (2) 1.50-2.4 'hardly often' (3) 2.50-3.49 'from time to time' (4) 3.50-4.4 'quite often' and (5) 4.50-5.00 'most often'. Q1. How often can you observe yourself to be shouldering the right amount of duties and responsibilities? A.1. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.2. How often did you feel the need for proper training and induction programs on newer job processes? A.2. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.3. How often was your performance rewarded or criticized by your superior authority? A.3. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.4. How often did you feel the need of taking a leave from your busy schedule? A.4. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.5. How often could you complete you meet the job deadlines given to you by your superior? A.5. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.6. In how many times did you take decisions regarding job issues in a collaborative manner? A.6. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.7. How often did you observe growth opportunities in your present career? A.7. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.8. How often do you think changes are required at the workplace ? A.8. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.9. In what frequency did the management encourage your views to organizational decision-making process? A.9. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q. 10. How often did you feel the need for gaining increment on your present payment scale? A.10. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.11. What was the frequency of job rotations in your organization? A.11. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.12. How often did you feel discriminatory practices pursued in your organization? A.12. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.13. How often was your performance evaluated through appraisal system by your superiors? A.13. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.14. How often did you observe that the performance appraisal conducted followed the 360 degree approach? A.14. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.15. How often do you feel that your performance should be rated through the 360-degree performance appraisal system? A.15. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ 2. Superiors’ Opinion About Their Subordinates In regards to analyzing the superiors’ viewpoint on the performance parameters of their subordinates a 360 degree appraisal system was conducted over a group of eighteen managers taken on a random basis. Questionnaires were developed to rate their individual opinions. The opinions cited for the questions will be rated on a five-point scale given as follows. The scale will bear ranges on five points 1,2,3,4 and 5. The ranges are (1)1.00-1.99 'least often' (2) 1.50-2.4 'hardly often' (3) 2.50-3.49 'from time to time' (4) 3.50-4.4 'quite often' and (5) 4.50-5.00 'most often'. Q.1. How often do you feel that amount of duties and responsibilities shouldered by the employees need evaluation? A.1. (1) ‘least often’; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.2. How frequent have you found the employee reacting positively to the training programs? A.2. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.3. During how many periods were your employees rewarded or criticized in regards to their performance? A.3. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.4. What is the leave taking rate of the employee in your organization? A.4. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.5. What is the rate of meeting job targets by the employee of your concern? A.5. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.6. In how many occasions did the employee manage to decide jointly in groups regarding work-related problems? A.6. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.7. How often the employee envision growth opportunities in their career? A.7. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.8. At what rate did you find the employees desiring for changes in the organization? A.8. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.9. How often did your employee have a successful say in the organizational matters and decisions? A.9. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q. 10. How often do you feel that the employee’s effort demands higher remuneration? A.10. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.11. During how many periods have there been job rotations in your organization? A.11. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.12. What do you feel about the discriminatory practices being pursued in your organization? A.12. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.13. How often did you organize the performance appraisal system for evaluating the performance of your employee? A.13. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.14. How often you have used the 360 degree performance appraisal system in evaluating the job performance of your employee? A.14. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.15. What is your plan in regards to rating the performance of your employee depending on the 360 degree appraisal system in future periods? A.15. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ 3. Students' Opinions on University Employees Further, a group of twenty students was chosen as a sample through the process of random selection to make further analysis. The students are identified as the customers of the organization which falling under the educational system renders service through creating a proper education and training environment for its customers. Herein, the 360 degree performance analysis approach is taken to understand the satisfaction of the student base. Questionnaires were developed to rate their individual opinions. The opinions cited for the questions will be rated on a five-point scale given as follows. The scale will bear ranges on five points 1,2,3,4 and 5. The ranges are (1)1.00-1.99 'least often' (2) 1.50-2.4 'hardly often' (3) 2.50-3.49 'from time to time' (4) 3.50-4.4 'quite often' and (5) 4.50-5.00 'most often'. Q.1. What is the frequency by which the organization conducts educational tours to enhance the pedagogical pattern? A.1. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.2. How often does the organization organize workshops and conferences to inculcate a practical atmosphere in the educational system? A.2. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.3. What is the rate at which the professor interacts with the students to help them solve their queries in a one-to-one manner? A.3. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.4. What is the frequency at which foreign professors are invited in University to help them earn global experience? A.4. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.5. How often ex-students are invited by the University to gain practical inputs from the external professional field? A,5. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.6. How often does the University conduct the campus placement program in recruiting periods? A.6. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.7. How often has the University opened up a grievance cell to address the problems troubling the student population? A.7. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.8. How often has the University encouraged your stake in regards to taking decisions in educational matters? A.8. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.9. What is the frequency in which you desire the 360 degree approach to be taken to better evaluate your needs? A.9. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Q.10. How many times do you desire the evaluation process to be conducted on an annual basis to help judge your viewpoints? A.10. (1) ‘least often’ ; (2) ‘hardly often’; (3) ‘from time to time’; (4) ‘quite often’; (5) ‘most often’ Appendix B. Table 1 Element of evaluation Scale options Self-appraisal Supervisor’s views Weightage of self-appraisal for each scale option Weightage of supervisor's views for each scale option Meeting of job deadlines 1 2 5 2 5   1.25 3 5 3.75 6.25   1.5 5 7 7.5 10.5   1.75 5 9 8.75 15.75   1.99 7 12 13.93 23.88   2 5 15 10 30   2.25 5 30 11.25 67.5   2.5 5 25 12.5 62.5   2.75 12 25 33 68.75   2.99 15 15 44.85 44.85   3 15 15 45 45   3.25 20 12 65 39   3.5 20 10 70 35   3.75 21 10 78.75 37.5   3.99 22 13 87.78 51.87   4 24 7 96 28   4.25 12 5 51 21.25   4.5 12 5 54 22.5   4.75 10 2 47.5 9.5   5 10 3 50 15 Taking part in organization's decision-making             1 1 15 1 15   1.25 4 12 5 15   1.5 3 10 4.5 15   1.75 6 15 10.5 26.25   1.99 5 15 9.95 29.85   2 6 25 12 50   2.25 6 24 13.5 54   2.5 10 23 25 57.5   2.75 11 22 30.25 60.5   2.99 15 10 44.85 29.9   3 15 12 45 36   3.25 20 10 65 32.5   3.5 25 8 87.5 28   3.75 27 9 101.25 33.75   3.99 20 5 79.8 19.95   4 20 5 80 20   4.25 11 4 46.75 17   4.5 10 3 45 13.5   4.75 10 2 47.5 9.5   5 5 1 25 5             increment necessary in current pay scale             1 1 10 1 10   1.25 1 12 1.25 15   1.5 1 15 1.5 22.5   1.75 5 15 8.75 26.25   1.99 5 15 9.95 29.85   2 10 20 20 40   2.25 11 18 24.75 40.5   2.5 12 18 30 45   2.75 11 17 30.25 46.75   2.99 10 15 29.9 44.85   3 10 11 30 33   3.25 12 10 39 32.5   3.5 15 11 52.5 38.5   3.75 11 9 41.25 33.75   3.99 12 8 47.88 31.92   4 20 7 80 28   4.25 20 6 85 25.5   4.5 21 5 94.5 22.5   4.75 22 5 104.5 23.75   5 20 3 100 15 Appendix C. For the element ‘meeting deadlines’ t-Test: Paired Two Sample for Means             Variable 1 Variable 2 Mean 39.628 31.98 Variance 892.9909537 398.0850421 Observations 20 20 Pearson Correlation 0.181999875   Hypothesized Mean Difference 0   df 19   t Stat 1.043639978   P(T Read More