THE MODERATING EFFECT OF EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT IN THE

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN STRATEGIC PLANNING AND ORGANIZATION

PERFORMANCE

BY

DENNIS O. OLUOCH

UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY - AFRICA

FALL 2014

THE MODERATING EFFECT OF EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT IN THE

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN STRATEGIC PLANNING AND ORGANIZATION

PERFORMANCE

BY

DENNIS O. OLUOCH

UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY - AFRICA

A Project Report Submitted to the Chandaria School of Business in Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirement for the Degree of Master of Business Administration (MBA)

FALL 2014

ii

DECLARATION

I, the undersigned, declare that this is my original work and has not been submitted to any

other college, institution or university other than the United States International University in

Nairobi for academic credit

Signed: Date:

Dennis Oluoch (ID: 638500)

This project report has been presented for examination with my approval as the appointed

supervisor.

Signed: Date:

Prof. Maina Muchara, PhD

Signed: Date:

Dean, Chandaria School of Business

iii

COPYRIGHT

All rights reserved; no part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or

transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or

otherwise without the express written authorization from the writer.

Dennis O. Oluoch © 2014

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I received a lot of support during the preparation of the research proposal and subsequent

data collection and compilation of thesis. Foremost, I would like to thank the Almighty God

for the gift of life and knowledge. I appreciate the assistance from USIU Chandaria School of

Business. Specifically, my supervisor, Prof. Maina Muchara, his guidance and feedback was

instrumental in shaping this study. The government is one of the most challenging institution

to source primary data from and therefore I acknowledge the support from the thirty three

organizations that filled out and returned my research questionnaire. I also thank my

employer (Retirement Benefits Authority) for their ever present support during this season.

Final appreciation is to my loving wife and daughter, who have been my co-partners in

conducting the research. I will forever be grateful.

v

DEDICATION

To my wife (Cherie) and daughter (Ivana).

vi

ABSTRACT

The subject of strategic planning has been widely researched specifically in the private sector

and in recent years has elicited further interest in government especially after its adoption in

the public sector. However, there is mixed set of results that is inconclusive on its

relationship with organization performance. In an effort to establish an accurate position,

previous studies have proposed introduction of a contextual factor as an intervening variable

because organizations do not operate in a vacuum but are heavily affected by their operating

environment. Strategic management research consider employees as a critical success factor

in the strategic planning process.

Therefore this study focused on testing three research questions. First, the extent of strategic

planning process; the relationship between strategic planning and performance; and whether

employee engagement had a moderating effect on the relationship between strategic planning

and organization performance of public sector organizations in Kenya. The study adopted a

descriptive research design with a census of 86 public organizations that had embraced

strategic management through implementation of strategic plans. Data collection was done

through a pre-tested research questionnaire with 33 out of 86 sampling units returning their

filled out questionnaire, representing a response rate of thirty eight percent (38%). The data

received was then analyzed by use of a computer statistical package with descriptive and

inferential statistics computed to test the hypotheses.

The findings of this study confirmed the formality of strategic planning across public

organization in Kenya. Additionally, the study revealed that the greatest outcome of adoption

of strategic planning based on the four perspectives of the balance score card frame work was

continuous learning and improvement. This was closely followed with improvements in

internal operations as demonstrated by enhanced co-ordination that resulted in better decision

making. Overall, the study revealed that strategic planning process had a positive and

significant relationship with performance of these public organizations. Furthermore,

employee engagement had a positive influence on this relationship though its moderation

effect was not significant. Notwithstanding, the study also showed that the degree of

involvement varied depending with the level of management with top management having

the highest level of involvement in the process. The study also discussed the importance of

vii

allowing employees to be involved in the strategic planning process with a majority of

respondents reporting improvement in their understanding of the strategic plan, which had an

implicit impact on their commitment during implementation of their strategic plan.

The study concluded that the strategic planning by public organization is a formal and

systematic process, with those engaging in this practice expected to improve on their

performance. It was also concluded that engaging employees in the strategic planning does

not necessarily result in improvement of organizational performance.

In line with the findings, the study recommends that the government of Kenya should ensure

that all its agencies initiate strategic planning as it is bound to improve service delivery to its

citizens. In the same breadth, for those agencies that have already initiated strategic planning,

it is recommended that during review of their strategic plans at the end of every strategy

cycle, they strive to carry out the process in its entirety and discouraged against halting mid-

stream or taking shortcuts to ensure they accrue its full benefits. Finally, top management is

encouraged to involve other employees in the strategy formulation process and also to install

effective communication structures that will assist in co-ordination of the entire process.

To further the research, it is recommended that this study be replicated in other sectors of the

economy by modifying the school of planning to fit the sector of study. In addition, the

employee engagement can be narrowed to each level of management and similarly the

moderation effect to the different stages of the strategic planning process. Finally, future

research should consider utilizing longitudinal data to better measure the impact of strategy

over time.

viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION................................................................................................................... i

COPYRIGHT ...................................................................................................................... iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .................................................................................................. iv

DEDICATION.......................................................................................................................v

ABSTRACT ......................................................................................................................... vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................. viii

LIST OF TABLES .............................................................................................................. xi

LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................... xii

CHAPTER ONE ...................................................................................................................1

1.0 INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................1

1.1 Background of the Problem ..............................................................................................1

1.2 Statement of the Problem ..................................................................................................4

1.3 Purpose of the Study .........................................................................................................6

1.4 Research Questions ...........................................................................................................6

1.5 Significance of the Study ..................................................................................................6

1.6 Scope of the Study ............................................................................................................7

1.7 Definition of Terms...........................................................................................................7

1.8 Chapter Summary .............................................................................................................8

CHAPTER TWO ................................................................................................................10

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................10

2.1 Introduction .....................................................................................................................10

ix

2.2 Strategic Planning ...........................................................................................................10

2.3 Strategic Planning and Organization Performance .........................................................17

2.4 Environmental Context on Strategic Planning and Organization Performance ..............22

2.5 Chapter Summary ...........................................................................................................28

CHAPTER THREE ............................................................................................................29

3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ................................................................................29

3.1 Introduction .....................................................................................................................29

3.2 Research Design..............................................................................................................29

3.3 Population and Sampling Design ....................................................................................30

3.4 Data Collection Methods ................................................................................................32

3.5 Research Procedures .......................................................................................................32

3.6 Data Analysis Methods ...................................................................................................33

3.7 Chapter Summary ...........................................................................................................33

CHAPTER FOUR ...............................................................................................................34

4.0 RESULT AND FINDINGS ..........................................................................................34

4.1 Introduction .....................................................................................................................34

4.2 Background Information .................................................................................................34

4.3 Strategic Planning Process ..............................................................................................39

4.4 Strategic Planning and Organizational Performance ......................................................45

4.5 Employee Engagement as Moderator .............................................................................49

4.6 Chapter Summary ...........................................................................................................56

x

CHAPTER FIVE ................................................................................................................57

5.0 DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...........................57

5.1 Introduction .....................................................................................................................57

5.2 Summary .........................................................................................................................57

5.3 Discussion .......................................................................................................................59

5.4 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................64

5.5 Recommendations ...........................................................................................................65

REFERENCE ......................................................................................................................67

APPENDINCES ..................................................................................................................73

Appendix I: Introductory Letter ............................................................................................73

Appendix II: Research Questionnaire ...................................................................................74

Appendix III: Public Sector Organization with Strategic Plans ...........................................81

Appendix IV: List of Respondents .......................................................................................85

xi

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1: Research Variables ...........................................................................................30

Table 3.2: State Corporations under Government Ministries with Strategic Plans ...........31

Table 3.3: Cronbach Alpha Coefficients ...........................................................................33

Table 4.1: Distribution of Respondents by Ministry .........................................................35

Table 4.2: Job Position of Respondents .............................................................................36

Table 4.3: Strategic Planning Process ................................................................................40

Table 4.4: Extent of Strategy Analysis ..............................................................................41

Table 4.5: Extent of Strategy Control ................................................................................45

Table 4.6: Correlation Strategic Planning Phases and Organizational Performance .........48

Table 4.7: Regression Output of Strategic Planning and Performance .............................49

Table 4.8: Employee Engagement Components ................................................................51

Table 4.9: Correlation of Research Variables ....................................................................52

Table 4.10: Component of Employee Engagement and Organization Performance .........53

Table 4.11: Regression Analysis Output of the Moderation Effect ...................................55

xii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 4.1: Gender Representation ......................................................................................... 35

Figure 4.2: Number of Employees .......................................................................................... 37

Figure 4.3: Sector / Industry of Sample .................................................................................. 38

Figure 4.4: Strategic Plan Horizon.......................................................................................... 39

Figure 4.5: Strategic Analysis Tools Utilized ......................................................................... 42

Figure 4.6: Extent of Strategy Formulation ............................................................................ 43

Figure 4.7: Extent of Strategy Implementation ....................................................................... 44

Figure 4.8: Strategic Planning Outcome ................................................................................. 46

Figure 4.9: Overall Organizational Performance .................................................................... 47

Figure 4.10: Level of Employee Engagement ........................................................................ 51

1

CHAPTER ONE

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Problem

Over the last few decades a number of private sector principles and tools have been

introduced and embraced in the public sector to assist in improving efficiency and

effectiveness (McBain & Smith, 2010). One of the key practices is strategic management

that was invented in the private sector and whose application has been pushed to the public

sector through its adoption of strategic planning (Cohen, 2006). Mansour, Mohammed and

Abdulaziz (2013) describe it as the transformative management tool that is to revolutionize

the public sector from a bureaucratic to a more responsive and innovative administration

through facilitating effective decision making.

Bryson (2010) observes that strategic planning is now a conventional feature in most

governments with Shahin (2011) declaring its grand promise as improvement of living

standards of citizens but warns of its complexity that requires special consideration of the

characteristics of the public sector. To assist in addressing this complexity, Baile (2008) calls

for appreciation of the uniqueness of public organizations through a critical assessment of the

differences between private and public sector during the planning process as it might affect

the ultimate success of an organization. In comparison to the private sector, public sector

organizations are generally not-profit oriented, besides they operate within tight legal and

political constraints, marred with bureaucracy and ambiguity of goals (Boyne & William,

2003; Fard, Moshabbaki, Abbasi & Hassanpoor, 2011).

Notwithstanding, Arasa, Aosa and Machuki (2011) believes that strategic planning is

still welcomed in the public sector as an avenue to improve organizational performance. In

addition, Hughes (2003) acknowledges the constraints but reiterates its anticipated benefits

with some modification of the private sector perspective especially involvement of key

stakeholders who represent the interest of citizens, and as an aid to management rather than

an end in itself. Although proponents of strategic planning posit a positive relationship with

organizational performance across firms, existing empirical research depicts a mixed set of

results (Glaister, Dincer, Tatoglu, Demirbag & Zaim, 2008; Boyne & Walker, 2010). Some

2

studies have proven a positive relationship (Glaister et al., 2008; Arasa & K‟obonyo, 2012),

while others were inconclusive (Boyne and William, 2003).

A review of these previous study findings reveal inconsistencies in the

methodological operationalization of strategic planning and performance variables with a

majority adopting overly simple one-dimensional measures (Glaister et al., 2008). In

addition, little or no emphasis has been placed on the organizational or contextual factors

(Boyne & Walker, 2010; Suklev & Debarliev, 2012). As a remedy to these shortcomings

Edward (2011) proposes usage of multidimensional constructs to measure the complexity of

the planning process while Ouakouak and Ouedraogo (2013) assert the importance of

incorporating the environmental context to explain the non-systematic observation.

Furthermore, it is argued that organizations do not operate in a vacuum but are influenced by

external pressures as well as internal organizational factors and therefore integration of these

contextual elements is crucial for an effective strategic planning process (Ugboro, Obeng &

Spann, 2011). The mixed set of results in the strategic planning-performance relationship

calls for introduction of intervening variables that attempt to establish the exact direction of a

relationship where there exists a weak or inconsistent relationship between a predictor and

outcome variable (Baron & Kenny, 1986).

While numerous literature have highlighted the notion that strategy should fit a

variety of organizational and environmental constructs in order to lead to superior results,

researchers have not fully considered behavioral factors that influence strategy (Parnell,

Carraher & Holt, 2002). Meta-analyses suggest that some factors may either mediate or

moderate the linkage between strategic planning and performance, but with very little

empirical evidence, employee participation has been presented as one of the predominant

factors and potential intervening variables (Petter, Brynes, Choi, Fegan & Miller, 2002;

Kohtamaki, Kraus, Makela & Ronkko, 2012). The involvement of stakeholders in the

strategic planning process is central as it may serve as the key to ensure buy-in and easier

implementation. It ensures that the interest of stakeholders is catered in the strategic plan

(Adewale & Munano, 2012).

As documented by Edwards (2011) public sector research has demonstrated that

including employees, from street-level employees to management, in decision-making helps

3

to facilitate consensus in difficult situations, spreads interpersonal trust within organizations

and enriches job satisfaction of employees. However, despite the call to engage employees in

strategy making processes, empirical evidence that ties employee participation to strategy

and performance has not been forthcoming (Tegarden, Sarason, Childers & Hatfield, 2005).

Moreover, Suklev and Debarliev (2012) reports that far less attention has been paid to firm in

the public sector as compared to private sector firms, out of which, a majority of the

investigation has been undertaken in industrialized countries and therefore more credence on

the need to validate these previous studies by replicating them in other parts of the world

(Shahin, 2011).

In pursuit of improved service delivery, the government of Kenya drawing from the

practices of new public management that advocates for adoption of tried and tested private

sector practices in public organizations instituted a series of reforms to transform its public

sector. Under the old constitutional order, the major reforms by the government can be

mapped across two generations. The first major reform that commenced in the year 1993 was

targeted at the civil service to counter the economic challenges that arose from high wage bill

that drove the government into budget recurrent deficits and brought with it structural

adjustment programs. This reform was effected in three phases through the Civil Service

Reform Programme (CSRP) whose main objective was containment of the burgeoning wage

bill, improvement in service delivery and sustenance of the reforms gains. The next major

reform was the catalyzed by general election of year 2002 that saw a new government come

into office with promise of reforms. The new regime presented its socio-economic blueprint

in 2003, entitled Economic Recovery Strategy for Wealth and Employment Creation 2003-

2007 (ERS 2003-2007). The fundamental difference between the two major reforms was the

swiftness of service delivery (Obong‟o, 2009; Hope, 2012).

The key tenets of this recovery strategy was development of strategic plans in all

government ministries and agencies and the introduction of performance based management

in the public sector. Therefore its implementation heralded the introduction of result based

management through performance contracting that was anchored on strategic planning and

was expected to spur economic recovery and service delivery. The strategic plans were to be

4

integrated with the Kenya‟s Vision 2030 blue print to assist smooth implementation of

flagship projects and mitigate long-tern planning challenges. (Wairimu & Theuri, 2014).

The present-day government came into power in March 2013, after promulgation of

the new Constitution of Kenya 2010, and have also instituted further reforms. The

Presidential Taskforce on Parastatal Reforms (PTPRs) was formed on 23rd

July 2013 to

review public organizations and how their role of public organizations in national

development reflected in Kenya Vision 2030 and further articulated in its Second Medium

Term Plan, 2013 – 2017. The Taskforce reported that there were 18 ministries in government

that superintend 262 public organizations in Kenya, with Ministry of Education supervising

the majority at 49 corporations closely followed by Ministry of Agriculture with 42

corporations and the least is Ministry of Defense with a single corporation. The Taskforce

was concerned with conflicting mandates and poor linkage of these organizations to national

development goals as stipulated in the Kenya Vision 2030. One of the recommendation by

the Taskforce was consolidation of these organizations to facilitate faster and cost effective

execution of the master plan. They also suggests the paramount solution to handle national

priorities is to link the national development process to strategic planning process of public

organizations. (PTPRs, 2013).

