ADDIS ABABA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF GRADUATE

STUDIES DEPARTMENT OF MPMP

Result Based Performance Evaluation (RBPE) in the case of

MOENCO

By
Dereje Mekonnen

A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE

REQUIREMENTS FOR DEGREE OF MASTERS IN
DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT

July 2015
 Result Based Performance Evaluation (RBPE) in the case of
MOENCO:

By: Dereje Mekonnen

A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE

REQUIREMENTS FOR DEGREE OF MASTERS IN DEVELOPMENT
MANAGEMENT

Advisor: Teferi Regassa (Ato)

July 2015
Addis Ababa
Statement of declaration

I, the undersigned, declare that this thesis is my original work and

has not been presented for a degree in any other university,
and that all source of materials used for the thesis have been duly
acknowledged.

Declared by:

Name _________________________________

Signature ______________________________

Date __________________________________

Confirmed by:

Name _________________________________

Signature ______________________________

Date __________________________________
 Addis Ababa University
College of Business & Economics
Department of public Administration & Development
Management

Result based Performance Evaluation (RBPE)in the case of

MOENCO

By Dereje Mekonnen

A thesis Submitted to Addis Ababa University, Department of Public

Administration &
Development Management, in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of
Masters of Arts in Development Management

Approved by Board of Examiners

___________________ _________________ ______________

Advisor Signature Date

_______________________ ____________________ _________________

External Examiner Signature Date

________________________ ____________________ _________________

Internal Examiner Signature Date
Acknowledgement

It is a great pleasure for me to thank many people who, in different ways, have supported me
and contributed to the process of writing this paper.

Firstly, I would like to thank my advisor, Teferi Regassa (Ato) for all his wise and
insightful comments, support and direction he gave me. Secondly, I would also like to thank Ato
Yohannes Molla Human Resource Department division manager at MOENCO and Ato Yibeltal
Hailu Human Resource section manager at MOENCO , for the support they provided while
collecting data and Ato Seife Gatahun finance director of the company for his support give me to
get financial support from the company. Thirdly , I would like to acknowledge My friends,
Tesfaye Tadesse, Shimeles Tesfaye , selamawit Asfaw and others for the encouragement and
support they offered me where ever I need that.

Lastly, I extend my deepest gratitude goes to my wife Almaz Eshetu and my daughters Meklit
Dereje and Mebastion Dereje for their love, patience, understanding and support in the long
journey. They were behind all the accomplishments of this course.

i
 Table of Contents
Content Page
Acknowledgement...……………………………………………………………………………….i
Table of contents ………..………………………………………………………………………..ii
List of tables …...……………………………………..........................................………...……..iii
List of Figures ……………………………………………………………………………….…...v
List of Graph............................................................................. ............………....………………vi
Acronyms ….……………….………………………………………………………………..….vii
Acknowledgement …..……….……..………………………………………………………….viii
Chapter One Introduction……………………………………………………………..………....1
1.1. Background of the study ……………………………………………..…………...1
1.2. Statement of the problem …………………………………………………………3
1.3. Research questions ……………………………………………………..….…….5
1.4. Research Objectives …………………………………………………….………..5
1.4.1. General Objective ………………………………………….…………..……..5
1.4.2. Specific Objectives………………………………………….…..……...……..6
1.5. Significance of the study ………………………….…………...…….…………...6
1.6. Scope of the study ……………………………….………………………………..6
1.7. Limitation of the study……………………………………………………………6
1.8. Organization of the paper…………………………………………………………6
Chapter 2 Review of related Literature ……………...…………………….………..…..…7
2. introduction……………………………………………………………………………………7
2.1.Theoretical Literature Review ……………………………….……………….……….…..…7
2.1.1. Understanding the performance Appraisal System…………..…………...7
2.1.2. The Purpose & important of Performance appraisal……………………...7
2.1.3. Performance Appraisal Criteria…………….……………………………..8
2.1.4. Exercise of performance Appraisal ……………..………………………..9
2.1.5. Performance Appraisal System………………..…….…………………..10
2.1.6. Approaches of Performance appraisal ……….…..………….……..……10
2.1.7. The Role of the Appraiser…………………………..…………….……..11
2.1.8. Effectiveness of PA System.……………………….……………………11
2.1.9. Performance appraisal system and performance Improvement …....……12
2.1.10. Time to conduct Performance Appraisal ………………………………13
2.1.11. Responsible Body to conduct PA …...………….………..….…………13
2.1.12. Performance Appraisal Attitudes ..………………..…...………………13
2.1.13. The concept of PRP ...………………………………………………….14
2.1.14. Importance and Application of PRP……...…………………………….14
2.1.15. Controversies and employees’ Perception to PRP system ………...…..16
2.1.16. Definition of motivation …….………………….……………...………18
2.1.17. The process of Motivation …………………..…………...…………….19
2.1.18. Motivation & Reward …………...………………….……..…….……..19
2.2. Empirical Literature review ……….………………………………………………….…….21
2.3.Theoretical Frame work ………………………………………………..……………..……..23
2.3.1.Employees’ understanding to PRP ….……………...………..…………..23
2.3.2.Employees’ perception to the level of related to RBPE …………………26

ii
 2.3.3. Employees’ feeling of fairness to PRP …....…….…………..……………27
2.3.4. Work related behavior ……………………………..……………..………29
2.3.5. Motivation-performance linkage ……………..…………....…………......31
2.3.6. compensation and reward system(CRS) management theory ………..…..32
Chapter Three Research Methodology ……………..………………………………………….34
3. Introduction………………………………………………………………………………….34
3.1. Research Method…..………………………………………………………………………34
3.2. Data Source & Collection Procedures……………………………………………………...34
3.2.1primary Data Collection Techniques…………………………………………34
Questionnaire...……………………………………………………….34
Interview…………………….……………………………………….35
Observation…….………………………………………………….….35
3.2.2.Secondary Data Source………………………………………………………35
3.3 Sampling Technique ………………………………………………………………………...35
3.3.1.Target Population………………………………………..…………………..35
3.3.2.Sample Size………………………………………………………………….36
3.4.Data Analysis……….………………………………………………………………………..36
3.5 Ethical Consideration………………………………………………………………………..36
Chapter Four Data Analysis &Discussion…………..…………….……..….……..…………..38
4. Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………...38
4.1. Historical Background of MOENCO …………………………………..…………………..38
4.2. Description & analysis of Data ………………………………………….………………….40
4.2.1. Response Rate ……………………..……………………..…………………40
4.2.2. General understanding RBPE Pay System…….……………………………41
4.2.3. Employees’ Discussion on the purpose of RBPE with motivation ...............43
4.2.4. Employees’ understanding about the fairness to the level of
RBPE & pay system………………………………...………………………47
4.2.6. Work related behaviours……………………………...………………..……52
3.3. Discussions on Findings.........................................................………………….…………...57
Chapter Five: Conclusion and Recommendation …………………………...…………………..62
4.1. Conclusion ………………………………………………….....……………62
4.2. Recommendation ……………………………………….…………………..64
Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………..…………65
Appendix-Ι
Appendix-ΙI
Appendix-ΙII

iii
List of Tables
Page

Table 2.1 : Myths & Realities Concerning merit pay………………………..………….……….17

Table 3.1: sample size of respondents……………………………..………....…………..……...34

Table 4.1: Response Rate..…………………………………………...…………………………..39

Table 4.2 : General understanding of RBPE Pay system …………………..……..…………….40

iv
List of Figures Page
Fig.2. 1: The process of Motivation …………………..………………………………………...19

Fig. 2.2: Expectancy theory & pay satisfaction…………..………………….…………………20

Fig.2.3:Relationship of employees’ perception to PRP with work related behaviours

through employees’ feelings of fairness............................................................................24

Fig.2.4: Performance, Pay and Motivation Model Building blocks of motivation………….…..31

Fig.2.5: The Reward System model………………………………………..………………..…..33

v
List of Graph Page

Graph 4.1: Employees’ Discussion the purpose of RBPE & relationship with motivation .......42

Graph 4.2: Employees’Understanding about the fairness to the level of RBPE & Pay-system.46

Graph 4.3: Work Related Behavior. ………………………………..…………………….……51

vi
 ACRONYM

CBI Competency Based Interviews

CRS Compensation and Reward Systems
HRM Human Resource Management
MBO Management by Objectives
MIS Management Information Systems
MMD Masters of Management Development
MOENCO Motor and Engineering company
MPMP Masters of public management and policy
NPM New Public management
PA Performance Appraisal
PM Performance Management
PMS Performance Management System
PRP Performance Related pay
RBPE Result based Performance Evaluation
UK United Kingdome

vii
Abstract

The purpose of this research was to explore impacts of Result based performance evaluation with
related pay in day to day activities. It focused on the relationship of employees understanding of
the performance appraisal, the impacts of implementing performance appraisal on all
stakeholders and the determinants of the relationship between RBPE pay system and employees’
understanding, motivation, feeling and fairness. a case study has been chosen as a proper
research method for this study and used purposive sampling technique.The data collection was
made through questionnaire and interview of employees’ in the organization of MOENCO using
qualitative and quantitative method of research. Major findings of the research are interpreted
and analysed in comparison with findings of existing literatures.The key findings of the research
indicate positive fairness feelings and the related positive perceived work related behaviours of
employees’ of MOENCO in addition to sound knowledge and understanding of RBPE pay
system procedures and the perceived feelings of motivation by level of pay attached to PRP. In
addition to positive relationship of fairness perception with work related behaviours, analysis of
the research also revealed the possibility of negative influence of subjective performance
measurement parameters on employees’ feelings of fairness. Finally, the study concludes that
RBPE need further study and revision of the RBPE pay system to fill up the gaps mentioned
above and minimizing negative impact to maximizing the strength of the relationship between
the organization and employees.

viii
 Chapter One: Introduction

1.1 Background of the Study

In this world of competition, for an organization to remain competitive and sustainable,
the human resource professionals and strategic planners should collaborate strongly in designing
strategies which is the most important part and crucial of all resources for the survival of an
organization or business firms. According to Ivancevich, et al (1989), “It is important to
remember that people do the work and create ideas that show the organizational service”.
Therefore it is agreed that resources remain unutilized unless the human element is involved.
The degree of human resource contribution should be evaluated in the development of the
organization or business firm, and is called Performance Appraisal (PA). PA is the
identification, measurement, and management of human performance in an organization
(Gomez, et al,2001).

The history of performance appraisal is quite brief. Its roots can be traced in the early 20th
century to Taylor’s pioneering time and motion studies. The performance appraisal system
started in practice mainly in the 1940s and with the help of this system,merit rating was used for
the first time near the Second World War as a method of justifying an employee’s wages (Lillian
& Sitati, 2011).

In this regard MOENCO has established RBPE, to increas or provide a long-term business
growth and a leading market share. MOENCO established specialized skills development and
played an important role in the implementation of RBPE process.

The roll of RBPE in a growing economy is vital. It promotes economic development through
reducing the wastage time and materials firms need to operate. Business development needs to
be a dynamic process. Most companies seek to enhance the welfare of their owners and
employee by following a development process that is designed to achieve specific goals that
accelerate the growth of market share of their company.
Performance Related Pay system (PRP) is a compensation system that rewards performance on
an individual or group basis (Farrell and Morris 2009, cited in Lee, Iijima and Reade 2011:2086).

1
Literatures indicate that western companies implemented and exercised PRP for several years.
PRP systems have been steadily implemented in Western companies over the past several
decades (Brown and Armstrong 2000; Storey and Sisson 2005 cited in Lee, Iijiman and Reade
2011: 2086).According to Torrington (1993: 149), PRP has grown during the late 1980s in
Britain largely as a result of government policy to improve the efficiency of public sector
organizations.

The basic purpose of PRP is motivating workers by linking performance with monetary
incentives. According to some scholars (e.g. Schay and Fisher 2013) literatures in organizational
motivation seem to be informed by theories and concepts of motivation that stress different
factors in motivation.

Although Herzberg (1966) believes that pay is merely a "hygiene factor" or potential dis-
satisfier, Lawler's (1981) research has shown that performance contingent pay can be a powerful
performance incentive because money can satisfy many different needs (Schay and Fisher 2013:
360).

Literatures on PRP show the importance of transparency and perceived fairness. Lawler (2000)
states that, to be motivating, PRP systems require that individuals trust the organization to
deliver on its reward system commitments. When these systems fail, it is usually because of lack
of trust due to perceived unfairness or lack of system transparency. If merit pay is implemented
successfully and administered fairly, the majority of employees will overcome the initial
skepticism, trust their supervisors, and ultimately accept the new system. (Schay and Fisher
2013: 361).

In addition, theories and literatures also indicate levels of merit pay in PRP have relationship
with employees’ feelings of fairness. According to the theory of organizational justice,
employees are concerned with the fairness of two aspects of organizational decisions: outcomes
and procedures Greenberg, (1987) cited in (Schay and Fisher 2013: 361). In the context of PBP,
employees are concerned with the amount of merit pay they receive (distributive justice) and the

2
fairness of the procedures used to determine that amount procedural justice: Heneman, (2002)
cited in (Schay and Fisher 2013: 361).

Therefore, study tries to investigate three features of the RBPE process as identified 1) What is
the employees understanding of the performance appraisal? 2) What are the impacts of
implementing performance appraisal on all stakeholders? 3) What are the determinants of the
relationship between RBPE pay system and employees’ understanding, motivation, perception of
fairness?In doing so, the current work aims at extending the work by Bowen & Ostroff (2004),
by looking further inside the organization through the lens of employees’ for the effectiveness of
human reasoure manahement and thus organizational work force at MOENCO.

1.2 Statement of the problem

Result- based performance evaluation is one of the most important activities of human resource
management. It is a significant factor to the organization’s success. If result based performance is
properly appraised it helps the organization to realize its strategic objectives by increasing
effective working process through continuous improvement of individuals’ performance. (Ali
2008). Such appraisal system also helps to focus on the performance work and improvments
points of individual workers.

Performance appraisal as part of organizational life consists of several processes such as

measuring of work performance and establishing purposes and reward management.
Implementing a performance appraisal system in a company generates numerous benefits both to
the employees and company. Such as this is in line with most of the findings of
researchconducted on PRP implementation (Lazear 2000, Booth and Frank 1999, Gielen,
Kerkhofs and Ours 2010 and others).

The available literatures on PRP implementations discuss both benefita and problems of the PRP
system.Some literatures can be categorized in to two. i.e, these indicate that PRP, despit its
problems in its implementation of the system ,positively contributes to the success of
organization.

3
Other literatures such as Maheshwari and Singh (2010) put that a common problem with the
RBPE ay systemcomes from its implementations. The problem may be that when a PRP systemis
implemented Proper parameters and accurate measurement of performance may not have been
identified.As a result performance evaluation may suffer from subjectivity and. irrelevance of the
criteria used to appraise performance of employees.Morover, shortage of skilled and
knowledgable raters, luck of continuous documentation and inability to provide feedback on time
are some other problem observed in the implementation of a RBPE pay system.

These and other above problemes, in the implementation of a RBPE pay system, would
adversely affect employees’ perceptions of the performance appraisal system, and they would
express dissatisfaction with the implementation of system. The overall dissatisfaction of
employees, results in a decrease in motivation and commitiment to working hard and an increase
in the turnover of stafe.This in turn, bring an adverse effect not only on the immediate
productivity and benefits of the company but also,at its future success and survival.

On the other hand, scholars such as Lazear (2000), Booth and Frank (1999),Gielen, Kerkhofs and
Ours (2010) and others support a PRP implementation .which identifies employees satisfaction
with the implementation of RBPE. In such condition employees would exerte every possible
effort to carry out their responsibility efficiently and effectively. Thus this certainly makes the
organization more productive and successful. Employees must be made to experience positive
reaction in the practice of performance appraisal; otherwise, appraisal system will be deemed to
failure.

The researcher had noticed that employees’ understanding of RBPE pay system could
be a highly influencing factor in fully introducing the system for the first time.
Shields, et al @ (2012: 70) also commented that “a further possible factor influencing
attitudinal outcomes is pay understanding”.

Therefore, based on the findings from different research studies in the field of PRP, it
can be argued that the effectivencess of PRP implementation dependes on different
factors, and that one of the factors affecting PRP’s effectiveness is employees’
perception to the system.

4
The issue here is that,in the light of views of scholars discussed above hoe effective in
MOENCO-the subject of this study-in introduce the RBPE pay system to its work
traditions,how do the different factors identified by scholars affect the effectiveness of
the company?

In doing so MOENCO implemented result based performance evaluation (RBPE) pay

system since 2009.However, until now no detailed micro level assessment has been
made regarding the attitudes of employees toward the practice of RBPE pay system.
and regarding the implementation impact of the system on both the employees and the
company..

There is this knowledge gap to fully characterize MOENCO in terms of its RBPE pay
system, despite the prevalence of employees, informal discussions negative attitudes
to the system, often revealed in.Thus this study therefore, seeks to scientifically
investigate the employees’ perceptions of effectiveness ofthe existing RBPE pay
system and employees at MOENCO.

1.3 Research Questions

Based on the above stated problem the research tries to address the following questions.
1. How much MOENCO’s employees understand the RBPE pay system,currently being
practiced in the company?
2. How successful and effective is the implementationof the RBPE pay system in
MOENCO?
3. What are the determinants of the relationship between RBPE pay system and employees’
understanding, motivation, feeling and fairness?
1.4 Research Objectives

1.4.1 General objective

The main objective of this research is to investigate the practices and problems of RBPE in
MOENCO.

5
1.4.2 Specific Objective
The specific objectives of the study are:
To evaluate MOENCO employees’ understanding of the RBPE pay system being
practiced in the company.
To analyze Moenco employees’ perceptions of the RBPE pay system
To identify determinants of the relationship between RBPE pay system and
employees understanding, motivation, feeling and fairness

1.5 Significance of the Study

This study is a micro level investigation of an organization; Hence the findings of the study are
belive to be primarly significant to the organization .However, it can also gives insight in to the
practice and problem of RBPE with other companies.The over all of this research out put
contributes to the general knowledge us to now properly implement such performance related
pay system to improve private and public organization performance in particular and to the
economy in general.

