The impact of the 360 degree feedback system on Employee Satisfaction in Higher Educational Institutes: An Analysis in

the Public and Private Sectors of Sindh, Pakistan Abdul Subhan Kazi

Assistant Professor, Isra University, Hyderabadsubhan.kazi@isra.edu.pk

Abstract: This study focuses on the 360o feedback system which is a performance appraisal system. This study also tries to see its impact on employee satisfaction. The 360o feedback system has been a strong factor in many countries in increasing performance of employees. Here the purpose is to see what impact the 3600 feedback system has on employee satisfaction in Sindh, Pakistan with a sample size of higher educational institutes teachers (N=200). Out of these 100 are from the public sector and 100 are from the private sector. The private sector includes Isra University, Hyderabad, and Shaheed Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto Institute of Science and Technology, Karachi. The public sector includes University of Sindh, Jamshoro and Mehran University of Engineering and Technology, Jamshoro. The purpose is to see which sector has more employee satisfaction and what will happen if the 3600 feedback system is adopted. The results show that the traditional systems used in organizations today are not liked and this hinders employees’ satisfaction. And employees have shown more interest in the 3600 feedback system.

Key Words: 360o feedback system, employee satisfaction

Introduction

When talked about employee satisfaction, the 3600 feedback system which is a performance appraisal system can come into play. As the 3600 feedback system is a procedure through which a multiple number of sources may deliver an evaluation for the person being assessed. This process tends to provide the employee with a comprehensive view of what people and can match it with his own evaluation of himself/herself. Which later on helps an employee change his/her behavior or attitude towards work and make it better. (Alexander, 2006) If looked at the success of the 360 0 feedback system, in 1995 40% of American companies used the 3600 feedback system which later on climbed to 65% in 2000 and then in 2002 90% of Fortune 500 companies were using the 3600 feedback system. (Linman, 2006) It is important to note that where the culture of 3600 feedback system is new and the employees do not know what is expected of them, especially direct reports. To gain employee satisfaction the element of trust is necessary, and that can be done through communication which is something that is applied in the 3600 feedback system. Employee satisfaction is a trait that is relevant to the employees, that verifies to be a prized asset for the growth of any sector.(Kiani, Ahsan, Khurshid & Sajid, 2008)

Objective

The main objective of research is to observe the level of employee satisfaction in the public and private sectors of Sind, Pakistan. The point that is kept in view is to see role or impact the 360 0 feedback system can have if adopted in both the sectors.

Literature review

Saqib, Khan, Ahmed & Ullah (2012) mentions the roots of the Performance Appraisal (PA) is in the controlling function of management through which a manger makes sure whether his/her employees performance is up to the desired level required by the organization or not. And PA is widely now known to be a core function of HRM. One of reasons for not getting people to work to their maximum is due to lack proper feedback which, tend to demoralize people. Due to this today the world is focusing performance appraisals which are a source of feedback for the employee and it tends to be a factor which influences the performance (usually) of our vital Human Resource.

Coens and Jenkins (2000) have pointed out that performance appraisals impede genuine feedback, and there’s no solid evidence that it motivates people or lead to meaningful improvement. In fact it usually produces distorted and unreliable data about the contribution of employees. Consequently, the resulting documentation isn’t useful for staffing decisions and often doesn’t hold up in court. Too often, appraisal destroys human spirit and, in the span of a 30 minutes meeting, can transform a vibrant, highly committed employee into a demoralized, indifferent wallflower who reads want ads on the weekend. This isn’t just an opinion. A survey by the Society for HRM found that, more than 90% of appraisal systems are not successful. Hundreds of other studies and surveys also support the gross inadequacies of performance appraisals. In large part, appraisals fail because the very notion of rating people clashes with human nature. The overwhelming majority of people view themselves as excellent performers. In fact, 80% see themselves in the top quarter of all performers. Telling them otherwise is deflating, not motivating. People see mediocre ratings as a lack of appreciation. Supervisors realize this, and this is why most are so reluctant to conduct appraisals.

