142

Chapter 4RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONThis chapter focuses on providing answers to the research questions through analysis, interpretation and discussion of the data gathered for this study in determining the relationship of management control system, human resource management practices and organizational performance as moderated by age, educational attainment, position, and length of service in current position of regular workers of selected higher educational institution in the Southern Asia Pacific Division (SSD).

The Perceptions of Workers Institutions on Management Control System Strategic PlanningRespondents as came from the nine higher institutions which were ranked from highest to lowest as shown in Table 4. Presentation of the items showed the mean and standard deviation. It revealed that all the items in strategic planning were rated oftentimes in the following order: The vision is clearly stated (M = 4.3817; SD = 0.8518); Administrators and department heads are involved in strategic planning (M = 4.2692; SD = 0.8570); Strategic planning considers: a. strengths (M = 4.1747; SD = 0.8478); Planning consist of: a. short term goals (M = 4.1447; SD = 0.9500); Planning considers who has authority and responsibility for activities (M = 4.1232; SD = 0.8782); Planning is based on condition of the organization (e.g. economic) (M = 4.0956; SD = 0.8565); Management makes assumption to determine the plan (M = 4.0898; SD = 0.8388); Strategic plan provides the framework for the operating budget (M = 4.0835; SD = 0.8840); Planning consists: c. long term goals (M = 4.0665; SD = 0.9703); Strategic planning considers: c. opportunities (M = 4.0315; SD = 0.8908); Planning consists of: intermediate goals (M = 4.0063; SD = 0.93678); Strategic planning considers: b. weakness (M = 3.9582; SD = 0.9610); Analytical skills are employed in strategic planning (M = 3.9522; SD = 0.9266); Goals and objectives are attained (M = 3.9440; SD = 0.7723); Planning is supported by data or information (M = 3.9186; SD = 0.9660); Strategic plan is communicated to employees (M = 3.8971; SD = 0.9704); Strategic planning considers: d. threat (M = 3.8835; SD = 0.9943); Strategic plan is regularly evaluated to achieve the goals (M = 3.8191; SD = 1.0319)The grand mean of 4.0466 with a standard deviation of 0.6717 reveals that the institutions had good management control system in terms of strategic planning as perceived by the respondents institution. This implies that the institutions oftentimes follow procedures in preparing, implementing, and monitoring the strategic planning with the institution policies. Certo (2003) mentioned that strategic planning is long-range planning that focuses on the organization as a whole. In the strategic planning phase, senior management determines the major programs the organization will undertake during the coming period and the approximate expenses that each will incur. These decisions are made within the context of the goals and strategies that emerged from the strategy formulation activity...

Table 4Descriptive Statistics of Strategic PlanningItem NoStatementMeanSDScaled ResponsesDescriptive Interpretation

1The vision is clearly stated.4.38170.8518OftentimesGood

5Administrators and department heads are involved in strategic planning.4.26920.8570OftentimesGood

4.aStrategic planning considers: strengths.4.17470.8478OftentimesGood

6. aPlanning consists of: short term goals. 4.14470.9500OftentimesGood

10Planning considers who has authority and responsibility for activities.4.12320.8782OftentimesGood

9Planning is based on condition of the organization (e.g. economic).4.09560.8565OftentimesGood

11Management makes assumption to determine the plan.4.08980.8388OftentimesGood

8Strategic plan provides the framework for the operating budget.4.08350.8840OftentimesGood

6. cPlanning consists of: long term goals.4.06650.9703OftentimesGood

4. cStrategic planning considers: opportunities.4.03150.8908OftentimesGood

6. bPlanning consists: intermediate term goals.4.00630.9367OftentimesGood

4. bStrategic planning considers: weakness.3.95830.9610OftentimesGood

7Analytical skills are employed in strategic planning.3.95220.9266OftentimesGood

2Goals and objectives are attained3.94400.7723OftentimesGood

13Planning is supported by data or information.3.91860.9660OftentimesGood

3Strategic plan is communicated to the employees.3.89710.9704OftentimesGood

4. dStrategic planning considers: threat.3.88350.9943OftentimesGood

12Strategic plan is regularly evaluated to achieve the goals.3.81911.0319OftentimesGood

Overall strategic planning4.04660.6717OftentimesGood

Legend: Very Good (4.50 5.00); Good (3.50 4.49); Fair (2.50 3.49); Poor (1.50 -2.49);; Very Poor (1.00 1.49)

Anthony and Govindarajan (2004) when they said that strategic plans show the financial and other implications over the next several years of implementing company strategies. They also mentioned that strategic planning process involves the following steps: reviewing and updating the strategic plan from last year, deciding on assumptions and guidelines, first iteration of the new strategic plan, analysis, second iteration of the new strategic plan, review and approval. In the strategic plan process, management decides on the goals of organization and main strategies for achieving these goals and seeks to develop programs that will implement the strategies efficiently and effectively. Budget PreparationAll the management controls of the respondents in terms of budget preparation in Table 5 were rated oftentimes except in item 8. The responses indicated that the respondents institutions were doing very well in dealing with their worker especially on the following:Budgets are approved by appropriate committee (M = 4.2625; SD = 0.8819); The budget explains the need for expenditure (M = 4.1444; SD = 0.8773); Budget is adjusted according to available funds (M = 4.1444; SD = 0.8262); The administration receives budget proposal from the department (M = 4.1420; SD = 0.9360); Budget provides an estimated amount money needed to carry out the plan (M = 4.1253; SD = 0.8575); Budgets reflect the objectives of a plan (M = 4.0983; SD = 0.8670); The department heads are involved in preparing the budget (M = 4.0919; SD = 0.9488); The administrators prepare budget according guidelines (M = 4.0774; SD = 0.8739); The increase of the estimated expenditure depends on the increase in economic inflation (M = 3.9540; SD = 0.8386); Program includes allocation for expenditure (M = 3.9561; SD = 0.8973); Administrators conduct a budget hearing (M = 3.9189; SD = 1.0543); Administrators evaluate all program (M = 3.8170; SD = 1.0425); Once the budget is approved, it is communicated to the employees (M = 3.6432; SD = 1.2125) and Every employee is involved in preparing the budget (M = 2.8852; SD = 1.2579) was interpreted as fair, which means the employees were sometimes involved in the budget preparation. The grand mean of 3.9472 with a standard deviation of 0.71674 reveals that the institutions had good management control system in terms of budget preparation as perceived by the respondents institutions. This implies that the institutions oftentimes follow a budget preparation process toward accomplishing their goals and objectives.This study supports the study of Hartman as cited in Narbarte (2000). He explained that since the budget is prepared by several persons, in the organization, all those involved must follow the same direction. Consequently, the first step in the budget process is the preparation of guidelines for the individual preparing a portion of the budget. The guidelines frequently contain such items as: directives from the board concerning the size of the budget; limitations in expenditure requests; accompanying the use of the forms; and, cost estimating procedures, among others.The finding of this study also supports the research conducted by Qomoyi (2008) that in budget preparation they need to request proposal from departments, review departmental estimates for the accuracy, the department to provide budget manual in order to assist them in capturing their income, expenditure, activity planning as well as how to extract reports, and budget hearing to discuss their requested budget and for them to motivate their need required funding.

Table 5Descriptive Statistics of Budget Preparation Item NoStatementMeanSDScaled ResponsesDescriptive interpretation

13Budget are approved by appropriate committee.4.26250.8819OftentimesGood

7The budget explains the need for expenditure.4.14440.8773OftentimesGood

6Budget is adjusted according to available funds.4.14440.8262OftentimesGood

4The administration receives budget proposal from the department.4.14200.9360OftentimesGood

5Budget provides an estimated amount of money needed to carry out the plan.4.12530.8575OftentimesGood

1Budget reflects to objective of plan4.09830.8670OftentimesGood

3The department heads are involved in preparing the budget.4.09190.9488OftentimesGood

2The administrators prepare budget according to guidelines.4.07740.8739OftentimesGood

11The increases of the estimated expenditure depend on the increase in economic inflation.3.95400.8386OftentimesGood

10Program includes allocation for expenditure.3.95610.8973OftentimesGood

12Administrators conduct a budget hearing.3.91891.0543OftentimesGood

9 Administrators evaluate all programs3.81701.0425OftentimesGood

14Once the budget is approved, it is communicated to the employees.3.64321.2112OftentimesGood

8Every employee is involved in preparing the budget.2.88521.2579SometimesFair

Grand Mean and SD for Budget Preparation3.94720.7167OftentimesGood

Legend: Very Good (4.50 5.00); Good (3.50 4.49); Fair (2.50 3.49) Poor (1.50 -2.49); Very Poor (1.00 1.49)