1.2 Statement of the Problem

Human resource is a critical success factor in the strategy development exercise that

promises to translate the formulation and implementation of strategies into expected

outcome. This implies that organizations which embrace employee involvement are bound to

accrue benefits in pursuant of their strategic goals (Arasa, Aosa & Machuki, 2011). Strategic

planning therefore affords management the opportunity to engage employees in creating a

vision, build commitment to strategic objectives, and focus organizational resources and

energies in advancing the strategic agenda of the organization (Poister & Streib, 1999).

Although decision-making responsibility relating to strategic planning has been a

preserve of top management, involving employees of different cadres in this process is bound

to generate greater commitment and better communication and thereby enhancing the

probability of organizational success (Tergaden et al., 2005). This presupposes an internal

5

alignment of the employee involvement and support for the organization‟s strategy

(Ouakouak & Ouedraogo, 2013). While there is no consensus on the degree to which

organizational members should participate in strategy formulation, scholars argue that

stakeholder engagement is increasingly being employed by both public and private

organizations as an important strategy for improving stakeholder relations and is valuable in

improving implementation (Kivits, 2011).

In relation to its impact, planning in public organizations has been widely debated but

never tested conclusively (Boyne & William, 2003). Also a majority of previous studies that

are published in academic journals have focused on the public sector in western countries

with little research available for developing and emergent countries (Putu et al., 2007). It

must be noted that while these studies have begun to open the organizational black box and

provide evidence that application of multi-level strategy processes can help explain firm

performance, there is still a gap in understanding how and why involving employees in the

strategy making processes improves performance (Tergaden et al., 2005).

In Kenya several studies have also been undertaken on these topics. A recent study by

Arasa and K‟obonyo (2012) attempted to break from the traditional formality research on

strategic planning that compared planners to non-planners by studying private companies in

operating in the insurance sector. They focused on the different stages in the strategic

planning process and concluded that firms exhibiting higher level of strategic planning

performed better than those in lower levels. However, a crucial limitation of this research

was their failure to control the effects of the environmental context and therefore

recommended an investigation on the role of intervening variables in translating the strategy

into reality. Previously, Arasa, Aosa and Machuki (2011) had conducted a study in the same

sector to test the strategic planning – performance linkage and also introduced employee

participation as an intervening variable. Their findings ascertained that employee

participation had a significant moderating effect on the relationship between strategic

planning and performance. The researchers proposed for further research in other sectors of

the economy of the economy to validate this position.

On the backdrop of the reforms initiated by the Kenyan government and

recommendation for further study by Arasa, Aosa and Machuki (2011), this study sought to

6

bridge the research gap by extending the research to the public sector in Kenya. The study

intended to establish the effectiveness of reforms sanctioned by the government of Kenya

through introduction of performance contracting for public organizations that was anchored

on implementation of strategic plans. The study was to provide evidence on whether adoption

of strategic planning by public sector organizations had any impact on service delivery.

1.3 Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to examine the moderating effect of employee

engagement on the relationship between strategic planning process and organization

performance of public sector institutions in Kenya.

1.4 Research Questions

The study sought to answer the following questions:

1.4.1 To what extent is the formal strategic planning process practiced in the public sector

in Kenya?

1.4.2 Is there any relationship between strategic planning process and organizational

performance in the public sector in Kenya?

1.4.3 Does employee engagement have a moderating effect on the relationship between

strategic planning process and organization performance in the public sector in Kenya?

1.5 Significance of the Study

This study would benefit:

1.5.1 Government of Kenya

The government can rely on the outcome of this study to appreciate ways upon which

it can improve in its service delivery through advocating for public sector employees in

strategic making process of their respective institution. In addition, it can assist in developing

proposals that can be incorporated into the strategic management policy documents to

improve effectiveness of public organizations operations.

1.5.2 Public Organizations

Apart from establishing the influence of the strategic planning process on

organizational performance, the findings of this study determined the importance of

7

undertaking the process in its entirety and also involving employees in the strategy process

can form a basis of improvement in future strategic planning cycles.

1.5.3 Scholars

The findings of this study adds into the knowledge in the field of strategic

management through appreciation of the influence on employee engagement in the

relationship between strategic planning and performance more so in the public sector. It also

provides suggestion for further research.

1.6 Scope of the Study

The study was conducted in Nairobi County and focused on public organizations as

published in the Presidential Task Force Report (2013) on parastatal reforms in Kenya. The

focus group was accounting officers of the respective public organizations, with collection

and analysis of data done between July and December 2014.

At the onset, it was anticipated that data collection was going to be a challenge

especially the bureaucracy associated with governments. This limitation was mitigated by

obtaining introductory letter from the university and a research permit from The National

Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation (NACOSTI). This formed part of the

documentation that was forwarded together with the research questionnaire, subsequent to

contacting the respondent organization to establish the protocol of transmitting the research

documents. The other limitation was linked to dissemination of the research questionnaire

due to the geographical dispersion of the respondents and budget constraints. To mitigate

against this challenge the researcher opted to leverage on technology and distributed and

collected some of the questionnaires via emails particularly to those organizations that were

willing.

1.7 Definition of Terms

1.7.1 Strategic Management

According to David (2011), strategic management is the art and science of

formulating, implementing, and evaluating cross-functional decisions that enable an

organization to achieve its objectives.

8

1.7.2 Organization Performance

According to Lebans and Euske (2006), organization performance is a set of financial

and non-financial indicators which offer information on the degree of achievement of

objectives and results.

1.7.3 Moderator

According to Baron and Kenny (1986), a moderator is a qualitative or quantitative

variable that affects the direction and/or strength of the relation between an independent or

predictor variable and a dependent or criterion variable.

1.7.4 Employee Engagement

According to Tergaden et al (2005), employee engagement is involving employees in

the strategic planning process that results in a better understanding of the formulated strategy

and generates their commitment in the implementation of the strategy.

1.7.5 Strategic Planning

According to Bryson (2010), strategic planning is a deliberative, disciplined effort to

produce fundamental decisions and actions that shape and guide what an organization (or

other entity) is (its identity), what it does (its strategies and actions), and why it does it

(mandates, mission, goals, and the creation of public value).

1.7.6 Public Sector

According to The Institute of Internal Auditors (2011), the public sector consists of

governments and all publicly controlled or publicly funded agencies, enterprises, and other

entities that deliver public programs, goods, or services.

1.8 Chapter Summary

This chapter provided a background to the field of strategic management and its

adoption in the public sector as a means of improving service delivery with reforms instituted

by the government of Kenya were also highlighted. A review of previous studies in strategic

planning, organizational performance and environmental context was then undertaken to

establish the research gap under the statement of the problem section. The next section

9

described the purpose of the study by elucidating the research questions to be investigated,

and significance of the study followed by definition of terms.

Chapter two is a discussion on literature from previous research work conducted in

the field of strategic planning, organizational performance and employee engagement. The

first section of this chapter provides an overview on the subject of strategic management and

planning with detailed explanation of stages involved in the process. Thereafter, the

researcher discusses the tenets of organizational performance and its linkage to strategic

planning. The chapter concludes by reviewing employee engagement and its connection with

strategic planning and organizational performance as a moderator.

Chapter three is on research methodology and offers the research design that was

applied in conducting the research. It also describes the population under study and details

the sampling technique adopted. A discussion on data collection methods follows together

with the research procedure that was followed and reliability test done. The last bit of this

chapter highlights the data analysis methods applied in testing the hypotheses.

Chapter four presents the findings and results of the study. It commences by

providing the demographics of the respondents. It is then followed by a discussion of the

findings for each of the three research questions. The presentation is done by utilizing

descriptive and inferential statistics. Similarly, the outcome of the hypotheses testing is

provided.

The final chapter of this study, chapter five, discusses the research findings in relation

to previous studies and current theory on the study topics, and concludes with implications

and recommendation based on the research findings.

10

CHAPTER TWO

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

This chapter gives a more detailed view of existing studies in the fields of strategic

planning, employee engagement and organizational performance in the public sector. Section

2.2 introduces the concept of strategic planning and proceeds to discuss the stages involved

in the strategic planning process, and its application in the public sector context. Section 2.3

assesses the relationship between strategic planning and organization performance. Section

2.4 introduces the context of strategic planning by reviewing employee engagement and its

influence on the relationship with strategic planning and organizational performance. In

conclusion, Section 2.5 offers a summary and an overview of the next chapter.

2.2 Strategic Planning Process

Strategy, strategic management and strategic planning are terms that are often used in

research but without much attention to their explicit definitions (Edward, 2012). Historically,

strategy has a strong heritage in the military (David, 2011). The birth of strategic

management as an academic discipline and organizational practice can be traced to the

pioneering works of Alfred Chandler‟s Strategy and Structure (1962) and Igor Ansoff‟s

Corporate Strategy (1965). Chandler explored the growth of business and organizational

structures adopted to manage this growth and argued that any change of an organizational

strategy necessitated a change in strategy. Ansoff documented a blueprint to assist

organizations in planning for their objectives that included product positioning and expansion

(Furrer, Thomas & Goussevskaia, 2008).These initial works were based on case studies that

carried out in-depth descriptive analyses of strategies, strategy formulation, and

organizational environment in private corporations. They could not be generalized implying

limited use (Furrer, Thomas & Goussevskaia, 2008). Consequently in subsequent decades a

foray of empirical research took center stage.

Strategy is derived from the Greek word strategos meaning to plan the destruction of

our enemies through effective use of resource. In an organizational perspective, strategy

simply means a plan of action to achieve the desired long-term objective whilst allowing an

organization to balance its resources and capabilities in line with the requirements of the

11

environment. In this context strategy is a vehicle that moves the organization from its current

to desired position (Wandjiva, 2011). On top of viewing strategy as a plan, Mintzberg (2009)

also defined it as a ploy, pattern, perspective and position. A firm's strategy may be planned

in advance, it may emerge over time, or it may have some planned and some emergent

elements. Emergent strategies represent decision making under conditions of bounded

rationality; that is, where cognitive limitations, incomplete information, behavioral processes,

and the like, intervene to preclude optimal a priori decisions from being made (Slevin &

Covin,1997).

“Strategic management is the art and science of formulating, implementing, and

evaluating cross-functional decisions that enable an organization to achieve its objectives”

(David, 2011, p6). Bryson et al. (2010) also defined strategic management as the appropriate

and reasonable integration of strategic planning and implementation across an organization

(or other entity) in an ongoing way to enhance the fulfillment of its mission, meeting of

mandates, continuous learning, and sustained creation of public value. Edward (2012) viewed

it as a combination of all the tools that an organization uses to pursue their strategies. The

author cites Vinzant and Vinzant (1996) who consider strategic planning as part of strategic

management with the other two components being resource allocation, and evaluation and

control. Poister and Streib (1999) maintain that strategic management must provide a

process for developing and appraising strategic plans and also a way of monitoring its

implementation on a continuous basis. Its overall purpose is to reinforce commitment to the

mission and vision of the organization by way of nurturing a culture that identifies and

supports them whilst focusing on its strategic agenda in all its decisions.

According to Burnside (2002), an output of strategic planning are specific actions that

are required to carry out a specific strategy. The process commences with setting up of long-

term organizational goals, followed by objectives to be met in fulfillment of these goals and

strategies to be executed through effective utilization of resource resulting in accomplishing

the stated objectives. Poister and Streib (1999) also assert that strategic planning is at the

heart of strategic management aimed at ensuring the long-term viability and is the most

critical process for ensuring effectiveness in a challenging and ever-changing environment. It

focuses on action resulting to improved organizational performance through a conscious

12

process by which an institution assesses its current state and the likely future condition of its

environment then incorporates it into the future-orientated planning (Adewale & Munano,

2012). The organization is therefore always in constant interactions with its environment and

this means it‟s paramount for successful planners to maintain the fit by adjusting to

discontinuities in the environment.

According to Falshaw, Glaister and Tatoglu (2006), literature on strategic planning

has two dimensions: content or processes. Content applies to the distinct elements that differ

across firms and put emphasis on the overall goals of the firm, scope of the strategy and

nature of specific strategies. On the other hand, process refers to mechanisms that are applied

in the development and implementation of strategic plans, be it deliberate or emergent

(Shahin, 2011). Deliberate strategies are intended and precede action while under emergent

strategies are not formulated in the strict sense but emerges over time as the most appropriate

managerial decision or tactic become clear (Slevin & Covin,1997).

Mintzberg (2009) discoursed ten school of strategy formulation with three

prescriptive and seven descriptive. The prescriptive attempts to define the procedure of

strategy making and herein are the design, planning and position schools of thought. The

planning school is highly formal while the design school having informal process that are

conceived in the mind of the leader that defines the strategy. The positioning school view

strategy more in terms of content than process. In addition, it consider strategy formulation as

analytical. This study was based on government and therefore focused on the formality of the

strategic planning process and viewed strategy as deliberate.

Another perspective of the strategic planning was discussed by Tegarden, Sarason

and Banbury (2003) who provides for classification in relation to the degree of participation

in the strategic planning process of top management vis-à-vis the other employees in the

organization. They defined five strategic planning process typologies: command, symbolic,

rational, transitive and generative. The typologies representing the greatest degree of

participation by top management in the strategic planning process are the command and

symbolic while the transitive and generative typologies favor greater autonomy and

involvement by other employees. However, the rational typology is more accommodating as

it provides for involvement by all employees at all levels of management with top

13

management in charge of the overall process with other employees predominantly involved

in implementation. In terms of the typologies, the research therefore adopted the rational

typology, which was consistent to the planning school of strategy formulation.

In conclusion, Falshaw et al. (2006) documented a general consensus in the strategic

management field on the stages involved in a formal strategic planning process: strategy

formulation, strategy implementation, and strategy control. According to Stringer (2007), it

tackles four questions: (a) where are we going - mission, (b) how do we get there - strategies,

(c) what is our blueprint for action - budgets, and (d) how do we know if we are on track -

control. Kiliko, Atandi and Awino (2012) indicated that the formal approach view the

strategy process as rational, linear and logical. However in practice, the process is not strictly

linear as some of these elements are co-dependent and boundaries dividing the elements are

indistinguishable and management may need to cater for the rapid and ever changing

environment thereby unable to follow the precise order. In the public sector, strategic

planning is bound to promote not only strategic thinking but also enhance organizational

effectiveness through creating structures and alignment of activities to better serve the

broader societal system (Shahin, 2011).

2.2.1 Strategy Analysis and Formulation

The formality of strategic planning process in the public sector is premised on the

planning school. This view presents strategy development as a formal process with distinct

steps that calls for top management to develop an explicit and fitting organizational strategy

after acquainting themselves with their operating environment (Rose, 2010). This stage is all

about developing a vision and mission, conducting a situation analysis of the environment,

establishing of long term objectives, generation and evaluation of alternative strategies and

finally selection of strategies to pursue (Slater, Olson & Hult, 2006; David, 2011). In a

nutshell, Kithinji (2012) referred to it as the stage where the organization has to make tough

decisions through determination of where they are now, where they want to go, and finally

how to get there.

In the public sector to ensure responsiveness from all stakeholders, the process also

includes development of an initial agreement concerning the strategic planning effort and

identification of organization mandate. The agreement details the main steps in the planning

14

process, expected deliverables and roles and responsibilities of all participants (Shahin,

2011). Bryson (1988) observed that the clarification of the mandate allows everyone to

comprehend what is allowed or prohibited, and for public agencies these mandates will be

contained in legislation.

The next step is to develop the mission and vision, which creates an organization‟s

identity by defining its purpose and sets the broad outlines for strategy development. In the

public sector, it ought to be consistent with its mandate. The vision also should define what

the organization would like to become in the future. David (2011) observe that public sector

firms operate with less autonomy in comparison to private firms as legislators generally have

a direct control. This implies strategists in government are curtailed in altering the mission

and objectives of their organizations. The mission statement will clarify what the

organization will do while the vision statement how the organization will look like on

fulfilling its mission. In developing the statements, it is paramount for the public

organizations to thoroughly understand their mandate by confining themselves to what is

legally allowable and avoid any constraints (Fard et al., 2011).