Rasheed, Aslam, Yousaf & Noor (2011) mention a traditional method the Annual Confidential Report. It was introduced in the 1940’s and is still in use today. The ACR has negative aspects some of which are lack of employees’ participation, communication gaps and personal bias. Its lack of effectiveness does not help in employees’ learning and development. In educational institutions, the ACR isn’t shared with the concerned teacher. Likewise the teachers remain unaware of their high and low rated traits in the report. If looked at the ACR is a very old and redundant appraisal technique. It should be replaced with a better technique which has the potential to boost the employees and get the organization going effectively. One technique that is famous these days is the 360-degree feedback appraisal system for managing employees and it has been proved by a number of researchers that this technique can give a comprehensive performance review as well as indulge transparency in the concerned system.

http://www.sieena.com/Pages/Sieena%20%20Best%20Practices%20in%20the%20Usage%20of%20360-degree%20Evaluations.pdf (2010). The so called 3600 feedback (multi rater feedback), is appraisal method that is a deeply comprehensive one. This is a method in which the performance is derived from all the sources that come in contact with the employees’ job. The 3600 respondents that an employee has to face for an employee has to face could be his/her peers, managers (i.e. superior), subordinates, team members, customers, suppliers/ vendors (anyone who may come into contact with the employee and be capable of provide valuable insights and feedback regarding the “on-the-job” performance of the employee). This appraisal technique is inclusive of four components. They are a self appraisal, subordinate’s appraisal, peer appraisal and the superior’s appraisal. Self-appraisal has the impact that the employee gets the chance to judge and understand his/her own performance and also for him/herself to understand the possible strengths and weaknesses including his/her own personal achievements. The subordinate’s appraisal provides the employee with judgment of the parameters that include things like motivating abilities, communication skills, delegation powers of the ability of the supervisor and leadership qualities. The appraisals provided by the supervisor form the so called traditional part of the 3600 appraisal, where the employee is rated by the supervisor him/herself with regard to the responsibilities of the actual performance. When looked at the Self-assessment in the 360 0

assessment is indispensable. These appraisals have high involvement of employees and have the strongest impact on performance and behavior both. This method is known to be one that is a very credible appraisal method. This appraisal system (3600 degree) is a powerful development tool. To move ahead in life today, we need to know what we are working for and have a system that is able to tell us, if we are on the correct direction, towards achieving the objectives, we are working for. We may say that, Performance Appraisal is a type of measurement tool, used to evaluate how close the employees are working towards the standards of the organization. Performance Appraisal helps in creating a friendlier environment, as it encourages open communication to take place between management and the workers. Through PA, effectiveness can be enhanced, as it opens the gateway towards, recognizing outstanding performance. And as a result of outstanding performance, effectiveness tends to be enhanced.

O’Neill (2012) Mentions Having a happy work environment where you can keep your employees happy is always essential, but these days in the social media world it can prove to be crucial to keeping a constructive image. A boring approach to a unified path for the team’s principles and goals can really muddy up that image and make your customers say good bye. The social media can bring about a

negative image of your organization’s team (employees) which should not be unacceptable. Here management needs to hold on to the reigns, and take proper control of the situation at hand. Going an additional length is well worth it if it can bring about employee satisfaction. It is necessary to bring about change in the workplace when previous ideas become idle. As things become idle, you will see a loss of motivation to move forward, from the workers side to bring about change. Having some organizational meetings or even some brainstorming is not enough. Try and give change a fresh new look. “People want things to stay fresh”, but the problem is that they fear change if there in uncertainty or doubt. One should try and communicate a new vision to make the employees stir up. But if this also does not work one has communicate with the employees in a way that they understand and can feel the way the management does. Even though management may have been able to make their employees feel about the new standards as they are feeling, don’t let the old standards be gone, you need to show them for the purpose they were made for. Management needs to “encourage insight from their employees” so as to be able to provide a sense of contribution in the employees regarding the developing nature. Feedbacks are important sources of help which can make management understand where things stand, as well as where things have not been up to the mark. For management to stay on top of its new agenda is very important. The problem lies with the issue of convincing people to change as many try to avoid it. The main reason being the ambiguity inside change regarding of what the authentic direction is. Management should remember that the true key for a smooth change from old standards to new standards is proper transparency. Management needs to make sure that all its employees easily understand what is actually taking place, as it is only then that management can make feel relaxed with what is in line. The new standards management makes need to be used carefully to get benefit from them. Management needs to guide its customers in the market towards its organization. Here management has to be careful not to lose its focus about its change and should concentrate on the customers’ needs. For management to achieve success, it can be done through the process of giving, and providing their employees with proper confidence in management’s ideas, so that the employees may feel at ease and have trust in the work they are doing. Having a pleasant working environment may be nice for employees on the other hand having a working environment that is, eager and properly tackled will produce results. Management needs to certify each time that the standards don’t become idle again, and in this way if things go on success will always come about.