Operation and MeasurementTable 6 shows the perception of the respondents toward institutions which were ranked from highest to lowest. All the items in operating and measurement are oftentimes practiced in higher education institutions except for item 9a which yielded the result of sometimes. The responses indicated that respondents of institutions were doing well:The goals are communicated to the employees (M = 4.0872; SD = 0.91136); Performance measurement is used for: a. improvement (M = 3.9604; SD = 0.9359); Performance measurement is used for: b. monitoring (M = 3.9480; SD = 0.9174); Employees understand and agree on work goals (M = 3.9066; SD = 0.8482); Management coordinates between groups of employees (M= 3.8441; SD = 0.8894); Performance measurements are aligned with strategy (M = 3.8235; SD = 0.9168); Employee skills are matched to their work (M = 3.8108; SD = 0.8221); Each department has the freedom to adapt their goals as needed (M = 3.7884; SD = 0.9688); Employees have the equipment to do their work (M = 3.7842; SD = 0.8368); Abilities of employees are matched to their work (M = 3.7630; SD = 0.8890); Performance measurements are frequently discussed in staff and management meeting (M = 3.7079; SD = 1.0010); Measurement feedbacks are proactively sought and welcomed (M = 3.6778; SD = 0.9609); Employees contribute with: b. organizational directions (M = 3.6381; SD = 0.9249); Employees work together with outside community to meet mutual needs (M = 3.5565; SD = 1.0235); Employees contribute with: a. up-to-date information competitors (M = 3.4449; SD = 0.0131) which was interpreted as fair. This shows that employees contribute with up-to-date information competitors was sometimes practiced.Table 6

Descriptive Statistics of Operation and MeasurementItem NoStatementMeanSDScaled ResponsesDescriptive interpretation

1The goals are communicated to the employees4.08720.9113OftentimesGood

6.aPerformance measurement is used for: a. improvement.3.96040.9359OftentimesGood

6.bPerformance measurement is used for: b. monitoring.3.94800.9174Oftentimes Good

2Employees understand and agree on work goals3.90660.8482Oftentimes Good

3Management coordinates between groups of employees.3.84410.8894Oftentimes

Good

7Performance measurements are aligned with strategy.3.82350.9168Often timesGood

12Employee skills are matched to their work.3.81080.8221OftentimesGood

10Each department has the freedom to adapt to their goals as needed.3.78840.9688OftentimesGood

13Employees have the equipment to do their work.3.78420.8368OftentimesGood

11Abilities of employees are matched to their work.3.76300.8890OftentimesGood

5Performance measurements are frequently discussed in staff and management meeting.3.70791.0010OftentimesGood

4Measurement feedbacks are proactively sought and welcomed.3.67780.9609OftentimesGood

9.bEmployees contribute with: b. organizational directions.3.63810.9249OftentimesGood

8Employees work together with outside community to meet mutual needs.3.55651.0235OftentimesGood

9.aEmployees contribute with: a. up-to-date information competitors.3.44491.0131SometimesFair

Grand Mean and SD for Operation and measurement.3.78280.7169OftentimesGood

Legend: Very Good (4.50 5.00); Good (3.50 4.49); Fair (2.50 3.49) Poor (1.50 -2.49); Very Poor (1.00 1.49)

The grand mean of 3.7828 with a standard deviation of 0.7169 reveals that the institutions had good management control system in term of operation and measurement as perceived by respondents institution. This implies that the institutions oftentimes follow operation and measurement in accomplishing their goals and objectives.Result of this study is supported by the study of Anthony and Young (2003) that demonstrated the three basic measurement categories such as social categories, result measures, and process measures. The social indicator is a broad measure of output that reflects the impact of organizations work in the society at large. Social indicators can be useful in strategic planning, however, in that they can help guide senior managements decisions about the overall directions the organization should take. Result measures, on the other hand, attempt to express output in terms that are related to an organizations objectives. Objectives are stated in measurable terms, and output measures are stated in these same terms. A result measure relates to an organizations success in attaining its goals. Furthermore, the process measures (also called a productivity measure) relate to an activity carried out by the organization. A process measures related to what a responsibility center or an individual does to help organization achive its objectives. Thus, process measures help managers gauge efficiency. According to Oliver (2000), management control systems are standard cost system, budgets, performance evaluation and quality control. A management control system operates through a repetition of five squinty steps: (1) Establish standard of performance, (2) Measure actual performance, (3) Analyze performance and compare it with standard, (4) Construct and implement and action plan, (5) Review and revise standard.Reporting and EvaluationTable 7 shows the perception of respondents on reporting and evaluation which were ranked from highest to lowest. Items rated oftentimes are: Work accomplishments are recognized (M = 3.8441; SD = 0.88710);Reports that cover a period of time facilitate management action (M = 3.7822; SD = 0.8301); Significant information are reported accurately (M = 3.7588; SD = 0.8785); There is a system for evaluating employee performance (M = 3.7386; SD = 1.0846); Performance standard is maintained (M = 3.7089; SD = 0.9214); Work schedule is monitored to ensure that the task is completed on time (M = 3.6750; SD = 0.9972); Management action is done promptly (M = 3.6743; SD = 0.9016); Actual performance is reported accurately according to budget (M = 3.6701; SD = 0.9711); Progressing employees are evaluated and reported (M = 3.5979; SD = 1.0035); Performance appraisal works well for all (M = 3.7386; SD = 1.0846); Poor performance is handled sensitively (M = 3.4959). Items were rated sometimes are: Underlying causes of conflict are solved (M = 3.4570; SD = 0.9709); Employees with good performance are recommended for promotion (M = 3.3929; SD = 1.1219).The grand mean of 3.6392 with a standard deviation of 0.7894 reveals that the institutions had good management control system in terms of reporting and evaluation as perceived by the respondents. This implies that the workers of institutions are oftentimes responsible for their work done according to their assigned activities in the institutions. Works accomplishments are recognized, reports that cover a period of time facilitate management action and significant information are reported accurately.

Table 7Descriptive Statistics of Reporting and EvaluationItem NoStatementMeanSDScaled ResponsesDescriptive interpretation

1Works accomplishments are recognized.3.84410.8871OftentimesGood

12Reports that cover a period of time facilitate management action.3.78220.8301OftentimesGood

11Significant information are reported accurately.3.75880.8785OftentimesGood

3There is a system for evaluating employee performance.3.73861.0846OftentimesGood

7Performance standard is maintained.3.70890.9214OftentimesGood

6Work schedule is monitored to ensure that the task is completed on time.3.67500.9972OftentimesGood

13Management action is done promptly.3.67430.9016OftentimesGood

10Actual performances are reported accurately according to budget.3.67010.9711OftentimesGood

8Progressing employees are evaluated and reported.3.59791.0035OftentimesGood

4Performance appraisal works well for all.3.51351.0605OftentimesGood

2Poor performance is handled sensitively.3.49590.9816SometimesFair

5Underlying causes of conflicts are solved.3.45700.9709SometimesFair

9Employees with good performance are recommended for promotion.3.39291.1219SometimesFair

Grand Mean and SD for Reporting and evaluation.3.63920.7894OftentimesGood

Legend: Very Good (4.50 5.00); Good (3.50 4.49); Fair (2.50 3.49) Poor (1.50 -2.49); Very Poor (1.00 1.49) The result of this study is supported by the studies of Gibbs, Merchant, Stede, and Vargus (2005). They said that performance evaluations play important roles in almost all jobs, from the lowest levels of the organization to the CEO. Subjectivity can be used to increase the alignment of interest between the performer and the firm, while reducing performers risk. Scwhartz and Wayne (2005) said that evaluation reports can provide information on the occurrence of expected changes from the program or policy, the part of these changes that can be attributed to the program, cost effectiveness of the intervention, the unintended effects of any and the continued relevance of a goal.

Overall Management Control SystemTable 8 shows the overall perception of workers on each dimension of management control system. The dimensions are arranged from highest to lowest according to the value of the mean. The management control system of the participating institution is perceived by their workers as oftentimes practiced by their institution.The overall mean and standard deviation of management control system as perceived by the workers as oftentimes by their institution are: strategic planning (M = 4.0466; SD = 0.6717), budget preparation (M = 3.9472; SD = 0.7167), operation and measurement (M = 3.7828; SD = 0.7169), reporting and evaluation (M = 3.6392; SD = 0.7894).The grand mean of overall management control system is 3.8539, with a standard deviation of 0.6570. The finding indicated that management control system in terms of strategic planning, budget preparation, operation and measurement, and reporting and evaluation are good. The workers of institutions followed the instructions and procedures in their job to accomplish organizational objectives.This study is supported by the study of Ghost (2005) indicated that management control system is the process by which managers influence other members of their organization to implement their strategic plan, and also assures that resources are obtained and used effectively and efficiently in achieving its objectives. The process of management control is carried on within the framework outlined by strategic planning. It is intended to achieve the planned objectives as effectively and efficiently as possible within the given parameter.Table 8Descriptive Statistics of Overall Management Control System MeanSDScaled ResponsesDescriptive Interpretation

Strategic Planning4.04660.6717Oftentimes Good

Budget Preparation3.94720.7167Oftentimes Good

Operation and Measurement 3.78280.7169Oftentimes Good

Reporting and Evaluation3.63920.7894Oftentimes Good

Overall for Management Control System3.85390.6570Oftentimes Good

Legend: Very Good (4.50 5.00); Good (3.50 4.49); Fair (2.50 3.49) Poor (1.50 -2.49); Very Poor (1.00 1.49)