1.6 Scope of the Study

The scope of this study was limited to assessing MOENCO’S result based performance
evaluation, focusing on performance related pay system, motivation of workers and employees’
perception of fairness of the result based performanceevaluation of workers in the organization.
1.7 Limitation of the Study
The limitation of this research was at the company selected for the study- i.e MOENCO –did not
provide the the research with all the information they were regrted matters of confidentiality .
However,the researcher exterted his utmost effort to to procure data that was necessary and
sufficient to serve the purpose of the study.

1.8 Organization of the Paper

This paper is organized in the following way. The second chapter deals with review of literature
both theoretical and empirical ones. In the Third chapter, a discussion is presented on the
adoption of methodology for this research.the fourth chapter deals with data description and
analysis. Finally, chapter five contains conclusions and recommendations.

6
 Chapter Two
Review of Related Literature
2. Inroduction
The purpose of this chapter is to examine literatures in the field of RBPE, focusing on
perceptions related issues that can help address the research questions and develop a theoretical
framework for analysis of the relationship of employees’ understanding of PRP and employees’
perceptions of fairness of PRP system has with the effectiveness of the system interms of
company’s performance. Therefore, the chapter tries to identify issues related with employees’
understanding of PRP, employees’ perception of fairness of RBPE related pay and some of the
work related behaviours of workers that may influence their day to day performance.

2.1 Theoretical Literature Review

2.1.1 Definition of Performance Appraisal

The term “performance appraisal” has been defined as a process by which an individual’s work
performance is assessed. Performance appraisal refers to a process of identifying, evaluating and
developing the work performance of employees in an organization so that the organizational
goals and objectives are more effectively achieved, while at the same time benefiting employees
in terms of recognition, receiving feedback, catering for work needs and offering career guidance
(Lansbury, 1988). It is the formal process of observing and evaluating an employee’s
performance (Erdogan, 2002). According to Angelo S. DeNisi and Robert D. Pritchard (2006)
“Performance appraisal” is a discrete, formal, organizationally sanctioned event, usually not
occurring more frequently than once or twice a year, which has clearly stated in advance.

2.1.2 The Purpose and Importance of Performance appraisal

There has been a large amount of researchs done in the past several decades on performance
appraisal (Bretz, Milkovich & Read, 1992; Fisher, 1989). Performance appraisal sounds simple
but researches tell us that it is commonly used in performance feedback and identify individual
employee’s strengths and weaknesses. Performance appraisal systems are used for different
purposes which include human resource decisions, evaluation and feedback (Cleveland, et al.
1989). The different works dominated by psychologists concentrated on the psychometric

7
characteristics of appraisal for supervisors in their performance evaluation (Milkovich, et al.
1991). Psychologist focused on employee’s reaction to appraisal and shared view in which
performance appraisal takes place (Levy and Williams, 2004).

Performance appraisal establishes reward systems that will combine the efforts of leaders and
workers of an organization to the common goals of their organizations (Cleveland, and et
al,1989). For achieving high performance goals of an organization, performance appraisal is a
very important component of human resource management. The information gathered and the
performance appraisal provide basis for recruitment and selection, training and development of
existing staff, and motivating and maintaining a quality human resource through correct and
proper rewarding of their performance (Lillian, et al .2011).

2.1.3 Performance Appraisal Criteria

According to Armstrong (2009), the criteria for reviewing performance should be balanced
between: achievements in relation to objectives; the level of knowledge and skills possessed and
applied (competences or technical competencies); behavior in the job as it affects performance
(competencies); the degree to which behavior upholds the core values of the organization; and
day to day effectiveness.
As Mathis and Jackson (1997: 341) stressed, performance criteria are standards commonly used
for testing or measuring performances. Criteria for evaluating job performances can be classified
as trait- based, behavior- based, or results based.
Performance appraisal (PA) roots in the early 20th century and its existence consists of different
criteria or approaches in its history. The three criteria or approaches that deal with PA from
Heneman et, al. (1996, pp.311-335) are presented below.
1) Trait -based rating scale approach: involves rating an individual’s personal traits or
characteristics. Commonly assessed traits are: decisiveness and dependability. Although the trait-
based approach is widely used by managers, it is generally considered by experts to be the
weakest; it contains different methods during application.
2) Behavior-based rating scale approach: is done on job- by- job basis. The steps in developing a
behavior -based rating scale are both time consuming and rigorous. It contains different methods,
during application.

8
3) Result –based rating scale approach: focuses in the product of one’s efforts. It is the most
common format for the results-based approach. Also, it contains different methods during
application. (Henenman et al. 1996, pp.335)

2.1.4 Exercise of Performance Appraisal

The use of PA is elaborated by Mullins (1996, pp. 367) as a formalized and systematic appraisal
scheme that can also form the basis of a review of financial rewards and planned career
progression. Performance appraisal is therefore, a crucial activity of the personnel function and
the management of human resources (ibid).As discussed by Henenman (1996, pp.423) as PA is
used to identify the dimension of performance.

Mullins (1996) states that Managers often believe that the most significant PA outcome involves
the contributions employees make to the organizations goal attainment. Higher performing
employees successfully meet their responsibilities and thereby make a contribution to the goals
of the organization.Performance appraisal is a vital component of a broader set of human
resource management practices; it is a mechanism for evaluating the extent to which each
employees’ day- to- day performance is linked to the goals established by the organization
Coutts and Schneider (2004).

According to Armstrong (2000), a PA function is a continuous and evolutionary process in

which performance improves over time. It provides the basis for regular and frequent dialogues
between managers and individuals about performance and development needs based on feedback
and self assessment. It is mainly concerned with individual performance but it can also be
applied to teams.According to Gomez Mejia et al. (2001), organizations usually conduct
appraisals for administrative and/or developmental purposes. Performance appraisals are used
administratively whenever they are the basis for a decision about the employee’s work
conditions including promotions, terminations and rewards. Development as purpose of
performance appraisal are geared toward improving employsees’ performance; and strengthening
their job skills, including counseling employees on effective work behaviors and sending them
for training.

9
2.1.5 Performance Appraisal systems
A performance appraisal system involes certain steps .According to Gomez Mejia et al. (2001),
the first step in the performance appraisal process is identifying what is to be measured. This
process seems fairly simple at first glance. In practice, however, it can be quite complicated.
Identification of performance dimensions is the important first step in the appraisal process. If a
significant dimension is missed, employees’ moral is likely to suffer because employees who do
well on that dimension will lose the points from it, and thus employee will not be recognized or
rewarded. If an irrelevant or trivial dimension is included, eimpoyees may perceive the whole
appraisal process as meaningless.

The second step in a performance appraisal process is measuring employees’ performance.

Measuring employee performance involves a number to reflect an employee’s performance on
the identified characterstics or dimensions. Technically numbers are not mandatory. Label such
as “Excellent”, “Good”, “average” and “Poor” might be used, instead.

The third step ina performance appraisal is managing performance. The effective management
of human performance in an organization requires more that formal reporting and annual rating.
A complete appraisal process includes informal day to day interaction between managers and
workers as well as formal face to face interviews. Although the ratings themselves are
important, even more critical is what managers do with them.

2.1.6 Approaches to Performance Appraisal

Numerous techniques for measuring performance have been developed over the years.
According to Gomez-Mejia, et al. (2001), techniques of measuring performance of employees
involve a wide array of appraisal formats from which to choose. These authors discuss the
formats that are most common legally defensible. These formats can be classified in to varity
types depending on: (1) the type of judgment that is required (relative or absolute), and (2) the
focus of the measure (trait, behavior, or outcome). Performance appraisal formats should be
discussed with reviewed on regular basis. In addition,to the use of appraisal formats, informal
appraisals can be conducted whenever a manager feels they are desirable.

10
2.1.7 The Role of the Appraiser
Attitudes toward the appraiser are important, particularly because the person providing the
performance appraisal is often the employee's supervisor (Milkovich and Boudreau, 1997). The
feelings created during the performance appraisal may endure and affect the employee-
supervisor relationship in general (Wendy et al. 2000). These authors considered that evaluation
may create negative feelings toward the appraiser (the immediate supervisor) and could arguably
be detrimental to the relationship. This may be particularly true if the employee receives a low
PA rating or perceives injustice. Although negative feelings may upset the relationship between
the evaluator and the individual being evaluated (Drenth. 1984), evaluation may lead to positive
outcomes, such as pay increases or promotions, and ultimately a positive reaction toward the
person providing the feedback. Russell and Goode (1988), for example, found that satisfaction
with the appraisal positively associated with satisfaction with the appraisal source: the
supervisor.
Gosselin and colleagues (1997) A research suggests that many employees not only prefer
developmental performance appraisal uses such as career planning but also prefer that their
immediate supervisor provide the performance appraisal feedback.

2.1.8 Effectiveness of PA systems

To meet the vision, mission, objective, goals and targets of an organization or an institution,
everyone should set clear and precise methods of PA system objectivity. If so, effective output of
PA system leads an organization to prosper,specially in the environment where formal learning
and other similar activities are held. As a result every employee’s awareness leads to set and
control how to implement an effective PA system. Nelson et al. (1997 :391) discuss that an
effective PA system has about five main characteristics,which are described as follows.
1) Validity: comes from capturing multiple dimensions of a person’s job performance.
2) Reliability: comes from capturing evaluation from multiple sources and at different times over
the courses of the evaluation period.
3) Responsiveness: allows the person being evaluated some input in to the final outcome.
4) Flexibility: it opens to modification based on new information such as federal requirements.
5) Equitableness: results in fair evaluations against established performance criteria, regardless
of individual differences.

11
Again clear and very important statements about the effectiveness of PA system are expressed by
Mathis and Jackson (1997, pp. 364-365) as follows. An understanding of what an appraisal is
supposed to do is very critical whichever of the method is used. It usually works, but if PA is
used as a punishment or when raters fail to understand its limitations it fails.

What and whichever the appraisal method is used, the main point is that managers and
employees must understand the purpose of PA system. So, consistent with the strategic mission
of the organization, useful as an administrative tool, legal as development tool, as a
documentation of employees’ performance are pints of chances to be obtained if and only if PA
is practiced properly.

2.1.9 Performance Appraisal System and Performance Improvement

Performance management focuses on ways to motivate employees to improve their performance.
The goal of the performance management process is performance improvement, initially at the
level of the individual employee, and ultimately at the level of the organization.

The performance appraisal is a technique that has been credited with improving performance
(Bagozzi, 1980; DeCarlo and Leigh, 1996) and building both job satisfaction and organizational
commitment (which has been related to lower levels of turnover).

Although the relationship between appraisals and performance may not be a direct and causal
one, their impact on performance may be attributed to their ability to enhance: role clarity,
communication effectiveness, merit pay and administration, expectancy and instrumentality
estimates, and perceptions of equity. Duhinsky, et al (1993) discuss that role clarity can affect
both the effort/performance expectancy and performance/reward instrumentality estimates. Thus,
by reducing ambiguity, performance appraisals may positively influence the levels of motivation
exhibited by employees. More frequent appraisals and feedback help employees to see how they
are improving, and this should increase their motivation to improve further (Kluger and DeNisi,
1996).

12
Appraisals are generally considered to have a positive influence on performance, hut they also
may have a negative impact on motivation, role perceptions, and turnover when they are poorly
designed or administered (Churchill et al., 1985).

2.1.10 Time to Conduct Performance Appraisal

In any administratives activity of an organization, PA has its own time to be conducted.
Everyone in the organization has his/her own time to conduct PA depending on their own
philosophy of time period (Mullins 1996: 501).Typically, they are conducted once or twic a year,
usually near the employer’s anniversary dates.

2.1.11 Responsible Body to Conduct PA

PA is the most significant activity of an organization. If the right persons are not assigned to
process PA activities, then the strategic objectives of organization is seriously affected. Tosi et
al. (1986) “Performance evaluation by one’s superior, groups of management at higher levels,
subordinates or peers has been departed and for certain purposes, self- ratings are used.” Mathis
and Jackson, (1997: 347) also argue that performance appraisal can be done by any one familiar
with the performance of individual employees. Possibilities are including the following.
supervisors who rate their supervisors,
team members who rate each other,
outsider sources,
employee self-appraisals and
Multi-score (360) appraisal.

2.1.12 Performance Appraisal Attitudes

Previous research has shown that the purpose of performance appraisal affects rating processes
and outcomes (Murphy et al. (1982) and employees indicate a preference for certain performance
appraisal uses (Jordan and Nasis, 1992). It is conceivable that employee attitudes may vary
depending on perceptions of how the performance appraisal is used. If people perceive
performance appraisal purposes differently, as has been suggested by (Balzer and Sulsky (1990)
and Ostroff, (1993), then attitudes may vary depending on that perception.

13
It has also been proposed that evaluation is often of a negative nature Meyer et al. (1965),
whereas development is more likely to be viewed positively

2.1.13 The Concept of PRP

According to the definition given by Maheshwari and Singh (2010: 64-65), PRP is a merit-based
pay system that helps in aligning the individual goals with the desired outcomes of the
organization. It is a reward given to employees for the optional and special contribution towards
the accomplishment of the assigned individual and organizational goals. It is also a mechanism
for incorporating accountability, where employees are made accountable for attaining the
assigned results.

Others also consider RBPE as an effective system to boost profitability through aligning
organizational target and employee performance. They describe it as a compensation system
related with merit, productivity, motivation and reward. Performance related pay (PRP) system is
a compensation system that rewards performance on an individual or group basis (Farrell and
Morris 2009 cited in Lee, Iijima and Reade 2011:2086). The aim of PRP is to motivate
employees to work harder by presenting a transparent link between performance and financial
reward, and hence to raise employees’ productivity (Deckop and Mangel 1999, cited in Lee,
Iijima and Reade 2011: 2086).

Though there are a number of studies in the field of PRP, research findings do not indicate there
is similarity and agreement whether it is an effective system that boosts profit and productivity or
it is ineffective in maximizing individual and organizational income. Some studies found it is a
system that boosts profitability. Other research findings show limitations of the system and
ambiguities in the effectiveness of the system. Few even comment PRP as productivity loss.

2.1.14 Importance and Application of PRP

Lazear (2000), Booth and Frank (1999) and others concluded in their studies supporting the idea
that PRP boosts productivity, company profit and employees’ income.

14
Understanding and making use of fundamental differences in employee response to incentive
systems appears merited (Fox, Scott and Donohue 1993:692). As Lee, Iijiman and Reade
suggested, if employee performance data are obtainable, it can allow examination of impact of
employee preference to PRP on actual performance.

MOENCO which is the subject of this study is one of the subsidiaries of western multinational
companies currently operating in Ethiopia. Therefore, employees’ perceptions of the RBPE pay
system as investigated in the study so that we can see if there are cultural differences or
similarity between the PRP system practice in MOENCO and that in other similar companies in
the west. With the globalization of HR practices, such as the implementation of RBPE pay
system, ‘there is a need to consider culturally based variation in the ways employees
conceptualize their relationships with their employers’ (Thomas, et al. 2003, p 451 cited in Lee,
Iijima and Reade 2011:2104).

Therefore, to answer the research questions, employees’ perception of fairness of the system,
understanding of the system and motivation of employees, a perception to the level of incentive
pay and employees view as element of control shall be considered as perception factors to
explore the outcome. In addition, other fundamental perception factors emanating in the early
stages of data collection process will be considered.
RBPE pay system may be viewed by workers as an element of control rather than support (Frey
and Jegen 2001 cited in Artz 2008: 316). Mitra, Gupta and Jenkins suggest that small level of
pay increase is motivationally ineffective and organizations should introduce an effective merit
system that can enhance employee’s motivation to increase performance.

They also provide an estimate of the minimum percentage raise that induces cognitive and
behavioural reactions. Pay differences have a consistent negative effect on employees’
perception of fairness, hence, it behoves management to explain to employees how and why they
are paid because of the positive relationships that pay understanding has with pay fairness
(Shields, Scott, Bishop and Goelzer 2012:82).

15
Finally, these perception factors will be considered to explore the relationship of performance
related pay system and its impact on workers day to day performance.

2.1.15 Controversies and Employees’ Perception to PRP System

There have been some scholarly debates as to the practices and effects of the PRP system that
can affect productivity and income positively. Lazear (2000), Booth and Frank (1999) and others
support the idea that PRP boosts productivity, company profit and employees’ income. Some
estimate that the introduction of a PRP system increases productivity of firms with about 9%.
This may be partly due to an incentive effect and partly due to worker sorting. The increase in
productivity does not come at a cost of employment, on the contrary; the inflow of workers
increases more than the outflow does, thus generating a net employment growth of 5 percentage
points (Gielen, et al. 2010: 300).

Whatever is told about PRP, Heneman (2002) cited in Schay and Fisher (2013: 363) summary
(shown in the below Table 1) of myths and realities in merit pay generally shows PRP has
positive outcomes though there are myths in merit pay showing negative impressions and some
other research findings also show limitations in implementing the system.

Employees’ understanding to the system can be one factor affecting employees’ perception of
PRP. Research findings show effective implementation of PRP needs employees’ understanding
of the system. Shield, et al. (2012) assert that pay system effectiveness resides not just in how the
system is designed and administered but also in how clearly and consistently the system is
explained to those affected and how well it is understood and accepted by them as fair and
equitable. The result of their research show that it behoves management to explain to employees
how and why they are paid because of the positive relationship that pay understanding has with
pay fairness (Shield, et al .2012: 82).