Methodology

This study is based on primary data collected from four higher educational institutes, namely, Isra University, Hyderabad, and Shaheed Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto Institute of Science and Technology, Karachi, from the private sector and University of Sindh, Jamshoro and Mehran University of Engineering and Technology, Jamshoro from the public sector. 50 teachers were selected from each institution. A questionnaire using the Likert scale method was distributed to the teachers working in both sectors. The scale was from 1 to 5. 1 being strongly disagree to 5 being strongly agree. The questionnaire was analyzed putting in view the hypotheses that were made.

The Analysis was done using the Mann-Whitney U Statistical test, the Kruskal-Wallis, Cronbach's alpha and the chi-square test with the help of the SPSS software. Overall nine hypotheses have been used to see the impact of employee satisfaction within both the sectors.

The following are the nine hypotheses:

H. 1. The employees’ satisfaction in terms of mix of research, teaching and community service is better in the private sector than the public sector universities in Pakistan.

H. 2. The employees’ satisfaction in terms of their intellectual stimulation is better in the private sector than the public sector universities in Pakistan.

H. 3. The employees’ satisfaction in terms of interaction with students is better in the private sector than

the public sector universities in Pakistan.

H. 4. The employees’ satisfaction in terms of cooperation received from employees of the organization is better in the private sector than the public sector universities in Pakistan.

H. 5. The employees’ satisfaction in terms of support from administration of the department is better in the private sector than in the public sector universities in Pakistan.

H. 6. The employees’ satisfaction in terms of clarity about faculty promotion is overall weak but is better in the private sector than the public sector universities in Pakistan.

H. 7. The employees’ satisfaction in terms of salary and compensation package provided by the organization is weak but is a bit better in the private sector than the public sector universities in Pakistan.

H. 8. The employees’ satisfaction in terms of job security and stability at the organization is better in the private sector than the public sector universities in Pakistan.

H. 9. The employees’ satisfaction in terms of the amount they have for their family is better in the public sector than the private sector universities in Pakistan.

According to Hypothesis H.1 The universities are moving beyond teaching towards research and further towards offering services to communities. The overall mean value of this factor is 3.04 which show a good commitment to these multiple activities. The mean ranking for the public sector universities is 77.46 and for the private sector universities it is 123.55. The rankings show that in the private sector universities, employees’ satisfaction objectives in terms of teaching, research and community service is better than in the public sector universities. The result of the Mann-Whitney U statistical test shows the mean rankings are significantly different from each other (at the significance level of 0.000). However, in order to find the impact of the 3600 evaluation on the employees’ satisfaction, the Kruskal-Wallis H test is applied. The mean ranking for the supervisor as evaluator is 84.39 and for the 3600 evaluation it is 138.63. The ranking shows employees are more satisfied with these multiple activities with the 360 0

evaluation method in comparison where only supervisors’ evaluation takes place. The result of the Kruskal-Wallis H statistical test shows that difference of this factor is highly significant (at the significance level of 0.000). Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected with the conclusion that employees are more satisfied in the private sector universities than the public sector universities in terms of multiple activities related to teaching, research and community services.

Figure 1.1: Employee satisfaction in terms of multiple activities related to teaching, research and communication services between both the public and private sector universities

According to Hypothesis H .2 the faculty members of universities receive intellectual stimulation from their teaching and research. The overall mean value of this factor is 3.04 which show a neutral response. The mean ranking for the public sector universities is 75.46 and for the private sector universities it is 125.55. The rankings show that in the private sector universities, employees’ satisfaction in terms of intellectual stimulation is better than in the public sector universities. The result of the Mann-Whitney U statistical test shows the mean rankings are significantly different from each other (at the significance level of 0.000). However, in order to find the impact of the 360 0 evaluation on the employees’ satisfaction, the Kruskal-Wallis H test is applied. The mean ranking for the supervisor as evaluator is 84.88 and for the 3600 evaluation it is 137.31. The ranking shows employees are more satisfied in terms of intellectual stimulation with the 3600 evaluation method in comparison to where only supervisors’ evaluation takes place. The result of the Kruskal-Wallis H statistical test shows that difference of this factor is highly significant (at the significance level of 0.000). Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected with the conclusion that employees’ satisfaction in terms of their intellectual stimulation is better in the private sector than the public sector universities.