Perception of Workers Institutions on Human Resource Management Practices

RecruitmentThe perception of the respondents on recruitment of the four 483 respondents from nine higher education institutions were ranked from highest to lowest as shown in Table 9. Table 9 shows respectively, that seven items were rated as oftentimes, three items sometimes and one item rarely practiced. These items are presented in the following order: The organization prefers to recruit employees who graduated from SDA institution (M = 4.3536; SD = 0.8230); Recruitment is conducted according to organizational need (M = 3.8963; SD = 0.9946); Work experiences are considered in recruitment policies (M = 3.8503; SD = 1.0517); The organization has recruitment policies (M = 3.8503; SD = 1.0517); Recruitment is included in organizational planning (M = 3.7396; SD = 1.0490); Applicants applied for a vacancy because of someone in the organization (M = 3.6709; SD = 1.0178);Candidates are interviewed by HR personnel (M = 3.5729; SD = 1.2800); The organization indentified and attracted potential employees (M = 3.5198; SD = 1.0565); The organization has budget for recruitment (M = 3.4688; SD = 1.1373); Recruiters of organization are HR specialists (M = 3.3090; SD = 1.2275); The organization periodically turns to outside labor market to replace employees who leave (M= 2.9000; SD = 1.2266); Vacancy is posted online (M = 26549; SD = 1.2985); The organization advertises job vacancies through media (such as daily newspaper, TV, and radio) (M = 2.274; SD = 1.2588)The grand mean of 3.4686 and a standard deviation of 0.7391 reveal that recruitment practices were fair. This implies that the institutions oftentimes had recruitment policies and recruit employees who graduated from SDA institution. Sometimes the institutions had budget for recruitment, and rarely advertised job vacancies through media (such newspaper, TV, and radio).The result of this study supported the recent study of Omolo, Oginda, and Oso (2012) on small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in Kisuma Municipality Kenya. The study found that the overall average performance of SMEs in Kisuma Municipality was 60.71 %. There was a significant positive correlation between recruitment and performance of SMEs. The average performance of SMEs with good recruitment was 81.90 %, with moderate 67.94 %, and poor 53,90 %. Recruitment had a significant effect on the performance of SMEs.

Table 9Descriptive Statistics of RecruitmentItem NoStatementMeanSDScaled ResponsesDescriptive interpretation

9The organization prefers to recruit employees who graduated from SDA institution.4.35360.8230OftentimesGood

1Recruitment is conducted according to organizational need.3.89630.9946OftentimesGood

2Work experiences are considered in recruitment.3.88150,9946OftentimesGood

7The organization has recruitment policies.3.85031.0517OftentimesGood

13Recruitment is included in organizational planning.3.73961.0490OftentimesGood

10Applicants applied for a vacancy because of someone in the organization.3.67091.0178OftentimesGood

4Candidates are interviewed by HR personnel.3.57291.2800OftentimesGood

12The organization identified and attracted potential employees.3.51981.0565OftentimesGood

6The organization has budget for recruitment.3.46881.1373SometimesFair

8Recruiters of organization are HR specialist.3.30901.2275SometimesFair

5The organization periodically turns to outside labor market to replace employees who leave.2.90001.2266SometimesFair

11Vacancy is posted online2.65491.2985SometimesFair

3The organization advertises job vacancies through media (such as daily newspaper, TV, radio).2.27441.2588RarelyPoor

Grand Mean and SD for Recruitment 3.46860.7391SometimesFair

Legend: Very Good (4.50 5.00); Good (3.50 4.49); Fair (2.50 3.49); Poor (1.50 -2.49); Very Poor (1.00 1.49) SelectionMost of items shown in Table 10 were rated as oftentimes except items 1, 3, 4 and 8. Items in Selection that were rated oftentimes are: The organization has criteria for selection (M = 3.8669; SD = 0.99530); Candidates are informed whether they are hired or not (M = 3.7615; SD = 1.0631); Candidates for hiring are required to undergo medical examination (M = 3.7505; SD = 1.2154); The organization has a standard method for selecting candidates (M = 3.7417; SD = 1.1341); Applicants are required to accomplished application form (M = 3.6674; SD = 1.2969); A background check of candidate is done in selection (M = 3.6250; SD = 1.1217); Interview is conducted to a job applicants who passed the initial screening (M = 3.5322) and Selection starts when enough job applicant have applied (M = 3.2883; SD = 1.2029); Interviews are trained on how to ask objective questions (M = 3.2104; SD = 1.2686); Applicants are required to take aptitude test (M = 3.0313; SD = 1.3174); Candidate may negotiate with the organization regarding salary (M = 2.8212; SD = 1.2488) were interpreted as fair.The grand mean of 3.4810 and a standard deviation of 0.9167 reveal that selection practices were fair. The practices that were rated oftentimes clearly indicate that the institutions set criteria as basis of selection and candidates were asked to undergo medical checkup, accomplish application form and background check. Institutions sometimes start selection when enough job applicants have applied, train interviewer, and require applicants to take aptitude test.Finding of this study is congruent with Ekuma (2012) study that in the selection of candidates, the process must be fair and conducted, honestly and courteously with all applicants and providing framework within which diverse candidates can demonstrate their ability, and should be a primary pursuit of HR practitioners. The employee selection requirements may emphasize skills and knowledge not easily learned on the job. It is often wise to select candidates who already have these skills and knowledge rather than hope a candidate will be able to learn them after hiring, (Billikoff, 2003).Table 10

Descriptive Statistics of SelectionItem NoStatementMeanSDScaled ResponsesDescriptive interpretation

2The organization has criteria for selection.3.86690,9953OftentimesGood

9Candidates are informed whether they are hired or not.3.76151.0631OftentimesGood

6Candidates for hiring are required to undergo medical examination.3.75051.2154OftentimesGood

11The organization has a standard method for selecting candidates.3.74171.1341OftentimesGood

10Applicants are required to accomplish application form.3.66741.2969OftentimesGood

7A background check of candidate is done in selection.3.62501.2154OftentimesGood

5Interview is given to job applicants who passed initial screening.3.53221.2486OftentimesGood

1Selection starts when enough job applicants have applied.3.28331.2029SometimesFair

8Interviewers are trained on how to ask objective questions.3.21041.2686SometimesFair

3Applicants are required to take aptitude test.3.03131.3174SometimesFair

4Candidates may negotiate with organization regarding salary2.82121.2261SometimesFair

Grand Mean and SD for Selection 3.48100.9167SometimesFair

Legend: Very Good (4.50 5.00); Good (3.50 4.49); Fair (2.50 3.49); Poor (1.50 -2.49); Very Poor (1.00 1.49) Training and DevelopmentThe items rated as oftentimes in Table 11 are: In assessing training needs, the following are considered: a. skill (M = 3.7854; SD = 0.98842); In assessing needs, the following are considered: c. abilities (M = 3.7699; SD = 0.9691); In assessing training needs, the following are considered: b. knowledge (M = 3.7568; SD = 0.9646); Employees are helped to acquire knowledge, skill, abilities through training (M =3.617; SD = 1.0071); Informal training (such as meeting, teaming, customer interaction and mentoring) is conducted (M = 3.6112; SD = 1.1010); Training and development are reflected in the organizational budget (M = 3.6042; SD = 1.0901); Training program is related to personnel career plans (M = 3.5630; SD = 1,07322); Training on skill improvement is provided (M = 3.5551; SD = 1.0977); Training is recommended by the department heads of employees (M = 3.5438; SD = 1.0337); There is a process to assess the training need in the organization (M = 3.5396; SD = 1.0829); Training programs are communicated to all employees (M = 3.5290; SD = 1.1415); External training program is given to improve employees performance (M =3.4927; SD = 1.0910) and the items rated as sometimes are: Training programs are well planned (M = 3.4606; SD = 1.0795); Employees participate in assessing their training need (M = 3.4361; SD = 1.1000); There is a continuing program of training for all levels of employees (M = 3.3617; SD = 1.1442); Result of training program is evaluated (M = 3.2813; SD = 1.1332); Long term training is conducted.The grand mean of training and development is 3.5370 with a standard deviation 0.8989. This reveals that training and development practices were good. The results indicated that through training, employees are able to acquire the needed skills, abilities and knowledge, informal training (such as meeting, teaming, customer interaction and mentoring) is conducted. Also employees involved in informal training are recommended by the department heads.The other practices that were rated sometimes imply that training programs were not regularly planned, employees were not always participating in assessing their training need and there is a continuing program of training for all levels employees.