The next segment is situational analysis, which is concerned with anticipating

changes in the internal and external environment through an environmental scanning and

organizational analysis (Slater, Olson & Hult, 2006). It strives to identify the opportunities

and threats the organization faces from its external environment, and strength and weakness

through an internal review of resources, capabilities as precursor to envisioning the future

status (Zandi et al., 2013). Shahin (2011) noted that with the uncertain environment, the

output of this stage is very important as an organization can build on strategies to take

advantage of any opportunities and mitigate against any weaknesses and threats.

Gilbert and Benham (2009) stated that the Political-Economic-Social-Technological

(PEST) analysis and its subset Strength-Weakness-Opportunities-Threats (SWOT) analysis

are the most common strategic analysis tool. Another tool mostly employed in the public

sector is stakeholder analysis that defines the salient characteristics of interested parties that

are directly impacted by the organization‟s strategy (Edward, 2011). By incorporating

stakeholder analysis in the process, the public manager can avert conflicts and also

accommodate diverse interest. In the same breadth, to accommodate the internal

15

environment, leadership from top management is crucial especially to effect the strategic

change by adopting strategic planning to overcome the bureaucratic culture in public

organizations. They ought to consider involving employees in the exercise to build consensus

that would result in realistic goals and less disagreements during implementation (Baile,

1998).

Based on the situational analysis, the organization would then generate strategic

issues that require to be tackled. These are fundamental policy question affecting the

mandate, mission, values, services, management, client and cost (Bryson, 1988). They

embody conflicts and resolving them will require change. Its management necessitates

scanning of the environment, reviewing their probability of occurrence and impact, and

articulating responses to tackle them (Shahin, 2011). To resolve these strategic issues will

require generation and evaluation of strategic alternatives that ought to be thorough to ensure

no opportunity is missed though it might be costly.

The decision making stage is where the strategic alternatives are generated in line

with the specific organizational needs then evaluation and selection of specific ones to pursue

to further its mission. The goal within this stage is to select promising strategic options and to

formulate applicable strategies at the corporate, business, and functional levels (Gilbert &

Benham, 2009). Strategic choice incorporates generation and evaluation of strategic

alternatives that can be implemented to achieve organizational goals and objectives. These

strategies are grouped into corporate-level, business-level and functional level (Hancyk,

2004). An effective strategy from this stage is technically feasible, acceptable to key

stakeholder and in line with the core values of the organization not to add ethical, moral and

legal (Bryson, 1988). Parnell (2008) assert that employee participation is crucial during this

stage as it encompasses some degree of implicit or explicit goal setting and greater

involvement in formulation is anticipated to enhance its execution.

2.2.2 Strategy Implementation

A strategy is only as good as its implementation, and this stage involves actualization

of the plan (Kithinji, 2012). Kiliko, Atandi and Awino (2012) perceived it to be a tougher

step than formulation because it is expected to yield results. This implies it‟s useless to have

a strategic plan that is not supported with an implementation plan (Zandi et al., 2013).

16

Implementation requires a shift of responsibility from the strategist to the functions.

Therefore this stage is bound to be easier when management and employees alike are

involved in the process as they are likely to understand the content and will also be

committed to its implementation (David, 2011).

It requires an implementation strategy with specific time-frames and a proper

organization structure to go with it (Hancyk, 2004). Implementation is about translating the

plan into action through several action plans that define annual objectives, functional-level

strategies and tactics. It involves using the organizational structure to fit the strategy and

getting the right personnel to fill those positions (Zandi et al., 2013). On the basis of the

annual objectives, resources are allocated to the functional units through preparation of

financial budgets to support the approved strategies. Another implementation vehicle is

performance management system that measures specific measurable objectives and

achievement rewarded appropriately. Therefore an effective implementation ought to contain

specific measurable action plans. (Poister & Streib, 1999; Fard et al., 2011).

A shared vision can improve the implementation of strategic plan because it can

enhance co-operation and reduce conflicts amongst the implementers. A means to enhancing

employee understanding is through involving them in the formulation of the plan. This might

substantially reduce the probability of resistance and position bias, where employees decide

to pursue individual instead of organizational goals (Rose, 2010). Therefore Gilbert and

Benham (2009) advocated for managers to cascade their strategies by communicating it to all

their employees. Management ought to be wary of the constant changes in the environmental

context as they may be required to incorporate flexibility during the implementation phase

and ensure the essential components are adjusted to counter these changes. Also they should

endeavor to comprehend the organizational strategy because managers who fail to understand

the organizational strategy may face an uphill task during its execution as they may be unable

to relate to the strategic goals and how to get there (Parnell,2008).

Sanders (2011) summarized strategy implementation as involving the allocation and

management of resources based on a chain of command with respective people in the

structure having assignment of responsibility to carry out specific tasks. This phase will be

17

actualized through allocation of resources in forms of budgets to fund the formulated plan. It

is also very easy where the formulated plans are realistic (Wandjiva, 2011).

2.2.3 Strategy Evaluation and Control

The implementation of the strategy can have significant ramification on the

organization and therefore it is vital that timely evaluation be carried out to detect any

potential adverse outcome that might require attention of management. It involves examining

the basis of the current plan, comparing the expected results with actual, and implementing

any corrective action that will ensure performance conforms to plan (David, 2011). It

provides a feedback mechanism that is required to assist in monitoring and applying

corrective actions to plans as a means of reflecting the changes in the operating environment

of firm (Hancyk, 2004).

Gilbert and Benham (2009) stated that it is not the last step in the strategy process but

a counterbalancing activity to the other three steps and an autonomous management function.

The purpose of this stage is to ensure that management is proactive instead of being reactive

to its environment. It answers the question “how do we know if we are on track” and

comprises of four main activities: following the execution of the plans, measuring

performance vis-à-vis the expected outcome, monitoring for any changes in the environment

that might affect the strategy and taking any corrective actions (Fard et al., 2011; Zandi et al.,

2013).

Baile (1998) highlighted the difficulties across governments in obtaining proper

performance measures due to multiplicity and ambiguous goals. This might adversely impact

on strategy control, which is bound not to be effective without proper performance measures

that provide feedback mechanisms during the strategy process. A ripple-effect might occur

on the appraisal of performance and provision of rewards to employees. This challenge can

be addressed in the planning process by setting clear performance measures that can be used

to track achievement of strategic objectives.

2.3 Strategic Planning and Organizational Performance

The prescriptive strategic literature suggests there is a positive association strategic

planning and performance. However, the plethora of empirical tests has been inconclusive

18

(Falshaw et al., 2006; Glaister et al., 2008). This section carries out an assessment on the

evolution of the subject through a review of previous empirical evidence on these two

variables.

2.3.1 Organization Performance in the Public Sector

Lebans and Euske (2006) viewed organization performance as set of financial and

non-financial indicators which offer information on the degree of achievement of objectives

and results. Performance measurements are tools through which the management of a firm

monitors whether the achieved results meet the target. Initial measures exclusively used

financial performance but over time have drifted to include the non-financial measures as a

means of accommodating the multidimensionality of performance (Namada, Aosa, Awino, &

Wainaina, 2014). According to Fard et al. (2011), performance measures are principal

components of a performance-monitoring system with a good set addressing four key

questions: How many? How efficiently? Of what quality? To what effect?

According to Boyne and William (2003), most of the literature measures the impact

of planning in the private sector in financial terms. However, in the public sector this is

considered inappropriate because there is no bottom line. More so the fact that they serve an

array of stakeholder makes it arguably important for the public managers to offer different

performance parameters. Nonetheless, a great concern is the goal ambiguity in public sector

implying most standards and criteria used to measure performance in public organizations are

often diverse and complicated (Fard et al., 2011).

In addition, in the public sector, the meaning of a good performance measure has a

political connotation and thus Boyne and William (2003) argued that a majority of study

favor of perceptual rather than objective measures. The unique factors in public sector are

summarized by Edwards (2011) who classified them into three broad factors. First,

environmental factors include mandates and political influence that define the decision

making. Second is transactional factors that relate to stakeholders. The third category is

organizational factors focus on goal ambiguity and set of incentives that influence employees

to act.

19

Due to the multiplicity of stakeholders public organizations might be required to

report on a range of goals with some in conflict. Edward (2011) advocated for the idea of

utilizing different performance measures to cater for all stakeholders and multidimensional

nature of the performance variable because one type would be inadequate to measure

progress. A review of academic literature on performance categories used by government

and public organizations include: output, efficiency, effectiveness, responsiveness and

democratic outcomes. Outputs are in the form of quantity and quality of services. Efficiency

relates to the degree to which resources are used economically expressed in output-input

rations. Effectiveness measures the extent of achievement of formal objectives.

Responsiveness considers measures of satisfaction such as customer and employee while

democratic outcome are concerned with accountability and participation (Boyne, 2002).

Obong‟o (2009) proposed that these measures need to be set at the onset as they stir

employees to understand their deliverables thereby allowing them to develop appropriate

benchmarks to evaluate progress. Therefore before setting the desired outcome, employees

will be forced to self-examine their organization in order to appreciate their roles. This

process is helpful because it brings bear the widespread lack of focus in the public sector and

a solution too. Hence in contrast to the private sector where strategy is considered a means of

conquering competition in the market, in the public sector it is meant to improve an essential

function of service delivery that meet or surpasses the expectation of its citizen (Boyne &

Walker, 2010).

To cater for the multiplicity of stakeholders, Nashwa and Laila (2013) argued that the

balance score card (BSC) as the most appropriate tool in measuring performance of not for

profit organizations since it is centered on achieving the organizational mission, which is at

the core of public organizations. The BSC acts as the focal point of strategic plans that

provides feedback across the multiple perspectives and aids in adapting to the environment to

catalyze achievement of the mission. They also assert that in the public sector, the customer

perspective is deemed to have more weight as their focus is service delivery to the citizens. It

may also provide key measures for the other perspectives that can serve in enhancing service

delivery. Next, is the financial perspective that captures the efficiency in utilization of scarce

resources as the government is not profit oriented and has no bottom line. The internal

20

business process perspective tackles value addition and handles the organizational operations

and process required to achieve the mission. The last perspective is learning and growth,

which handles matter relating to employees such as skills and competencies and ways to

constantly enhance them.

2.3.2 Strategic Planning and Organizational Performance

According to Shahin (2011), organization performance is viewed as the outcome on

implementation of strategy. Arasa and K‟obonyo (2012) claims that firms which have

embraced strategic planning are bound to experience better performance. However, this can

only be true if the planning is pursued appropriately. Though strategic planning on its own

cannot be expected to cure all organizational problems but can result in greater synergies. In

addition, Boyne and Walker (2010) maintain for the strategy-performance linkage to hold

two presumptions are required. The first assumes that there is a causal mechanism that links

the two variables implying adoption of strategy is bound to have influence on performance

while the other assumption is performance is not solely determined by the environment but

may apply alongside strategy as a separate contributor or moderate either by strengthening or

weakening their effect.

Many empirical studies have been undertaken to prove a nexus between strategic

planning and organization performance with a mixed set of results. Some have indicated the

relationship as positive (Glaister et al., 2008; Arasa & K‟obonyo, 2012), others found no

linkage (Falshaw et al., 2006) while some researchers arrived an inconclusive position

(Boyne & William, 2003) and proposed for incorporation of intervening variables to

establish the nature of this association. Rudd, Greenley, Beatson and Lings (2008) argued

that the inconsistent results of previous research is largely due to investigation of the direct

and bivariate relationship of varying conceptualization of strategic planning and

performance, with financial performance taking prominence. There has also been little

evidence on tackling the mediating variables. In the subsequent paragraphs the research will

analyze the outcome of previous literature on this subject.

Glaister et al. (2008) were amongst the first researchers who empirically examined

the strategy-performance relationship in an emerging country context conducted in Turkey.

They cited the first reported empirical test conducted by Thune and House (1970), whose

21

results indicated better economic performance amongst formal planners in comparison to

non-planners. Glaister et al. (2008) criticized previous research on relying in simplistic

measures of the planning process and suggested the use of multiple indicators. Another

concern was the failure to incorporate the contextual influences and considered strategic

planning as an isolated set of activities. The research findings specified a positive

relationship amongst Turkish manufacturing companies. In addition, the research established

that organization structure and firm size had a moderating effect on the strategic planning-

performance relationship. Planning was more effective among firms with a high level of

organic structure than mechanistic, and linkage tended to be stronger as the firm size

increased. They recommended for further research in other developing countries and also

incorporations of other theoretically relevant moderators.

Boyne and William (2003) also questioned why initial studies had only dichotomized

firms into planners and non-planners as this measure suppressed the extent of variation in

planning. Limitations of these private sector studies were the use of a single measure as a

proxy for the entire process and exclusive application of financial measures of performance.

They focused on the existence of planning documents as evidence and neglected its

conceptualization as a process. However, the lack of a bottom line and multiplicity of

stakeholders in the public sector justifies the use of multiple performance measures. The

researcher operationalized planning into various elements in the cycle and also applied

different subjective dimensions to measure performance. Their findings were inconclusive

though their best guess was that planning leads to service improvement. Some aspects of

planning have a positive effect on performance, others have a negative effect and yet others

have no effect. The researcher proposes further researcher to clear the matter.

Arasa and K‟obonyo (2012) attempted to tackle the failure of previous research to

incorporate the specific steps in strategic planning process. They examined 31 companies in

the insurance sector in Kenya and found out that all their sample firms were engaged in

strategic planning practices with difference noted in the extent and rigor. Their findings

indicated a significant positive correlation between the two research variables with firms

exhibiting higher levels of strategic planning performing better as compared to those

exhibiting low levels of strategic planning. Another observation was that individual steps in

22

the strategic planning process were also positively related to both financial and non-financial

measures of organizational performance. They propose replication of this study in the other

sectors of the economy.

2.4 Environmental Context on Strategic Planning and Organization Performance

Organizations do not exist in a vacuum but are influenced by their operating

environment. It is therefore important to consider this environment (Fard et al., 2011). Shahin

(2011) defined context of strategy as the settings in which the strategies are developed and

actualized and relate to both internal and external environmental factors shaping the content

and process of strategy. According to Glaister et al. (2008), existing literature on strategic

planning has been criticized for disregarding the organizational or contextual influences.

They stress that the extent to which an organization engages in strategic planning process is

highly dependent on organizational factors so this ought to be taken into account. As

highlighted in the previous section previous empirical literature have reported a mixed set of

results in the strategic planning-performance relationship and recommended for

incorporation of the context to shed more light on this subject.

According to Miller, Reutzel and Certo (2007), moderating and mediating effect

facilitated researchers in the field of strategic management to understand “black-box”

processes underlying complex relationships whereby the effect of an independent variable on

a dependent variable is influenced via a third variable. In a mediation relationship, a mediator

(M) that transmits the effect of a predictor variable (X) to an outcome variable (Y) in a causal

sequence such that X causes M and M causes Y. Moderator variables, on the other hand, are

typically introduced where there is weak or inconsistent relationship between a predictor and

outcome variable. It is a third variable that alters the direction or strength of relationship

between the independent and dependent variables. A moderating effect within a correlational

framework exists if the direction of the correlation changes with incorporation of the

moderator variable (Baron & Kenny, 1986).

2.4.1 Employee Engagement

Employee engagement is a complex construct touching almost all parts of human

resource management facets. It‟s derived from concepts such as job satisfaction, employee

23

commitment and organizational citizenship behavior. Accordingly if employees are not

addressed in an appropriate manner they may fail to engage themselves in their job in

response to such kind of mismanagement. It is conceptualized as positive attachment and

willingness to exert energy for success of the organization, feeling proud of being a member

of that organization and identifying oneself with it by proactively seeking opportunities to

contribute one‟s best and going extra mile beyond the employment contract (Markos &

Sridevi, 2010).