Figure 1.2: Satisfaction of employees in terms of their intellectual stimulation of work. A comparison of the public and private sector universities

According to Hypothesis H .3 the faculty members of universities need to interact regularly with students for teaching and research. The overall mean value of this factor is 4.08 which show the good level of agreement. The mean ranking for the public sector universities is 93.3 and for the private sector universities is 107.7. The rankings show that in the private sector universities, employees’ satisfaction in terms of interaction with students is better than in the public sector universities. The result of the Mann-Whitney U statistical test shows the mean rankings are significantly different from each other (at the significance level of 0.03). However, in order to find the impact of the 3600 evaluation on the employees’ satisfaction, the Kruskal-Wallis H test is applied. The mean ranking for the supervisor as evaluator is 85.34 and for the 3600 evaluation it is 155.50. The ranking shows employees are more satisfied in terms of students’ interaction with the 3600 evaluation method in comparison where only supervisors’ evaluation takes place. The result of the Kruskal-Wallis H statistical test shows that difference of this factor is highly significant (at the significance level of 0.000). Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected with the conclusion that employees’ satisfaction in terms of interaction with students is better in the private sector than the public sector universities. However, those employees who are evaluated under supervisors only are less satisfied than those evaluated under the 3600 system.

Figure 1.3: Employee satisfaction in terms of interaction with students. A comparison between the public and private sector universities

According to Hypothesis H .4 the faculty members of universities work in teams to achieve certain tasks and therefore they need to co-operate with each other. The overall mean value of this factor is 3.29 which show a little level of agreement. The mean ranking for the public sector universities is 74.68 and for the private sector universities it is 126.33. The rankings show that in the private sector universities, employees’ satisfaction in terms of cooperation with other employees is better than in the public sector universities. The result of the Mann-Whitney U statistical test shows the mean rankings are significantly different from each other (at the significance level of 0.00). However, in order to find the impact of the 3600 evaluation on the employees’ satisfaction, the Kruskal-Wallis H test is applied. The mean ranking for the supervisor as an evaluator is 84.03 and for the 3600 evaluation it is 147.61. The ranking shows employees are more satisfied in terms of cooperation from other employees with the 3600 evaluation method in comparison to where only supervisors’ evaluation takes place. The result of the Kruskal-Wallis H statistical test shows that difference of this factor is highly significant (at the significance level of 0.000). Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected with the conclusion that employees’ satisfaction in terms of cooperation from other employees of the organization is better in the private sector than the public sector universities.

Figure 1.4: A comparison between the public and private sector universities on employees’ satisfaction in terms of cooperation received from other employees of the organization

According to Hypothesis H .5 the faculty members of universities need the administrative support from time to time to accomplish their teaching and research activities. The overall mean value of this factor is 3.20 which show a little level of agreement. The mean ranking for the public sector universities is 74.38 and for the private sector universities it is 126.63. The rankings show that in the private sector universities, employees’ satisfaction in terms of administrative support is better than in the public sector universities. The result of the Mann-Whitney U statistical test shows the mean rankings are significantly different from each other (at the significance level of 0.000). However, in order to find the impact of the

3600 evaluation on the employees’ satisfaction, the Kruskal-Wallis H test is applied. The mean ranking for the supervisor as an evaluator is 85.42 and for the 3600 evaluation it is 142.27. The ranking shows employees are more satisfied in terms of administrative support with the 3600 evaluation method in comparison to where only supervisors’ evaluation takes place. The result of the Kruskal-Wallis H statistical test shows that difference of this factor is highly significant (at the significance level of 0.000). Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected with the conclusion that employees’ satisfaction in terms of administrative support from the department is better in the private sector than the public sector universities. However, those employees who are evaluated under supervisors only are less satisfied than those who are evaluated under the 3600 system.