Table 11

Descriptive Statistics of Training and DevelopmentItem NoStatementMeanSDScaled ResponsesDescriptive interpretation

7aIn assessing training needs, the following are considered: a. skill.3.78540.9884OftentimesGood

7cIn assessing training need, the following are considered: c. abilities3.76990.9691OftentimesGood

7b In assessing training need, the following are considered: b. knowledge.3.75680.9646OftentimesGood

13Employees are helped to acquire knowledge, skill, abilities through training.3.63751.0071OftentimesGood

10Informal training (such as meeting, teaming , customer interaction and mentoring) is conducted.3.61121.1010OftentimesGood

4Training and development are reflected in the organizational budget.3.60421.0901OftentimesGood

6Training program is related to personnel career plans.3.56301.0732OftentimesGood

1Training on skill improvement is provided.3.55511.0977OftentimesGood

12Training is recommended by the department heads of employees.3.54381.0337OftentimesGood

5There is a process to assess the training need in the organization.3.53961.0829OftentimesGood

3Training programs are communicated to all employees.3.52901.1415OftentimesGood

9External training program is given to improve employees performance3.49271.9010Oftentimes Good

2Training programs are well planned.3.46061.0795SometimesFair

8Employees participated in assessing their training need.3.43611.1000SometimesFair

14There is a continuing program of training for all levels of employees.3.36171.1442SometimesFair

(Table continuous)

Table 11

Descriptive Statistics of Training and Development (continued)

Item NoStatementMeanSDScaled ResponsesDescriptive interpretation

15Result of training program is evaluated.3.28131.1332SometimesFair

11Long term training is conducted.3.20171.0850SometimesFair

The Grand Mean and SD for Training and development.3.53700.8989OftentimesGood

Legend: Very Good (4.50 5.00); Good (3.50 4.49); Fair (2.50 3.49); Poor (1.50 -2.49); Very Poor (1.00 1.49) McConnel (2003) described that the training function is becoming an increasingly important element of organizational and individual employee success. As jobs have become more technical and organization specific, there are fewer candidates whose qualifications meet such requirement. The need for pair of hands is diminishing as the need for technological knowledge and abilities is increasing. New jobs are continually being created, and new equipment and system are introduced for existing jobs. Some jobs are vanishing, and many whose jobs are elimated do not have the needed skills for the positions that are now available. Performance ManagementTable 12 shows the perceptions of the respondents on performance management which were ranked from highest to lowest. The items in performance management which were rated oftentimes are:Performance evaluation is needed (M= 4.3077; SD = 0.8719); Performance evaluation involves: b. superior evaluation (M = 4.0146; SD = 1.0534); Performance management is helpful for improving individual skill (M = 4.0042; SD = 0.9619); Performance evaluation involves: a. self-evaluation (M = 3.9834; SD = 1.0544); Performance evaluation improves work effectiveness (M = 3.9605; SD = 0.9491); Employee performance is measured based on established standards (M = 3.8784; SD = 0.99891); Performance evaluation improves work efficiency (M = 3.8254; SD = 0.9698); Performance evaluation is conducted regularly (M = 3.8087; SD = 1.0992); Performance evaluation involves: c. peer evaluation (M = 3.7322; SD = 1.1592); Performance evaluation involves: d. client evaluation (M = 3.7259; SD = 1.1764); Performance evaluation is independently conducted (M = 3.7256; SD = 1.0444); I am informed of the result of my evaluation (M = 3.5462; SD = 1.2490), The items rated sometimes are: Performance evaluation improves my motivation (M = 3.4710; SD = 1.1176); I am satisfied with the existing performance evaluation (M = 3.1521; SD = 1.1593); After performance evaluation, I am given: a. reward (M= 2.6369; SD = 1.2700),The grand mean of performance management is 3.7181 and the standard deviation is 1.1176. It is interpreted as good. The finding implies that institutions performance evaluation for every employee to improve work effectiveness and efficiency was good. Performance of employees were measured based on established standards, performance evaluation is helpful for improving individual skills, performance evaluation is conducted regularly, The findings also reveal that performance evaluation sometimes improved motivation of employees by giving rewards.The result of this study is supported by study of Buytendijk (2009). He said that performance management is more crucial now than it was during the booming years, accurate insight into what is working, and what is not, may mean the difference between survival and failure over the next few years. Many organizations need to consider the focus of their performance management activities.

Table 12Descriptive Statistics of Performance ManagementItem NoStatementMeanSDScaled ResponsesDescriptive interpretation

1Performance evaluation is needed.4.30770.8719OftentimesGood

4bPerformance evaluation involves: b. superior evaluation.4.01461.0534OftentimesGood

6Performance evaluation is helpful for improving individual skills.4.00420.9619OftentimesGood

4aPerformance evaluation involves: a. self-evaluation.3.98341.0544OftentimesGood

7Performance evaluation improves work effectiveness.3.96050.9491OftentimesGood

3Employee performance is measured based on established standards.3.87840.9989OftentimesGood

5Performance evaluation improves efficiency.3.82540.9698OftentimesGood

8Performance evaluation is conducted regularly.3.80871.0992OftentimesGood

4cPerformance evaluation involves: c. peer evaluation.3.73221.1592OftentimesGood

4dPerformance evaluation involves: d. client evaluation.3.72591.1764OftentimesGood

2Performance is independently conducted.3.72561.0444OftentimesGood

9I am informed of the result of my evaluation.3.54621.2490OftentimesGood

12Performance evaluation improves my motivation.3.47101.1176SometimesFair

11I am satisfied with the existing performance evaluation system.3.15211.1593SometimesFair

10aAfter performance evaluation, I am given: a. reward.2.63691.2700SometimesFair

Grand Mean and SD for Performance management3.71811.1176OftentimesGood

Legend: Very Good (4.50 5.00); Good (3.50 4.49) Fair (2.50 3.49); Poor (1.50 -2.49); Very Poor (1.00 1.49)

CompensationTable 13 shows the perception of respondents on compensation which were ranked from highest to lowest. Items in compensation that were rated oftentimes are: Medical fees are covered by the organization (M = 4.4772; SD = 0.7760): Length of service influence salary rate (M = 4.0313; SD = 1.0170); Employees receive salaries according to: a. educational level (M =4.0166; SD = 0.9531); Employees are informed of their benefit (M = 3.9387; SD = 0.9123); Employees receive salaries according to: b. work experience (M = 3.8631; SD = 1.0672); The organization is transparent in determining compensation (M = 3.8441; SD = 0.9888); Employee salaries are adequate to enhance cost of living (M = 3.8299; SD = 0.9917); The organization explains all allowance system to employees (M = 3.7563; SD = 1.0647); The organization communicates to employees any change in pay structure (M = 3.5971; SD = 1.1242); Current compensation system is competitive (M = 3.5912; SD = 1.0075); Employees are allowed to have: a. annual pay leave (M = 3.5437; SD = 1.3566); Employees are given group life insurance (M = 3.5292; SD = 1.2895), and the items rated as sometimes are: Employees are allowed to have: b. pay service leave (M = 3.3782; SD = 1.3679); Annual pay increase are linked to performance appraisal rating (M = 3.2458; SD = 1.1572); Employees are paid for overtime work (M = 2.4229; SD = 1.3794).The grand mean of 3.6710 with a standard deviation of 0.6620 reveals that compensation practices was good. This indicates that medical fees were covered by the organization, length of service affected salary and employees receive salary based on education level and experiences.

Table 13

Descriptive Statistics of CompensationItem NoStatementMeanSDScaled ResponsesDescriptive interpretation

11Medical fees are covered by the organization.4.47720.7760OftentimesGood

13Length of service is influence salary rate.4.03131.0170OftentimesGood

10bEmployees receive salaries according to: a. educational level4.01660.9531OftentimesGood

9Employees are informed of their benefit.3.93870.9123OftentimesGood

10aEmployees receive salaries according to: b. work experience.3.86311.0672OftentimesGood

12The organization is transparent in determining compensation.3.84410.9888OftentimesGood

8Employee salaries are adequate to enhance cost of living.3.82990.9917OftentimesGood

3The organization explains all allowance system to employees.3.75631.0647OftentimesGood

7The organization communicates to employees any change in pay structure.3.59711.1242OftentimesGood

4Current compensation system is competitive.3.59121.0075OftentimesGood

2aEmployees are allowed to have: a. Annual vacation leave with pay.3.54371.3566OftentimesGood

5Employees are given group life insurance.3.52921.2895OftentimesGood

2bEmployees are allowed to have: b.Sservice leave with pay.3.37821.3679SometimesFair

1Annual pay is linked to performance appraisal rating.3.24581.1572SometimesFair

6Employees are paid for overtime work.2.42291.3794SometimesFair

Grand Mean and SD for Compensation 3.67100.6620OftentimesGood

Legend: Very Good (4.50 5.00); Good (3.50 4.49); Fair (2.50 3.49); Poor (1.50 -2.49); Very Poor (1.00 1.49)