Organizational performance is not only influenced by how effectively every phase of

planning process is carried out but is also impacted by the attitude of employees towards the

process (Boyne & Williams, 2003). Tergaden et al (2003) recommended for inclusion of

other employees in the organization while reviewing participation apart from top

management. In relation to the five strategy processes, the authors argue that the most

accommodating to all levels of management is the rational process with top management

predominantly overseeing the other employees. However, the most considerate for the lower

levels of management is the transactive and generative processes that triggers their creativity.

Tergaden et al (2005) argued that involvement ought to broadly to go beyond mere

participation in the process and information sharing but also integrate actual decision

making. By allowing for an organization-wide involvement in the strategy process, the firm

is bound to have a greater probability of achieving its strategic goals, due to a better

understanding achieved through participation in the process. This will make feel employees

feel empowered and will motivate them to stay committed to the achieving the objective as

demonstrated from their performance. Their study however failed to assess the quality of

strategy formulated. A participatory process is expected to results in time lags and consensus

building that might impair the quality of decisions.

Markos and Sridevi (2010) pointed out the precursor of employee engagement as

alignment of efforts with strategy; empowerment; promoting and encouraging teamwork;

assisting people to grow and develop and where appropriate, provision of support and

recognition. It is worth noting that most of them are non-financial in nature and therefore any

organization with committed leaders can strive for the highest level of engagement.

24

A review of empirical evidence on antecedent to employee engagement in relation to

organization strategy by Ouakouak and Ouedraogo (2013) identified the key elements such

as: communication of objectives to employees, understanding of the strategy, employee

commitment and integration of middle level managers in the strategy process. An

inspirational leader is willing to communicate strategy to employees and integrate the entire

management while a supportive organizational culture coupled with interpersonal trust can

allow for participation of employees in the strategy process thereby enhancing knowledge

and commitment (Petter et al., 2002). An organizational culture is a system of shared

attitudes, values and beliefs. As mentioned above it shapes the decision making in an

organization by prescribing the appropriate behavior. Therefore for planning to succeed

management should prioritize improvement by linking performance to rewards (Fard et al.,

2011).

Tegarden et al. (2005) considered strategy as an iterative process requiring an

ongoing communication between managers and employees and not a preserve of the leader.

Instead of the traditional top-down approach, a blend is proposed to also incorporate a

bottom- up approach whereby the vision is generated by the leader. A progression from mere

talk to support by the top management will spur an organizational-wide commitment. This

can be demonstrated by communicating the strategic direction and performing the managerial

roles of co-ordination and control to accomplish the stated objectives, and presence of reward

systems (Ugboro, Obeng &Spann, 2011).

Parnell (2008) also emphasized the need to include other levels of management apart

from top management in testing the moderating effect in the strategy-performance linkage as

they are major players during the execution. This assists in integrating strategy content and

execution at a deeper level in the organization allowing for strategy diffusion. The findings

of Parnell, Carraher and Holt (2002) indicated that a participative organizational culture

breeds involvement, and employees who are involved in strategy formulation are bound to

have a better understanding of the implemented strategy. The efforts expended by

management in developing the organizational culture may be fruitless without means of

sharing it throughout the organization. Specifically, examining the involvement of

25

subordinates in the strategy making process results in the effective dissemination of the

strategy and greater decision effectiveness

Another important facet is structural alignment. Organizations are open systems with

various departments that are interdependent. Alignment of goals amongst these departments

facilitates achievement of organizational goals because it allows for consistency across the

organization. Actualization of structural alignment requires effective communication,

employee enhancement that targets to support and develop employees and managerial

effectiveness, which refers to the support from leaders in furtherance of organizational goals

(Beehr, Glazer, Fischer, Linton & Hansen, 2009).

Therefore leadership is considered vital in establishing alignment with the leader

responsible for ensuring congruency by creating a shared vision. This can be done by

continuously communicating to afford employees an opportunity to appreciate the goals of

the organization and more so their sub-unit role, whilst at the same providing feedback on

achievement of the stated goals (Beehr, Glazer, Fischer, Linton & Hansen, 2009). Every

employee in the organization is expected to play a fundamental role in the strategy process

with top management providing leadership with their role oscillating from commander to

sponsor while middle managers are conduits who cascade strategy into operations. The

technical employees are expected to be at the forefront of service delivery to customers.

Engaged employees are considered to play a complementary role by acting as good soldiers

in implementing the directives from management but also expected to be innovative to cater

for rapid changes in the working environment (Fard et al, 2001).

Gill (2012) summarized eight drivers of employee engagement from effectiveness of

communication from management, nature of their job, with an understanding of how their

job performance contributes to the organizational performance, prospect of career

progression, employee development programs, pride about organization, fellow employees,

and relationship with one‟s manager. This factors can be summarized as pertaining to power,

information, knowledge and skills, and rewards. They influence how employees‟ discharge

their roles in the organization with their existence allowing them to either engage or

disengage. It is essential for organizations to assess these drivers to determine the degree of

engagement amongst their employees. These factors directly influence the level of

26

engagement with their demonstrating high level of employee engagement and absence linked

to low levels of engagement.

2.4.1.1 Benefits of Employee Engagement

There are several reasons advanced for engaging employees in the strategic

management process. To begin with Kithinji (2012) cited involvement of employees in

strategy formulation stage as a motivator since it aids in the understanding of the

productivity-reward linkage and role clarification on what is expected of them thereby

reducing any resistance to change. It is believed that through participation there is free flow

of information that leads to better decisions and therefore greater commitment. Similarly, it

allowed for greater authority during planning and implementation, while concurrently

enhancing employees‟ accountability for their results (Suklev & Debarliev, 2012). Other

secondary benefits are innovation, greater effectiveness and better performance (Petter et al.,

2002).

Tergaden et al. (2005) found out that employee contribution is a critical in high

performing organizations and concluded that participation of employees in strategy

formulation mediated achievement of organizational strategic goals. This study anticipated

that a broader definition of employee engagement that incorporated not only participation but

also understanding and commitment ought to have advanced more evidence This is because

it is not only a matter of participating in the strategy process but also central is the

understanding of the strategy and individual role in its achievement thereby reducing the

probability of resistance.

2.4.2 Strategic Planning, Performance and Employee Engagement

Gilbert and Benham (2009) affirmed that including a mediating variable in testing the

cause and effect can assist in establishing what it is about the dependent variable that is

important to shed new light on the relationship between the strategy process and

performance. This argument is also presented by Venkatraman as cited by Tergaden et al.

(2005) asserts that a mediating variable offers proof of a significant intervening mechanism

between an independent (antecedent) variable and dependent (consequent variable).

27

Employee contribution to organizational strategic goals is a critical driver of high

performing organizations, which can be fostered through strategic alignment of their

organization. Employee engagement can enhance strategy diffusion by ensuring every

employee in the organization knows their role, performance benchmarks and how their

performance is linked to organizational strategy. Therefore in a well-aligned organization all

efforts should be traceable to the strategic organizational. Strategic alignment encompasses a

strategic plan that outlines the purpose of the organization, a strategy execution plan,

performance measures that cascade strategy into objectives to sections within the

organization allowing employees to know what they need to do and how it impacts the

overall strategy (Stringer,2007).

It was suggested that a participative management style can influence management‟s

ability to diffuse the strategy throughout the organization. Strategy diffusion incorporates

three dimensions: involvement, understanding and commitment. Involvement is concerned

with the degree to employees are involved in the strategy-making process and encompass

numerous processes and techniques that reflect management‟s active consultation with others

in the organization. Another dimension is understanding that suggests it is much easier to

implement a strategy when employees thoroughly comprehend its component parts. Finally,

commitment reflects the degree to which employees determine to see the strategy effectively

implemented and become part of the organization (Parnell, Carraher & Holt, 2002).

Kohtamaki et al. (2012) argued that employees‟ commitment to strategy

implementation mediates the link between participative strategic planning and company

performance. They further adduce evidence to back their claim by stating that participation in

the strategic process clarifies the vision of the organization, they also get an opportunity to

appreciate the organization‟s strategy, in so doing creates of shared purpose. Their findings

indicate a significant positive influence of participative strategic planning and personnel

commitment, which also firm performance.

Tergaden et al. (2005) provided empirical evidence of better achievement of strategic

goals through inclusion of employees in the strategy making process. Their findings

demonstrate that inclusion of the employee as a mediating variable in the linkage between

strategy and performance as initially there was no direct relationship realized when the

28

variable was excluded. A more recent research by Ouakouak and Ouedraogo (2013)

examined how employee participation in the strategic planning process facilitates the internal

alignment between the strategy and organization towards achievement of organizational

goals. Their findings show that strategic planning solely has no direct effect on performance.

However, a positive indirect effect on financial and non-financial performance is noted

through the full mediation effect of employee strategic alignment.

2.5 Chapter Summary

This chapter critically examined literature on the research variables: strategic

planning, organizational performance and employee engagement. First, a brief history on

strategy was followed by an exposition of the stages undertaken during strategic planning.

The next section introduced organizational performance and its linkage with strategic

planning. The final section reviewed the impact of engaging employees in the strategic

planning process on organizational performance. The next chapter provides a detail analysis

on the research methodology that was adopted for the study.

29

CHAPTER THREE

3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This chapter describes the approach to be used in answering the research questions. A

preview of the research design is presented under section 3.2, with the next section

highlighting the study population and sampling. Section 3.4 discusses the methods to be

applied during data collection and is followed with the research procedure. The final section

discusses the data analysis methods, and a summary of the chapter.

3.2 Research Design

The study adopted a descriptive research design as suggested by Namada et al.

(2014). The researchers assert that this design can assist in establishing statistical evidence on

the relationship between the research variables. The study was also grounded on a cross-

sectional approach with research data collected at a point in time.

The independent variable in this study was the strategic planning process, which was

operationalized using variables adopted from David (2011) and Shahin (2011). The

organizational performance, which was the dependent variable was assessed using subjective

performance measures to cater for the multidimensionality of performance measures in the

public sector. Last was employee engagement that was hypothecated as the moderating

variable and was operationalized using variables adopted from Parnell (2008) and Parnell,

Carraher & Holt (2002).

Table 3.1 below provides a summary on the operationalization of the research

variables:

30

Table 3.1: Research Variables

VARIABLE TYPE DIMENSION QUESTIONS

Strategic Planning Process Independent Analysis & Formulation 7

Implementation 1

Control 3

Organization Performance Dependent Organization Performance 2

Employee Engagement Moderator Understanding [ a - d ] 4

Commitment [ e – j ] 6

Involvement [ k – m ] 3

3.3 Population and Sampling Design

3.3.1 Population

Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (2009) defines population as the full set of cases from

which a sample is taken. The population of this study consisted of 262 public organizations

in Kenya with the main characteristics being those that have initiated strategic management

through development and implementation of strategic plans.

3.3.2 Sampling Design

Sampling is the act, process or technique of selecting a suitable sample, or a

representative part of the population for determining parameter or characteristics of the

whole population. The purpose of sampling is to enable the researcher draw conclusion about

a population from a sample (Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill, 2009).

3.3.2.1 Sampling Frame

Sampling frame is a complete list of all the cases in the population from which a

sample is to be drawn (Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill, 2009). The sampling frame was the list

of public organizations as published in the Presidential Task force Report (2013) on

parastatal reforms in Kenya. The report identified 262 public organizations out of which 86

organizations had written strategic plans as confirmed through a desktop research on the

31

corporations‟ websites. The list of public organizations with strategic plans is presented

under Appendix V.

3.3.2.2 Sampling Technique

A census study was adopted with each of the eight six (86) public organizations that

had implemented strategic planning sampled. This was anticipated to increase the response

rate and improve the quality of the research findings.

3.3.2.3 Sample Size

The study was conducted on the entire population of public organizations across the

fifteen government ministries as depicted in Table 3.2

Table 3.2: State Corporations under Government Ministries with Strategic Plans

No Government Ministry Population

1 Agriculture, Livestock & Fisheries 17

2 Devolution & Planning 3

3 East African Affairs, Commerce & Tourism 4

4 Education Science and Technology 9

5 Energy & Petroleum 4

6 Environment, Water & Natural Resources 8

7 Health 2

8 Industrialization & Enterprise Development 10

9 Information and Communication 3

10 Interior & Co-ordination of National Government 3

11 Labour, & Social Security Services 1

12 Lands Housing & Urban Development 1

13 National Treasury 10

14 Sports, Culture & The Arts 2

15 Transport & Infrastructure 9

Grand Total 86

32

3.4 Data Collection Methods

Shahin (2011) states that data collection method is integral in research and that the

selection of the appropriate method depends greatly on the objective of the research.

Therefore the researcher considered a structured questionnaire as the most appropriate

method to collect primary data intended to investigate the moderating effect of employee

engagement on the relationship between strategic planning and organizational performance.

According to Arasa, Aosa and Machuki (2011), the Likert type scale is an acceptable

technique for purposes of carrying out parametric statistical analysis and this research

applied a five point Likert-scale ranging from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 5 (Strongly agree).The

questionnaire for the study contained a mix of structured closed and open ended questions

and constituted of four parts. Part A of the questionnaire sought for general information of

the organization. The other three parts collected data on the three key variables: the

independent, dependent and moderating variables - Strategic Planning (Part B),

Organizational Performance (Part C) and Employee Engagement (Part D). The entire

questionnaire is on appendix II.

3.5 Research Procedures

The researcher carried out pilot testing on the research questionnaire to improve the

quality and validity of the instrument. After pre-testing the researcher made the requisite

amendments and contacted the respondent‟s organizations via telephone and email before

dispatching the questionnaire for filling.

The initial contact of respondents was applied in an effort to improve the response

rate. It assisted in creating a rapport with link person in every organization through whom

subsequent follow-up was done. In addition, it was anticipated that most respondent would

require some evidence to confirm that the researcher was authorized to conduct research and

therefore an introductory letter from the university together with a research permit were

obtained

According to Shahin (2011), validity and reliability are used to assess the „goodness‟

of the measures, where validity is concerned with measurement of the right concept and

reliability with the stability and consistency of the measurement. The validity of the study

33

was improved though pretesting of the questionnaire. Reliability was tested using Cronbach‟s

alpha co-efficient with a level of 0.7 considered acceptable for internal consistency.

As indicated by Table 3.3 Cronbach alpha was computed for all the items measuring

the independent and dependent variables with high co-efficient well above the recommended

alpha co-efficient of 0.7 and thus the model was considered reliable.

Table 3.3: Cronbach Alpha Coefficients

Variable Number of Items Cronbach Alpha

Strategic Planning Process 23 0.840

Employee Engagement 13 0.712

Organizational Performance 4 0.841

Whole Instrument 40 0.888

3.6 Data Analysis Methods

The data collected was coded and analyzed using a computer analytical program. The

study used both descriptive and inferential statistics to explain the findings of the research.

The study used descriptive statistics such as mean, standard deviation, mode, frequencies.

Some of the descriptive summaries were also presented in graphs and charts. The main

inferential statistics that were used to test the significance of the relationship are partial-

correlations, multiple regressions analysis and analysis of variance (ANOVA). The statistical

significance level for the study was a p-value of ≤ 0.05.

3.7 Chapter Summary

This chapter dealt with research methodology that was used in conducting the

research. It presented the research design to be applied in the study on the target population

and also discussed the sampling technique to be utilized in choosing the research sample. The

research procedure was also presented, with the data collection method proposed being a

questionnaire and data analysis done using descriptive and inferential statistics. The next

chapter offers a discussion on the results and findings with each research question presented

under a stand-alone section.

34

CHAPTER FOUR

4.0 RESULT AND FINDINGS

4.1 Introduction

This chapter analyses the response from the organizations that were responsive with

the first section dealing with the demographics of the respondents. The remaining sections

review the output from statistical computer program and interpreting them guided by the

research questions to assess the relevant hypotheses.