16
Table 2.1: Myths and realities concerning merit pay

Myth 1 Organizations have abandoned merit pay

Reality Merit pay is the most frequently used reward program; over 80% of
employers use it
Myth 2 Merit pay programs are ineffective
Merit pay is almost always related to improved employee attitudes (which,
Reality in turn, are related to attendance and retention), and merit pay is sometimes
related to improved job performance
Myth 3 Merit pay decreases satisfaction with work
Reality Merit pay adds to satisfaction with work
Myth 4 Employees prefer team and organization based rewards over individual
rewards such as merit pay
Reality Employees prefer individual rewards over team and organizational rewards

Source: LeBlanc and Mulvey (1998) and Heneman (2002) cited in Schay and Fisher (2013: 363)
Maheshawi and Singh (2010: 63) also commented the importance of checking preparedness of
employees for effective implementation of PRP. According to this authores, implementation of
PRP is a challenging task; therefore, organizations should make themselves ready before
implementation, including the psychological preparedness of employees.

Therefore, it looks important to study how employees understand and perceive PRP and how the
employees’ understanding and perception of PRP affect work related behaviours.

Another factor that has the potential to affect implementation of PRP, according to research
findings, is employees’ feelings for the level of pay attached to PRP.Konstantinos (2010)
comments that monetary incentives may have a positive effect on workers’ utility and
performance as long as they are large enough. All other things being equal, a higher intensity of
rewards is observed to enhance the utility that workers derive from their jobs (Konstantinos
(2010: 618). Therefore, it seems also studying employees’ perception of fairness of the amount
of pay attached to the prp system is important pay is important.

In addition, research findings also indicate the need to study employees’ understanding and
employees’ feelings of level of pay in PRP. Lawler (2000) stated that PRP needs individuals trust

17
on organizations, to be motivating. Trust can be created through effective communication which
enhances perceived fairness through transparency. Additionally, Heneman (2002) cited in Schay
and Fisher (2013: 361) stated that employees are concerned with the amount of merit pay they
receive in the context of PRP.

2.1.16 Definition of Motivation

Motivation is incidental to or defined by goal-directed behaviour. This implies that motivation is
concerned with the strength and direction of that behaviour. In other words, it implies that
motivation takes place when people expect that a course of action is likely to lead to the
attainment of a goal and a valued reward - one which satisfies their particular needs. Well-
motivated people are, therefore, those with clearly defined goals who take action which they
expect will achieve those goals (Erez and Zion, 1984).

Motivating employees can be a manager’s biggest challenge. Employee motivation is a key to

the overall effectiveness of an organisation. Jones and George (2007) define motivation as
psychological forces that determine the direction of a person’s behaviour in an organisation, a
person’s level of effort and a person’s level of persistence. The authors consider direction of
behaviour, efforts and persistence as key components towards motivation.The behaviour that a
person chooses is direction of behaviour. Effort measures how hard an employee works.
Persistence occurs when an employee continues in the face of difficulties, instead of giving up.

They make effective contributions at work because of strongly developed feelings of behavioural
commitment. As scholars argue they acknowledge that their efforts are required to further both
the needs of the organisation and their own interests (Tarkenton, 1986, and Robinson, 1992).
Therefore, in the context of PM model, the process of motivation entails positive reinforcement
progression

The foregoing discussion highlights the importance of PRP for motivation on the job. It is the
kind of compensation that is relevant in a study of the link between motivation and performance.
It is the role of pay in motivating employees on the job that is the focus of this study, and not the
impact of money on decisions to take up or to leave employment.

18
2.1.17 The Process of Motivation
The process of motivation can be modeled as shown in Figure 2.1 below. This is a needs related
model and it suggests that motivation is initiated by the conscious or unconscious recognition of
unsatisfied needs. These needs create wants, which are desires to achieve goals or obtain
something.

2. Establish Goal

1. Need
3. Take Action

4. Attain Goal

Figure 2.1: The process of motivation

Source: Armstrong, (1993)

Goals are then established to satisfy these needs and wants and a behaviour trail is selected
which it is expected will facilitate the achievement of the goal. If the goal is achieved the need
will be satisfied and the behaviour is likely to be repeated the next time when a similar need
emerges. If the goal is not achieved the same action is less likely to be repeated.
This model describes how individual motivation process takes place. It is based on the
motivational theories related to needs (achievements), goals, equity, behaviour modeling
(reactance) and expectancy.
The model can be used to illustrate a process of motivation which involves setting of corporate
goals that are likely to meet individual and organizational needs and wants, and encourage the
behaviour required to achieve those goals.

2.1.18 Motivation and Reward

The underlying rationale for performance‐related pay is based on theories of motivation and the
degree to which financial reward can influence an individual’s performance. The view that the

19
right behaviour can be encouraged through reward and discouraged through punishments derives
from many years of psychological thinking. For behaviourists like Skinner (1974), learning only
takes place through external positive and negative reinforcement – the ‘carrot or stick’ approach
to reward. Taylorism applied this thinking to financial rewards, contending that money was the
sole motivator for workers to perform. This is an essentially employer‐centric view of reward,
based on the premise that behaviour can be controlled and moulded to suit employer needs. It is a
view that takes no account of employee reward preferences.
This perspective has been hotly contested by other motivational theorists. For example,
expectancy and goal theorists put the emphasis on cognition thought processes – that is, the
decisions people make about how far to participate and perform in the workplace. For goal
theorists, future goals or anticipated outcomes can be used to influence behaviour and
motivation, and the mere existence of goals can lead people to behave in ways that mean they
will attain their goals. This does not even necessarily imply that financial reward is needed;
rather, there is a strong indication in goal theory that objective setting is a powerful motivational
tool in its own right.

Expectancy Instrumentality Valence

Pay
satisfacti

Goal setting Performance Reward

evaluation

Motivation
Figure 2.2: Expectancy theory and pay satisfaction
Source: Ducharme, Singh and Podolsky, (2005)York University, CBR

Goal theory was refined in a number of ways through expectancy theory. Porter and Lawler
(1968), building on earlier work by Vroom, (1964)developed the central hypothesis that
motivation is dependent on whether the outcomes hold psychological value or ‘valence’ for the
individual.
Effort would be made where people expect to be rewarded for it, but there needs to be a clear
line of sight between the effort and expected reward. The reward needs to match the effort
expended – if the reward is too small or unimportant for the effort involved, an individual will

20
not try that hard, so ‘valence’ has both quantitative and qualitative dimensions – whether the
reward is of the right kind and whether there is enough of it.

This theory has implications for the level of awards that are paid under PRP schemes. There is
also the contention made by Adams (1965) that people are uncomfortable about being better
rewarded than others, although this seems to depend on the social setting.

2.2 Empirical Literature Review

Eric (2011) studied the effects of employee performance appraisal on the achievements of
organizational objectives, achievements and contributions to the organization, Employees of
Ghana Health Service in recent times have been accused of high level of inefficiencies in the
discharge of their duties by the general public. Data were collected via questionnaire from senior
and junior staff and the primary data were collated and analyzed using appropriate statistical
techniques the study sought to ascertain the level of knowledge and awareness of employees
of performance appraisal practices at the Manhyia District Hospital.

This was to help determine whether employees were educated enough on appraisal
systems and its relevance to the individual employee’s performance. Finally, the researcher
suggested that training and incentives should be offered to meet desired performance standards,
minimize conflict and confrontation, and develop self-auditing.

Mohamed (2005) also studied the factors that shape and influence the institutionalization of
the performance appraisal system in the Maldivian Public Service. The research approach
followed in this study was a qualitative one. Maldivian Public Service had been establishing a
formal performance appraisal system. However, after 3 years it was evident that the objectives of
implementing the system had not been achieved. Mohamed gathered data through: (a)
interviews, (b) observations and (c) examination of secondary documents.Mohamednfound out
that the desired motivation among the Maldivian Public Servants was currently absent. Due
to the lower salaries in the government and in order to survive in the expensive living standards
of Maldives, most public servants were motivated when the rewards were worth while to
them in terms of promotion or any form of salary rise.

21
Based on the research findings the researcher then recommended that motivation and reward
would be necessary prerequisites for any reform to succeed. However, the researcher further
recommended that a new performance appraisal system that would be fit to the Maldivian
context should be formulated.

An other study conducted by Deborah and Brain (1997) was based on the opinion that
organizations need to have a systematic framework to ensure that performance appraisal is “fair”
and “consistent”. These authors belives that designing an effective appraisal system requires a
strong commitment from top management. They argue that the system should provide a link
between employee performance and organizational goals through individualized objectives and
performance criteria. They further argued that the system should help to create a motivated and
committed workforce. The system should have a framework to provide appropriate training for
supervisors, raters, and employees; a system for frequent review of performance, accurate record
keeping, a clearly defined measurement system, and a multiple rater group to perform the
appraisal.

According to Mathias (2011) comparative study was done to compare the performance
management and rewarding systems followed by the case enterprises i.e. in two selected
privatized and state owned enterprises in Ethiopia. The problem is that there is no sufficient
empirical evidence on performance management in privatized and public enterprises. In
Ethiopia, there have been lots of state owned and private enterprises playing great role in the
Economy. Therefore, the data collection was made through questionnaire filled by employees,
review of policy documents and interview with general managers of both enterprises. The
findings showed that, in many instances, performance management practices were not
significantly different between these enterprises. In some parameters of performance
management, the privatized enterprise was found better than the state owend enterprise.
However, this study has limitation in that a case study is not conclusive for all other similar
organizations.

22
In general, keeping weak points from each enterprise, the overall comparison reflects that the
public enterprise (ASSC) was weaker than the privatized enterprise PMS. An important lesson
that can be derived from this research is that these enterprises do not give much emphasis for
performance management as a system to boost performance.

2.3 Theoretical Framework

This study consideedr employees’ understanding of RBPE, employees’perceptions of level of
performance related pay system and fairness of RBPE psy system.

Research findings have shown (Shields, Scott, Bishop and Goelzer 2012) some of the factors
affecting employees’ motivation and performance are employees’ understanding of the system
and employees’ feeling of fairness of the level of PRP related pay.Folger and Konovsky
(1989),and Lee, Law and Bobko (1999) cited in Shield, Scott, Bishop and Goelzer (2012: 70)
contend that employees’ feelings of fairness are related to a number of outcomes as pay
satisfaction, product quality, performance and physical and psychological health. Based on this,
Shield, Scott, Bishop and Goelzer (2012: 70) suggested pay fairness seem to be a significant
predictor of employee attitude and behaviour influencing employees’ work related behaviours.
Therefore, this study tries to explore the relationship of these perception factors with RBPE and
work related behaviours of MOENCO employees.

2.3.1 Employees’ Understanding of PRP

A basic tenet of compensation theory is that the impact of pay programs and policies impact on
work-related attitudes and behaviour depends upon how they are perceived (Shield, Scott,
Bishop and Goelzer (2012: 69). One of such perceptions as identified by different researchers is
pay understanding.

Shields, et al .(2012: 82) also commented that “Pay system effectiveness resides not just in how
the system is designed and administered but also in how clearly and consistently the system is
explained to those affected and how well it is understood and accepted by them as fair and
equitable”.

23
Another research by Gupta (1980) cited in Shields, Scott, Bishop and Goelzer (2012: 75), which
shows the importance of pay understanding in PRP, identified four reasons why low pay,
communication, and understanding may have negative outcomes. First, lack of understanding
may cause uncertainty and give rise to feelings of unfairness. Second, poor communication may
give rise to the belief that the system is weak, whereas perceptions of system strength will elicit
positive reactions. Third, by reducing role clarity, low communication may preclude employees
from altering behaviour to address performance and reward expectations. Fourth, inadequate
system understanding may impair employees’ belief in the possibility of maximizing reward
returns.
Commitment

Employees’
Willingness to
understanding of
cooperate with others
PRP

Team
Employees’ perception
of fairness of PRP
Belongingness
system
Employees’
perception about
the level of PRP Intent to quit
related pay
Job involvement

Figure 2:3 – Relationship of employees’ perception of PRP with work related behaviours
through employees’ feelings of fairness,
Source: Shields, Scott, bishop and Goelzer (2012: 72), with modification.

Similarly, Barber and Simmering (2002) cited in Shields, et al (2012: 75) propose that an
understanding of the pay system would facilitate feelings that the pay system is fair and
encourage acceptance of pay outcomes. Furthermore, compensation professionals believe that
clear and consistent communication aimed at helping employees understand their employer’s pay
policies and programs will engender perception of pay fairness and will further the goals of their
pay programs (e.g, Scott et al. 2007, 2008) cited in Shields, Scott, Bishop and Goelzer 2012:75).

24
Others also found employees’ understanding of how they are paid relative to what others is paid
show a positive relationship with their feelings of fairness of pay. Brown and Huber (1998).
Dulebohn and Martocchio (1998); Judge (1994) and Lee et al. (1999) all cited in Shields, et al.
.(2012: 75) have found that employees who have a better understanding of how they are paid
relative to their own responsibilities and inputs, and relative to what others are paid, express
higher levels of pay felt-fairness and pay satisfaction. Additionally, Scott, Sperling, McMullen,
and Bowbin (2008); Shaw and Gupta (2007) both cited in Shields, et al .(2012: 70) suggested
that there is positive association between employees’ understanding of pay system and pay
fairness.

On the other hand, stressing on the role of certainty of communication in reducing the feeling of
injustice, Sopow, (2007) and Sayeed and Bhide (2003) both cited in Maheshwari and Singh
(2010: 65) commented that communication may not enhance the feeling of justice among
employees.

Research findings also show negative influence of understanding if employees feel others are
paid more than them. Dornstein (1991) and Sweeney, McFarlin and Inderrienden (1990) both
cited in Shields, Scott, Bishop and Goelzer (2012: 73) found that when employees believed
others with whom they chose to compare themselves earned more than they did, they felt
dissatisfied.

This is amplified by others (e.g., Adams 1963, 1965; Crosby 1976; Folger and Cropanzano 1998:
1–24; Heneman 1985; Sweeney et al. 1990,all cited in Shields, Scott, Bishop and Goelzer 2012:
73) stating that a person may feel inequitably treated if other persons with whom they choose to
compare themselves receive more desirable outcomes (e.g., pay) than they do, especially if they
perceive themselves as making equivalent or higher contributions than those comparable
individuals.

Generally, from research findings, it can be understood there is a relationship between pay
understandings with fairness feelings. And equity for workability of PRP Mohrman and
Mohrman, (1995) Randama-LiiV (2005), cited in Maheshwari & Singh (2010: 65). They propose

25
that adequate and clear communication makes employees to understand what is expected and
build trust and involvement in the system.They commented that organizational communication
process is an important factor to influence justice.

Therefore, as Shields, Scott, Bishop and Goelzer (2012) concluded, explaining to employees
about how and why they are paid is a necessary task of management to have positive feelings of
fairness of employees because of the positive relationship between pay understandings with pay
fairness.

Accordingly, it seems important to relate employees’ understanding of PRP with employees’

feelings of fairness to explore influence of employees’ understandings of PRP on work related
behaviors’.

2.3.2. Employees’ Perceptions of Fairness of the Amount of Pay Related to RBPE

Another perception factor that can affect work related attitudes is employees’ feelings of pay
fairness . Though Mitra, Gupta and Jenkins (1997) do not conclude pay raise levels are the sole
determinants of employees’ perception to pay raise, they concluded merit pay may also be
ineffective because simply the raises are not large enough to evoke positive perceptual and
attitudinal reactions among employees. Similarly, Rambo and Pinto (1989) cited in Mirta,
Gupta and Jerkins (1997: 134) commented that most people agree intuitively that mini-scale pay
raises are not seen as raises and may instead be disappointing. In summarizing their study Mirta,
Gupta and Jerkins (1997: 135) reinforce “The intuitive notion that small pay raises may be
meaningless and motivationally ineffective. When a pay raise is a mere drop in the bucket, it
may not be viewed as a pay raise by employees.”

The experimental findings of Konstantinos Pouliakas (2010) also showed that employees will be
motivated as long as incentive payments are large enough. They commented that “All other
things equal, a higher intensity of rewards is observed to enhance the utility that workers derive
from their jobs.” In addition, Kauhanen and Piekkola (2006: 149) conducted a study on the
perceptions of Finish highly educated employees and found out that “For effectiveness of the
PRP the employees have to feel they are able to affect the outcomes and the level of payments

26
should be high enough and rewards frequent enough. Levels below the median do not generate
positive effects.”

In their suggestons for organizations implementing PRP, Mitra, Gupta and Jenkins (1997) said
that small level of pay increase is motivationally ineffective and organizations should introduce
an effective merit system that can enhance employees’ motivation to increase performance. They
also provide an estimate of the minimum percentage raise that induces cognitive and behavioural
reactions. Additionally, Worley, Bowen and Lawler (1992) recommend that future research
should give attention to employees’ response for pay increase below the lower threshold of
attractiveness, inferring an initial threshold of 5 percent of current salary.

Therefore, it seems important to study employees’ perceptions of fairness of the level of PRP pay
to understand their response to PRP and know their feelings of fairness in relation to PRP.

2.3.3 Employees’ Feeling of Fairness of PRP

From the discussions in the preceding two sub sections, one can understand that employees’
feelings of fairness of PRP can be affected by perception factors related to PRP. Therefore, it is
worth to study employees’ feelings of fairness of PRP to understand perceptions, related to PRP,
and its effect on work related behaviours of workers.
Tyler and Bies (1990) suggest that it is procedural justice – the process of how someone is
treated – that is the key element in ‘felt fairness’. Distributive justice, or the outcome of the
rewards, is less important. This is borne out by research done by Folger and Konovsky (1989)
and McFarlin and Sweeney (1992). Both studies showed that reward system process was more
important than reward system content. Perceptions of distributive justice only predict immediate
satisfaction with reward outcomes, whereas perceptions of procedural justice are associated with
a broader range of attitudes, like organisational commitment and the quality of employee
relationships with bosses.