According to the study of Kulik (2001), compensation practices may reflect not only the organizations business strategy but also the organizations corporate identity and the employees decision to accept a particular amount and form of compensation, as this reflects his or her aspirations and self- perception.RelationshipAll the items in Table 14 were rated oftentimes except items 6 and 7. The results of this study indicated that the respondent schools are doing well in dealing with their workers especially on the following: A friendly atmosphere is promoted in the work place (M = 4.0603; SD = 0.8986); The workers environment is enjoyable (M = 4.0479; SD = 0.8831); Employees are given a copy of the handbook (M = 3.9772; SD = 1.1849); There is team work among employees (M = 3.8504; SD = 0.9081); Organization allows employees opportunities to develop (M = 3.8013; SD = 0.9642); Organization encourages employees to practice in improving the employee-management relationship (M = 3.8000; SD = 0.9541); Employees are treated fairly (M = 3.7542; SD = 1.0336); The HR department handles questions regarding organizational policy (M = 3.6736; SD = 1.1466); Superiors consider the suggestions of employees (M = 3.6141; SD = 0.9728); As a follower, if I have complaints, my superior calmly explains what went wrong (M =3.6008; SD = 0.9868); The socialization program is satisfying (M = 3.5477; SD = 1.0035). The score in items, Employees are given feedback to solve employees problem ( M = 3.4726; SD = 1.0467) and The HR department addresses employees dissatisfaction (M = 3.3145; SD = 1.0958) were ranked sometimes.The grand mean of 3.7319 with a standard deviation of 0.9081 reveals that the management, relationship its worker was good. It indicates that there was a friendly atmosphere in the work place and the work environment was enjoyable. There was teamwork among employees.Table 14

Descriptive Statistics of RelationshipItem NoStatementMeanSDScaled ResponsesDescriptive interpretation

11A friendly atmosphere is promoted in the work place.4.06030.898OftentimesGood

10The workers environment is enjoyable.4.04790.8831OftentimesGood

1Employees are given a copy of the handbook.3.97721.1849OftentimesGood

13There is team work among employees.3.85040.9081OftentimesGood

9Organization allows employees opportunities to develop.3.80130.9642OftentimesGood

8Organization encourages employees to practice in improving the employee-management relationship.3.80000.9541OftentimesGood

12Employees are treated fairly.3.75421.0336OftentimesGood

2The HR department handles questions regarding organizational policy.3.67361.1466OftentimesGood

4Superiors consider the suggestions of employees.3.61410.9728OftentimesGood

5As a follower, if I have complaint, my superior calmly explains what went wrong.3.60080.9868OftentimesGood

3The socialization program is satisfying.3.54771.0035OftentimesGood

7Employees are given feedback to solve employees problem.3.47261.0467SometimesFair

6The HR department addresses employees dissatisfaction.3.31451.0958SometimesFair

Grand Mean and SD for Relationship 3.73190.9081OftentimesGood

Legend: Very Good (4.50 5.00); Good (3.50 4.49) Fair (2.50 3.49); Poor (1.50 -2.49); Very Poor (1.00 1.49) Findings are supported by the study of Rhee (2004) stating that employees who have positive employee-organization relationship (i.e., employees who have high level of commitment) and those who are capable of using symmetrical cultivation strategy contribute significantly to the development of positive organization-public relationship. The study also found that when the external publics have positive interactions and develop trusting individual relationships with employees, they tend to evaluate the overall organization positively. In other words, when employees have positive employees-organization relationships and employee-public relationships, external publics who interact with those employees tended to develop positive organization-public relationship.

Overall Human Resource Management Practices

The overall perception of workers of the respondent institutions in each dimension of human resource management practice are shown in Table 15. The dimensions are arranged from highest to lowest to the value of the mean. The overall human resource management practices mean and standard deviation are M = 3.7319 and SD = 0.7976, respectively, for relationship (M = 3.6710; SD = 0.6620), compensation (M = 3.6231; SD = 0.7968), performance management (M = 3.5370; SD = 0.8989), training and development were interpreted as good. Selection (M = 3.4810; SD = 0.9167), and recruitment (M = 3.4686; SD = 0.7391) were interpreted as fair.The grand mean of 3.5853 with a standard deviation of 0.6964 revealed that the overall human resource management practice was good. The findings imply that human resource management practice was good in relationship, compensation, performance management, training and development and fair in selection and recruitment.Table 15Descriptive Statistics of Overall Human Resource Management PracticesMeanSDScaled ResponsesDescriptive Interpretation

Relationship 3.73190.7976OftentimesGood

Compensation 3.67100.6620OftentimesGood

Performance Management3.62310.7968OftentimesGood

Training and Development3.53700.8989OftentimesGood

Selection 3.48100.9167SometimesFair

Recruitment 3.46860.7391SometimesFair

Overall for Human Practice Management Practice3.58540.6964OftentimesGood

Legend: Very Good (4.50 5.00); Good (3.50 4.49); Fair (2.50 3.49); Poor (1.50 -2.49); Very Poor (1.00 1.49) York (2010) mentioned that the purpose of human resource management (HRM) is to manage the people who run the organization. Just as organizations must effectively manage their physical, capital, and information resources, they must also effectively manage their human resources-the people who run the organization. Organizations must recruit, select, and retain qualified people to perform important tasks, motivate them, and train them to maintain and improve their job skills.He also added that organizations must forecast their human resources needs by accurately predicting how many people with specific job skills will be needed in the near future and in the long term. Policies must be established specifying how much each employee in a specific job will be paid, what percentage of the pay will be based on job performance, and whether workers in that job will be paid incentives or commission or salary. Human resource management is concerned with people who work in the organization to achieve the objectives of organization.

The Level of SDA Higher Education PerformanceLearning and Growth

The perception of respondents on learning and growth which were ranked from highest to lowest are shown in Table 16. The items that were rated oftentimes are: Organization ask employees to do more than one job (M =3.9584; SD = 0.8511); Organization is encourages employees to share their capabilities to their co-employees (M = 3.8667; SD = 0.8896); Organization is develops information technology to support the strategy (M = 3.8372; SD = 0.8633); Organization invites employees to contribute to the organizations vision (M = 3.8354; SD = 0.9041); Organization encourages employees to develop innovative service (M = 3.7875; SD = 0.8765); Organization improves service quality every year (M = 3.7838; SD = 0.8850); Employees are open- minded in the organization (M = 3.7775; SD = 0.8364); Organization motivates employees to improve their competency (M = 3.7458; SD = 0.8702); Skills and jobs are matched in the organization (M = 3.7000; SD = 0.8723); Employees are recognized by management for taking initiative (M = 3.6798; SD = 0.9072); Employee satisfaction is measured in the organization (M = 3.5551; SD = 0.9777); Complete facilities are available in the organization (M = 3.53543; SD = 0.9350). The grand mean of 3.7552 and a standard deviation of 0.68965 reveal that the organizational performance in terms of learning and growth was good. This means that workers of institutions had more than one job, sharing their capability to co workers and striving to be innovative and involved in improving outcome

Table 16Descriptive Statistic of Learning and Growth Item NoStatementMeanSDScaled ResponsesDescriptive interpretation

12Organization asks employees to do more than one job.3.95840.8511OftentimesGood

8Organization is encourages employees to share their capabilities to their co-employees.3.86670.8896OftentimesGood

9Organization is develops information technology to support the strategy.3.83720.8633OftentimesGood

7Organization invites employees to contribute to the organizations vision.3.83540.9041OftentimesGood

6Organization encourages employees to develop innovative service.3.78750.8765OftentimesGood

1Organization improves service quality every year.3.78380.8850OftentimesGood

10Employees are open-minded in the organization.3.77750.8364OftentimesGood

4Organization motivates employees to improve their competency.3.74580.8702OftentimesGood

11Skills and jobs are matched in the organization.3.70000.8723OftentimesGood

3Employees are recognized by management for taking initiative.3.67980.9072OftentimesGood

2Employee satisfaction is measured in the organization.3.55510.9777OftentimesGood

5Complete facilities are available in the organization.3.53540.9350OftentimesGood

Grand Mean and SD for Learning and growth 3.75520.6895OftentimesGood

Legend: Very Good (4.50 5.00); Good (3.50 4.49); Fair (2.50 3.49); Poor (1.50 -2.49); Very Poor (1.00 1.49) This study supports the study of Sadler, Spicer, and Chaston (2001) indicated casual relationship between learning and firm growth. Their study showed that higher growth small manufactures report behaviors that are conducive to lifelong learning.Business and Production Process All the items shown in Table 17 which were ranked from highest to lowest are rated oftentimes except for item 4. These are presented in the following order: Employees have necessary skills to perform their job (M = 3.9896; SD = 0.7552); The organization has good relation with supplier (M = 3.9583; SD = 0.8034); Employees submit reports to superior: (M = 3.9419; SD = 0.8906); Employees are willing to accept change (M = 3.9004; SD = 0.8009); There are standard operating procedures (M = 3.8836; SD = 0.8731); Operational procedures facilitate efficient work (M = 3.8008; SD = 0.8604); Improvement efforts start after an assessment is conducted (M = 3.7354; SD = 0.8366); Work activities of employees are continuously monitored (M = 3.7069; SD = 0.9353); The organization sets clear standards for output (M = 3.6299; SD = 0.9042), and Employees are provided with advanced technology (M = 3.4772; SD = 0.9042) is rated sometimes. The grand mean of 3.8024 and a standard deviation of 0.6795 reveal that the organizational performance in term of business and production process is good. This means that workers of institutions delivered quality in their work outcomes and they had skills to do their work. Institutions supported their workers with advanced technology to accomplish their job, had good relation with their suppliers and had standard operating procedures.Harmon (2003) stated that business process represents the core of the functioning of organization because the company primarily consists of process. Business process is measured at an aggregate level and by the following individual dimensions: process view, process job, process management, and measurement. Process view involves a focus on the workflow and process across an organization. Functional roles and title, reflecting the traditional hierarchical structure, are replaced by owner leaders who are responsible and accountable for the operation and improvement of the business. Process management, supplemented with process measure, has as much to do with changing the culture and the way of thinking, as it does with setting process oriented measures and goals for an organization.Table 17Descriptive Statistics of Business and Production Process Item NoStatementMeanSDScaled ResponsesDescriptive interpretation