Figure 1.5: A comparison between the public and private sector universities on employee satisfaction in terms of support from administration of the department

According to Hypothesis H .6 the employees of universities feel more motivated if their promotion process becomes more transparent. The overall mean value of this factor is 1.358 which shows the level of disagreement. The mean ranking for the public sector universities is 78.09 and for the private sector universities it is 122.92. The rankings show that in the private sector universities, employees’ satisfaction in terms of clarity about the faculty promotion is still better than in the public sector universities. The result of the Mann-Whitney U statistical test shows the mean rankings are significantly different from each other (at the significance level of 0.000). However, in order to find the impact of the 3600 evaluation on the employees’ satisfaction, the Kruskal-Wallis H test is applied. The mean ranking for the supervisor as an evaluator is 82.93 and for the 3600 evaluation it is 164.66. The ranking shows employees are more satisfied in terms of clarity in the faculty promotion process with the 3600 evaluation method in comparison to where only supervisors’ evaluation takes place. The result of the Kruskal-Wallis H statistical test shows that difference of this factor is highly significant (at the significance level of 0.000). Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected with the conclusion that employees’ satisfaction in terms of clarity in the faculty promotion is still better in the private sector than the public sector universities. However, those employees who are evaluated under supervisors only are less satisfied than those evaluated by the 3600 system.

Figure 1.6: A comparison between both the public and private sector universities with regard to employee satisfaction in terms of clarity about the faculty promotion process

According to Hypothesis H .7 the employees of universities feel more motivated if rewards to them, in the form of salary and compensation, meet their requirements. The overall mean value of this factor is 2.20 which show a little level of disagreement. The mean ranking for the public sector universities is 93.17 and for the private sector universities it is 107.83. The rankings show that in the private sector universities, employees’ satisfaction in terms of salary and compensation is still better than in the public sector universities. The result of the Mann-Whitney U statistical test shows the mean rankings are significantly different from each other (at the significance level of 0.03). However, in order to find the impact of the 3600 evaluation on the employees’ satisfaction, the Kruskal-Wallis H test is applied. The mean ranking for the supervisor as an evaluator is 80.33 and for the 3600 evaluation it is 155.03. The ranking shows employees are more satisfied in terms of salary and compensation with the 360 0

evaluation method in comparison where only supervisors’ evaluation takes place. The result of the Kruskal-Wallis H statistical test shows that difference of this factor is highly significant (at the significance level of 0.000). Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected with the conclusion that employees’ satisfaction in terms of salary and compensation package is still better in the private sector than the public sector universities. However, those employees who are evaluated under supervisors only are less satisfied than those evaluated under the 3600 system.

Figure 1.7: A comparison between both the public and private sector universities with regard to salary and compensation packages provided by the organization

According to Hypothesis H .8 the employees of universities feel more comfortable working where their jobs are more secure and stable. The overall mean value of this factor is 3.15 which show the little level of agreement. The mean ranking for the public sector universities is 88.18 and for the private sector universities it is 112.83. The rankings show that in the private sector universities, employees’ satisfaction in terms of job security and stability is better than in the public sector universities. The result of the Mann-Whitney U statistical test shows the mean rankings are significantly different from each other (at the significance level of 0.001). However, in order to find the impact of the 3600 evaluation on the employees’ satisfaction, the Kruskal-Wallis H test is applied. The mean ranking for the supervisor as an evaluator is 78.62 and for the 3600 evaluation it is 166.65. The ranking shows employees are more satisfied in terms of job security and stability with the 3600 evaluation method in comparison to where only supervisors’ evaluation takes place. The result of the Kruskal-Wallis H statistical test shows that difference of this factor is highly significant (at the significance level of 0.000). Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected with the conclusion that employees’ satisfaction in terms of job security and stability at the organization is better in the private sector than the public sector universities. However, those employees who are evaluated under supervisors only are less satisfied than those evaluated under the 3600 system.

Figure 1.8: A comparison between the public and private sector universities with regard to job security and stability

According to Hypothesis H .9 the employees of universities feel more comfortable working where their jobs are more secure and stable. The overall mean value of this factor is 3.15 which show the little level of agreement. The mean ranking for the public sector universities is 112.85 and for the private sector universities it is 88.16. The rankings show that in the public sector universities, employees’ satisfaction in terms of amount of time for them and for their family is better than in the private sector universities. The result of the Mann-Whitney U statistical test shows the mean rankings are significantly different from each other (at the significance level of 0.001). However, in order to find the impact of the 360 0 evaluation on the employees’ satisfaction, the Kruskal-Wallis H test is applied. The mean ranking for the supervisor as an evaluator is 80.24 and for the 3600 evaluation it is 163.73. The ranking shows employees are more satisfied in terms of amount of time for them and for their family with the 3600 evaluation method in comparison to where only supervisors’ evaluation takes place. The result of the Kruskal-Wallis H statistical test shows that difference of this factor is highly significant (at the significance level of 0.000). Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected with the conclusion that employees’ satisfaction in terms of amount of time for them and their family is better in the public sector than the private sector universities. However, those employees who are evaluated under supervisors only are less satisfied than those evaluated under the 3600 system.