4.2 Background Information

The study questionnaire was dispatched to 86 public sector organizations with follow

ups done via telephone. The research questionnaire contained a section on general

information about the sampled organization. This information included the gender and job

position of the respondent, number of employees in their organization, sector of operations in

the economy and their strategic planning horizon. This section provides an analysis on the

background information relating to the survey organizations.

4.2.1 Response Rate

A total of 33 organizations filled out and returned the research questionnaire

representing 38 percent response rate. Table 4.1 illustrates the distribution of the respondents

across the government ministries. The largest proportion of respondents was from Treasury

and Industrialization ministries (18.2%) followed by Agriculture (15.2%) while the lowest

was from the Information, Sports, Energy and Health with each having one respondent

representing 3% of all respondents.

35

Table 4.1: Distribution of Respondents by Ministry

Parent Ministry Frequency Percent

Agriculture 5 15.2

Information 1 3.0

Treasury 6 18.2

Sports 1 3.0

Transport 4 12.1

Commerce 2 6.1

Education 4 12.1

Energy 1 3.0

Environment 2 6.1

Health 1 3.0

Industrialization 6 18.2

Total 33 100.0

4.2.2 Gender of Respondents

In relation to gender, a majority of the respondents were male at 67 percent while

female stood at 33 percent. The new constitutional dispensation demands for at least a third

representation from either gender in the public sector and the gender representation of

respondents is consistent to this requirement. The same is also expected of the actual

employees‟ representation in each of the respondent organizations. Figure 4.1 depicts this

position.

Figure 4.1: Gender Representation

36

4.2.3 Job Position of Respondents

The target group for the research was Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the public

organizations and as a means to corroborating this information, the research questionnaire

required respondents to document their job positions. From the response, only one was filled

out by the CEO with the remaining responses delegated to individuals within the

organization who had information on the topic of study. This was expected to improve the

credibility of the research data since the response was provided by those who were actively

involved in the process. Table 4.2 indicate that 18 questionnaires were filled out by those in

management position (CEO, Company Secretary, Head of Department and Managers)

representing 54 percent of the respondent. Being that a majority of the respondent held

managerial position it was expected that they play an integral role in formulation and

implementation of the organization‟s strategic plans.

Table 4.2: Job Position of Respondents

Position Number Percentage

Chief Executive Officer (CEO) 1 3%

Corporation Secretary 2 6%

Head Of Department 8 24%

Manager 7 21%

Senior Officer 4 12%

Officer 11 33%

TOTAL 33 100%

4.2.4 Staffing Level of Organizations

In relation to the staffing levels in the sampled organizations, 14 organizations (

representing 42% of the respondents ) had over 250 employees with the next band being

between 50 to 100 employees having 12 organizations (representing 36% of the

respondents). A majority of the respondents under these two bands were highly decentralized

with vast branch networks across the country. The next band was for respondents with less

than 50 employees standing at 5 organizations (representing 15% of respondents) and

37

constituted organizations that had centralized their operations in the capital city (Nairobi).

Figure 4.2 below depicts the distribution of employees of the respondents.

Figure 4.2: Number of Employees

4.2.5 Industry of Operation

Even though the sampled organizations had been stratified in accordance to the

government ministry they reported to, a further analysis was conducted to also establish their

operational sector. The response indicated that these organizations operated in diverse set of

industries. Figure 4.3 shows that a majority (30%) of the sampled organizations operated in

sectors that was not provided in the research questionnaire. Notwithstanding, the prominent

sectors were financials (18%) and agriculture (12%) that had linkages with their parent

ministries, treasury and Agriculture who supervised the largest proportion of public

organizations in Kenya.

38

Figure 4.3: Sector / Industry of Sample

4.2.6 Horizon of Strategic Plans

The research output indicated the most dominant planning horizon was between 3 to

5 years (97%) with only one organization having a different horizon ranging from 1 to 3

years as depicted by Figure 4.4.

39

Figure 4.4: Strategic Plan Horizon

4.3 Strategic Planning Process

The first research objective was to establish the extent of formal strategic planning

process in public sector organizations in Kenya. The strategic planning process was tested by

analyzing the extent to which the sampled organization validated the formality of their

process by utilizing a Likert scale (0 to 5 representing strongly disagree to strongly agree).

The process was divided into four steps: analysis, formulation, implementation and control.

Overall strategic planning process (SP) in the public sector was to a greater extent

formal with a mean score of 4.0 implying that a majority of the respondents agreeing to

practice the process documented in the research questionnaire. A review of the sub-process

indicate that strategy analysis had the highest mean score (4.3) followed by strategy

formulation (4.2), strategy control (3.9) and strategic implementation (3.7) respectively. Any

score below 3 indicated that the phase was not implemented, and therefore from some output

it was noted that some of the respondents did fully implement and evaluate their strategic

plans as highlighted by the minimum score represented in Table 4.3.

40

Table 4.3: Strategic Planning Process

Descriptive Statistics (N=33)

Strategy

Analysis

Strategy

Formulation

Strategy

Implementation

Strategy

Control

Strategic

Planning

(SP)

Mean 4.367 4.242 3.758 3.980 4.087

Median 4.375 4.000 4.000 4.000 4.151

Std. Deviation 0.440 0.730 0.830 0.862 0.530

Range 1.438 2.500 3.000 3.000 2.151

Minimum 3.563 2.500 2.000 2.000 2.849

Maximum 5.000 5.000 5.000 5.000 5.000

Percentiles

25 4.000 4.000 3.000 3.500 3.729

50 4.375 4.000 4.000 4.000 4.151

75 4.813 5.000 4.000 4.667 4.492

4.3.1 Strategy Analysis

Under strategy analysis the researcher considered the pre-assessment of the

organizational environment both internally and externally. The questionnaire assessed the

extent to which the board of directors of these organizations initiated the strategy process and

thereafter an assessment on the clarity and communication of credo and ethos. Finally, the

researcher established the tools used to carry out environmental analysis.

The respondents strongly agreed that their board of directors played a major role in

initiating strategic planning with a range of 2.7 to 5 with a mean score of 4.4. This is an

indication that boards of public sector organizations provided leadership in determining the

strategic direction of their organizations. Also most organizations had clearly defined

mandate including vision and mission statement, which had been communicated to key

stakeholders both internal and external as highlighted by the mean score for these parameters

that were above 4. Finally, a majority of the respondents confirmed that they carried out an

environmental assessment during the strategic planning process. Table 4.4 below provides a

summary of the descriptive statistics relating to strategy analysis.

41

Table 4.4: Extent of Strategy Analysis

Descriptive Statistics (N=33)

Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation

Strategy Analysis

Initiating and agreeing on a strategic

planning process

2.67 5.00 4.444 .610

Organizational Mandate 3.50 5.00 4.560 .541

Vision Statement .00 5.00 4.292 .967

Mission Statement 3.40 5.00 4.406 .498

Assessing the Environment & Strategic

Issues

2.00 5.00 4.393 .714

In relation to strategic analysis tools applied in conducting the environmental

assessment, the response indicated the most popular tool as the SWOT analysis (100%) with

all respondents affirming its usage in their organization. Other reported tools were the

PESTEL framework (90%) with thirty out of thirty three respondents utilizing it.

Stakeholder analysis (84%) was also widely used followed by critical success factor analysis

(60%) and benchmarking (57%). Only three organizations representing less than 1% of the

respondents utilized other environmental analysis tools. These other analysis tools included

validation, stakeholder interviews and feedback session that can be considered under

stakeholder analysis. The study therefore established that public organizations engage in

environmental analysis of their operating environment during the strategy process. Figure 4.5

shows the strategic analysis tools and extent of their usage across the respondents.

42

Figure 4.5: Strategic Analysis Tools Utilized

4.3.2 Strategy Formulation

In the research questionnaire, formulation was assessed by testing the devising and

cascading of strategy within departments in the organization. It also assessed the allocation of

responsibility and proposed timings of implementation. Figure 4.6 depicts that the mean

score from respondents was 4.2 indicating that a majority acknowledged that their

organization formally conducted this stage with clear assignment of responsibilities across

departments within the organization and timings on execution of the formulated strategies.

43

Figure 4.6: Extent of Strategy Formulation

4.3.3 Strategy Implementation

The questionnaire also examined whether the formulated strategies were implemented

successfully. Figure 4.7 shows that the mean output was 3.76 signifying that a large

proportion of respondents were in concurrence that their organizational strategy were

implemented or in the process of being implemented. However, in some few instances the

plan was yet to be implemented.

44

Figure 4.7: Extent of Strategy Implementation

4.3.4 Strategy Control

After implementation of the formulated strategy, the researcher wanted to confirm

whether these strategies were being periodically monitored and evaluated, and on a need

basis revised to account for any changes in the operating environment. Table 4.5 indicate a

mean score of 4.3 implying on average a majority of respondents agreed that monitoring was

being undertaken by their organizations. However, under evaluation and revision of

strategies the respondents scored their organization modestly with a mean of 3.97 and 3.67

respectively, which generally indicated a non-committal status.

45

In addition, the evaluation and strategy revision parameters had the largest deviations with a

range of 3 and 5, and standard deviation of 0.98 and 1.31 respectively.

Table 4.5: Extent of Strategy Control

Descriptive Statistics

Monitoring Evaluation Strategy Revision

Mean 4.30 3.97 3.67

Median 4.00 4.00 4.00

Std. Deviation .847 .984 1.315

Range 3 3 5

Minimum 2 2 0

Maximum 5 5 5

Percentiles

25 4.00 3.50 3.00

50 4.00 4.00 4.00

75 5.00 5.00 5.00

4.4 Strategic Planning and Organizational Performance

The second objective of the study was to test whether there was any relationship

between strategic planning and performance of public sector organizations in Kenya.

Performance was assessed using subjective performance measures adopted from David

(2011) and Shahin (2011) that were customized by utilizing the balanced scorecard spectrum

to cater for the multidimensionality of the variable.

4.4.1 Organizational Performance

The measurement of strategic planning outcome was conducted based on the

balanced scorecard methodology by assessing the four perspectives: customer, financial,

internal operations, learning and growth perspectives. Figure 4.8 indicate the best result was

under learning and growth perspective (10 organizations) assigning a fully achieved score

followed by internal operations (8 organizations) then customer (7) and finally the financial

perspective (6). The graph below depicts the performance across the four perspectives.

46

Figure 4.8: Strategic Planning Outcome

The other measure of performance was the overall performance against the sector

peers of the surveyed organizations. Figure 4.9 indicate that a larger proportion of the 33

sampled organizations believed they were in the upper (11) and the top quintile (17) of

performers in comparison to their peers. There was no respondent that considered itself

amongst those in the lowest quintile. Only one considered itself amongst the lower quintile

and four in the middle quintile. This demonstrates one of the weakness of using subjective

measures of performance with high reliance placed on integrity of the respondent.

47

Figure 4.9: Overall Organizational Performance

4.4.2 Strategic Planning and Performance

The relationship between the research variables was carried out through a

correlational analysis of the different stages in strategic planning process and performance

and also by applying regression analysis to test the association between strategic planning

and performance.

4.4.2.1 Correlations of Strategic Planning Components and Organizational

Performance

Table 4.6 below shows that the correlation between the strategic planning

components and organizational performance was generally positive: analysis (.48),

formulation (.21), implementation (.47) and control (.52). The correlation coefficients for all

phases of planning were statistically significant at the statistical significance level for the

48

study (p-value ≤ .05). This demonstrate that each phase of the strategic process contributes to

organizational performance with strategic control having the highest impact.

Table 4.6: Correlation Strategic Planning Phases and Organizational Performance

Correlations (N = 33)

Analysis Formulation Implementation Control Performance

Analysis Correlation 1

Formulation Correlation .435

* 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .011

Implementation Correlation .460

** .358* 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .007 .041

Control Correlation .465

** .256 .430* 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .006 .150 .013

Performance Correlation .478

** .212 .474** .523

** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .005 .237 .005 .002

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

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

4.4.2.2 Strategic Planning and Organizational Performance

A regression analysis was performed to test the relationship between strategic

planning process as the independent variable and organizational performance as the

dependent variable. The results of the analysis are presented in Table 4.7. The output

indicated a coefficient of determination (R Square) of .325, which means that 32.5 percent of

the variation in organizational performance was explained by changes in the strategic

planning process while 67.5 percent was explained by other factors not incorporated into the

model. The model was considered to have a low explanatory power in explaining changes in

organizational performance. Overall, the explanatory power of the model was considered

statistically significant with the ANOVA output of the model reporting a p-value of .001

which is less than .05. Therefore the null hypothesis was rejected and a conclusion arrived at

that there was a statistically significant relationship between the strategic planning process

and organizational performance. The same inference was arrived at by analyzing the beta co-

efficient of the strategic planning process (.570) which was also significant with a p-value of

.001.

49

Table 4.7: Regression Output of Strategic Planning and Performance

Model Summary

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate

1 .570a .325 .303 .505614

a. Predictors: (Constant), Strategic Planning

ANOVAa

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Regression 3.817 1 3.817 14.932 .001b

Residual 7.925 31 .256

Total 11.742 32

a. Dependent Variable: Performance

b. Predictors: (Constant), Strategic Planning

Coefficientsa

Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

(Constant) 1.322 .695 1.904 .066

Strategic Planning .651 .169 .570 3.864 .001

a. Dependent Variable: Performance

4.5 Employee Engagement as Moderator

The study proceeded to test whether employee engagement moderated the

relationship between strategic planning and organizational performance for public sector

organizations in Kenya.

4.5.1 Employee Engagement

The researcher assessed employee engagement as a composite of three variables:

understanding, commitment and involvement. Table 4.8 shows that commitment (3.98) had

the highest mean levels followed by understanding (3.90), which also had the largest

deviation while involvement was last with a mean level of 3.35.

Involvement variable had the least mean score of 3.35. This indicates that the

respondents were in agreement of top management efforts to seek their input during the

50

strategy process though they felt more could be done. They also believed that strategies were

more effective when employees were involved in the planning process. In offering their

input, they felt that the cascaded strategies were therefore not wholesomely strange to them.

Next was the understanding variable with a mean level of 3.9. The respondents

strongly agreed that strategic planning was an organizational concern with employees fully

understanding the formulated strategies and difference thereto from previous strategic

planning cycle. They also considered strategic planning as an organizational project and not

solely the concern of top management and therefore imperative for every employee to

understand its content and how it impacts on their work. They also stated their appreciation

of the strategic direction of their organizations in the next five years.

The commitment variable had the highest mean score at 3.98. The respondents felt

that employees were fully committed to implementation of strategies. In addition, they

believed there was greater co-ordination amongst all the department in their organization

during the process. Further, they felt that in implementing the strategy the organization

objective took preeminence as employees worried about how their jobs would affect the

strategy implementation and participated in the process even where it was not directly

beneficial to their department.

In summary, the output indicated that the respondents were agreeable that employees

across the organization had been involved in the strategy process which resulted in greater

levels of understanding amongst the employees that boosted commitment during

implementation of the strategic plan.

51

Table 4.8: Employee Engagement Components

Statistics (N=33)

Understanding Commitment Involvement Average

Mean 3.90 3.98 3.35 3.75

Std. Deviation .709 .592 .570 .453

Variance .504 .351 .326 .206

Range 2.50 2.33 3.00 1.72

Minimum 2.50 2.67 1.67 2.83

Maximum 5.00 5.00 4.67 4.56

Percentiles

25 3.25 3.00 3.00 3.39

50 4.00 3.33 3.33 3.80

75 4.50 3.67 3.67 4.07

Also, the respondents were required to assess the degree of engagement across

managerial levels in the strategic planning process. As expected, the top management had the

greatest level of engagement while non-managerial staff the least. Figure 4.10 below depicts

the position.

Figure 4.10: Level of Employee Engagement

52

4.5.2 Employee Engagement, Strategic Planning and Performance

The third objective of the study was to determine whether employee engagement had

any moderating effect on the relationship between strategic planning process and

organizational performance in public agencies in Kenya. This was determined foremost by

testing for correlations amongst the variables and thereafter testing for the moderation effect

using a multiple regression model that provided for the employee engagement variable as the

moderator.