7Employees have necessary skills to perform their job.3.98960.7552OftentimesGood

1The organization has good relation with suppliers.3.95830.8034OftentimesGood

9Employees submit reports to superior.3.94190.8906OftentimesGood

6Employees are willing to accept change.3.90040.8009OftentimesGood

8There are standard operating procedures.3.88360.8731OftentimesGood

2Operational procedures facilitate efficient work.3.80080.8604OftentimesGood

10Improvement efforts start after an assessment is conducted.3.73540.8366OftentimesGood

3Work activities of employees are continuously monitored.3.70690.9353OftentimesGood

5The organization sets clear standards for output3.62990.9042Often timesGood

4Employees are provided with advanced technology.3.47720.9814SometimesFair

Grand Mean and SD for Business and Production Process.3.80240.6795OftentimesGood

Legend: Very Good (4.50 5.00); Good (3.50 4.49); Fair (2.50 3.49); Poor (1.50 -2.49); Very Poor (1.00 1.49)

Financial

The perception of respondents on financial performance is ranked from highest to lowest in Table 18. All the items in financial were rated oftentimes and are shown in following order:The organization pays employees salaries on time (M = 4.3568; SD = 0.7949); The organization avails of government scholarship programs (M = 3.9710; SD = 0.9218); Promotional campaigns are conducted periodically (M = 3.9313; SD = 0.8407); The organization has capacity to settle its financial obligations (M = 3.9170; SD = 0.8382); Organizational facilities accommodate additional students (M = 3.7967; SD = 0.8174); Revenue growth is caused by quality service offering (M = 3.7827; SD = 0.8528); External sources (such as donation, grants, and subsidies) also finance capital expenditure (M = 3.7755; SD = 0.8992); The ancillary service generates income (M = 3.7271; SD = 0.9123); Effective marketing impacted to a number of students (M = 3.6985; SD = 0.8847); The organization finds new sponsors for student scholarships (M = 3.6674; SD = 0.8555); The organization implements cost reduction activities (M = 3.6646; SD = 0.8598); The number of enrollment is increased (M = 3.6021; SD = 1.0010); The students are open-minded for fee increases (M =3.5996; SD = 0.8662); Organization industries increase organizations revenue (M = 3.5854; SD = 0.91382); Tuition fees are enough to support organizational operation (M = 3.5717; SD = 1.03 The grand mean of 3.7765 and a standard deviation of 0.5734 reveal that the organizational performance in terms of financial was good. This means that the institutions were capable of paying the salaries of their employees on time, institutions availed scholarship from the government, institutions had the capacity to settle their financial obligations, and revenue growth was also caused by quality service offering.Table 18

Descriptive Statistics of Financial Item NoStatementMeanSDScaled ResponsesDescriptive interpretation

15The organization pays employees salaries on time4.35680.7949OftentimesGood

13The organization avails of government scholarship programs.3.97100.9218OftentimesGood

9Promotional campaigns are conducted periodically.3.93130.8407OftentimesGood

14The organization has the capacity to settle its financial obligations.3.91700.8382OftentimesGood

10Organizational facilities accommodate additional students.3.79670.8174OftentimesGood

4Revenue growth is caused by quality service offering.3.78270.8528OftentimesGood

5External sources (such as donation, grants, and subsidies) also finance capital expenditure.3.77550.8992OftentimesGood

2The ancillary service generates income.3.72710.9123OftentimesGood

11Effective marketing impacted to a number of students.3.69850.8847OftentimesGood

8The organization finds new sponsors for student scholarships.3.66740.8555OftentimesGood

6The organization implements cost reduction activities.3.66460.8598OftentimesGood

7The number of enrollment is increased.3.60211.0010OftentimesGood

12The students are open-minded for fee increases.3.59960.8662OftentimesGood

3Organization industries increase organizations revenue.3.58540.9138OftentimesGood

1Tuition fees are enough to support organizational operation.3.57171.0344OftentimesGood

Grand Mean and SD for Financial 3.77650.5734OftentimesGood

Legend: Very Good (4.50 5.00); Good (3.50 4.49); Fair (2.50 3.49) Poor (1.50 -2.49); Very Poor (1.00 1.49)

To verify the perception of the employees of respondent institutions that their financial standing was good, the researcher requested the division (SSD) to allow the researcher to look into the financial statements of respondent institutions to conduct liquidity analysis to find out if the respondent institutions had the capability to meet their current obligation. Based on current ratio analysis (see Table 19) from the financial statements of the four respondent institutions, they had capabilities to pay their current obligations. This means that the perception of the employees with regards to the ability of the respondent institutions in paying their current obligation was confirmed by the analysis in Table 19.Table 19Liquidity Analysis by Current RatioInstitutions20102011

A1.741.70

B2.753.41

C1.201.25

D16.0811.43

Based on Table 20, the overall performance of the 4 schools in term of profitability, as shown by their average increase, is going better. The increase is higher than the decrease. Through the significance of the increase can not be measured statistically. Visually, the increase is more significant than the decrease. Therefore, the general observation of respondents that the organizational performance of their school are good, seem to be valid.

Table 20Profitability Analysis by Net Profit marginInstitutions 20102011Increase(Decrease)

A0.62%-3.11%(3.73%)

B2.56%10.26%7.7%

C-7.08%-1.35%5.73%

D-5.73%-6.53%(0.8%)

Average Increased2.225%

The result of this study supports Des, Lumpkin, and Eisner (2007). They stated that measures of financial performance indicate whether the companys strategy, implementation, and execution are indeed contributing to bottom-line improvement. Typical financial goals include profitability, growth, and shareholders value. Periodic financial statements remind manager that improved quality, response time, productivity, and innovative products benefit the firm only when they result in improved sales, increased market share, reduced operating expenses, or higher asset turnover.

Overall level of Organizational PerformanceThe overall level of organizational performance is ranked from highest to lowest in Table 21. The grand mean of 3.7780 with a standard deviation of 0.5917 revealed that the overall organizational performance was good. The findings imply that the institutions were doing well. The workers of institutions were innovative and developing, their workers had skills and capabilities and the institutions had the ability to generate income.Table 21Descriptive Statistics of Overall Level Organizational PerformanceMeanSDScaled ResponsesDescriptive Interpretation

Business and Production Process 3.80240.6795OftentimesGood

Financial 3.77650.5734OftentimesGood

Learning and Growth 3.75520.6895OftentimesGood

Overall for level organizational performance3.77800.5917OftentimesGood

Legend: Very Good (4.50 5.00); Good (3.50 4.49) Fair (2.50 3.49); Poor (1.50 -2.49); Very Poor (1.00 1.49)

Relationship between Management Control System and Organizational Performance

Strategic planning, budget preparation, operating and measurement, reporting and evaluating are dimensions of management control system that were individually correlated with learning and growth, business and production process and financial the dimensions of organizational performance. The Tables shown in this section present the results of the Pearson Product-Moment Correlation Coefficient. Results of this study were evident by their obtained coefficient of correlation (r) and their significance (sig). The correlation coefficient was interpreted (I) according to whether it is significant (S) or not significant (SN).Strategic PlanningThis section shows whether or not there is a significant relationship between strategic planning as a dimension of management control system to the dimensions of organizational performance (learning and growth, business and production process and financial).

Table 22Correlation of Strategic Planning and Dimensions of Organizational PerformanceOrganizational Performance

Learning and Growth Business and Production Process Financial

RsigVIRsigVIRSigVI

Strategic Planning0.675**.000S0.693**.000S0.457**.000S

**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)

Table 22 shows that strategic planning was significantly related to the following: learning and growth (r = 0.675); business and production process (r = 0.693); and financial (r = 0.457). The associated probability is .000 for strategic planning and significant at 0.01 level. The direction of the relationship is positive indicating that the more the respondent institutions practiced strategic planning, the more they would attain learning and growth, better business and production process, and better financial. Therefore, the null hypothesis that states there is no significant relationship between strategic planning and the dimensions of organizational performance is rejected.The result of this study is supported by the study of Arasa and KObonyo (2012) on organization, from both the private and public sector. It focused on the relationship between strategic planning and organizational performance, and indicated the existence of a strong relationship between strategic planning and firms organization. Similarly, an empirical research conducted in Jourdanian hotels in two cities (Aqaba and Petra) quessionnaires were distributed to hotel managers found that strategic planning processes achieved a good fit (or alignment) between the environment and internal capability of organization, followed by formal strategic planning is an effective way to achieve improved financial performance. (Aldehyyat, & Al khattab, 2011).