This holds true regardless of whether or not reward decisions are favourable to employees.
Procedural justice, that is, the fairness of the reward allocation process was found to be more
important. Indeed, where procedural justice is rated as high, there is evidence to suggest that

27
distributive justice has less impact on employees (McFarlin and Sweeney, 1992). This has
important implications for employers, who might do well to focus their investment on time spent
on getting reward processes right rather than on the size of reward at stake.

However, further research has emphasized that fair procedures alone are not enough. It points to
the importance of interactional or interpersonal justice. Bies and Moag (1986) emphasize that
procedures cannot exist without being enacted and that people may regard the way in which
procedures are followed as equally or indeed, more important than the existence of the
procedures themselves. Firstly, there is the sincerity with which procedures are followed, for
example, the degree to which managers truly consider employees’ views on pay when consulting
them. Secondly, interpersonal sensitivity comprises the politeness and courtesy with which an
individual is treated when a decision is being made or implemented, which affects the
maintenance of their sense of dignity and self-worth, often referred to now as ‘interpersonal
justice’. This may include subtle and intangible aspects of communication such as tone of voice
and body language in face‐to‐face interactions.

Additionally, Agarwal and Bose (2004) and Campbell, Campbell and Chia (1998) both cited in
(Maheshwari and Singh 2010: 65) highlighted that the PRP system satisfies the employees by
providing them justice, which motivates them to perform and believe in the fairness of the
system.

Shield, Scott, Bishop and Goelzer (2012: 82) also indicated the negative and positive influence
of perception of pay fairness on desired work attitudes. Additionally, Ramaswami and Singh
(2003) and Scarpello and Jones (1996) both cited in Shield, Scott, Bishop and Goelzer (2012: 71)
found relationships between employees’ fairness perception and organizational commitment.

Therefore, we can say that employees’ feelings of fairness to PRP can influence employees’
work related behaviours. Lee (1995) and Moorman and Byrne (2005) both cited in Shield, Scott,
Bishop and Goelzer (2012: 71) day that perceptions of justice are related to extra-role behaviour,
which includes employee willingness to help and cooperate with other employees even though it
is outside of their defined, required work duties.

28
Research findings also show a relationship of pay fairness feelings of employees with their work
related behaviours. Theories of organizational justice, social exchange, and equity theory suggest
that perceptions of reward fairness can affect a range of employee.

There are also suggestions from research that recommend the need to study employees’ feelings
of pay fairness. Shields, Scott, Bishop and Goelzer (2012) also suggest there is the need to
examine employees’ feelings of pay fairness because of its relationship with desired
performance-related work attitudes. Consequently, from these research findings, we can say that
employees’ feelings of fairness to PRP may influence a number of work related behaviours that
can be related with performance.

2.3.4 Work Related Behaviors’

Some of the work related behaviours, according to literatures, are belongingness, willingness to
extra effort, organizational membership feeling, and others. Research also found that committed
employees have positive attitudes towards the organization and are characterized as productive.
According to Cook and Wall (1980) cited in Lee, Iijima and Reade (2011: 2093), individuals
who are highly committed to the organization are most likely to hold attitudes and engage in
behaviours favorable to the employer, such as having a strong belief in and accepting the
organization’s goals, a willingness to exert extra effort on behalf of the organization and a strong
desire to maintain organizational membership.

In addition, Porter, Steers, Mowday and Boulian (1974) cited in Somers and Birnbaum (1998:
621) commented that committed employees are characterized as loyal, productive members of
work organizations. According to London, (1983); Rabinowitz and Hall, (1977); Randall,
(1990), cited in Somers and Birnbaum (1998: 621) a wide array of desirable behaviour outcomes
are linked to work related commitment.

Research findings also show that desirable work behaviours are related with performance though
they have argued the cause of employees work behaviours positive relationship with
performance are (1) managers may provide higher evaluations to employees exhibiting

29
organizational citizenship behaviours as a form of reciprocity P. M. Podsakoff, MacKenzie, and
Hui, 1993, cited in Podsakof, et al (2013), (2) Organizational citizenship behaviours are
interpreted as behavioural manifestations of commitment and/or loyalty Allen and Rush, 2001,
cited in Podsakof, et al (2013) and (3) managers tend to like these individuals more Lefkowitz,
2000 cited in Podsakof, et al (2013).

Other study indicating a positive relationship of work related attitudes with performance (Organ,
Podsakoff, & MacKenzie, 2006; Podsakoff, Whiting and Blume, 2009 ,cited in Rapp, et al.
(2013: 668) which stated that organizational citizenship behaviour is positively associated with a
range of performance outcomes, including task performance.

In addition to the relationship of work related behaviours with performance, researchers have
found that work related behaviours are influenced by employees’ feelings of fairness. Some have
found positive relationship while others negative relationships.

Some researchers, e.g., Lee (1995), and Moorman and Byrne (2005) , cited in (shields, et al.
(2012: 71), have found out that positive fairness perceptions are related to positive outcome of
employees’ work related behaviours. Shield, et al. (2012) conceded that non communication and
miscommunication are likely to lead to pay misunderstanding and, thus, to negative attitudinal
and behavioural consequences. This leads to the generalization that if employees’ are well
communicated about pay, there may be a different behavioural consequence.

On the other hand, Deckop and Mangel (1999), cited in Lee, Iijima and Reade 2011: (2095)
commented that PRP may reduce employees’ effort devoted to organizational citizenship
behaviour since employees may focus only on performance targeted by rewards. Lee, Iijima and
Reade (2011) also indicate that prior research has reported that PRP dampen individual
willingness to engage in organizational citizenship behaviours.

There is,however,a different perspective from other research findings. The contrasting
perspective is that that there is no relationship between employees’ perceptions of PRP and their
work related behaviours. forexample, Lee, Iijima and Reade (2011) argue that there is no strong

30
relationship between employees perceptions of PRP and their related behaviours, be it positive
or negative. Finally, it seems rational to study work related behaviours in relation to employees’
fairness feelings, employees’ understanding of PRP and employees’ perception of level of PRP
pay. Shields, Scott, Bishop and Goelzer (2012) summarized that both theory and research
highlight the need to examine employees’understanding of pay system and their feelings about
fairness to PRP relation to of how they influence desired performance-related work attitudes.

In addition, Fox et al. (1993) propose understanding, and making use of, fundamental
differences in employee response to incentive systems appears merited. Therefore, this
research will try to investigate MOENCO employees understanding of RBPE,their perceptions of
level of PRP pay, their feelings of fairness to PRP and the implications of their PRP fairness
feelings to their work related behaviours. Work related behaviours to be considered in this study
are considered willingness to help colleagues, supervisors and customers; belongingness;
commitment, team work; intent to quit ; and job involvement.

2.4.5 Motivation - Performance linkage

Money, in the form of pay or some other sort of remuneration, is the most obvious extrinsic
reward. Money provides the carrot which most people want. However, doubts have been cast in
the literature on the effectiveness of money. It is argued that while the lack of money can cause
dissatisfaction, its provision does not result in lasting satisfaction either Herzberg, et al. (1957).
There is something in this, especially for people on fixed salaries or rates of pay who do not
benefit directly from an incentive scheme. This group of people may feel good when they get an
increase; apart from the extra money, it is a highly tangible form of recognition and an effective
means of helping people to feel that they are valued. But this feeling of jubilation can rapidly die
away.

Need Value Goal Action

Eg. Food Eg Money Eg. Receive Eg. Go to Work

can buy food payment

Figure 2.4: Performance, Pay and Motivation Model Building blocks of motivation
Source: Locke and Henne, (1986)

31
Locke and Henne (1986) argue that there is a strong link between an employee’s performance,
pay and motivation. This linkage can be perfected by the building blocks as illustrated in Figure
2.4 above.
As noted by Goldthorpe, et al. (1968), pay is the dominant factor in the choice of employer, and
considerations of pay seem most powerful in binding people to their present jobs. Financial
incentives do motivate people who are strongly motivated by money and whose expectations that
they will receive a financial reward are high. But less confident employees may not respond to
incentives, which they do not expect to achieve.

It can also be argued that extrinsic rewards may erode intrinsic interest - people who work just
for money could find their tasks less pleasurable and may not, therefore, do them so well. What
we do know is that a multiplicity of factors is involved in performance improvements and many
of those factors are interdependent. Money can therefore provide positive motivation in the right
circumstances not only because people need and want money but also because it serves as a
highly tangible means of recognition. But badly designed and managed compensation and
reward systems can demotivate.

Verhellen (1994) argues that motivation strategies aim to create a working environment and to
develop policies and practices, which will provide for higher levels of performance from
employees. According to Tarkenton (1986), motivational strategies will be concerned with
measuring motivation to provide an indication of areas where motivational practices need to be
improved; ensuring, so far as possible, that employees feel they are valued; developing
behavioural commitment; developing an organisation climate which will foster motivation;
improving leadership skills, job design, PM,compensation and reward management, and the use
of behavioural modification approaches. One of these strategies, reward systems management is
briefly discussed below.

2.3.6 Compensation and Reward Systems (CRS) Management Theory

Employee reward systems management is concerned with designing, implementing and
maintaining reward systems, which are geared to the improvement of organisational team and
individual performance (Armstrong, 1993; Beaumont, 1993). This aspect of personnel

32
management used to be called salary administration, but is now regarded as a limited description
of one aspect of the whole subject of remuneration (Butler, 1986).
Business Strategy

Reward Strategy

Performance Job Evaluation Market rate Employer Benefit

Management Survey

Pay Pay Levels and

Structure Differentials

Non – Financial
Reward
Performance Pay Total
Remuneration

Total Reward

Figure 2.5: The Reward System Model

Source: Armstrong, M. (1993)

Figure 2.5 above is a model which demonstrates that an employee reward system consists of an
organisation’s integrated policies, processes and practices for rewarding its employees in
accordance with their contribution, skill and competence and their market worth. It is developed
within the framework of the organisation’s reward philosophy, strategies and policies. The model
contains arrangements in the form of processes, practices, structures, and procedures which will
provide and maintain appropriate types and levels of pay, benefits and other forms of total
reward.

33
 Chapter Three:
Research Methodology
3. Introduction
This chapter dealt with methodological issues including the selection and justification of the
research method, approach and tools employed. More specifically, the chapter presents the
proper data sources accessed to collect pertinent information, the sampling techniques employed
to draw adequate sample of respondents and proper data collection. Instrument utilized together
data that helped in answering the research question designed.

3.1. Research method

This study sought to investigate employees’ perception and understanding about the Result
Based Performance-evolution system and its impact on the pay system of MOENCO

Inorder to address the issue, a case study has been chosen as a proper research method for this
study. This is due to the fact that there are number of organization implementing Result Based-
Performance Evaluation. Hence, Moenco is selected as a case study organization, in order to
make detail investigation. Beside, case study is selected as it is helpful in using multiple tools
and designs Moreover, it is appropriate for social since research of this kind in which it is hardly
possible to get solid responses.
Furthermore, in order to compliment the method chosen, mixed research approach was used. The
mixed research approach was used as it enables to compliment the benefits of both quantitative
and qualitative research approaches.

3.2 Data Source and Collection Procedure

3.2.1 Primary Data Collection Techniques

Questionnaire
Primarily data were collect through of questionnaires.In order to collect the necessary
information (responses), both closed and open ended questions was developed and included in
the questionnaire.

34
Interview
From four departments 8 employees were selected for interviews. The interviews are were
selected based on their academic qualification and work experience in the company.

As Anon (2009) suggests, open questions are more suitable to gather rich qualitative data, In
order to this interview questions were used for this study.

Observation
The researcher currently working in MOENCO,in the sales department. I am also one of the
members of workers union leaders. It is during my stay in workers union that RBPE pay system
started with in the company 2009. My personal observation as a full participant at the stage of
carrying out of the system reveals the following changing attitudes of employees and union
representatives, which is useful for successful implementation of the system. I, especially,
observed that employees’ understanding and perception of the system determines the
effectiveness of the organization in accomplishing its function.
Similarly, as it is discussed elsewhere in the paper, my personal experience and observation
indicated that proper implementation of RBPE pay system benefits both employees and the
company. Otherwise it could amount to waste of time.

3.2.2 Secondary Data Sources

The Secondary data were collected from annual report; Human Recourse Department recorded
data, journals, different books and research papers on various relevant RBPE issues, the internet
and brochures.

3.3 Sampling techniques

3.3.1 Target population
To select a sample for the study, sampling frame is required for selection of different department
from the total 341 employees of MOENCO head office. The researcher employed purposive
sampling technique considering respondents’ ability to provide data that will help to answer the
research questions (Anon 2009:102).

35
3.3.2 Sample size
For selecting the above mentioned population researecher used purposive sampling
technique.was used sixty respondents were selected as a representative sample of the target
populationfrom four different departments :Marketing and Sales Department, Human Recourse
Department, After Sales Department and Finance and Import Control department.data gathering
through questionnaire. The total number of respondents selected from each department
corresponds to the total number of workers in the department.

Table3.1 Sample size of respondents

Respondents Sample Size Total

Marketing and Sales Department 15
Human Recourse Department 5
After Sales Department 25 60
Finance and Import control department 15

3.4 Data Analysis

The data analysis was undertaken right after the data collection from the field, during data
analysis and interpretation; primary and secondary data were combined in explaining,
confirming and enriching data from one approach to another. Hence, primary data obtained
from questionnaires and interviews were used to explain issues related to the positive and
negative prospects of RBPE. The analysis of the data was employed qualitative methods as well
as discussing and interpreting facts.The data was presented by using tools like tables, charts and
percentages.

Moreover, secondary data obtained from various data sources were organized and analyzed to
compliment the survey results from primary data sources.

3.5 Ethical Consideration

The researcher selected employees were directly contacted by the researcher, first, through the
telephone and face to face communication and the research purposes including number of
employees to be questionnaire and interviewed respondents, the anticipated time it will take,
anonymity and confidentiality of the company and individuals to be participated were explained.

36
In addition, the respondents are also informed that they have the right to participate or decline at
any point and they were guaranteed about the confidentiality and anonymity of data, company
and individuals. Accordingly 68 participants were willing and took part in the data collection.

A copy of questionnaire was sent to respondents the research was considered for further steps of
the research after respondents’ response.
.

37
 Chapter Four:
Data Analysis and Discussion
4. Introduction
This chapter emphasises on the data description and analysis. It therefore generates the findings
of the study in the types of payments related with RBPE and general thinking about the rationale
of PRP, employees’ understanding of PRP-system the Relationship of motivation, employees’
perception of feelings about the fairness of job performance evaluation. Finally the relationship
of work related behaviours to employee perceptions’ of RBPE and its effect on their work
outcomes would be peresented.

4.1. Historical Background of MOENCO

Moenco was established in the heart of Addis Ababa, around the area commonly known as
Mexico, It was a small garage with a capital of 200,000 Ethiopian Birr was founded by Mr. Y. D.
Lappine 50 Years ago in a small rented house. His far sighted vision become reality with the
help of other resourceful people, such as Ato Menasseh Lemma, former the Governor of the
National Bank of Ethiopia, and boss of Imperial Insurance company.Anniversary pamphlet
(May,2009 )

Nine years later, MOENCO took over the TOYOTA franchise business for Ethiopia when
Inchcape, a London based international organization, became a major shareholder and injected a
considerable amount of capital. This was a milestone moment in the firm’s journey to become
the MOENCO of today. In addition to the TOYOTA business, at different times MOENCO used
to represent General Motors for various types of American vehicles and trucks, Ingersoll-Rand;
WABCO, Pettibow; Universal; Dupont; Teneral Tire; Frigdaire; Zanussi; and Thomas De La
Rue & Co. of England.( moencoethiopia.com )

All the experiences MOENCO has gained have come from working with partners, allowed
MOENCO to focus on people, service and innovation over the past five decades. The strength it
has acquired in these years has also endowed MOENCO with the resilience to survive during the
many difficult times (Ibid).

38
According to the above sources, MOENCO has implemented RBPE in 2009, to increase or
provide long-term business growth and market share that do long term lending .Supervisors have
conducted performance appraisals and employees have attended training sessions for years.
Organization members have worked long and hard hours for decades. But all too often, these
activities are done mostly for the sake of doing them, and to contribute directly to the desired
results of the organizations.

The major contribution of performance management is its focus on achieving result by providing
useful products and services for customers inside and outside the organization. Performance
management redirects organizational efforts away from business towards effectiveness (Ibid).

MOENCO realizes the importance of having the right talent in the right position and monitoring
individual effectiveness through performance management. As a result, there is a system in
place whereby every employee has a goal at the beginning of the year followed up by periodical
assessments to ensure that goals are being met consistently in an effective and efficient manner.
The Company also use the performance management process to reward employees fairly and
objectively.

Finally, all round effort in developing, engaging and rewarding human capital has helped to
place MOENCO where it is today.

39
4.2 Description and analysis of data

4.2.1 Response Rate

In fact, the survey data was collected through questionnaire from 60 MOENCO’s employee with
in four different departments. As it is indicated in Table 3.1 below, 60 questionnaires were
distributed and all ot them were returned.
From the total returned copies of questionnaire , 12 of them were partially completed and did not
full information.Thus, 55 responses are complete, which represents the response rate 100%.In
addition 8 key informants from different departments used for interview to secure primary data

Table 4.1.Response Rate

Response
No Department Sample size Returned Response Rate
1 Marketing and Sales Department 18 18 100 %
2 Human Resource Department 4 4 100%
3 After Sales Department 25 25 100 %
4 Finance Department 13 13 100 %
60 60 100%
Source: Own survey questionnaires data, 2015

40
4.2.2 General understanding of RBPE Pay system

Table 4.1 General understanding of RBPE Pay system response rate by number of respondent

Statement Options
Strongly Agree % No % Disagree % Strongly Total No of
Agree opinion Disagree Respondents
I know the 60 100 60
purpose of
performance
appraisal?
I am satisfied 45 75 5 8% 10 17 60
with the
current
performance
appraisal
system my
organization?
I am satisfied 60 100 60
with the overall
compensation
package?
I believe the 55 92 5 8 60
Performance
appraisal is
used formutual
benefit?
Level of wage 6 10 10 17 44 73 60
is fair and
satisfactory
Source: Own survey questionnaire data, 2015

Table 4.1 shows 100 percent (n=60) of respondents’ recognized and agrees that they are having a
general understanding about the purpose of RBPE. In addition, all interview respondents agree
and understand the purpose of the RBPE pay system.