4.5.2.1 Correlations of Employee Engagement and Strategic Planning

Table 4.9 shows that each phase of the strategic planning process is positively

correlated with employee engagement. The Pearson correlation with strategic formulation

was highest at .675, implementation at .477, analysis at .473 and finally control at .394. This

is an indication of the extent of engagement of employees in each of the phases of the

process and it can be inferred that the highest level of engagement was during strategy

formulation and the least at the control phase.

Table 4.9: Correlation of Research Variables

Strategic

Analysis

Strategy

Formulation

Strategy

Implementation

Strategy

Evaluation

Employee

Engagement

Strategic

Analysis Correlation

1

Strategy

Formulation

Correlation .435* 1

Sig. (2-

tailed)

.011

Strategy

Implementation

Correlation .460** .358

* 1

Sig. (2-

tailed)

.007 .041

Strategy

Evaluation

Correlation .465** .256 .430

* 1

Sig. (2-

tailed)

.006 .150 .013

Employee

Engagement

Correlation .473** .675

** .477** .394

* 1

Sig. (2-

tailed)

.005 .000 .005 .023

53

The employee engagement variable constituting of involvement, understanding and

commitment was broken down for further analysis. Table 4.10 depicts the highest

correlation to organization performance from the constituents of employee engagement

originated from the involvement sub-variable that had a 61.3 percent correlation, followed by

commitment with 24 percent and least was understanding component with 10 percent. This

shows any unit change in organizational performance was explained best by changes in

employee involvement to the tune of 61.3 percent.

Table 4.10: Component of Employee Engagement and Organization Performance

Correlations

Understanding Commitment Involvement Performance

Understanding

Correlation 1

Sig. (2-

tailed)

Commitment

Correlation .687**

1

Sig. (2-

tailed)

.000

Involvement

Correlation .140 -.030 1

Sig. (2-

tailed)

.437 .869

Performance

Correlation .442* .391

* .091 1

Sig. (2-

tailed)

.010 .024 .613

N 33 33 33 33

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

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

4.5.2.2 Employee Engagement, Strategic Planning and Performance

The study proceeded to test the moderation effect applying the process documented

by Rose (2010) that involved regressing the dependent variable (Y) on the suspected

moderator (Z) together with the independent variable (X) and the product of the two variable

(Y = X + Z + XZ). It was expected that the presence of moderation was to be detected by

the presence of a significant effect on the interaction term (XZ). In relation to the study, Y,

54

X, Z and XZ represented organizational performance, strategic planning process, employee

engagement and the moderating interaction variable respectively.

To dispel any concern of collinearity, a multicollinearity test was conducted by

checking at the variance inflation factor (VIF). A rule of thumb is that a VIF greater than 10

suggests a serious multicollinearity that might call for the variable(s) to be excluded from the

model (Myers, 1990). A review of the collinearity statistics on table 4.10 indicate that none

of the independent variable had a VIF above 6 confirming lack of multicollinearity between

the study variables. This allowed for further analysis to be conducted on the moderating

effect of employee engagement.

The model summary as depicted in Table 4.11 reveals two models with model 1

having only strategic planning as the independent variable and correlate with performance to

the tune of 57 percent. Model 2 incorporated employee engagement as an additional

independent variable together with the interaction effect variable whose correlation was 57.6

percent indicating a slight improvement. There was also a corresponding increase in the

explanatory of model 2 from 32.5 percent to 33.2 percent signifying that strategic planning

and employee engagement as independent variables explained 33.3 percent of the variation in

organizational performance denoting 0.7 percent increase in explanatory power. However,

the adjusted R Square declined from 30.3 percent to 28.8 percent an indication that if the

population instead of the sample was used to estimate performance then there would be a

weakening of the explanatory power by 1.5 percent.

In summary, the combined influence of strategic planning process and employee

engagement had a significant impact on organizational performance as depicted by model‟s

ANOVA p-value of 0.02 in Table 4.11. Additionally, employee engagement as the moderator

variable had a positive influence on the relationship between strategic planning and

performance as indicated by the beta co-efficient of the interaction term at .205. However,

the moderation effect was not statistically significant as demonstrated by the computed p-

value of the beta co-efficient which stood at .577 and was above .05. The study therefore

failed to reject the null hypothesis and concluded that employee engagement had no

significant moderating effect on the relationship between strategic planning process and

organizational performance.

55

Table 4.11: Regression Analysis Output of the Moderation Effect

Model Summary

Model R R

Square

Adjusted

R Square

Std.

Error of

the

Estimate

Change Statistics

R Square

Change

F

Change

df1 df2 Sig. F

Change

1 .570a .325 .303 .505614 .325 14.932 1 31 .001

2 .576b .332 .288 .511267 .007 .318 1 30 .577

a. Predictors: (Constant), Strategic Planning

b. Predictors: (Constant), Strategic Planning, Interaction Effect

ANOVAa

Model Sum of

Squares

df Mean Square F Sig.

1

Regression 3.817 1 3.817 14.932 .001b

Residual 7.925 31 .256

Total 11.742 32

2

Regression 3.901 2 1.950 7.461 .002c

Residual 7.842 30 .261

Total 11.742 32

a. Dependent Variable: Performance

b. Predictors: (Constant), Strategic Planning

c. Predictors: (Constant), Strategic Planning, Interaction Effect

Coefficientsa

Model Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig. Collinearity

Statistics

B Std.

Error

Beta Tolerance VIF

1

(Constant) 1.322 .695 1.904 .066

Strategic

Planning

.651 .169 .570 3.864 .001 1.000 1.000

2

(Constant) 1.654 .915 1.806 .081

Strategic

Planning

.438 .414 .384 1.058 .298 .169 5.905

Interaction

Effect

.034 .061 .205 .564 .577 .169 5.905

a. Dependent Variable: Performance

56

4.6 Chapter Summary

The chapter presented a summary of the research findings for the three research

questions through a data analysis of the census. The research data was summarized through

use of tables and graphs with a combination of descriptive and inferential statistics utilized.

Thereafter the hypotheses for each of the respective research questions was tested resulting to

the rejection or failure to reject the null hypothesis. Chapter five, which is the last chapter

presents a discussion on the research findings and concludes by providing implications and

recommendations.

57

CHAPTER FIVE

5.0 DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Introduction

This chapter provides a discussion on the study findings for each research questions

by providing its consistency and deviation to previous empirical studies. The chapter

commences with a summary of the study by highlighting the research problem, data

collection methods and abridged findings for each of the research questions. In subsequent

sections, the researcher provides a detailed discussion, conclusion and recommendations for

further research for each research questions.

5.2 Summary

The primary purpose of this study was to establish whether employee engagement

had a moderating effect on the relationship between strategic planning and performance

across public organizations in Kenya. The study also examined the extent to which formal

strategic planning was practiced, and its relationship with performance of public

organizations.

A census was adopted for the study that comprised 86 public organizations in Kenya. These

organizations had adopted strategic management through formulation and implementation of

strategic plans. Data was collected through a self-administered questionnaire that was

analyzed through a computer analytical program. The data analysis was carried out using

descriptive and inferential statistics.

First, in tackling the problem, the research reviewed the formal strategic planning

process and empirically tested its application amongst the sampling unit in the census. The

strategic planning process was divided into four stages: analysis, formulation,

implementation, and control. A Likert scale of 0 to 5 representing strongly disagree to

strongly agree was utilized in testing the extent the different stages were being practiced by

public sector organizations in Kenya. Overall, the strategic planning process was to a greater

extent formal with a mean score of 4.0. A review of the sub-process indicated that strategy

analysis had a mean score (4.3) followed by strategy formulation (4.2), strategy evaluation

(3.9) and strategic implementation (3.7) respectively. This evidence demonstrated the

58

formality of strategic planning across public organizations in Kenya. This was verified by a

majority of the respondents who affirmed that their organization had formalized the strategic

planning process across the different stages with different players involved in each stage with

top management playing a critical role.

Secondly, the study proceeded to test the relationship between strategic planning

process and organizational performance. In testing this relationship, organizational

performance was measured by utilizing the arithmetic mean scores under the four perspective

of the balance scorecard. The best outcome was reported under the learning and growth

perspective closely followed by improvement in internal operations through enhanced co-

ordination amongst departments. Next was level of customer satisfaction under the customer

perspective while the financial perspective was reported as the worst. The study findings

revealed that strategic planning process had a positive significant influence on organizational

performance with 32.5% of the variation in performance explained by changes in the

strategic planning process. The findings also established that each stage of the planning

process significantly contributed to organizational performance with strategic control having

the highest correlation at 52% followed by analysis (48%), then implementation (47%) and

finally formulation (21%).

Finally, the assessment of the moderating effect indicated that employee engagement

had a positive impact on the relationship between strategic planning process and

organizational performance. The findings confirmed the presence of all the three components

of employee engagement: employee involvement, understanding and commitment in the

strategic planning process, which defined employee engagement. The study found out that a

majority of the respondents were in agreement that their organizations had involved

employees in the strategic planning process thereby increasing the probability of the

articulated strategy was better understood across the organization and also high commitment

levels during its implementation. The study therefore revealed that employees in public

organizations apart from top management were involved though in varying degree in the

strategic planning process that appeared to have triggered better understanding and

commitment. Important was the assessment of the moderating effect that indicated employee

59

engagement positively influenced the relationship between strategic planning process and

organizational performance. However, the moderation effect was not statistically significant.

5.3 Discussion

5.3.1 Strategic Planning Process in Kenyan Public Sector

The study findings confirmed the formality of strategic planning process in public

sector in Kenya. This means that the different stages in the planning process are carried out

systematically with clear demarcation of each stage and its linkages with other stages and its

expected input and output. The study exposed that prior to formulating their strategy, public

organizations carried out a situational analysis that guided their strategy formulation and

implementation and periodically reviewed their position by improving on areas of

shortcomings. This finding is consistent with the planning school of strategy formulation as

presented by Mintzberg (2009) who manifestly formulate their plans before proceeding to

implement them.

The findings revealed the involvement by board of directors in the initiation of the

process through ratification of the exercise. This is an indication that the board appreciated

the importance of strategic planning in their respective organizations and in discharge of their

leadership role offered strategic direction by approving its implementation. This is very

important as it offers credence to the process and can encourage top management to fully

embrace the idea with the backing of the board already assured. In addition, all organizations

had clearly spelt out mandates that were enshrined in legislation. This is essential in the

strategy process as it outlines the future direction of the organization and can allow for

optimized resource allocation in line with the strategic fit to achieve the set goals (Zandi et

al., 2013). Management therefore understood their boundaries and in formulating their

strategies confined themselves to what was legally acceptable. Their vision and mission

statement were also consistent to their mandate and were widely communicated to its

stakeholders.

The study also indicated the great extent to which public managers appraised their

operating environment by utilizing diverse strategic analysis tools in an effort to better

understand their stakeholders‟ needs. The most widely used strategic analysis tools were the

60

SWOT analysis and stakeholder analysis that was consistent with the findings of Shahin

(2011). The strategic analysis phase provides the organization with an opportunity to

understand its environment both internal and external and establish a strategic fit through

formulating strategies that are responsive to its stakeholders and consistent with

organization‟s mandate. Public managers ought to employ this phase to unearth their

organization‟s strengths and weaknesses that can be applied to take advantage of existing

opportunities in the external environment whilst mitigating against any possible threats.

Specifically crucial is the identification and inclusion of key stakeholders, who have diverse

interests, as they possess the power to either break or spur the process. Adewale and Munano

(2012) claim that in the public sector the inclusion of key stakeholders is not a necessity but

rather an obligation. Therefore it is imperative for all public organizations to incorporate

their stakeholders in this process.

In addition, it was revealed that the strategic issues emanating from the analysis phase

was utilized in the strategy formulation phase and also there was proper allocation of

responsibility. Fard et al (2011) highlights the importance of developing performance

measures at this juncture to facilitate proper tracking of achievement of goals during the

implementation and control phase. This problem emanates from the diverse interest of

stakeholders that result in multiplicity and ambiguity of goals prevalent in the public sector.

Another key finding was that a majority of the public organizations had a planning horizon of

up to five years. This predominant planning horizon matched the electoral cycle in Kenya

and might be an indication of the political influence whereby each ruling regime strives to

actualize their political party manifesto to justify their re-election. Baile (1998) claim that the

planning period in the public sector is usually shortened due to the influence from political

leaders, whose tenure in office is relatively short and have the propensity for quick fixes.

Their myopic view coupled with the frequency of turnover of these leaders may discourage

public managers from initiating long-term projects.

The study established that public organizations in Kenya implement their strategic

plans. This is an action oriented phase that translates the formulated strategies into actionable

form. It can be inferred that public managers in Kenya appreciate that formulated strategies

are useless without implementation. Wairimu and Theuri (2014) assert that those charged

61

with the implementation of strategic plans ought to be more concerned about its content and

how it impacts their work. This calls for a thorough understanding of the plan that can be

improved through effective communication. It is therefore important for public managers to

initiate linkages within the strategic planning process that will facilitate transfer of relevant

information to assist those charged with implementation of the plan in discharging their

duties effectively and efficiently.

In relation to strategy control, the study findings disclosed that this phase was not

exclusively deliberate as there was agreement to revisions of existing plans to accommodate

changes in the environment. Rose (2010) emphasize that though these changes may be

reactive but it affords organizations some latitude to avoid a destructive course and therefore

the explicit strategies are to some extent flexible in that they act as guidelines that ought not

to hinder exploitation of any opportunities in the operating environment.

5.3.2 Strategic Planning Process and Organizational Performance in Public Sector

The study established that each stage of the strategic planning process positively

influenced organizational performance. According to Shahin (2011), the strategic planning

stages complement each other and may not be singularly linear. Therefore managers ought to

look at the process from a holistic perspective and avoid the temptation of breaking it into

parts. This will increase the probability of organizations enjoying the anticipated benefits.

This calls for consistency and commitment in executing each stage as the success of the

process is dependent on each of the strategic planning stages.

Further, the study revealed that the major outcome of adopting strategic planning by

organizations in the public sector was continuous learning and improvement through

innovation. This means that strategic planning stimulates strategic thinking and learning

through exchanges amongst players in the process. The study findings are consistent with

those of Sanders (2011) who adduced evidence on the benefits of participation in the

strategic planning and recommended for the inclusion of employees as their diverse

background is bound to enrich the process and knowledge transfer leading to better

organizational outcomes.

62

Another closely linked finding was the improvement in internal operations as a result

of enhanced co-ordination thereby improving decision making. This may be attributed not

only to participation but also effective communication that is likely to reduce conflicts

because every employee is clear on what is expected of them. A predominant theme from

previous studies is the vital role communication plays at every phase of the planning process.

Therefore it is imperative for managers in the public sector to install proper communication

structures in their organizations to boost the process. An anticipated outcome that never

materialized was for the customer satisfaction perspective to rank as the best strategic

planning outcome since the bottom line in the public sector is service delivery.

The major finding was that strategic planning process has a positive and significant

relationship on performance of public organizations in Kenya. This suggests that any public

organization that is engaged in strategic planning is bound to perform better in comparison to

its peers who do not have strategic plans. The findings are consistent with prescriptive

literature in strategy and empirical studies (Glaister et al., 2008; Arasa & K‟obonyo, 2012). A

justification provided for outperforming non-planners is that organizations that plan are

likely to recognize opportunities and threats faster and hence make better decisions (Falshaw

et al, 2006). It is therefore essential for the government to ensure that any public organization

that is yet to introduce strategic planning in their operations to do so as it is bound to improve

their performance.

5.3.3 Moderating Effect of Employee Engagement on the Relationship between

Strategic Planning Process and Organizational Performance

The study revealed employee engagement positively impacts on the linkage between

strategic planning process and organizational performance. This positive relationship is

consistent with management theory that view employee involvement in strategic planning as

a vital component in the achievement of organizational goals (Tergaden et al., 2005).