Figure 1.9: A comparison between the public and private sector universities on the basis of employee satisfaction with regard to the amount of time they have for their families

Table 1. Descriptive Statistics of variables assessing the employees’ satisfaction in the public and private sector universities

N Mean Std. Deviation Min Max

You are satisfied from the mix of your research, teaching and community service in your organization.

200 3.04 1.293 1 5

You are satisfied from the intellectual stimulation of your work.

200 3.02 1.266 1 5

You are currently satisfied from the type of research /teaching you do.

200 3.50 1.220 1 5

You are satisfied from the interaction you have with your students.

200 4.08 1.113 1 5

You are satisfied from cooperation you receive from other employees of the organization.

200 3.29 1.317 1 5

You are satisfied from the mentoring provided to you.

200 3.07 1.395 1 5

You are satisfied from Administrative support from the department.

200 3.20 1.341 1 5

You are satisfied from the clarity about the faculty’s promotion process.

200 2.84 1.358 1 5

You are satisfied from prospects for advancement and progress in the organization.

200 2.79 1.235 1 5

You are satisfied from the salary you get and your compensation package provided to you by the organization.

200 2.70 1.408 1 5

You are satisfied from the job security and stability at the organization.

200 3.15 1.305 1 5

You are satisfied from the amount of time you have for yourself and your family.

200 3.15 1.354 1 5

You are satisfied from the overall environment of the department.

200 3.32 1.255 1 5

Source: 2010-2011Table 2. Mean Ranks on the basis of public and private sector universities

Which sector does it belong to N Mean RankSum of Ranks

You are satisfied from the mix of your research, teaching and community service in your organization.

Public Sector 100 77.46 7745.50

Private Sector 100 123.55 12354.5

Total 200

You are satisfied from the intellectual stimulation of your work.

Public Sector 100 75.46 7545.50

Private Sector 100 125.55 12554.5

Total 200

You are currently satisfied from the type of research /teaching you do.

Public Sector 100 89.69 8968.50

Private Sector 100 111.32 11131.5

Total 200

You are satisfied from the interaction you have with your students.

Public Sector 100 93.30 9330.00

Private Sector 100 107.70 10770.0

Total 200

You are satisfied from cooperation you receive from other employees of the organization.

Public Sector 100 74.68 7467.50

Private Sector 100 126.33 12632.5

Total 200

You are satisfied from the mentoring provided to you.

Public Sector 100 72.49 7249.00

Private Sector 100 128.51 12851.0

Total 200

You are satisfied from Administrative support from the department.

Public Sector 100 74.38 7437.50

Private Sector 100 126.63 12662.5

Total 200

You are satisfied from the clarity about the faculty’s promotion process.

Public Sector 100 78.09 7808.50

Private Sector 100 122.92 12291.5

Total 200

You are satisfied from prospects for advancement and progress in the organization.

Public Sector 100 78.44 7844.00

Private Sector 100 122.56 12256.0

Total 200

You are satisfied from the salary you get and your compensation package provided to you by the organization.

Public Sector 100 93.17 9317.00

Private Sector 100 107.83 10783.0

Total 200

You are satisfied from the job security and stability at the organization.

Public Sector 100 88.18 8817.50

Private Sector 100 112.83 11282.5

Total 200

You are satisfied from the amount of time you have for yourself and your family.

Public Sector 100 112.85 11284.5

Private Sector 100 88.16 8815.50

Total 200

You are satisfied from the overall environment of the department.

Public Sector 100 80.89 8089.00

Private Sector 100 120.11 12011.0

Total 200Source: 2010-2011

Table 3. Test Statistics for the public and private sector universities Mann-Whitney U

Exact Sig. (1-tailed)

You are satisfied from the mix of your research, teaching and community service in your organization.

2695.5 0.000

You are satisfied from the intellectual stimulation of your work. 2495.5 0.000

You are currently satisfied from the type of research /teaching you do. 3918.5 0.003

You are satisfied from the interaction you have with your students. 42.80 0.03

You are satisfied from cooperation you receive from other employees of the organization.