According to the above table 4.3 shows 75 percent (n=45) of respondents agree and satisfied
with the current i m p l e m e n t e d r e s u l t b a s e d performance appraisal system in the
organization. Accordingly, the remaining 17 percent (n=10) of respondent is neutral responses
that they do not hold any feeling.
Inaddition, all interview respondents satisfied with the system designed to reward workers as per
their effort.

41
With regard to employees’ understanding the system implemented properly boosting
productivity the employees and company profit

As information shows the above table 4.3 100 percent (n=60) of respondents agree with the
overall compensation package. Accordingly, all interview respondents agree and satisfied with
the overall compensation package, merely one of the interview respondents Said, “the company
showed implement additional out of monetary motivational compensation like arranging special
vacation outside Ethiopia and the like”

As information shows the above table 4.3 All questionnaires’ and interview respondents’
recognized and admitted the existence of annual salary growth and overall compensation
packages of payments linked to their individual performance outcomes.

From the above table 4.1 92 percent (n=55) of respondents recognized and agree that they have
a general understanding and believed Performance appraisal is used as mutual benefit. In
addition to that, 8 percent (n=5) of respondents mentioned their own opinion in stressing the
importance of RBPE more focus on to boosting company productivity and profit accordingly
interview respondents agree with the above points.

Table 4.1 shows 10 percent (n=6) of respondents agreed and satisfied with the current
organization salary scale, but 73 percent (n=44) of respondents said, “The salary scale of the
organization should be further studies and identified one additional incentive pay as salary
increment due to promotion”. Accordingly, 4 interview respondents agree and satisfied with the
current salary scale, but 4 interview respondents said “the troupe does not take the salary scale
from similar automotive industries because the organization work load is different from the
similar automotive industries. So the wage scale of the organization needed to be further
studies”.

42
4.2.3 Employees’ discussion on the purpose of RBPE and Relationship with
Motivation

Graph 4.1 Employees’ discussion on the purpose of a RBPE and relationship with motivation
Response rate

Source: Own survey questionnaire data, 2015

From the above graph 4.1 it possible to learn that majority (97 in percent) respondents replied
that they were communicating about the details of the system by their executive programs in the
first target setting session. Accordingly,The remaining 3 percent of respondents said, I joined the
company recently no one informed how the process of RBPE pay system implemented.however,I
found the information informally from my colleagues,. So there is a big communication
breakdown

Accordingly, 3 interview respondents were workers participated in the union leadership; they
also obtained the information first from the company to engage employees’ in the operation.

Consequently, five interview respondents said MOENCO took the initiative to explain the
process of a RBPE pay system. However, the ways of communicating workers differ from
department to department in the Company.

The company participated; in training a supervisor on the process of RBPE pay system.
Somehow the supervisor tried to brief subordinates about the process of RBPE pay system. In

43
addition to this, the supervisor explained to union leaders so that they can brief about the
system to the workers of the company.

From the above graph 4.1 description all respondents understand that their performance is
determinant of their pay, in expressing the relationship of their performance with their pay.

All interview respondents said, “The process of RBPE pay system determined by target setting,
midyear feedback, and final year performance evaluation. They are determinant of their bonus
and pay increment as per individual performance results”.

With regard to employees’ understanding individual performance result determinant of

employees annual salary increment and bonus .In expressing the relationship of their
performance with their pay.

Graph 4.1 illustrate 100 percent of respondents replying by comparing pay rate with colleagues

Furthermore, six interview respondents “Revealed that they exchange information with each
other in same work units about their performance results and pays. This information exchange,
they believe, gives them the opportunity to know every detail to compare themselves with other
colleagues in their work unit”.

Accordingly, few interview respondents (2 in numbers) there is no exchang any information

about the colleagues performance evaluation result.

This information exchange, they believe, gives them the opportunity to know every detail to
compare themselves with other colleagues in their work unit. They reported that they know each
other in the work place with regard to performance so that they compare and decide in the
fairness of the RBPE.

44
The above graph 4.1 show 92 percent of respondents recognized high performance motivated
employees at work pleace. The remaining, 8 percent of respondents were neutral with no thought
about the matter.

All interview respondents mentioned the fairness of a RBPE pay system & high performance to
reward employees according to their individual contribution. Thus the respondents said “high
performance reflected the existence of impact on motivation, which enables employers to exploit
the potentials of the employees’ effort.

In addition, all interview respondents expressed RBPE as a highly determinant to their vertical
promotion. It has got a very high factor point to choose contestants for higher grades out of other
elements like education, tenure, discipline and training.

From the above graph 4.1 it is possible to recognize those majorities’ respondents (93 in percent)
that they agreed monetary rewarding mechanism motivated employees’ performance. The
remaining, 7 percent of respondent are neutral and taken as with no opinion.

All interview respondents, pointed out the monetary motivation system can’t always motivate the
employees’.Thus management should attempt to develop other motivational systems like
facilitating training, extra holiday, promotion, special award and the like that can create
competition among employees which boost company performance.

Nevertheless, 4 interview respondents said the motivation relatively lacks uniformity. It differs
from department to department, one of them stressed as bonus is the discretion of the company
and I am employed by the company to work with salary, the additional payment is motivating for
me and it is also an attractive payment.

The above graph 4.1 shows 80 percent of respondents replied that they do not observe the
weaknesses of RBPE pay system. The rest, 12 percent of respondents agreed and watched over
the weakness of RBPE pay system. In addition, that 8 percent of respondents are neutral & taken
as with no opinion.

45
All interview respondents mentioned the weakness of the system in this company is the average
4 out of 5 set by the management. They believe this average will not allow supervisors to order
their subordinates exactly as per the target given and they can manipulate the result to align with
the average already set.

All interview respondents express their views regarding the strengths and failings of the
organization. Most of them expressed the ability of a RBPE pay system to move workers to work
harder is one of the strong points of the organization. Rewarding is directly related to
recognitions and being recognized for what the employee performed and boosts workers moral.

As show in graph 4.1 90 percent of respondent that they have general understanding about the
relationship of PRP and motivation related with individual performance. However, 10 percent of
respondents are neutral & take as with no opinion.

All interview respondents feel that when level of pay increases they will be motivated to work
harder and when it decreases their motivation will be negatively affected. Two of the
respondents from them said “I feel very happy when my income through PRP is increased and I
feel sad if it is decreased.

Generally, respondents seem to have sound understanding relationship of PRP and motivation
related with individual performance. In their respective company and recognize the impact of
RBPE pay system on their income and company performance.

46
4.2. Employees’ understanding about the fairness to the level of RBPE & pay system

Graph 4.2 Employees’ Perception of feelings about the fairness to the level of RBPE Pay- system
Response rate based on percentage

Source: Own survey questionnaire data, 2015

From the graph 4.2 proved that 80 percent of the respondents agreed and feel that their
performance evaluation can evaluate properly and fair compared to their contribution to the
company. Those who are with no opinion constitute around 10 percent. The remaining 10
percent of respondents disagree on some points like the fairness of performance evaluation and
the subjectivity of evaluation criteria about the Perception of feelings, about the fairness to the
level of RBPE & pay- system.

Also 4 interview respondents said Sometimes supervisors focus on recent incidents rather than
looking the whole year’s picture which distorts the real performance result of workers. Another 4
respondent also stressed the same idea one weakness is the load it puts on supervisors in
registering incidents which affects the time and effort of supervisors not to focus on core
activities.
Respondents generally show different feelings for the performance evaluation. In mentioning
their thought about their feelings of the fairness of RBPE in reflecting their opinion.

From the above graph 4.2 verify that 75percent of the respondents accepted and agreed that there
always got the expected performance evaluation result. The remaining 10 percent of respondents

47
disagree; they did not get the expected result. It is less than they expected”. Those who are with
no opinion constitute around 15 percent.

Though most of the interview respondents (6 in number) they agreed performance evaluate
implemented properly. However, 2 interview respondents said, some of them feel the subjective
nature of some of the measurement parameters unfairly determine their performance and this is
the unfair part of RBPE even though it is a minor weakness which can be improved.

Generally, some jobs behaviour are not measured objectively, there are some subjective biases
by supervisors which may not bring employees result as expected. Therefore, employees cannot
be sure of his influence 100% .Hence, there are some targets which need the subjective
judgments of supervisors.

According to graph 4.2 shows 80 percent of the respondents agreed that their feelings are good
compared to the performance evaluation result and employees’ accomplishment and
achievement. Those who are with no opinion constitute around 12 percent. The remaining 8
percent of respondents disagree; they did not get the expected result based on their
accomplishments and achievements. It is less than their expected”.

Two of interview respondents said “The Company can pay more. I think I perform far above
what the company paid me. I think my contribution to the company is important. My
contribution is better than what the company pays for performance”.Another interview
respondent differently put his answer as “I can say it is 3 out of 5”. He feels the bonus payment
is a bit satisfying compared to his contribution. He also indicated that salary increment policy
should be revised.

In addition to that, two interview respondents said “I can say the RBPE payment systems in my
company are fair though there are areas which have to be improved.” He commented “other
types of incentive payments should be introduced. For example additional group based payments
that can motivate workers to clear backlogs to be done in campaigns and extra time”.

48
Nevertheless, one interview respondent said “He sense it is an average payment as compared to
the capacity of their company to pay and the level of payment in other industries”.

In addition, two interview respondents said “I did not get what I expected. It is less than my
expectation”.

From the above graph 4.2 descriptions 76 percent of respondents recognised the performance
rating criteria is fair and objective. Still, 8 % percent of respondents are neutral and taken as with
no sentiment. The remaining 16 percent of respondents disagreed the existence performance
evaluation criteria is not fair and objective.
Two interview respondents from service department who think they can influence the level of
pay said “I believe it will be difficult to influence income for support staff as performance is
measured subjectively. But for technicians its 100% decided by the individual as the targets are
objectively measurable”.

Therefore, two interview respondents from Finance who believes they cannot act upon it. They
reported the reason as “my influence is entirely with regard to making every effort to satisfy the
target given to me. Yet, as my targets are not objectively measured like the technicians, there are
some subjective biases by supervisors which may not bring my result as I expected”. Likewise,
the respondent who believes he cannot be sure of his influence 100% said “There are some
marks which need the subjective judgments of supervisors.

I believe that I cannot fully influence the level of my pay in subjective areas. Sometimes it
becomes lottery”.
Four interview respondents feel that RBPE payment reflects their effort to some extent. The
subjective nature of the targets makes the employees feel that there is some unfairness. As the
level of the performance pay is also determined by the amount of basic pay, one respondent feels
the unfairness of the basic pay.

Graph 4.2 shows 78 percent of respondents’ recognized performance evaluation monitored

effectively. In addition, 7 percent of respondents disagreed and do not implemented and

49
monitored performance evaluation. The remaining 15 percent of respondents are neutral
responses that they do not hold any feeling.

In addition, four interview respondent who said “I feel there is unfair when I compare my
performance payment with my colleagues. Supervisors sometimes favour a worker who is closer
to them in non work related relationships”. Therefore, on that point is a favouritism exercised
when operating RBPE pay system. This respondent replied, above, that RBPE pay system
reflects his effort to some extent. For those responding, above, that PRP reflects their effort
exerted the grounds for the similarity of tones is the system is same for all employees.

In addition, 4 interview respondents said “as a human being I am happy if I get even more, but
the payments made so far are fair to reflect our effort”. Another one respondent from them said
“I can say the salary increment is attractive comparing to the previous years’ though cost of
living is increasing at an alarming rate”.

Two interview respondents show different feelings for the fairness of RBPE pay-system. In
mentioning their thought about their impressions of the fairness of RBPE in reflecting their effort
exerted.
Another two interview respondent from the service department feeling of RBPE and payment as
fair compared to his contribution to the company he further said “Everybody’s contribution in
technical service is clear which can be clearly related with pay so it is fair in service”. Another
four interview respondent said “I am not share holder rather an employee. Therefore, I do not
compare my payments with the profits of the company. I only consider the fairness of my
payment”.

The weakness of the system pointed out by most of the respondents is the subjectivity of some of
the evaluation parameters that may lead to the negative effect of biased personal judgment of
supervisors.

Graph4. 2 shows the opinions of MOENCO employees’, 80 percent of respondents mentioned

supervisors do not support and recognized specific incidents of good or bad performance. The

50
remaining 10 percent of respondents agreed and recognized supervisors support and accepted
specific incidents whatever it is. The rest 10 percent of respondents are neutral responses that
they do not have any opinion.

All interview respondents mention this is the weakness of the system supervisors. They do not
consider and recognize incidents rather than looking the advantage or problem, which focus on
punishment”

Based on the above response Sometimes supervisors considering the incidents.since, employees
developed confidences by immediate supervisors. Otherwise, distorts the real performance result
of workers and minimizing the two sides of communication and company productivity.

Based the above graph 4.2 80 percent of respondents replied that RBPE pay system has no
contribution to work related hazard. The other 4 percent of respondents agreed and recognized
RBPE pay system has led to work related hazard. The remaining 16percent of respondents are
neutral reply that they do not hold any feeling.
Accordingly, three interview respondants said, I feel that risk is related with applying
safety rules and practices. They think that if workers put on safety items properly, risk will be
minimized and PRP has no influence on work related hazard.
In addition, three interview respondents put their reason as “when there is no standard in setting
targets in some jobs, people may be given a target that is beyond their capacity. People try more
than capacity to deliver it which has hazardous impact”. Thus, there is problem in objective
setting, due to absence of standard to get objects to some occupations.
However, two interview respondents feel there is relationship of PRP with risk. For one of
them the risk is for technical workers at older age. He believes the work of technical people
needs energy and physical fitness and people working for better performance apply the
maximum capacity they have at young age which may have negative effect at older time to
perform as before.

Finally from the above opinion the general fairness of RBPE pay system, somehow respondents
agreed that as the system pays everyone based on employee contribution to company
performance, in some way the system is generally fair. However, they point out limitations of the

51
system. For most of interview respondents mentioned the limitations pointed out are minor.
Subjective performance parameters and supervisors bias are limitations pointed out by all
interview respondents. Another limitation pointed out by other interview respondents the average
four given to supervisors as target. In addition, the researcher currently working in MOENCO,
especially, observed the above mentioned limitations.
With regard to competitiveness, all interview respondents feel they are competent enough for
RBPE pay system compared to their colleagues. The justifications given by most of them are:-

1. Continuously eliminating weaknesses.

2. The system minimizing subjectivity encourages employees to work hard.
3. The trainings given by the company.
4. Updating themselves for changes to cope up with the requirements of the job

All interview respondents’ feel and agree the purpose of performance evaluation is to boost &
fully exploit the potential of every employee, if not implemented properly it is waste of time.

4.2 Work related behaviour

Graph 4.3 Work related behaviours response rate by percentage

Source: Own survey questionnaire data, 2015

52
The above graph 4.3 shows 95 percent of the respondents concurred that a RBPE pay system has
no influence for their conduct, attitude and moral. The remaining 5 percent of respondents are
neutral responses that they do not have any opinion.

All interview respondents said Result based performance evaluation pay system has no influence
for their behavior and attitude. However, one interview respondent said, “Somehow it affects the
inspiration, but not much impact on behaviour and attitude”

Based on the above response employer has a responsibility to ensure the satisfaction of all of its
employees. Happiness in the workplace leads to much higher levels of productivity. It increases
employee morale; therefore employees are more willing to work harder to improve the company
and its goals. Management should have a positive effect on, and seek to support the happiness of,
the firm’s employees.

Graph 4.3 shows almost Majority of respondents (96 in percent) that they are willing to give a
helping hand for fellow workers as well as supervisors. The remaining 4 percent of respondents
are neutral responses that they do not have any opinion.

All interview respondents said that they are willing to give a helping hand for colleagues as well
as supervisors. One of them stressed this as “I am willing even by working extra time”. For all of
them RBPE pay system has no influence for their willingness.The reason for them to give a
helping hand without considering the influence of RBPE. Team work doesn’t directly affect their
result.

Respondents from sales report that priority is given to their own job and are willing to help
colleagues and supervisors after finishing normally assigned jobs to them. However, one
respondent pointed out that in tender sales activities, the nature of the job itself forced workers to
help each other and supervisors by working even extra time to meet deadlines. For respondents
from sales, the reason for giving priority to own job is to meet target which seems influence of
PRP.

53
All respondents from technical service show high willingness to give helping hands. They feel
technicians’ work is highly dependent on team output. For them there are jobs which cannot be
completed individually. According to them, their job is a process that cannot be completed at one
point. They believe the team output highly affects individual performance because if something
is stack at one point it will constrain the whole process. Therefore, they reported, they have to
help colleagues as well as supervisors by doing things that are not their regular duties to achieve
individual performance so that the inefficiency of the team should not have affected individual
performance result.

Graph 4.3 shows all respondents agreed and consider team work is essential to RBPE pay
system.
Accordingly, all interview respondents “exposed that they high willingness to give helping
hands. They feel all jobs are highly dependent on team output. For them there are jobs which
cannot be completed individually. According to them, their job is a process that cannot be
completed at one point. They believe the team output highly affects individual performance
because if something is stack at one point it will constrain the whole operation.

In addition, one of them recommended that “the allocation of incentive pays should be made for
the group and individuals in the group should get as per their contribution to the team output”.