Budget Preparation

This section presents whether there existed a significant relationship between budget preparation as dimension of management control system to learning and growth, business and production process and financial as measures of organizational performance.Table 23 shows that budget preparation was significantly related to the following: learning and growth (r =0.665); business and production process (r =0.694); financial (r = 0.495). The associated probability is .000 for budget preparation and significant at 0.001 level. The direction of the relationship is positive, indicating that the better the budget preparation is practiced, the better the learning and growth, business and production process, and financial of organization. Therefore the null hypothesis that states there is no significant relationship between budget preparation and each dimension of organizational performance is rejected.Table 23Correlation of Budget Preparation and Dimensions of Organizational PerformanceOrganizational Performance

Learning and Growth Business and Production Process Financial

RsigVIRsigVIRSigVI

Budget Preparation0.665**.000S0.694**.000S0.495**.000S

**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)Result of this study was confirm by Silva and Jayamaha (2012) study. They found that budgetary process have significant associations with the organizational performance of apparel industry in Sri Lanka. This confirms that efficient apparel companies maintain sound budgetary process which contributes to higher levels of organizational performance. Shastri and Karen (2008) indicated that the majority of respondents believe that the budget is usefulas it relates to the list of business objectives. Traditionally, the budget was considered to be important for planning and control purpose only. The mere fact is that the budget preparation indicated is also useful for other functions such as strategic planning, communication, team work, and incentive rewards determinations.Operation and MeasurementThis section shows whether or not there is a significant relationship between operating and measurement as dimension of management control system to learning and growth, business and production process, and financial.Table 24Correlation of Operation and Measurement, and Dimensions of Organizational PerformanceOrganizational Performance

Learning and Growth Business and Production Process Financial

RsigVIRsigVIRSigVI

Operation and Measurement0.756**.000S0.723**.000S0.576**.000S

**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-taile

Table 24 shows that operation and measurement was significantly related to the following: learning and growth (r = 0.756); business and production process (r = 0.723); financial (r = 0.576). The direction of relationship of all the three dimensions of organizational performance is positive indicating that the more the operation and measurement is practiced, the more the employees institutions would attain learning and growth, business and production process, and financial, respectively. Therefore, the null hypothesis that states there is no significant relationship between operation and measurement, and each dimension of organizational performance is rejected.This study conforms to the study conducted by Garrea, Ilies, and Stegerean (2011) in over 135 manufacturing companies in Rome Italy. They found out that there was a strong relationship between the performance measurement and organizational performance. Reporting and EvaluationThis section presents whether there exists a significant relationship between reporting and evaluating as dimension of management control system to learning and growth, business and production process, and financial as dimensions of organizational performance.Table 25Correlation of Reporting and Evaluation, and Dimensions of Organizational PerformanceOrganizational Performance

Learning and Growth Business and Production Process Financial

RsigVIRSigVIRSigVI

Reporting and Evaluation0.756**.000S0.723**.000S0.576**.000S

**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)Table 25 shows that reporting and evaluation was significantly related to the following: learning and growth (r = 0.758); business and production process (r = 0.763); financial (r = 0.578). The associated probability is .000 for reporting and evaluation, and significant at 0.01 level. The direction of the relationship is positive indicating that the more reporting and evaluation, the more learning and growth, business and production process, and financial. The null hypothesis that states there is no significant relationship between reporting and evaluation, and each dimension of organizational performance is rejected.The result of this study support the studies of Donnirimata and Gunawan (2006) in Perusahaan Terbatas (PT) Indonesia Jamsostek indicated that regular evaluation exercised in the company leveraged the performance of employees in the organization. Another study by Jacob (2004) found that there is a significant discounting effect in performance evaluations-based budgets and financial outcomes. Judgments of performance when financial outcomes are unfavorable and outcome facilitating situational factors were present. There was a shift upwards in the face of outcome-inhibiting situational factors. Similar downward adjustments in performance evaluation do not occur when financial results are unfavorable and outcome facilitating situational factors are present. Kurniasari (2012) conducted a study on insurance companies listed in Jakarta Stock Exchange which found that financial reporting and evaluating significantly influence firms performance.

Correlation of the Overall Management Control System and Individual Dimension of Organizational Performance

Table 26Correlation of Overall Management Control System and Dimensions of Organizational PerformanceOrganizational Performance

Learning and Growth Business and Production Process Financial

RsigVIRSigVIRSigVI

Management Control System0.788**.000S0.793**.000S0.583**.000S

**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)Table 26 presents the correlation of management control system to the dimensions of organizational performance as follows: learning and growth (r = 0.788); business and production process (r = 0.793); financial (r = 0.583). The associated probability is .000 for the overall management control system and significant at .01 levels..The direction of the relationship of management control system to learning and growth, business and production process, and financial was positive. It implies that better management control system means better organizational performance in terms of learning and growth, business and production process, and financial. Therefore, the null hypothesis that states there is no significant relationship between management control system and each dimension of organizational performance is rejected.

Relationship Management Control System to Organizational Performance.

The results in Table 27, show that management control system (r = 0.798); strategic planning (r = 6.75); budget preparation (r = 0.684); operation and measurement (r = 0.756), and reporting and evaluation (r =0.773) are significantly related to organizational performance. The associated probability is .000 for management control system which is significant at .01 levels.Table 27Correlation Management Control System to Organizational PerformanceOrganizational Performance

RSigI

Strategic Planning Budget Preparation Operation and Measurement Reporting and Evaluation Management Control System0.675**0.684**0.756**0.773**0.798**.000.000.000.000.000SSSSS

**correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)As indicated in Table 27, management control system in terms of strategic planning, budget preparation, operation and measurement, and reporting and evaluation is significantly related to organizational performance. Thus, the hypothesis that states there is no significant relationship between the dimensions of management control system and organizational performance is rejected.This study is supported by the study of Purnamasari (2006) at Indonesia Railway Company Limited which showed that the structure and process of management control system have a simultaneous positive correlation with financial performance. This means that the company financial performance is strongly determined by the system of management control of structure and process and the process of management control system has positive correlation with financial performance

Relationship between Human Resources Management Practices and Organizational Performance

Recruitment, selection, training and development, performance management, compensation, relationship as dimensions of human resources management practice were individually correlated with learning and growth, business and production process, and financial as dimensions of organizational performance. The table shown in this section presents the results of the Pearson Product-Moment Correlation Coefficient. Results of this study were evident by the obtained coefficient of correlation and their significant (sig). The verbal interpretation, VI of the correlation coefficient was interpreted S or NS according to whether it is significant or not significant.

Recruitment This section shows whether or not there is a significant relationship between recruitment as dimension of human resource management practice to the dimensions of organizational performance (learning and growth, business and production process and financial).Table 28Correlation of Recruitment, and Dimensions of Organizational PerformanceOrganizational Performance

Learning and Growth Business and Production Process Financial

RSigVIRsigVIRSigVI

Recruitment0.692**.000S0.693**.000S0.581**.000S

**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)Table 28 shows that recruitment was significantly related to the following: learning and growth (r =0.691); business and production process (r = 0.693); and financial (r = 0.581). The associated probability is .000 for recruitment and significant at 0.01 level. The direction of the relationship is positive indicating that the more the institutions practiced recruitment, the more institution would attain learning and growth, business and production process, and financial. Therefore, the null hypothesis that states there is no significant relationship between recruitment and each dimension of organizational performance is rejected.The result of this study supports the finding of Tespstra and Rozel (1993), that staffing practices such as recruitment and selection were significantly related to annual profit and profit growth across all industries. However, the strength of relationship between the use the staffing practices and organizational performance was found to vary by industry type.