Although the relationship was positive, the moderation effect was not statically significant.

This means that though in theory it is expected that employee engagement will positively

enhance the relationship between strategic planning process and performance, the research

findings showed that this might essentially not be the case. An explanation for this is offered

by Adewale and Munano (2012) who state that a forceful inclusion of employees through a

63

command-based approach may generate adverse outcomes and implores that involvement of

employees in the process should be encouraged but on a voluntary basis.

The ultimate outcome of forced participation will be a disgruntled workforce that is

less concerned or might willingly ignore the content of the plan resulting to resistance in

implementing the articulated plan. This will result in dismal performance by the public

organization. On the other hand, as explained by Beehr et al (2009), through voluntary

participation, employees can appreciate the linkage of their individual roles in furtherance of

the organizational mission thereby creating a sense of belonging and commitment to the

organization. Effective communication breeds understanding amongst employees as it

permits free flow of information during the iterative strategic planning process with a blend

of top-down and bottom-up approaches that permits for better decision making as

information flow freely and with less resistance (Suklev & Debarliev, 2012). The

consequence will be an internal strategic alignment that converts employees from mere

spectators to actors who discharge their duties as good soldiers in implementing the

directives of their bosses.

Notwithstanding, the study revealed that the degree of participation in the planning

process varied depending with the level of management. The degree of participation was

directly correlated with the level of management with top management having the highest

level of involvement and support staff the least. This is in conformity with the rational

typology of strategic planning process that posits involvement of all employees at varying

degrees with top management overseeing the entire process (Tegarden et al., 2003). In

Kenya, Wairimu and Theuri (2014) found out that employees in public sector organizations

are involved in the strategic planning process dependent on their rank and responsibility in

the organization. Their findings revealed that senior and middle level managers were fully

involved but junior staff were less involved. The resultant effect was resistance and

demotivation from these staff, which is a barrier to strategy implementation. They

recommend for inclusion of the junior employees for consensus building and ownership of

the plan by everyone in the organization.

It must be noted, in the modern age, decision making is no longer exclusive to top

management but in embracing inclusiveness management are bound to benefit from the

64

knowledge workers who can offer valuable insight during the strategy process (Lentz, 2007).

This calls for a supportive organizational culture that can be enacted and enshrined by top

management (Petter et al., 2002).The managerial implication is that while top management

ought to offer leadership by clearly articulating the vision that outline the direction the

organization will take to achieve its mission. It is also imperative for them to tap into this

intellectual capital and experience available across their organization by involving their

employees in the strategy process. This can only be possible where the leadership has

inculcated a participatory organizational culture. Parnell, Carraher and Holt (2002) also

concludes that involvement will be more effective in organizations that have a participative

culture. The results suggest the perception of greater participation may result in more

effective dissemination of the organization‟s strategy and greater decision effectiveness.

5.4 Conclusion

5.4.1 Strategic Planning Process

The study concludes that strategic planning by public organizations in Kenya is a

rational and formal process. Public organizations carry out an analysis of their environment

that contributes to the formulation and implementation of their adopted strategy that are

periodically reviewed. Additionally public sector organizations in their analysis primarily

utilize SWOT analysis and stakeholder analysis that caters for the multiplicity of

stakeholders in the public organizations as a means to enhance their buy-in and support.

Finally, control of strategy is observable amongst these organizations as most monitor and

evaluate their strategic plans.

5.4.2 Strategic Planning and Organizational Performance

The study established that public organizations who have implemented formal

strategic planning are bound to improve on their performances because strategic planning has

a positive significant influence on firm performance. In addition, strategic planning spurs

innovation in the public sector while ensuring internal co-ordination amongst departments

that results in better service delivery to the citizens. It also improves efficiency of operations.

65

5.4.3 The Moderating Effect of Employee Engagement

The study findings leads to a conclusion that engaging employees in the strategic

planning process positively impacts organizational performance. However, this relationship

was not statistically significant and consequently the study determines that employee

engagement does not moderate the relationship between strategic planning process and

organizational performance. This means that engaging employees in the strategic planning

process will not significantly in any way influence the strength of the relationship between

strategic planning process and organizational performance.

5.5 Recommendations

5.5.1 Recommendations from Study

The recommendations are presented in line with the research questions of the study.

5.5.1.1 Strategic Planning Process

This study recommends carrying out the strategic planning process in its entirety and

discourages against halting mid-stream in order to enjoy the full benefits. Another

recommendation is for public organizations to augment their environmental analysis and

ensure they integrate all the key stakeholders who will articulate their needs to be

incorporated in the strategic plan to be implemented. Finally, the top management are

encouraged to install effective communication structures to assist in co-ordination of the

strategic planning process especially the formulation and implementation phases.

5.5.1.2 Strategic Planning and Organizational Performance

The findings advocates for the public organizations to institutionalize strategic

planning as it is bound to improve performance in monetary and non-monetary forms. It is

therefore imperative for the government to ensure that all its agencies yet to adopt strategic

planning to initiate strategic management for better service delivery to its citizens.

5.5.1.3 Employee Engagement in Strategic Planning

The study recommends for inclusion of all employees in the strategic planning

process in varying degrees to stimulate ownership and improve their understanding of the

strategic plan and how it relates to their work as this is bound to ease its implementation.

66

5.5.2 Recommendations for Further Studies

The study recommends for further research to be conducted on factors that moderate

the relationship between strategic planning process and performance. First, the study can be

replicated in other sectors of the economy. In addition, researchers can also incorporate other

strategic planning school. Furthermore, it is recommended that future research should

consider narrowing down on the different levels of management and test the moderating

effect at each level. Similarly the moderation effect can be narrowed down to the different

phases of the strategic planning process. On performance, there is need to incorporate

objective measures to overcome the adverse impact of perception measures that are highly

susceptible to errors. Finally, future research should consider utilizing longitudinal data to

effectually measure the impact of strategy over time. The implementation of the above

recommendation is bound to generate more evidence that will advance the strategic

management theory.

67

REFERENCE

Adewale, A. R., & Munano, M. E. (2012). The Relationship between Stakeholders‟

Involvement in Strategic Planning and Organisation‟s Performance - A Study of the

University of Venda. International Business & Economics Research Journal (IBER),

11(11), 1175-1190.

Arasa, R. & K‟obonyo, P. (2012). The Relationship between Strategic Planning and Firm

Performance. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 2(22), 201-

213.

Baile, K. (1998). A Study of Strategic Planning in Federal Organization. (PhD Thesis,

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University). Retrieved from

http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses

Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The Moderator-Mediator Variable distinction in

Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.

Beehr, T.A., Glazer, S., Fischer, R., Linton, L.L., & Hansen, C.P. (2009). Antecedents for

Achievement of Alignment in Organizations. Journal of Occupational and

Organizational Psychology, 82(1), 1–20.

Boyne, G. A. (2002). Concepts and Indicators of Local Authority Performance: An

Evaluation of the Statutory Framework in England and Wales. Public Money and

Management, 22 (1), 17–24.

Boyne, G. A., & Walker, R. M. (2010). Strategic Management and Public Service

Performance: The Way Ahead. Public Administration Review, 70(1), 185-192.

Boyne, G., & Gould-Williams, J. S. (2003). Planning and Performance in Public

Organizations, Public Management Review, 5(1), 115-132.

68

Bryson, J. M. (1988). A Strategic Planning Process for Public and Non-profit organizations.

Long Range Planning, 21(1), 73-81.

Bryson, J. M. (2010). The Future of Public and Nonprofit Strategic Planning in the United

States. Public Administration Review, 70(1), 255-267.

Burnside, C. J. (2002).The Relationship between the Scope and Formality of Strategic

Planning and Organizational Performance (PhD Thesis, Nova Southeastern

University). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Database

Cohen M. (2006). Public Sector Strategic Planning: Is it really planning or is it really

strategy or is it neither or both? (Thesis, University of Maryland University College).

Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Database.

David, R. F. (2011). Strategic Management: Concepts and Cases (13 ed). New Jersey:

Prentice Hall.

Edwards, L. M. (2012). Strategic Planning in Local Government: is the Promise of

Performance a Reality? (Dissertation, Georgia State University). Retrieved from

http://scholarworks.gsu.edu/cgi

Falshaw, J.R., Glaister, K.W., & Tatoglu, E., (2006) Evidence on Formal Strategic Planning

and Company Performance, Management Decision, 44(1), 9-30.

Fard, H. D., Moshabbaki, A., Abbasi, T., & Hassanpoor, A. (2011). Strategic Management in

the Public Sector: Reflections on its Applicability to Iranian Public Organizations.

Public Organization Review, 11(4), 385-406.

Gilbert, D. U., & Behnam, M. (2009). Strategy Process Management in Multinational

Companies: Status Quo, Deficits and Future Perspectives. Problems and Perspectives

in Management, 7(1), 59-74.

69

Gill, P. S. (2012). An investigation of employee engagement and business outcomes at an

engineering services firm (Doctoral dissertation, College of Technology Eastern

Michigan University). Retrieved from http://commons.emich.edu/cgi

Glaister, K. W., Dincer, O., Tatoglu, E., Demirbag, M., & Zaim, S. (2008). A Causal

Analysis of Formal Strategic Planning and Firm Performance: Evidence from an

Emerging Country. Management Decision, 46(3), 365-391.

Hope Sr, K. R. (2013). Managing the Public Sector in Kenya: Reform and Transformation

for Improved Performance. Journal of Public Administration and Governance, 2(4),

128-143.

Kiliko, J., Atandi, B., & Awino, Z. (2012). Strategic Planning in Turbulent Environment: A

Conceptual View. DBA Africa Management Review, 3(1), 73-89.

Kithinji, N. (2012). Challenges of strategy formulation and implementation at Achilles Kenya

Ltd (Doctoral dissertation, University of Nairobi). Retrieved from

http://erepository.uonbi.ac.ke/handle/11295/10977

Kivits, R. A. (2011). Three Component Stakeholder Analysis. International Journal of

Multiple Research Approaches, 5(3), 318-333.

Kohtamäki, M., Kraus, S., Mäkelä, M., & Rönkkö, M. (2012). The Role of Personnel

Commitment to Strategy Implementation and Organisational Learning within the

Relationship between Strategic Planning and Company Performance. International

Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 18(2), 159-178.

Lebans, M., & Euske, K. (2006). A conceptual and operational delineation of performance.

Business Performance Measurement, Cambridge University Press

Mansour, E.Z., Mohammed, H.Y., & Abdulaziz, A. (2013). Strategic Management Practices

in the Local Authorities: Factors Associated with Adoption of Strategic Management

practices in the local authorities. Journal of Contemporary Research in Business,

5(3), 739–744.

70

Markos, S., & Sridevi, M. (2010). Employee Engagement: The Key to Improving

Performance. International Journal of Business & Management, 5(12), 89-96.

McBain, L., & Smith, J. (2010). Strategic management in the public sector. In the papers

from E-Leader Conference. Singapore: 2010 Accessed from www.g-casa.com

Miller, T., Triana, M., Reutzel, C, R., Certo, T. (2007). Mediation in Strategic Management

Research: Conceptual Beginnings, Current Application, and Future

Recommendations. Research Methodology in Strategy and Management, 4, 295-318.

Mintzberg, H., Ahlstrand, B., & Lampel, J. (2009). Strategy safari: Your complete guide

through the wilds of strategic management. FT Prentice Hall, Harlow, UK.

Myers, R. (1990). Classical and Modern Regression with Applications, 2nd Ed, Boston, MA,

Duxbury.

Namada, J. M., Aosa, E., Awino, Z., & Wainaina, G. (2014). Management Participation and

Firm Performance. American Journal of Industrial and Business Management, 4,

113-122.

Nashwa, G. & Laila, E. (2013). The Impact of Strategic Planning on Egyptian Non-profits‟

Performance: An Assessment Using the Balanced Scorecard. Journal of US-China

Public Administration, 10(1), 57-76.

Obong'o, S.R. (2009). Implementation of Performance Contracting In Kenya. International

Public Management Review, 10(2), 66-84.

Ouakouak, M. L., & Ouedraogo, N. (2013). The Mediating role of Employee Strategic

Alignment in the Relationship between Rational Strategic Planning and Firm

Performance: A European Study. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences,

30(3), 143-158.

Parnell, J. A. (2008). Strategy Execution in Emerging Economies: Assessing Strategic

Diffusion in Mexico and Peru. Management Decision, 46(9), 1277-1298.

71

Petter, J., Byrnes, P., Choi, D. L., Fegan, F., & Miller, R. (2002). Dimensions and Patterns in

Employee Empowerment: Assessing What Matters to Street-level Bureaucrats.

Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 12(3), 377-400.

Poister, T.H., & Streib, G. D. (1999). Strategic Management in the Public Sector. Public

Productivity & Management Review, 22(3), 308-325.

Rose, W. R. (2010). The Role of Context in the Transformation of Planned Strategy into

Implemented Strategy (Doctoral dissertation, Carleton University). Retrieved from

Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Database.

Rudd, J.M., Greenley, G.E., Beatson, A.T., & Lings, N., (2008). Strategic Planning and

Performance: Extending the Debate. Journal of Business Research, 61, 99–108.

Saunders, M. N., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research methods for business students

(5th

Ed.). London, England: Education.

Shahin, B. (2011). Evaluating the effectiveness of strategic planning within the Middle

Eastern public sector (Doctoral dissertation, Victoria University). Retrieved from

http://vuir.vu.edu.au/19416/

Slater, F.S., Olson, E. M., Hult, M., (2006). The Moderating Influence of Strategic

Orientation on the Strategic Orientation on the Strategy Formation Capability-

Performance Relationship, Strategic Management Journal, 27(1), 1221-1231

Slevin, D.P. & Covin, J.G. (1997). Strategy Formation Patterns, Performance and the

Significance of Context. Journal of Management, 23(2), 189-209.

Stringer, C. (2007).The Relationship between the Strategic Alignment, Meaningful Work and

Employee Engagement (PhD Thesis, University of New Mexico). Retrieved from

ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Database

72

Tegarden, L. F., Sarason, Y., & Banbury, C. (2003). Linking Strategy Processes to

Performance Outcomes in Dynamic Environments: The Need to Target Multiple

Bull's eyes. Journal of Managerial Issues, 15(2), 133-153

Tegarden, L. F., Sarason, Y., Childers, J. S., & Hatfield, D. E. (2005). The Engagement of

Employees in the Strategy Process and Firm Performance: The Role of Strategic

Goals and Environment. Journal of Business Strategies, 22(2), 75-99.

The Institute of Internal Auditors. (2011). Supplemental Guidance: Public Sector Definition.

Retrieved from https://na.theiia.org/

The Presidential Taskforce on Parastatal Reforms (PTPRs). (2013). Report of the

Presidential Taskforce on Parastatal Reforms. Retrieved from:

http://www.cofek.co.ke/Report%20of%20The%20Presidential%20Task%20force%2

0on%20Parastatal%20Reforms.pdf

Ugboro, I. O., Obeng, K., & Spann, O. (2011). Strategic Planning As an Effective Tool of

Strategic Management in Public Sector Organizations Evidence from Public Transit

Organizations. Administration & Society, 43(1), 87-123.

Wairimu, N., & Theuri, F. (2014). Factors That Influence the Level of Staff Involvement in

the Strategic Planning Process in Public Institutions. Journal of Business and

Management (IOSR-JBM), 16(4), 21-27.