Therefore, employees to help colleagues as well as supervisors by doing things that are not their
regular duties to achieve individual performance so that the inefficiency of the team should not
considered as individual result.

From the above response recommended the allocation of incentive pays should be made for the
group and individuals in the group should get as per their contribution to the team
output.Supervisors implemented to convey a good understanding about team based contribution
of employees’.

The above graph 4.3 shows 92 percent of the respondents do not have any clear plan to leave in
near future but think they will leave their current employer at some point for different reasons

54
like better offer from another company. The remaining 8 percent of respondents are neutral
responses that they do not have any opinion.
Accordingly, four interview respondents’ said they have no intention to leave the company. One
of these respondents intended to stay for the reason that he currently holds new role and he wants
to face the new challenge. Two respondents are the neutral response is taken as it is no opinion
Additionally, three interview respondents’ mentioned in differently way the system needs
energetic and young people to work, especially, in service area. Therefore, I don’t want to stay in
this system when I get older.
In addition, one interview respondents are neutral responses that they do not have any opinion.

With regard majority respondents that they believe RBPE pay system has nothing to do with
their plan to stay or quit. However, some respondents don’t want to stay in this system at older
age. Therefore, the management has considered long service provider employees previous Vs
current productivity while conducting annual performance evaluation. Otherwise, withdrawal
will lead either to the employee voluntarily leaving the organization or being terminated for
unprofessional behavior from company side.

Graph 4.3 show Majority of respondents (98 in percent) cooperation or team work do not affect
RBPE pay system team work spirit is good in the company. However, the remaining 2 percent
do not have any opinion.

In addition to that all of interview respondents’ said, “The team work spirit is good in our
company though they are working under individual performance based incentive system. Hence,
most of them are said, the organization majority jobs are interrelated to team work and some of
the works are organized in groups. Therefore, team work necessary for individual performance
achievement.

With regard the above response team work helps to success of individual performance result.
Therefore, organization management implemented grouped based incentive. Otherwise, the
system will make team work weaker in the future. Since, it does not evaluate and reward group
performance.

55
All interview respondents answering question related to belongingness, most of the respondents
tell friends and family members that their company successfully implemented PRP though some
of them tell it needs minor improvements. One of them said “I tell them only about the success
of the system in our company. My company is one of the few companies in Ethiopia that
successfully introduced this system”.

All respondents reported that there is no barrier to share information and cooperate with each
other. The reasons pointed by most of the respondents are the interrelation of jobs requiring
teamwork and the information flow system of the company.

Based on the above response employees will think that they are Share information and cooperate
with each other. Hence, increased the company productivity and to correct negative behavior,
and to reward productive employees.

All respondents do not compromise to go out of their way to help customers though they are
working under RBPE pay system. Some of the reasons are it is one way of attracting customers,
customer is first according to company principle, to build positive image to the company and the
income of the company comes from customers. Generally, it seems RBPE pay system does not
influence individual performance result. Therefore, willingness to go out of way to help
customers.However, one respondent differently answered that “I will give due respect for
customers’ inquiry but when it is not my duty I refer them to the right person rather than helping
by myself”.

With regard the researcher understand employees recognised customer first principle according
to company principle. In addition, happy to cooperate to move out of their way to serve
customers, though they are working under RBPE pay system”.

56
4.3 Discussions’ on Findings
All respondents reported that their incentive payments related to PRP are bonus and salary
increment due to promotion (for most of the respondents) to be paid based on individual
performance results. Most of them think PRP is a system developed to boost productivity and
company profit. This thinking is in line with most of the research findings (Lazear (2000), Booth
and Frank (1999), Gielen, Kerkhofs and Ours (2010) and others in support of PRP
implementation.

Respondents’ answers for understanding of PRP questions seem to show that employees’ of
Moenco have sound understanding of PRP’s purpose and the process of relating incentives with
performance results. Most of them reported that initiatives were taken by their companies to
explain the purpose and process of implementation of PRP to employees. In addition, most of
them responded that the strength of the system is its ability to motivate workers to work harder
and all of them understand that PRP is determinant to their incentive pay. This justifies Mohrman
and Mohrman, (1995); Randama-LiiV, (2005) cited in (Maheshwari & Singh (2010: 65)
conclusion that adequate and clear communication helps employees to understand what is
expected of them and in building trust and involvement in the system process.

It is also understood, on the contrary, if employees are not well communicated and have low pay
understanding, according to Gupta (1980) cited in Shields, et al (2012: 75), it impairs
employees’ belief in the possibility of maximizing reward returns and it may prohibit employees
from altering behaviour to address performance and reward expectations.

The weakness of the system pointed out by most of the respondents is the subjectivity of some of
the evaluation parameters that may lead to the negative effect of biased personal judgment of
supervisors. This has support to Marsden and Richardson (1992) findings of PRP’s failure to
motivate because of the corrupted nature of the appraisal system.

Most of the respondents believe they can influence the level of their RBPE pay system and feel
that when level of pay increases they will be motivated to work harder and when it decreases
their motivation will be negatively affected. Kauhanen and Piekkola (2006) concludes on their

57
studies of finish highly educated employees that for effectiveness of PRP the employees have to
feel they are able to affect the outcomes and the level of payments should be high enough.

The findings from respondents’ reply show level of RBPE pay influences employees’ perception
to PRP and hence affect their motivation to work. The findings are in line with Konstantinos
Pouliakas (2010:618) and others findings. Findings provide support to experimental evidence
that monetary incentives may have a positive effect on workers’ utility and performance as long
as they are large enough. All other things equal, a higher intensity of rewards is observed to
enhance the utility that workers derive from their jobs.

Though Mitra, et al (1997) do not conclude pay raise levels are the sole determinants of
employees’ perception to pay raise, they concluded merit pay may also be ineffective because
simply the raises are not large enough to evoke positive perceptual and attitudinal reactions
among employees. The findings of this research also demonstrate as employees’ motivation to
decrease if payment related to performance is low.

My personal observation as a full participant and findings from respondents’ (attached as

Appendix-ΙII), the company totally avoiding the average result 4 out of 5 set by the management.
This will not allow supervisors to rate their subordinates based on employees’ actual
accomplishment, this is due to confine the result the department to align with the average already
set at the beginning of the year.

Accordingle, in future employees dimotivate as they can’t get above 4 point whatever reason as
the company set as a maximum rate out of 5.due to this employees are not motivated to get better
rank and just try to maintain this effort as it is.

Rambo and Pinto (1989) cited in Mirta, Gupta & Jerkins (1997) commented that most people
agree intuitively that minuscule pay raises are not seen as raises and may instead be
disappointing. In summarizing their study Mirta, Gupta and Jerkins (1997) reinforce the intuitive
notion that small pay raises may be meaningless and motivationally ineffective. When a pay
raise is a mere drop in the bucket, it may not be viewed as a pay raise by employees. This is

58
amplified by the findings of this research that is ineffectiveness of PRP if employees feel level of
PRP payment is lower than expectation.

The research findings amplify Lee, Iijiman and Reade (2011) findings of Individual
competitiveness as powerful predictor of PRP preference. They found employees who think they
are competitive are more likely to be motivated by rewards and perceive PRP as fair. This
indicates that employees with higher belief to influence RBPE pay and positive thinking to be
competent for PRP are most likely to develop positive fairness feelings for PRP and motivated to
work harder.

The research findings also show most of the respondents feel PRP has no effect on work related
risk. This finding is contrary to others findings that PRP puts burden on employees to work more
than their capacity and increases work related risks at older age.

In addition, most of the respondents revealed RBPE pay fairly reflects their effort. All
respondents generally report that PRP is fair with minor limitations which have to be addressed.
These positive feelings of fairness are reflected in respondents’ positive work related behaviours
that they think are not influenced by PRP. Scarpello and Jones (1996) cited in (Shield, et al
(2012: 71)) found significant positive relationships between both outcome and procedural
fairness and organizational commitment. This suggests that the more employees feel fairly paid,
the more commitment they feel toward the organization. Other research (e.g., Lee 1995;
Moorman and Byrne 2005) cited in (Shield, et al (2012: 71)) shows that perceptions of justice
are related to extra-role behaviour, which includes employee willingness to help and cooperate
with other employees even though it is outside of their defined, required work duties.

Though most of the respondents agree the fairness of PRP, some of them feel the subjective
nature of some of the measurement parameters unfairly determine their pay and this is the unfair
part of PRP even though it is a minor weakness which can be improved. This amplifies what
Maheshwari & Singh (2010) put as a major challenge of successful implementation of PRP is
identification of proper parameters to assess performance and accurate measurement of
performance.

59
Respondents’ willingness to give a helping hand and their thinking for the influence of PRP on
their willingness show different findings. Sales people tend to give priority to their own assigned
jobs while Human Resours, Finance and technical people show willingness to help colleagues
and supervisors beyond what is normally expected. The reason for giving a helping hand is the
subjective nature of Human Resours and Finance performance measurement parameters that can
not affect performance result and the interrelation of jobs according to Human Resours and
Finance respondents while the reason is the high dependence of technical jobs result in each
others’ individual result in technical jobs. For most of the respondents, PRP does not affect them
to help customers out of their way.

The findings of this research, in this regard, are contrary to (Deckop and Mangel 1999) cited in
Lee, Iijima and Reade (2011: 2095) which concludes employees in PRP system focus on
performance targeted rewards and reduce their effort devoted to organizational citizenship
behaviours. Relatively, Shield, et al (2012) suggestion “the more employees feel fairly paid the
more commitment they feel toward the organization” is supported by these research findings.
Other research (e.g., Lee 1995; Moorman and Byrne 2005) cited in Shield, et al (2012: 71) which
shows the perceptions of justice are related to extra role behaviour, including employees’
willingness to help and cooperate with others is also in line with the findings of this research. In
addition to willingness to cooperate respondents show positive feelings about sharing of valuable
information and cooperation with others, team work and job involvement.

As Mohrman and Mohrman, (1995); Randama-LiiV, (2005) cited in Maheshwari & Singh (2010:
65) put, the high feelings of involvement on job by most of respondents may be the influence of
adequate understanding of what is expected of them through PRP communication which builds
trust and generate involvement though they think PRP has no influence on their involvement.
The response of the exceptional respondent for this question also justifies this as he is confound
with what his boss assign him and that is what is expected of him.

All respondents do not think PRP has influence on their stay or to leave the company. This
thinking may be the result of their positive fairness feelings and most of respondents’ feelings

60
that they are good performers. As Shaw and Gupta (2007) cited in (Shields, et al 2012) found in
some cases within individual based PRP, high pay communication reduces turnover by high
performers. They also suggest this is the result of employees’ understanding to PRP moderated
by fairness perception. If these respondents, on the other hand, felt fairness of PRP otherwise,
their intent to stay or leave the company may incline to be different.

Generally, 20% employees of MOENCO, participated in this study who are working under
individual based RBPE pay system, show sound understanding of a RBPE payment system, fair
perception of the level of pay related to PRP system, fair perception of PRP system and positive
work related behaviours, in most of the cases.

The major weakness of a RBPE pay system in implementing it to their respective company, as
somehow explained by the respondents, is the subjective nature of some of the performance
measurement parameters. The nature of some jobs of MOENCOs’ seems to involve highly team
based activities, though it is operating under individual based RBPE pay system. The next
chapter will try to look at the weakness of performance parameters and the involvement of team
work and make recommendations.

61
 Chapter Five: Conclusion and Recommendation

5.1. Conclusion
It has been long since RBPE pay system is implemented in western countries and became a
burning issue in Ethiopia during the last four to five years. The RBPE pay system is a
compensation system that rewards workers based on performance. It links performance with
financial pay to motivate workers to work hard so that to boost productivity. However, RBPE
pay -system is considered as a system that can increase employee benefit and maximizing
productivity of employes to boost company profit. Therefore, this paper tried to fill this gap
considering some perception factors. The research examined employees’ understanding of PRP,
employees’ perceptions of the level of a RBPE pay system, employees’ feelings of the fairness of
PRP and relationship of motivation and how these perceptions affect employees’ work related
behaviours with the context of MOENCO. The study was directed by the following research
questions.

It has to be said MOENCO’s employees working under individual performance based incentive
system understanding of RBPE pay system leads to relating their income with performance.
Communicating through a questionnaire and interview employees about RBPE pay system, in
this study, from the beginning of implementation stage appears to give employees understanding
to RBPE pay system. If the purpose of organizations is to increase productivity through RBPE
pay system, communicating their employees about the purpose and process of RBPE pay system
at the beginning of implementing the system may create awareness and positive feelings, at least
for good performers and somehow negative feelings for low performers. In addition, the
perceived feelings of these employees that they are good performers lead to work harder on PRP
environment.

Respondents’ answers indicate that they do not believe, in most of the cases, PRP has influence
on their work related behaviours, especially, in helping customers out of the way, cooperate each
other, share valuable information freely, teamwork spirit and intent to stay or leave. In addition,
employees seem to be comfortable working under a RBPE pay system as they feel they are fairly

62
paid at least considering the compensation of individual effort and respondents’ perception of
their competitiveness for RBPE.

It was noted from the participants’ response that employees show sound understanding of a
RBPE pay system, positive feelings of level of PRP pay, positive feelings of fairness of a RBPE
as well as the positive work related behaviours, in most of the cases. Respondents predominantly
expressed they feel PRP is fair. In response to questions about work related behaviours considerd
fairness of a RBPE pay system, they are also, in most of the cases, willing to give a helping hand
out of the way, they have belongings feelings to their companies, share information freely,
cooperate with each other, get along with teams, do not want to leave their company without
other reasons and believe they are involved in their jobs.

The major weakness of a RBPE pay system in implementing it to their respective company, as
somehow explained by the respondents, is the subjective nature of some of the performance
measurement parameters. The research findings also show most of the respondents feel RBPE
pay system has no effect on work related risk. However, contrary to few respoendent RBPE pay
system puts burden on employees to work more than their capacity. Therefore, increases work
related risks at older age.
The nature of some jobs of MOENCOs’ seems to involve highly team based activities, though it
is operating under individual based RBPE pay system.

63
5.2 Recommendation
Based on the findings, the researcher has suggested the following points to improve RBPE pay
system and rewarding tools for the better operation and to boosting company productivity and
profit accordingly for mutual benefit:

As some performance measurement parameters that cannot objectively evaluate workers’

performance may create negative perceptions. Moencos’ should make those RBPE criteria clear
and unbiased that have great contribution to the organization and employees.

Participation of employees while setting performance goals at organization level has to be

improved the organization production and profit. In addition, this helps MOENCOs’ to take into
account views and ideas from employees.

MOENCO also should clearly state what is expected from employees. It will help employees
understand and shoulder job duties.

MOENCO encourage employees to express their observations and feelings. This will raise a
sense of belongings and motivation.
Moenco considering team based evaluation criteria because this research findings show some
jobs as interrelated and highly team based. Consequently, there is a possibility of eroding the
teamwork spirit in the future as employees are individually compensated while the jobs are done
in teams.
Supervisors focus on the whole year’s employees’ outcome rather than looking recent incidents.
Generally ,the evaluation Criteria need Further studies should also look at other perception
factors affecting work related behaviours to check if there is similarity or difference of the
impact of employees’ perception on work related attitudes.

Finally RBPE should periodically reviewed and it should be avoiding subjectivity, it is a very
good tool to boost the performance of every employees and maximizing the company production
and profit.