2117.5 0.000

You are satisfied from the mentoring provided to you. 2199.0 0.000

You are satisfied from Administrative support from the department. 2387.5 0.000

You are satisfied from the clarity about the faculty’s promotion process. 2758.5 0.000

You are satisfied from prospects for advancement and progress in the organization.

27.94.0 0.000

You are satisfied from the salary you get and your compensation package provided to you by the organization.

4267 0.03

You are satisfied from the job security and stability at the organization. 3767.5 0.001

You are satisfied from the amount of time you have for yourself and your family.

3765.5 0.001

You are satisfied from the overall environment of the department. 3039.0 0.000Source: 2010-2011

Conclusion:

The assessment of the nine hypotheses revealed that employees in the private sector universities are overall more satisfied than in the public sector universities. Their overall satisfaction has been observed in terms of their intellectual stimulation and coordination amongst students, other employees and administration. In the case of public sector universities, the employees’ satisfaction has mainly been found in terms of their job timings. However, the impact of the 3600 evaluation has been found impacting the employees’ performance in all hypotheses. Therefore, findings collectively show where the method of supervisors as evaluators of performance is in practice causes less satisfaction of employees in the public and private sector universities in Pakistan.

Recommendation:

As the overall conclusion shows the impact of the hypotheses and portrays that the360 0 feedback system is found to have an impact on every aspect of the hypotheses. Therefore 3600 feedback system should be used to bring about positive change if put in place for every organization. However one has to be very careful how to implement the system. It should be according to our culture and the employees should be told about how it will be beneficial to them if it is to truly succeed. And this system if used correctly will increase employee satisfaction which is beneficial for every organization today.

References:

Coens T, & Jerkins M (2000), Abolishing Performance Appraisals and What to Do Instead, Berrett-Koehler

Diane M. Alexander (2006). HOW DO 360 DEGREE PERFORMANCE REVIEWS AFFECT EMPLOYEE ATTITUTES, EFFECTIVENESS AND PERFORMANCE?

Hina Sorab Kiani, Ali Ahsan, Omama Kurhshid and Ali Sajid (2008) Exploring ‘Employees Satisfaction’ as a Quality and Productivity Enhancement Tool for IT Sector of Pakistan.

Linman, Terri. 360-degree Feedback: Weighing the Pros and Cons http://edweb.sdsu.edu/people/ARossett/pie/Interventions/360_1.htm accessed April 15th, 2006.

Muhammad Imran Rasheed, Hassan Danial Aslam*, Saira Yousaf and Amna Noor (2011). A critical analysis of performance appraisal system for teachers in public sector universities of Pakistan: A case study of the Islamia University of Bahawalpur (IUB), African Journal of Business Management Vol. 5(9), pp. 3735-3744, 4 May, 2011: Available online at http://www.academicjournals.org/AJBM

Rhys O’Neill (2012). Start A Revolution – How Employee Satisfaction Determines Your Company’s Success

Saqib .M, Khan .M.A, Ahmed .M & Ullah .I (2012). A Brief Performance Appraisal Practices and its Implementation at Government Offices in Pakistan. Interdisplinary Journal Of Contemporary Research In Business. Vol 3 No 10

What is 360 DEGREE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PROCESS? (2010).http://www.sieena.com/Pages/Sieena%20%20Best%20Practices%20in%20the%20Usage%20of%20360-degree%20Evaluations.pdf

Appendix

Employee Satisfaction

Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree

1 2 3 4 5

1 You are satisfied from the intellectual stimulation of your work.          

2 You are currently satisfied from the type of research /teaching you do in the organization.          

3 You are satisfied from the interaction you have with your students.          

4 You are satisfied from cooperation you receive from other employees of the organization.          

5 You are satisfied from the mentoring provided to you.          

6 You are satisfied from Administrative support from the department.          

7 You are satisfied from the clarity about the faculty promotion process.          

8 You are satisfied from prospects for advancement and progress in the organization.

         

9You are satisfied from the salary you get and your compensation package provided to you by the organization.

         

 

Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree

1 2 3 4 5

10 You are satisfied from the job security and stability at the organization.          

11 You are satisfied from the amount of time you have for yourself and your family.          

12 You are satisfied from the overall environment of the department.