Wandjiva, J. T. (2011). An Explanatory Study on Strategic Planning and The Role of

Communication in the Public Service of Namibia with Specific Reference to the

Ministry of Gender Equality and Child Welfare (Doctoral dissertation, Leeds

Metropolitan University). Retrieved from

http://dspace.polytechnic.edu.na/handle/10628/300

Zandi, G., Sulaiman, M., Al Atiyat, H. M., & Naysary, B. (2013). The Strategic Planning

Process and Current Practices: A Comparative Empirical Study of UMW Toyota

Motor and Chemical Company of Malaysia. Asian Social Science, 9(9), 185-196

73

APPENDINCES

Appendix I: Introductory Letter

The Chief Executive Officer

Name of State Corporation

P.O. Box xxxx - xxxx

Town – Kenya

Dear Sir/Madam,

RE: REQUEST FOR ACADEMIC RESEARCH DATA

I am currently pursuing my MBA at the United States International University (USIU) and

finalizing on my thesis. My study is titled: “The Moderating Effect of Employee Engagement

on the Relationship between Strategic Planning and Organizational Performance”. The

study will focus on public organizations in Kenya.

I am therefore writing to request for research data from your corporation. The information

collected will be considered highly confidential and will be used for academic purposes only.

Kindly find attached an introductory letter from the university, and a copy of my research

questionnaire. Your assistance is highly appreciated.

Yours faithfully,

Dennis Oluoch

Email: oluochdennis@gmail.com

74

Appendix II: Research Questionnaire

PART A: GENERAL INFORMATION

1. Name of Organization :

2. Which government ministry does your organization fall under:

3. What is your position in the organization:

4. Your gender (Tick appropriately): Male [ ] Female [ ]

5. Current number of employees in your organization (Tick appropriately):

Less 50 [ ] 50-100 [ ] 101-150 [ ] 150-200 [ ] 201-250 [ ] Over 250 [ ]

6. In which industry does your organization operate (Tick appropriately):

Agriculture [ ]

Education [ ]

Energy [ ]

Financial [ ]

Health [ ]

Infrastructure [ ]

Telecommunication [ ]

Trade [ ]

Other [Specify…………………………………………………………..] [ ]

75

PART B: STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS

7. Does your organization have a written strategic plan? Yes [ ] No [ ]

[Tick appropriately. If your answer to question number 7 is NO then proceed to Part

C]

8. Which time horizon does your organization consider within strategic planning? (Tick

appropriately. )

1- 3 years [ ]

3 – 5 years [ ]

5 – 8 years [ ]

More than 8 years [ ]

9. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements regarding strategic

planning in your organization? (Tick appropriately)

1=Strongly Disagree; 2=Disagree; 3=Not Sure; 4=Agree; 5=Strongly Agree

Initiating and agreeing on a strategic planning process 1 2 3 4 5

i. An agreement was reached by the board of directors about the

purpose of strategic planning before starting the process of strategic

planning

ii. An agreement was reached among the board of directors about who

should be involved in the process of strategic planning

iii. The steps of the strategic planning formation process were agreed on

and documented before starting the process

Optional (1). Please provide more information if necessary:

Organizational Mandate 1 2 3 4 5

iv. In our organization, the interpretation of what is required/prohibited

by the mandate is clear

76

v. Our organization‟s formal and informal mandates are clearly

communicated among the participants in the strategic planning

process

Optional (2). Please provide more information if necessary:

Vision Statement 1 2 3 4 5

vi. The vision statement clarifies organizational visionary goals and the

organization‟s position in the future

vii. The vision statement is widely circulated and communicated among

…Employees

viii. The vision statement is widely circulated and communicated

among…External Stakeholders

Optional (3). Please provide more information if necessary:

Mission Statement 1 2 3 4 5

xi. The developed mission statement:

Clarifies the purpose of existence

Clarifies the optimum goals

Provides a framework by which strategies are formulated

x. The mission statement is widely circulated and communicated

among …Employees

The mission statement is widely circulated and communicated

among … External Stakeholders

77

Optional (4). Please provide more information if necessary:

Assessing the Environment & Strategic Issues 1 2 3 4 5

xi. A comprehensive strategic analysis was conducted as part of the

strategic planning process

(Strategic analysis: an examination of the possible or probable effects the internal

„organizational‟ and/or external „environmental‟ forces and conditions have on the

organization‟s success)

xii. What types of internal and external environmental analysis tools were used? – choose from

the following list:

a. SWOT Analysis Yes No

b. PESTEL Yes No

c. Stakeholder Analysis Yes No

d. Benchmarking Yes No

e. Critical success factor analysis Yes No

f. Other (Specify)……………………… Yes No

xiii. Strategic issues facing your organization, division, or department

have been clearly identified

xvi. The strategic issues were used to formulate the strategies and plans

Optional (5). Please provide more information if necessary:

Strategies and Plans Development 1 2 3 4 5

xv. A strategy map was developed for the organizational level you were

involved in

* A strategy map is a visual, single-page representation of the four components of an

organization‟s strategy, the relationships between an organization‟s financial, customer,

internal process, and learning and growth perspectives.

xvi. During the strategic planning formation process, it was decided what

current strategies should be kept, improved, or stopped

xvii. During the strategic planning formation process, it was decided what

new strategies and plans should be initiated, when, why, and by

78

whom

xviii. The developed strategies and plans were implemented successfully

Optional (6). Please provide more information if necessary:

Monitoring & Evaluation 1 2 3 4 5

xix. The execution of the strategies and plans are monitored

xx. The outcomes of the strategies and plans have been evaluated

xxi. Some of the strategies, systems, policies, and goals were revised as a

result of the evaluation process

Optional (7). Please provide more information if necessary:

PART C: STRATEGIC PLANNING OUTCOME

10. Indicate to what extent your organization‟s strategy has achieved the following? (Tick

appropriately)

1=Not at all; 2=Little Extent; 3=Moderate Extent; 4=Great Extent; 5=Fully Achieved

STRATEGIC PLANNING OUTCOME 1 2 3 4 5

i. Customer satisfaction through provision of value-adding services or

products

ii. Efficiency in allocation of organizational resources

iii. Continuous learning and improvement through innovations

iv. Improved co-ordination and control of organizational activities

11. Please tick () the choice that best describes your organization‟s performance in

comparison to its peers in your ministry.

Characteristic Lowest

20%

Next

20%

Middle

20%

Next

20%

Top

20%

Overall firm performance/success

79

PART D: EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT

12. Do your employees participate in the strategic planning process? Yes [ ] No [ ]

[Tick appropriately). If your answer to question number 9 is NO then do not complete

the remaining bit of this questionnaire]

13. Where employees participate in strategic planning, to what extent do you agree or

disagree with the following statements regarding strategic planning in your organization?

Assign a score beside each statement ( Scores Range: 1=Strongly Disagree; 2=Disagree;

3=Not Sure; 4=Agree; 5=Strongly Agree)

Strongly

Disagree Disagree Not Sure Agree Strongly Agree

1 2 3 4 5

EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT Score

a. Employees fully understand the strategy our organization is attempting to

implement

b. Employees know how our present strategy differs from that which was

developed last year

c. Strategy is top management‟s problem; employees don‟t have time to

understand all of the details

d. I know where our organization intends to be in five years

e. Employees are committed to seeing that our organizational strategy is

effectively implemented

f. Employees don‟t worry about implementing strategy; employees just do their

job

g. Employees don‟t concern themselves with implementing strategies if they are

not beneficial to their department

h. Departments in our company tend to be less concerned with working together

and more concerned with competing for resources

i. Our organization is most successful when everyone works to implement a

common strategy

j. Developing our organizational strategy is often a waste of time

k. Our board of trustees and top management ask for employees input concerning

the direction of the organization ought to take

l. When strategic or policy decisions are cascaded to staff, they often come as a

surprise

m. Our strategies would be more effective if employees had a greater opportunity

to contribute their opinions

80

14. Specify the degree of participation of the listed levels of management in the strategic

planning process ( Scores Range: 5 = Very engaged , 1 = No engagement)

Degree of Participation 1 2 3 4 5

i. Top Level Management

ii. Middle Level Management

iii. Lower Level Management

iv. Non – Managerial

-Thank You-

81

Appendix III: Public Sector Organization with Strategic Plans

No CORPORATION MINISTRY

1 Agricultural Finance Corporation National Treasury

2 Agro-Chemical and Food Company

Agriculture, Livestock &

Fisheries

3 Anti-Counterfeit Agency

Industrialization & Enterprise

Development

4 Brand Kenya Board

Information and

Communication

5 Capital Markets Authority National Treasury

6 Chemelil Sugar Company Ltd

Agriculture, Livestock &

Fisheries

7 Coffee Development Fund

Agriculture, Livestock &

Fisheries

8 Commission for University Education

Education Science and

Technology

9 Cotton Development Authority

Agriculture, Livestock &

Fisheries

10 East African Portland Cement Company Ltd

Industrialization & Enterprise

Development

11 Energy Regulatory Commission Energy & Petroleum

12 Export Processing Zones Authority

Industrialization & Enterprise

Development

13 Export Promotion Council (EPC)

East African Affairs,

Commerce & Tourism

14 Higher Education Loans Board

Education Science and

Technology

15 Horticultural Crops Development Authority

Agriculture, Livestock &

Fisheries

16

Industrial and Commercial Development

Corporation

Industrialization & Enterprise

Development

17 Insurance Regulatory Authority National Treasury

18 Jomo Kenyatta Foundation

Education Science and

Technology

19

Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture And

Technology

Education Science and

Technology

20

Kenya Accountants & Secretaries National

Examination Board (KASNEB)

National Treasury

21 Kenya Agricultural Research Institute

Agriculture, Livestock &

Fisheries

22 Kenya Airports Authority (KAA) Transport & Infrastructure

23 Kenya Bureau of Standard

Industrialization & Enterprise

Development

24 Kenya Civil Aviation Authority Transport & Infrastructure

82

No CORPORATION MINISTRY

25 Kenya Forest Service

Environment, Water & Natural

Resources

26 Kenya Forestry Research Institute

Environment, Water & Natural

Resources

27 Kenya Industrial Estates (KIE)

Industrialization & Enterprise

Development

28 Kenya Industrial Research & Development Institute

Industrialization & Enterprise

Development

29 Kenya Investment Authority

Industrialization & Enterprise

Development

30 Kenya Marine and Fisheries Research

Agriculture, Livestock &

Fisheries

31 Kenya Maritime Authority Transport & Infrastructure

32 Kenya National Bureau of Statistics Devolution & Planning

33 Kenya National Examination Council

Education Science and

Technology

34 Kenya National Highways Authority Transport & Infrastructure

35 Kenya National Library Service (KNLS) Sports, Culture & The Arts

36 Kenya National Trading Corporation

East African Affairs,

Commerce & Tourism

37 Kenya Pipeline Company (KPC) Energy & Petroleum

38 Kenya Plant Health Inspectorate Services (KEPHIS)

Agriculture, Livestock &

Fisheries

39 Kenya Ports Authority (KPA) Transport & Infrastructure

40 Kenya Railways Corporation (KRC) Transport & Infrastructure

41 Kenya Reinsurance Corporation Ltd National Treasury

42 Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) National Treasury

43 Kenya Roads Board (KRB) Transport & Infrastructure

44 Kenya Rural Roads Authority Transport & Infrastructure

45 Kenya School of Government Devolution & Planning

46 Kenya Seed Company (KSC)

Agriculture, Livestock &

Fisheries

47 Kenya Sugar Board (KSB)

Agriculture, Livestock &

Fisheries

48 Kenya Tourist Finance Corporation

East African Affairs,

Commerce & Tourism

49 Kenya Tsetse and Trypanosomiasis

Agriculture, Livestock &

Fisheries

50 Kenya Urban Roads Authority Transport & Infrastructure

51 Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS)

Environment, Water & Natural

Resources

52 Kenyatta National Hospital Health

83

No CORPORATION MINISTRY

53 Kenyatta University

Education Science and

Technology

54 Kerio Valley Development Authority

Environment, Water & Natural

Resources

55 Lake Basin Development Authority

Environment, Water & Natural

Resources

56 Maseno University

Education Science and

Technology

57 Moi Teaching and Referral Hospital Health

58 University of Nairobi

Education Science and

Technology

59 Communications Authority of Kenya

Information and

Communication

60 Kenya Water Institute

Environment, Water & Natural

Resources

61 Moi University

Education Science and

Technology

62 National Biosafety Authority

Agriculture, Livestock &

Fisheries

63 National Campaign Against Drug Abuse Authority

Interior & Co-ordination of

National Government

64 National Cereals & Produce Board

Agriculture, Livestock &

Fisheries

65 National Environmental Management (NEMA)

Environment, Water & Natural

Resources

66 National Housing Corporation

Lands Housing & Urban

Development

67 National Irrigation Board

Agriculture, Livestock &

Fisheries

68 National Museums of Kenya Sports, Culture & The Arts

69 National Oil Corporation of Kenya (NOCK) Energy & Petroleum

70 National Social Security Fund Board of Trustees

Labour, & Social Security

Services

71 New Kenya Co-operative Creameries

Industrialization & Enterprise

Development

72 Numerical Machining Complex

Industrialization & Enterprise

Development

73 Nzoia Sugar Company Ltd

Agriculture, Livestock &

Fisheries

74 Policy Holders Compensation Fund National Treasury

75 Postal Corporation of Kenya

Information and

Communication

76 Privatization Commission National Treasury

84

No CORPORATION MINISTRY

77 Public Procurement Oversight Authority National Treasury

78 Retirement Benefits Authority National Treasury

79 Rural Electrification Authority Energy & Petroleum

80 Sacco Societies Regulatory Authority

Industrialization & Enterprise

Development

81 Tea Research Foundation

Agriculture, Livestock &

Fisheries

82 The Kenya Veterinary Board

Agriculture, Livestock &

Fisheries

83 Tourism Fund

East African Affairs,

Commerce & Tourism

84 Water Resources Management Authority

Environment, Water & Natural

Resources

85 Water Services Trust Fund

Environment, Water & Natural

Resources

86 Youth Enterprises Development Fund Devolution & Planning

85

Appendix IV: List of Respondents

CORPORATION MINISTRY

Agricultural Finance Corporation National Treasury

Agro-Chemical and Food Company Agriculture, Livestock & Fisheries

Anti-Counterfeit Agency

Industrialization & Enterprise

Development

Capital Markets Authority National Treasury

Chemelil Sugar Company Ltd Agriculture, Livestock & Fisheries

Cotton Development Authority Agriculture, Livestock & Fisheries

Energy Regulatory Commission Energy & Petroleum

Export Processing Zones Authority

Industrialization & Enterprise

Development

Export Promotion Council (EPC)

East African Affairs, Commerce &

Tourism

Industrial and Commercial Development

Corporation

Industrialization & Enterprise

Development

Insurance Regulatory Authority National Treasury

Jomo Kenyatta Foundation Education Science and Technology

Kenya Agricultural Research Institute Agriculture, Livestock & Fisheries

Kenya Airports Authority (KAA) Transport & Infrastructure

Kenya Bureau of Standard

Industrialization & Enterprise

Development

Kenya Civil Aviation Authority Transport & Infrastructure

Kenya Investment Authority

Industrialization & Enterprise

Development

Kenya Maritime Authority Transport & Infrastructure

Kenya National Bureau of Statistics Devolution & Planning

Kenya Pipeline Company (KPC) Energy & Petroleum

Kenya Rural Roads Authority Transport & Infrastructure

Kenya Seed Company (KSC) Agriculture, Livestock & Fisheries

86

CORPORATION MINISTRY

Kenyatta National Hospital Health

Communications Authority of Kenya Information and Communication

Kenya Water Institute

Environment, Water & Natural

Resources

National Biosafety Authority Agriculture, Livestock & Fisheries

National Campaign Against Drug Abuse

Authority

Interior & Co-ordination of National

Government

National Environmental Management (NEMA)

Environment, Water & Natural

Resources

New Kenya Co-operative Creameries

Industrialization & Enterprise

Development

Policy Holders Compensation Fund National Treasury

Public Procurement Oversight Authority National Treasury

Retirement Benefits Authority National Treasury

Sacco Societies Regulatory Authority

Industrialization & Enterprise

Development