64
Bibliography

Adams, J.S. 1965. “Inequality in social exchange”, in Dixon, J. et al. (1998),

“Managerialism- something old, something borrowed, little new:
Economic prescription verses organizational change in public agencies”,
International Journal for Public Sector Managemnet , Vol. 11, No. 2/3,
pp.164-187.
Ali Divandari, (2008), Providing comprehensive system design and
performance appraisal of staff banking system (bank samples nation),
Journal of Industrial Management Science Department, Azad University of
Sanandaj, Year 3, No. 5, pp 103-115, in Persian.
Angelo S. DeNisi and Robert D. Pritchard, 2006, “ Management and Organization
Review 2:2 253–277, 1740-8776.
Anon (2009), Research Methods University of Leicester, Cheltenham: Learning
Resources
Armstrong, M.S.1993. Human Resource Management: Strategy and Action.
London: Kogan Page.
Armsrong.M.(2000).A hand book of personal management practice.7th Ed. London
:Kogan Page LTD
Armstrong, M. 1993. Managing Reward Systems. Great Britain: Open
University Press.
Artz, B (2008) ‘the role of Firm Size and Performance Pay in Determining Employee
Job Satisfaction Brief: Firm Size Performance Pay and Job Satisfaction’
Journal Compilation: Fondazione Giacomo and Blackwell Publishing Ltd 22 (2)
315-343.
Balzer, William K. and Lorne M. Sulsky. (1990), “Performance Appraisal
Effectiveness.” In Kevin R. Murphy and Frank E. Saal, eds. Psychology in
Organizations: Integrating Science and Practice. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp.
133–56.
Beaumont, P.B.1993. Human resource management: Key concept and skills.
London: Sage.
Bies, R. J., & Moag, J. F. (1986). Interactional justice: Communication criteria of
fairness. Research on Negotiations in Organizations, 1,43–55
Booth, A and Frank, J (1999) ‘Earnings, Productivity, and Performance-Related
Pay’ Journal of Labour Economics 17 (3) 447-462.
Bowen, D.E., & Ostroff, C. (2004). Understanding HRM-firm performance linkages:
the role of the ‘strength’ of the HRM system. The Academy of Management
Review, 29(2), 203-211.
Bretz, RD., Milkovich, G.T. and Read, W. (1992), "The current state of
performance appraisal research and practice: concerns, directions and

65
 Implications'', Journal of Management, Vol. 2, pp.321-52.
Butler, R ., 1986. “The Evolution of the Civil Service,” Public Administration, Vol.
71,pp.395-406.
Churchill, G. A., Jr., Ford, N. M., Hartley, S. W., & Walker, O. C, Jr. (1985), "The
determinants of salesperson performance: A meta-analysis", Journal of
Marketing Research, 22, 103-118.
Cleveland, J. N., Murphy, K. R., & Williams, R. E. (1989), " Multiple
of performance appraisals: Prevalence and correlates", Journal of Applied
Psychology, 74, 130-135.
Coutts, L.M. and Schneider F.W. (2004) “Police officer performance appraisal
systems: How good are they?” An International Journal of Police Strategies
and Management.Vol. 27 (1), pp. 67 –81
Deborah F. Boice and Brian H. Kleiner (1997). Designing effective performance
appraisal system. Work study, vol.46, No.6. PP.197-201.
DeCarlo, T. E., & Leigh, T. W. (1996), "Impact of salesperson attraction on sales
managers' attributions and feedback", Journal of Marketing, 60, 47- 66.
Drenth, P.J.D. (1984), "Personnel appraisal", In P.J.D. Drenth. H. K, Thierry, P, J.
Williams, & C. J, de Wolff (Eds.), Handbook of work and organizational
Psychology. New York: Wiley.
Dubinsky, A. J., Skinner, S. J., & Whittler, T. E. (1989), "Evaluating sales
personnel: An attribution theory perspective", Journal of Personal Selling
and Sales Management, 9, 9-21. Festinger, Leon. (1954), “A Theory of
Social Comparison Process.” Human Relations 7, November,117–40.
Ducharne M J,Singh and PodolskyM(2005),exploring the links between
performance appraisals and pay satisfaction, Compensation and Benefits
Review, Sept/Oct.
Erdogan. B (2002). Antecedents and consequences of justice perceptions in
performance appraisals School of Business, Portland State University,
USA.
Erez, M. & Zidon, I. (1984). Effect of goal acceptance on the relationship of goal
difficulty to performance. MJournal of Applied Psychology, 69 , 69-78.
Eric Boateng(June 2011) effects of performance appraisal on the achievement of
organizational objectives: a case study of manhyia district hospital, kumasi
(Pg3051009).
Fisher, C.D. (1989). Current and recurrent challenges in HRM. Journal of
Management, 1.5: 157-180.
Folger R, Konovsky M (1989), ‘Effects of Procedural and Distributive Justice on
Reactions to Pay Raise Decisions’, Academy of Management Journal, Vol.
32, No. 1
Fox, J, Scott, K and Donohue, J (1993) ‘An Investigation into Pay Valence and

66
 Performance in Pay for Performance Field Setting’ Journal of
Organizational Behaviour 14 (7) 687-693.
Gielen, A, Kerkhofs, M and Ours, J (2010) ‘How Performance Related Pay Affects
Productivity and Employment’ Journal of Population Economics 23: 291-
301.
Goldthorpe, J.H. et al 1968. The affluent worker: Political attitudes and behavior.
Cambridge: The University Press.
Gomez Mejia, Luis R. Balkin, David B, and Cardy, Robert L. (2001). Managing
Human Resource, Pearson Edition,
Gosselin, A., Wemer,J, M,, & Halle, N. (1997), "Ratee preferences concerning
performance management and appraisal", Human Resource Development
Quarterly, 8. 315-333.
Heneman Herbert G. Personnel (1996). Personnel Human Resources Management.
4th ed., New Delhi: Universal Book Stall.
Herzberg, F. (1966). Work and the nature of man. Cleveland: World Publishing
Company.
http://www. moencoethiopia.com
Hull, C. L. (1951). Essentials of behavior. New Haven: Published for the Institute of
Human Relations by Yale University Press.
Ivancevich, John M. and Cluech William F. (1989). Found of Personnel Human
Resource Management 4th, ed. Richard D. Irwin, Inc.
Jones, G.R., & George, J.M. (2007). Contemporary Management. (5th Edition).
Boston: McGraw-Hill/Irwin
Jordan, J. L., & Nasis. D, B, (1992), "Preference for performance appraisal ba sed
on method used, type of rater, and purpose of evaluation", Psychological
Reports, 70, 96.3-969.
Kauhanen, A and Piekkola, H (2006) ‘What Makes Performance-Related Schemes
Work? Finish Evidence’ Journal of Management Governance 10:
Kluger, A. N. and DeNisi, A. S. (1996), "The effects of feedback interventions on
performance: Historical review, meta-analysis, a preliminary feedback
intervention theory", Psychological Bulletin,119, 254–84.
Konstantinos Pouliakas November (2010). Pay Enough, Don’t Pay TooMuch or Don’t
Pay at All? The Impact of Bonus Intensity on Job Satisfaction, KYKLOS,
Vol. 63 No. 4, 597–626.
Lansbury, R. (1988). Performance management: A process approach. Human
resource management, Australia, Marc
Lawler, E. E. (1981). Pay and organization development . Reading, MA: Addison-
Wesley.
Lawler, E. E. (1984). Whatever happened to incentive pay? New Management, 1(4),
37-41.

67
Lawler, E.E., III. (2000). Rewarding excellence: Pay strategies for the new economy.
San Francisco: Jossey -Bass Inc.
Lazear E. P. (2000) ‘Performance Pay and Productivity’, American Economic Review
90: 1346–1361.
Lee, HJ, Iijima, Y and Reade, C (2011) ‘Employee Preference for Performance
Related Pay: predictors and consequences for organizational citizenship
behaviour in Japanese firm’ The International Journal of Human
Resources Management 22 (10) 2086-2109
Levy, P. E. and Williams, J. R. (2004), "The social context of performance
appraisal: A review and framework for the future", Journal of Management,
30, 881–905. Related Pay: predictors and consequences for organizational
citizenship behaviour in Japanese firm’ The International Journal of Human
Resources Management 22 (10) 2086-2109
Lillian, G.O., P. Mathooko and N. Sitati, 2011. The Effects of Performance
Appraisal System on Civil Servants. Kabarak University First
International Conference, (pp: 1-17).
Lillian, P. & Sitati, M. (2011). The Effects of Performance Appraisal System On
Civil Servants Job Performance and Motivation In Kenya. University of
Nairobi.
Locke E A, Henne D. 1986. Work motivation theories. In International Review of
Industrial and Organizational Psychology, ed. CL Cooper, I Robertson, pp. 1–
36. New York: Wiley Management.”Human Resource Management Journal.
Vol12, no.1, pp 8-9.
Maheshwari, M and Singh, M (2010) ’Organizational Readiness for Performance-
Related Pay: Focus on Government of India Employees’ journal of Decision
Makers 35 (1) 63-73.
Marsden, D and Richardson, R (1992) ‘Motivation and Performance related Pay in the Public
Sector:
The Case Study of the Inland Revenue’ Centre for Economic Performance 75: 1-53.
Mathias, N. (2011) "Comparative study of performance management & reward
practices between privatized & public enterprises: a case of Addis Ababa
Tannery S.C. & Anbesa Shoe S.C." Addis Ababa University.
Mathis, Robert L. Jackson John H. (1997). Human Resource Management 8th ed.
New York: West Publishing Company.
McFarlin D, Sweeney P (1992), ‘Distributive and Procedural Justice as Predictors
of Satisfaction with Personal and Organizational Outcomes’, Academy of
Management Journal, Vol. 35, No. 3
McGregor,-Douglas (1987). An uneasy look at performance appraisal.Training-and-
Development-Journal. 41(6), 66-69
Meyer, H. H., Kay, E. and French, J. R. P. (1965), "Split roles in performance

68
 appraisal", Harvard Business Review, 43, 123–29.
Milkovich, George T.,and Alexandra K.Wigdor,eds.1991.Pay for Performance
Evaluating Performance Appraisal and Merit pay Washington,DC: National
Academy Press.
Milkovich, G. T., & Boudreau, J, W, C. (1997), "Human resource management",
burr ridge, IL: Irwin.
Mirta, A, Gupta, N and Jenkins, GD (1997) ‘A Drop in the Bucket: When is a pay
raise a pay raise?’ Journal of Organizational Behaviour 18 (2) 117-137.
Mohamed Faizal Spring 2005, Bergen Institutionalization Of Performance Appraisal
System: A Case Study Of The Maldivian Public Service.
Mondy, Neo, Premeax. (1999). Human Resource Management. 4th ed. Allyn and
Bacon, Boston.
Mullins, L. (1996). Management and organization behavior . 8th ed. Great Britain,
Prentice Hall.
Murphy, K. Garcia, M,, Kerkar, S,, Martin, C, & Balzer, W, (1982), "The
relationship between observational accuracy and accuracy in evaluating
performance", Journal of Applied Psychology, 67,320-325.
Nelson A C, Sanchez T W, 1997, ``Exurban and suburban residents: a departure
From traditional location theory?'' Journal of Housing Research 8 249 ^ 276
Perry, J. L., Engbers, T. A., & Jun, S. Y. (2009). Back to the Future? Performance-
Related Pay, Empirical Research, and the perils of Resistance. Public
Administration Review, 69 (1): 33-51.
Perry, J. L., Mesch, D., & Paarlberg, L. (2006). Motivating Employees in a New
Governance Era: ThePerformance Paradigm Revisited. Public
Administration Review, 66 (4): 505 – 14.
Podsakoff, N, Whiting, S, Welsh, D and Mai, K (2013) ‘Survey for “Artifacts”, The
Susceptibility of the OCB Performance Evaluation Relationship to
Common Rater, Item and Measurement Context Effects’ Journal of
Applied Psychology 98 (5) 863-874
Porter, L. W., & Lawler, E. E. (1968), Managerial attitudes and performance.
Home wood, IL: Irwin.
Ramaswami, S.N., and J. Singh. 2003. “Antecedents and Consequences of Merit Pay
Fairness for Industrial Salespeople.” Journal of Marketing 67 (4): 46–66.
Rapp, A, Bachrach, D and Rapp, T (2013) ‘The Influence of Time Management Skill
on the Curvilinear Relationship Between Organizationsl Citizenship
Behaviour and Task Performance’ Journal of Applied Psychology 98 (4)
668-667.
Robinson, S. 1992. “The trouble with PRP, “Human Resources, Spring, 66-70.
Russell J , S,,& Goode, D, L, (1988), "An analysis of manager's reactions to their
own performance appraisal feedback", Journal of Applied Psychology.

69
 73, 63-67,
Schay, B and Fisher, S (2013) ‘The Challenge of Making Performance-Based Pay
Systems Work in the Public Sector’ Public Personnel Management 42 (3)
359-384.
Schuler, R.S. (1998). Personnel and Human Resources Management. (3rd Edition).
Toronto: West Publishing Company.
Shields, J, Scott, D, Bishop, J and Goelzer, P (2012) ‘Pay Perception and Their
Relationship with Cooperation, Commitment and Intent to Quit’
International Studies of Management and Organization 42 (1) 68-86.
Skinner B F (1974), About Behaviourism, Knopf Tamkin P, Giles L, Campbell M,
Hillage J (2004), Skills pay: the contribution of skills to business success,
SSDA.
Somers, M and Birnbaum, D (1998) ‘Work Related Commitment and Job
Performance: It is Also the Nature of the Performance that Counts’
Journal of Organizational Behaviour 19 (6) 621-634.
Tarkenton, F. 1986. How to motivate people: the team strategy for success:
London: Harper & Row.
Tyler T R, Bies R J (1990), ‘Beyond formal procedures: the interpersonal context of
procedural justice’, in Carroll J (Ed), Applied Social Psychology and
Organizational Settings, Lawrence Erlbaum
Torrington, D (1993) ‘”Sweets to Sweets”: Performance Related Pay in Britain’
International Journal of Employment Studies 1 (2) 149-164
Tosi, Henry L. Risso, John R. and Carrol, Stephen J: Managing Organizational
Behavior. New York: Pitman Publishing Inc. 1986.
Verhellen , E. 1994. Convention on the rights of the child: background, motivation,
strategies. Leuven: Grant
Van Eerde, W., & Thierry H. (1996). Vroom’s Expectancy Models and Work-Related
Criteria: A Meta- Analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81 (5): 575 – 89.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.81.5.575
Vroom, Victor H., (1964), "Work and Motivation", New York: Wiley.
Wendy R. Boswelljohn W. Boudreau, (2000), “ Employee Satisfaction with
Performance Appraisals and Appraisers: The Role of Perceived
Appraisal Use”, Human Resource development, Quarterly, vol. 11. no.3,
Fall.
Worley, C. G., Bowen, D. E. and Lawler, E. E., III (1992). 'On the relationship
between objective increases in pay and employees' subjective reactions',
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13, 559-571

70
Appendix -Ι
Research Questionnaire

Addis Ababa University Department of Public

Administration and Development Management Master in
Management Development

Dear Respondents;

I am master’s student in Addis Ababa University conducting a research on the “Result Based
Performance Evaluation in the case of MOENCO”. I kindly ask you to give your answers to all
questions in this questionnaire honestly and truthfully.The information you provide is only for
academic purpose,and will be keptconfidential.

This survey has both open and close ended questions and will take about 10-30 minutes of your
time and the answers you submit will provide valuable information. I am thankful for your time
and patience in completing this survey and I hope my analysis and results will offer a
contribution to MOENCO.

Dear participants, Kindly fill up this information and return. Any information obtained for this
purpose will be kept strictly confidential and will only be used for academic purpose. Your
cooperation will be highly appreciated in this regard.

Thank you!

Dereje Mekonnen

71
Please tick “√” inside the box that best represent your answer.
NO Section Ι: Demographic Variables of the Respondents

1 Name of the Respondent __________________________________________

2 Sex
Male Female
3 Which of the following age category describes you?

Under 25 25-34 35-44 45-54

55 & above

4 Marital status

Single Married Divorced

5 How many years you have worked for MOENCO?

0-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21 & above

6 You’re educational Qualification?

High school Technical school graduate

College diploma Master’s Degree
Degree PHD

7 Which department do you work in MOENCO?

Marketing & Sales Department After sales Department

Human resource Department Finance Department

72
NO Please rate the following statements by ticking “√” only one box below with the response that
you think best and explain your opinion represents you’re feeling about.
A General understanding of RBPE Pay system
1 I know the purpose of performance appraisal
Strongly Agree Agree No opinion Disagree
Strongly Disagree
2 I am satisfied with the current performance appraisal system of my organization?
Strongly Agree Agree No opinion Disagree
Strongly Disagree
3 I am satisfied with the overall compensation package?
Strongly Agree Agree No opinion Disagree
Strongly Disagree
4 Do you believe Performance appraisal is used for mutual benefit?
Strongly Agree Strongly Agree Agree No opinion Disagree
Strongly Disagree

5 Level of wage is fair and satisfactory?

Strongly Agree Strongly Agree Agree No opinion Disagree
Strongly Disagree
B Employees’ discussion on the purpose of RBPE and Relationship with Motivation
1 My supervisor, or a responsible body has communicated the purpose of RBPE pas system to
create awareness & positive feeling
Strongly Agree Strongly Agree Agree No opinion Disagree
Strongly Disagree
2 I understand my performance result determinant for my pay.
Strongly Agree Strongly Agree Agree No opinion Disagree
Strongly Disagree
3 I compare my pay rates related to performance with those of other colleagues? If yes, how?
Strongly Agree Agree No opinion Disagree
Strongly Disagree
4 H i g h performance m o t iv at es employees to involve at workplaces?
Strongly Agree Agree No opinion Disagree
Strongly Disagree
5 Monetary rewarding motivates employees ?
Strongly Agree Strongly Agree Agree No opinion Disagree
Strongly Disagree
6 There are observed, weaknesses in the RBPE pay system
Strongly Agree Strongly Agree Agree No opinion Disagree
Strongly Disagree

73
7 There is strong relationship pay and performance motivation?
Strongly Agree Agree No opinion Disagree
Strongly Disagree
C Employees’ Understanding about the fairness to the level of RBPE & pay system
1 In my opinion Current performance appraisal is fair and unbiased
StronglyAgree Agree No opinion Disagree
Strongly Disagree
2 I always get the expected result of the performance evaluation and payment.
strongly Agree Agree No opinion Disagree
Strongly Disagree
3 I feel good when I compare my performance Evaluation which is based on my
accomplishment
Strongly Agree Agre No opinion Disagree
Strongly Disagree
4 In my opinion, the performance evaluation system or criteria is fair and objective.

Strongly Agree Agree No opinion Disagree

Strongly Disagree
5 In my thining supervisor effectively monitored employees’ Performance ?
StronglyAgree Agree No opinion Disagree
Strongly Disagree

6 My supervisor generally supports my evaluation with specific incidents of good and poor
performances.
Strongly Agree Strongly Agree Agree No opinion Disagree
Strongly Disagree
7 I am considerd performance related pay on work related risks?
Strongly Agree Strongly Agree Agree No opinion Disagree
Strongly Disagree
D Work related behaviour
1 The evaluation results impact on my behavior, attitudes and
Morale.
Strongly Agree Agree No o pinion Disagree
Strongly Disagree
2 In my thinking cooperation or teamwork affects my performance result
Strongly Agree Strongly Agree Agree No opinion Disagree
Strongly Disagree
3 In my thinking team work in your company essential under PRP systeme
strongly Agree Agree No opinion Disagree
Strongly Disagree

74
4 I have the intention to stay long in this company.
strongly Agree Agree No opinion Disagree
Strongly Disagree
5 In my opinion cooperation or teamwork affects performance based incentive system
strongly Agree Agree No opinion Disagree
Strongly Disagree
6 It is nessary to tell friends & family members the success or failure of RBPE pay system in
your company? ……………………………………………………
7 In your opinion it is important to go out the way to help customer? ………………………

If anything you would like to say ----------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------- .

NB. Dear respondent thank you for your time to respond the above questions. Some
points required your further explanation; therefore you can use the attached
blank page and also allowed to express your mother tang.

Thank you very much for your assistance in completing this questionnaire.
It surely will be of great help to me. Wish you the very best in your future.