Selection The results shown in Table 29 revealed a positive correlation between selection as dimension of human resources management practice and organizational performance in terms of the following: learning and growth (r = 0.666); business and production process (r = 0.685); and financial (r = 0.451). The associated probability is 0.000 for selection and significant at 0.01 levels. The direction of the correlation indicates that the better the selection is practiced, the better the learning and growth, business and production process, and financial of the respondent institutions. Thus, the null hypothesis that states there is no significant relationship between selection and each dimension of organizational performance is rejected.Table 29Correlation of Selection and dimensions of Organizational PerformanceOrganizational Performance

Learning and Growth Business and Production Process Financial

RSigVIRsigVIRSigVI

Selection0.666**.000S0.685**.000S0.451**.000S

**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)The study is supported by the study conducted by Chad, Ferres, Perrewe, Perryman, Blass, and Heetderks (2009). There study showed that selection procedures affected the different aspects of organization performance overtime, and also affected the financial performance of organization.Training and Development

This section presents whether training and development as dimension of human resource management practice is significantly related to the dimensions of organizational performance. Table 30 shows that selection was significantly related to the following: learning and growth (r = 0.770); business and production process (r = 0.741); and financial (r = 0.545). The associated probability is .000 for training and development and significant at 0.01 level. The direction of the relationship is positive indicating that the more training and development, the more learning and growth, business and production process, and financial. The null hypothesis that states there is no significant relationship between training and development, and each dimension of organizational performance is rejected.Table 30Correlation of Training and Development, and Dimensions of Organizational PerformanceOrganizational Performance

Learning and Growth Business and Production Process Financial

RSigVIRsigVIRsigVI

Training and Development0.770**.000S0.741**.000S0.545**.000S

**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)Result of this study is consistent with the result of study conducted by Gafoor, Ahmed, and Aslan (2011). They reported that training and development have significant effect on organizational performance. It means that there was an increase in the overall organizational performance.Performance Management

The result of this study in Table 31 indicates a positive correlation between performance management as dimension of human resource management and the individual dimension of organizational performance such as learning and growth (r = 0.724); business and production process (r = 0.717); and financial (r = 0.530) exists. The associated probability is .000 for performance management and it is significant at 0.01 level. The direction is positive indicating that the better the performance management, the better the organizational performance in terms of learning and growth, business and production process, and financial. Therefore, the null hypothesis that states there is no significant relationship between performance management and each dimension of organizational performance is rejected.Table 31Correlation of Performance Management and dimensions of Organizational PerformanceOrganizational Performance

Learning and Growth Business and Production Process Financial

RSigVIRsigVIRSigVI

Performance Management0.724**.000S0.717**.000S0.530**.000S

**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)This study is supported by the research of Homayounizad and Bager (2012). The study found that majority of the respondents (38%) agree that performance management system determines productivity level of their organization and majority of the respondents (40%) believe that performance management system determines the efficiency level of the organization. Gunaratne and Plessis (2007) conducted a study on performance management system. The study revealed that implementing a performance management system that people understand and believe in will provide a powerful foundation for employees to achieve their ambitions and organizations to achieve their key financial goals. Compensation Table 32 shows that compensation was significantly related to the following: learning and growth (r = 0.677); business and production process (r = 0.607); and financial (r = 580). The associated probability is .000 for compensation and it is significant at 0.01 level. The direction of the relationship is positive indicating that the better the compensation means better learning and growth, business and production process, and financial. The null hypothesis that states there is no significant relationship between compensation and each dimension of organization performance is rejected.Table 32Correlation of Compensation and Dimensions of Organizational PerformanceOrganizational Performance

Learning and Growth Business and Production Process Financial

RsigVIRsigVIRSigVI

Compensation0.677**.000S0.607**.000S0.580**.000S

**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)The result of this study conforms to the research of Jave, Khan, Azam, and Iqbal (2010) conducted a research about employees compensation and organizations financial performance which found that employee compensation is linked to subsequent performance and suggested that firms should use effective compensational strategies to boost firms financial position. According to the study of Kulik (2001), compensation practices may reflect not only the organizations business strategy but also the organizations corporate identity of the employees decision to accept a particular amount and form of compensation, reflecting his or her aspirations and self-perception. Mohammad, May, and Maw (2009) stated that incentives are positively related to organizational performance.Relationship

The results of this study in Table 33 show that the relationship was significantly related to learning and growth (r = 0.826); business and production process (r = 0.793);and financial (r = 0.600). The associated probability for relationship is .000, and it is significant at 0.01 level. The direction of the relationship is positive indicating that the better the relationship, the better the organizational performance in terms of learning and growth, business and production process, and financial. The null hypothesis that states there is no significant relationship between relationship and each dimension of organizational performance is rejected. Table 33Correlation of Relationship and dimensions of Organizational PerformanceOrganizational Performance

Learning and Growth Business and Production Process Financial

RSigVIRsigVIRSigVI

Relationship0.826**.000S0.793**.000S0.600**.000S

**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)The finding of this study is confirmed by study of Rhee (2004) mentioned that stating the employees who have positive employee-organization relationship (i.e., employees who have high level of commitment) and those who are capable of using symmetrical cultivation strategies contribute significantly to the development of positive organization-public relationship. The study also found that when the external publics have positive interactions and develop trusting individual relationships with employees, they tend to evaluate the overall organization positively. In other words, when employees have positive employees-organization relationships and employee-public relationships, external publics who interact with those employees tended to develop positive organization-public relationship.

Correlation of the Overall Human Resources Management Practice and Individual Dimension of Organizational Performance

Table 34 presents the correlation between human resource management practices and each dimensions of organizational performance. Human resource management practices is significantly related to learning and growth (r = 0.837); business and production process (r = 0.817); and financial (r = 0.626). Associated probability of .000 which is significant at 0.01 level.Table 34Correlation of the overall Human Resource Management Practices and dimensions of Organizational PerformanceOrganizational Performance

Learning and Growth Business and Production Process Financial

RSigVIRsigVIRSigVI

Human Resource Management Practices0.837**.000S0.817**.000S0.626**.000S

**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)The direction of the relationship is positive. It implies that the better is the human resource management practices, the better the organizational performance of the respondent institutions in terms of learning and growth, business process and production , and financial. Therefore, the null hypothesis that states there is no significant relationship between human resource management practices and each dimension of organizational performance is rejected.

Relationship of the Overall Human Resource Management Practice to Organizational Performance

The result in Table 35 Shows that human resource management and its dimensions: practices (r = 0.840), recruitment (R = 0.722), selection (r = 0.666), training and development (r = 0.759), performance management (r = 0.727), compensation (r = 0.683), relationship (r = 0.818) are significantly related to the organizational performance. Table 35Correlation of the Overall Human Resource Management Practice to Organizational PerformanceOrganizational Performance

RSigVI

Recruitment Selection Training and Development Performance Management Compensation Relationship Human Resource Management Practice0.722**0.666**0.759**0.727**0.683**0.818**0.840**.000.000.000.000.000.000.000SSSSSSS

**correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)The direction of the relationship between human resource management practice, and organizational performance was positive; this implies that the better the human resource management practices in term of recruitment, selection, training and development, performance management, compensation, relationship, the better the organizational performance of the respondent institutions.As indicated in the table, there is a significant relationship of human resource management practices to the overall organizational performance. Thus, the hypothesis that states there is no significant relationship between the overall human resource management practice to the overall organizational performance is rejected.The finding of this research support the study conducted by Khan (2010) on oil and gas industry in Pakistan. A total of 150 managers of 20 randomly selected firms found that all HRM practices have positive and significant influence on the firm performance. The empirical results indicated that Pakistan organizations, both public and private sectors, are integrating HRM practices in organizational strategy to improve business performance and remain competitive.

Difference in the Level of Organization Performance when Respondents Profile is considered.

In this section, this study tested if there is a significant difference in the level of organizational performance considering the respondents profile such as age, educational attainment, position, and length of service, where the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was used.Age Table 36 shows statistical results regarding the level of organizational performance when the age of respondents is considered. The F ratio of 1.131 and Sig = 0.324 indicate that the means of different classifications of age did not differ significantly in terms of organizational performance. This means that when respondents are grouped according to age, do their perceptions on the level of organizational performance are same.When the dimensions of organizational performance were considered, the test results in Table 38 show the same, the values of significance are more than 0.05. This implies that age as a variable is not a factor to cause differences on organizational performance in learning and growth, business and production process, and financial dimensions. Thus, the null hypothesis that states There is no significant difference in level of organizational performance when age is considered is accepted.The result of this study is related to Felicianos (2011) study. He found that organizational performance does not significantly vary when age of respondents is considered. This means that age as variable is not a factor to cause differences in the organizational performance as perceived by the respondents.

Table 36

Descriptive Statistics and ANOVA of by Age Classification on Organizational PerformanceNMeanStd DeviationF ValueSig.V I

Learning and Growth 39 years and below40 49 years50 years and above1641641533.72053.71673.82940.729000.693190.64242

1.346

0.261

NS

Business and Production Process 39 years and below40 49 years50 years and above1641641533.76683.76573.87410.705530.662520.66966

1.313

0.270

NS

Financial 39 years and below40 49 years50 years and above1641641533.74513.77983.80410.551160.592540.58052

0.424

0.655

NS

Organizational Performance39 years and below40 49 years50 years and above1641641533.74413.75413.83590.614170.583050.57799

1.131

0.324

NS

I = Verbal Interpretation, NS = Not Significant, S= Significant; The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.

Educational AttainmentTable 37 shows the statistical results regarding the level of organizational performance when the educational attainment of respondents is considered. Based on ANOVA results, organizational performance (F = 0.747, Sig = 0.388) does not significantly vary when the educational attainment of respondents is considered. This implies that each mean of educational attainment classification does not differ each other. hence educational attainment as a variable is not factor to cause differences