75
Appendix -ΙI
RESEARCH INTERVIEW SCHEDULE
Personal data

1. Name________________________ Gender___________________
2. Age Group under 25 ____ 25-34____ 35-44____ 45-54_____ 55 & above_____
3. Educational level ________________________
4. Department ______________

5. WorkExperience_______________________
A- General questions related with PRP

1. Do you know the purpose of RBPE pay System? If yes/ No no please specify purpose of
performance appraisal, if say No why?
2. What is your understanding about the rationale of performance related pay?
3. Are you satisfied with the current performance appraisal system of your organization? if
yes/No Why?
4. Level of wage is fair and satisfactory? if say no why?
5.What is your understanding about the overall compensation package?

B- Employees’ understanding of RBPE with relationship of motivation

1. Do you understand how performance related pays are determined by your company? If yes,
how did
you now, first, the details of the method?
2. Do you communicate your supervisor beginning of implementation of RBPE pay System?
3. What do you understand about the weaknesses and strengths of the system, if any?
4. Can you compare your pay rates related to performance with other colleagues? If yes, how?
5. What are your feelings, if any, about the level of payments attached to PRP and motivation ?
6. What is your understanding, if any, Monetary rewarding mechanism motivated employee’s
performance?
7. What is your understanding, if any, about the relationship of your pay with your performance?
8. Do you think that you have the ability to influence the performance related pay level of your
income? If yes, how?

76
C- Employees’ Perception of feelings about the fairness to the level of RBPE & pay system
1. How do you feel that your performance related pay reflects the effort you exerted?
2. In your opinion performance appraisal can evaluation employee Properly?
3. What do you feel about the general fairness of the pay system?
4. What are your feelings when you compare your performance Evaluation based on your
accomplishment and achievement
5. Do you feel the performance criteria fair and satisfactory in your organization?
6. What are your feelings when you compare, if at all, the fairness of your performance related
pay with Your contribution to the company?
7. What do you think performance related pay on work related risks?

D - Work related behaviors

1. How do you feel that your perception about fairness of PRP influences your willingness to
give your colleagues a helping hand and help your immediate supervisor by doing things that
are not your job?
2. Do the evaluation results impact on your behavior, attitudes and morale?
3. Considering your feelings of fairness of PRP, how often do you go out of your way to help
customers?
4. How do you tell your friends and family members, if at all, the success or failure of PRP in
your company?
5. How do you think the sharing of helpful information and cooperation of your peers with each
other while you are working under PRP system?
6. What do you feel about the team work in your company under PRP system?
7. Do you have the intention to stay long in this company or quit in near future? Does the
intention have anything to do with the PRP system? If so, what are the influences of PRP to
your intention to stay?

77
Appendix-ΙII

2014 MOENCOS’ Head Office Employees Individual Performance Result

Employee Apprisal
Seq No PositionName
Id Point

1 1010018 4.20 Sr. Service Advisor II

2 1010026 4.40 Service Advisor II

3 1010047 4.20 Sr. Service Advisor II

4 1010049 4.00 Service Advisor II

5 1010054 4.20 Service Advisor II

6 1010074 4.00 Sr. Service Advisor II

7 1010076 4.00 Sr. Service Advisor II

8 1010078 4.00 Service Advisor I 16

9 1010080 3.70 Service Advisor I

10 1010081 4.10 Jr. Service Advisor II

11 1010082 4.00 Service Advisor I

12 1010083 3.90 Service Advisor I

13 1010084 4.00 Jr. Service Advisor I

14 1010085 4.00 Jr. Service Advisor I

15 1010086 3.90 Jr. Service Advisor I

16 1010087 4.00 Jr. Service Advisor I

Dept.
101
Code

1 1020012 4.23 Sr. Auto Technician II

2 1020014 4.00 Lead Auto Technician II

3 1020022 3.30 Auto Technician II

78
4 1020023 4.16 Auto Technician II

5 1020024 4.20 Sr. Auto Technician II

6 1020032 4.10 Lead Auto Technician II

7 1020033 3.20 Auto Technician II

8 1020034 3.30 Jr. Auto Technician II

9 1020045 3.60 Sr. Auto Technician II

10 1020048 3.20 Sr. Auto Technician II

11 1020051 4.40 Lead Auto Technician II

12 1020056 3.30 Sr. Auto Technician II

13 1020066 3.90 Lead Auto Technician II

14 1020078 4.90 Lead Auto Technician II

15 1020080 4.30 Lead Auto Technician II 94

16 1020085 4.12 Lead Auto Technician II

17 1020100 4.00 Lead Auto Technician II

18 1020105 4.40 Lead Auto Technician II

19 1020111 3.72 Lead Auto Technician II

20 1020125 4.10 Lead Auto Technician II

21 1020126 4.00 Lead Auto Technician I

22 1020127 4.60 Lead Auto Technician II

23 1020131 4.09 Lead Auto Technician II

24 1020135 3.70 Lead Auto Technician I

25 1020136 4.02 Sr. Auto Technician II

26 1020141 4.50 Sr.Maha Technician I

27 1020143 4.00 Sr. Auto Technician II

28 1020144 4.11 Sr. Auto Technician II

79
29 1020145 4.05 Sr. Auto Technician II

30 1020146 4.00 Sr. Auto Technician II

31 1020147 3.50 Tyre Repair Man II

32 1020148 4.50 Lead Auto Technician II

33 1020150 4.13 Sr. Auto Technician II

34 1020151 3.90 Sr. Auto Electrician II

35 1020152 3.74 Lead Auto Eelectrician II

36 1020154 4.40 Sr. Auto Electrician II

37 1020155 4.00 Auto Electrician II

38 1020156 4.53 Sr. Auto Technician I

39 1020158 4.00 Auto Technician II

40 1020160 4.30 Auto Technician I

41 1020161 3.70 Auto Electrician I

42 1020162 4.40 Auto Technician I

43 1020164 4.07 Auto Technician I

44 1020165 4.50 Auto Electrician I

45 1020167 3.66 Sr. Auto Technician II

46 1020168 3.70 Auto Technician I

47 1020170 4.20 Auto Technician I

48 1020171 4.20 Auto Technician I

49 1020172 4.20 Auto Technician I

50 1020173 3.90 Auto Technician I

51 1020174 4.20 Auto Technician I

52 1020175 4.08 Auto Technician I

53 1020178 4.20 Auto Technician I

80
54 1020179 4.10 Auto Technician I

55 1020181 4.20 Auto Technician I

56 1020184 4.05 Jr. Service Advisor II

57 1020186 3.20 Auto Technician I

58 1020187 4.50 Jr. Auto Technician II

59 1020188 4.00 Jr. Auto Technician II

60 1020189 4.00 Jr. Auto Technician II

61 1020191 3.60 Jr. Auto Technician II

62 1020193 3.70 Jr. Auto Technician II

63 1020195 4.10 Auto Technician I

64 1020196 4.50 Sr. Auto Technician II

65 1020197 4.00 Jr. Auto Technician II

66 1020198 4.04 Sr. Auto Technician II

67 1020199 3.60 Jr. Auto Technician II

68 1020200 4.10 Jr. Auto Technician II

69 1020201 3.80 Maha Technician I

70 1020203 3.90 Brake Lathe Technician I

71 1020204 4.00 Sr. Auto Technician II

72 1020206 4.10 Auto Electrician I

73 1020207 3.83 Sr. Auto Technician II

74 1020208 4.00 Sr. Auto Technician II

75 1020209 3.30 Auto Technician I

76 1020210 4.30 Jr. Auto Electrician II

77 1020211 3.30 Auto Technician I

78 1020213 3.70 Jr. Auto Technician I

81
 79 1020214 4.40 Jr. Auto Technician I

80 1020215 4.80 Jr. Auto Technician I

81 1020216 3.70 Jr. Auto Technician I

82 1020217 4.10 Jr. Auto Technician I

83 1020218 4.10 Jr. Auto Technician I

84 1020219 4.10 Jr. Auto Technician II

85 1020220 4.40 Jr. Auto Technician II

86 1020221 3.70 Jr. Auto Technician I

87 1020222 3.70 Jr. Auto Technician I

88 1020223 3.70 Jr. Auto Technician I

89 1020224 3.70 Jr. Auto Technician I

90 1020225 3.70 Jr. Auto Technician I

91 1020226 3.70 Jr. Auto Technician I

92 1020227 3.70 Jr. Auto Technician I

93 1020228 3.70 Jr. Auto Technician I

94 1020229 3.20 Tyre Repair Man I

Dept.
102
Code

1 1030001 4.90 Sr. Panel Beater I

2 1030005 4.20 Lead Panel Beater II

3 1030006 4.90 Lead Panel Beater II

4 1030008 3.70 Sr. Panel Beater II

5 1030009 3.40 Lead Panel Beater II

6 1030010 4.50 Lead Panel Beater II

82
7 1030012 4.10 Sr. Panel Beater II

8 1030015 4.10 Panel Beater II

9 1030020 3.40 Lead Panel Beater I

10 1030021 4.00 Lead Panel Beater II

11 1030023 3.20 Lead Panel Beater II

12 1030024 3.40 Sr. Panel Beater I

13 1030028 4.10 Sr. Panel Beater II

14 1030029 3.80 Sr. Panel Beater II

15 1030032 4.10 Sr. Panel Beater II

16 1030033 3.30 Sr. Panel Beater II

17 1030035 4.20 Sr. Panel Beater II

18 1030036 3.70 Sr. Panel Beater II

19 1030039 4.10 Sr. Panel Beater II

20 1030043 4.10 Sr. Panel Beater I

21 1030044 4.10 Sr. Panel Beater I

22 1030045 4.60 Panel Beater II

23 1030046 3.40 Sr. Panel Beater I

24 1030049 3.60 Painter II

25 1030050 4.30 Jr. Painter II

26 1030054 4.20 Painter II

27 1030055 3.30 Jr. Painter II

28 1030056 4.60 Panel Beater I

29 1030057 3.70 Panel Beater I

30 1030058 4.10 Panel Beater I

31 1030060 3.80 Panel Beater I

83
32 1030061 4.10 Jr. Painter II

33 1030062 3.50 Panel Beater I

34 1030063 4.30 Painter I

35 1030065 4.10 Jr. Panel Beater II

36 1030066 4.60 Panel Beater I

37 1030067 4.10 Jr. Panel Beater II

38 1030068 4.10 Jr. Panel Beater II

39 1030069 3.70 Jr. Painter II

40 1030070 4.20 Painter I

41 1030071 4.00 Jr. Painter II

42 1030072 4.70 Jr. Painter II

43 1030073 4.20 Jr. Painter II

44 1030074 3.80 Jr. Painter II

45 1030075 4.10 Jr. Painter II

46 1030076 4.20 Sr. Painter II

47 1030078 4.90 Jr. Panel Beater II

48 1030079 3.20 Jr. Panel Beater I

49 1030080 3.40 Jr. Panel Beater I 103

50 1030081 3.70 Jr. Painter II

51 1030083 3.40 Jr. Panel Beater I

52 1030084 3.70 Jr. Panel Beater I

53 1030085 3.70 Jr. Painter I

54 1030086 3.70 Jr. Panel Beater I

55 1030087 3.70 Jr. Panel Beater I

56 1030088 3.70 Apparentice

84
 Technician(Painter)

57 1030089 3.70 APPRENTICE TECHNICIAN (BODY)

58 1030090 3.70 APPRENTICE TECHNICIAN (BODY)

Dept.
103
Code

1 1040016 4.40 Sr. Driver II

2 1040017 3.80 Tools Room Attendant I

3 1040019 3.80 Workshop Cleaner II

4 1040020 4.40 Lubricant Custodian II

5 1040021 4.10 Workshop Cleaner II

6 1040022 4.20 Cleaner/ Messenger II

7 1040024 4.80 Sr. Driver I

8 1040026 3.80 Workshop Cleaner II

9 1040031 4.30 Sr. Driver II

10 1040032 3.90 Replaced Parts Custodian I

11 1040033 3.50 Car Washer/Grease Boy II

12 1040034 4.20 Car Washer/Grease Boy II

13 1040037 3.90 Workshop Cleaner II

14 1040039 4.00 Car Washer/Grease Boy II

15 1040043 3.70 Driver II

16 1040044 4.00 Cleaner/ Messenger II 23

17 1040047 3.20 Driver I

18 1040048 4.30 Driver I

19 1040049 4.20 Driver I

20 1040052 3.80 Admin Assistant II

85
 21 1040053 4.10 Admin Assistant I

22 1040054 3.40 Instructor I

23 1040055 3.70 Admin Assistant I

Dept.
104
Code

1 1070003 4.10 Car Registration Clerk II

2 1070010 4.35 Jr. Sales Person II

3 1070013 4.20 Sr. Sales Person II

4 1070018 4.10 Stock Controller II

5 1070019 4.10 Sr. Driver II 11

6 1070021 4.00 Cleaner/ Messenger II

7 1070025 4.10 Data Encoder II

8 1070026 4.35 Sales Officer II

9 1070028 3.80 Cleaner/ Messenger II

10 1070029 4.00 Jr. Store Controller II

11 1070030 3.70 Admin Assistant I

Dept.
107
Code

1 1080008 4.15 Lead Parts Sales Person I

2 1080012 3.90 Sr. Sales Person II

3 1080022 4.05 Sr. Driver II

4 1080026 4.13 Cleaner/ Messenger II

Sr. Parts Inventory

5 1080040 3.90
Controller II

6 1080042 4.05 Cleaner/ Messenger II

7 1080043 4.05 Cleaner/ Messenger II

86
 8 1080044 4.05 Cleaner/ Messenger II

9 1080047 3.90 Sr. Driver II

10 1080052 3.99 Sr. Parts Sales Person II

11 1080070 4.28 Sr. Parts Sales Person I

Parts Information
12 1080075 4.04
Technician II 22

13 1080102 4.05 Sr. Driver II

14 1080104 4.05 Sales Officer II

Sr. Parts Inventory

15 1080106 4.17
Controller II

16 1080107 4.18 Jr. Parts Information Technician II

17 1080111 3.80 Admin Assistant I

18 1080112 4.20 Driver II

19 1080113 4.02 Sales Person II

20 1080114 4.10 Sr. Parts Sales Person I

21 1080115 4.15 Parts Sales Person II

22 1080116 3.90 Sales Person II

Dept.
108
Code

1 1090012 4.02 Sr. Picker II

2 1090015 4.02 Forklift Operator II

3 1090016 3.97 Picker II

4 1090017 4.00 Sr. Picker II

5 1090019 4.14 Store Assistant I

6 1090025 4.09 Sr. Picker II

7 1090028 4.20 Store Assistant II

87
8 1090030 4.02 Picker II

9 1090032 4.00 Picker II

10 1090033 4.03 Picker II

11 1090034 4.09 Store Assistant II

12 1090035 3.92 Jr. Picker II

13 1090036 3.79 Jr. Picker II

14 1090038 3.90 Jr. Picker II

15 1090039 4.00 Jr. Picker II

16 1090041 4.18 Store Assistant II

17 1090042 4.13 Lead Store Assistant I

18 1090044 4.13 Jr. Store Assistant II

19 1090045 4.00 Jr. Store Assistant II

20 1090047 3.90 Jr. Store Assistant II

21 1090048 4.11 Sr. Store Assistant II

22 1090049 3.90 Jr. Picker II

23 1090050 3.75 Jr. Picker II

24 1090051 3.85 Jr. Picker II

25 1090052 4.03 Jr. Store Assistant II

26 1090054 3.95 Jr. Store Assistant I 34

27 1090055 3.70 Jr. Store Assistant I

28 1090056 3.70 Jr. Store Assistant I

29 1090057 3.70 Jr. Store Assistant I

30 1090058 3.70 Jr. Store Assistant I

31 1090059 3.70 Jr. Store Assistant I

32 1090060 3.70 Jr. Store Assistant I

88
 33 1090061 3.70 Jr. Store Assistant I

34 1090062 3.70 Jr. Store Assistant I

Dept. Code 109

1 1100005 4.01 Sales Liason Officer I 2

2 1100006 4.50 Cleaner/ Messenger II

Dept.
110
Code

1 1110009 3.90 Cleaner/ Messenger II

2 1110010 4.50 Driver II 2

Dept.
111
Code

1 1120007 4.00 Sr. Cashier II

2 1120008 4.00 Accountant II

3 1120017 4.00 Sr. Cashier II

4 1120021 3.90 Cleaner/ Messenger II

5 1120025 4.00 Sr. Cashier I

6 1120027 4.13 Sr. Clearing Officer II

7 1120029 3.80 Sr. Driver II

8 1120030 4.00 Accountant II

9 1120035 3.90 Cleaner/ Messenger II

10 1120037 4.29 Office Assistant I

11 1120051 4.10 Jr. Accountant II

12 1120053 4.14 Cleaner/ Messenger II

13 1120060 4.00 Archivist II

14 1120062 3.57 Cleaner/ Messenger II

89
 15 1120063 4.00 Sr. Driver II

16 1120065 4.05 Accountant I

17 1120066 4.00 Sr. Cashier I

18 1120067 4.20 Accountant I

19 1120069 4.00 Accounting Clerk II

20 1120070 4.10 System Administrator II 34

Import and Clearing

21 1120071 4.17
Officer I

22 1120072 3.95 Data Base Administrator I

23 1120073 4.05 Network Administrator I

24 1120074 3.90 Sr. Main Cashier

25 1120075 3.90 Jr. Accountant I

26 1120076 3.90 Jr. Accountant I

27 1120077 3.90 Jr. Accountant I

28 1120078 4.00 Sr. Clearing Officer I

29 1120079 0.00 Jr. Accountant I

30 1120080 0.00 Jr. Accountant I

31 1120081 3.70 Cashier II

32 1120082 0.00 Driver I

33 1120083 0.00 Driver I

34 1120084 0.00 Cashier II

Dept.
112
Code

90