000			06165na a2201009 4500
001			227199
003			koha_MIRAKIL
005			20221226090128.0
008			190118b tu 000 0
040			_aCY-NiCIU _btur _cCY-NiCIU _erda
041	0		_aeng
090			_aYL 365 _bN44 2013
100	1		_aNihinlola, Adewale John _d1985-
245	0		_aPerception of employees towards performing performance evaluation system _bCase study of National Horticultural Research Institude (NIHORT) Nigeria _cAdewale John Nihinlola; Supervisor: Hasret Balcıoğlu
260			_aNicosia _bCyprus International University _c2013
300			_aXI, 74p. _bTables, charts _c30.5 cm _eCD
336			_2rdacontent _atext _btxt
337			_2rdamedia _aunmediated _bn
338			_2rdacarrier _avolume _bnc
500			_aIncludes CD
504			_aIncludes references (67-71 p.)
504			_aIncludes curriculum Vitae (72-74 p.)
520			_a'ABSTRACT Appraising performance is the act of observing and evaluating an employee\'s work behavior and accomplishments, with the purpose of measuring real performance against expected performance. An effort was made to discover out what employees of the institute feel about the whole process and practice of performance appraisal (Annual Performance Evaluation Report), the case of National Horticultural Research Institute (NIHORT) Nigeria. This study also recommends practical approaches to improve any appraisal biases that may be present in the institution\'s appraisal system. Samples of 164 questionnaires were distributed based on Cochran's formula calculation, only 110 respondents questionnaires were returned (78 senior stuffs and 32 junior staffs), the criteria for distributing the questionnaire was based on random sampling techniques. The data collected was analyzed, using statistical product and service solution (SPSS), in order to address the research questions. The overall perception of the respondent shows negative result that the employees perceived towards the practice, indicated that the system was affected by subjectivity and influenced by major errors and bias regarding to the result of the research. The results have severe administrative suggestion for motivation, training and condition of resources for efficient performance appraisal. The significant limitations of this research work are due to financial constraint and the time available for the research, it was conducted in only one institute NIHORT, Therefore, the findings may not be referred to as an expression of the general state of affairs in the other research institutions in Nigeria. Keywords: NIHORT, Performance Appraisal, Appraisal Subjectivity, Performance Evaluation '
650	0	0	_aDeğerleme öznelliği
650	0	0	_aAppraisal subjectivity
650	0	0	_aPerformans değerlendirme
650	0	0	_aPerformance appraisal
700	0		_aSupervisor: Balcıoğlu, Hasret _91656
942			_2ddc _cTS
505	1		_g1 _tCHAPTER ONE
505	1		_g1 _tINTRODUCTION
505	1		_g1 _tINTRODUCTION TO PĞERFORMANCE APPRAISAL/EVALUATION SYSTEM
505	1		_g6 _tRESEARCH OBJECTIVES AND AIMS
505	1		_g6 _tRESEARCH SIGNIFICANCES
505	1		_g7 _tRESEARCH PROBLEMS
505	1		_g8 _tRESEARCH LIMITATION AND SCOPE
505	1		_g10 _tCHAPTER TWO
505	1		_g10 _tLITERATURE REVIEW
505	1		_g10 _tINTRODUCTION
505	1		_g10 _tDEFINITION AND EXPLANATION OF PERFORMANCE
505	1		_g12 _tPERFORMANC APPRAISAL USEFULNESS
505	1		_g14 _tPERFORMANCE APPRAISAL SCHEME
505	1		_g15 _tProcedure for Performance Appraisal
505	1		_g17 _tP*erformance Appraisal Approaches
505	1		_g19 _tEffıcacy of Performance Appraisal Systems
505	1		_g20 _tDuration for Conducting Performance Appraisal
505	1		_g21 _tConduction Employee Performance Appraisal
505	1		_g22 _tCriteria for Performing Performance Appraisal
505	1		_g25 _tRemedies to Performance Appraisal Setbacks
505	1		_g27 _tCHAPTER THREE
505	1		_g27 _tRESEARCH METHODOLOGY
505	1		_g27 _tRESEARCH PLANS AND METHODS
505	1		_g27 _tRESEARCH QUESTIONS
505	1		_g27 _tRESEARCH METHODS
505	1		_g28 _tResearch Subjects
505	1		_g28 _tData Source
505	1		_g29 _tApproach to Research Work
505	1		_g29 _tSize of the Research Sample
505	1		_g30 _tSelection of Sample
505	1		_g30 _tCollection of Data Methods and Study Tool
505	1		_g31 _tProcessing of Data Methods and Analysis
505	1		_g32 _tCHAPTER FOUR
505	1		_g32 _tDATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATIONS
505	1		_g32 _tIntroduction
505	1		_g32 _tDemographic Data
505	1		_g33 _tCategory of Respondents
505	1		_g34 _tAge Distribution of Respondents (Employees)
505	1		_g35 _tLevel of Eduction of Respondents
505	1		_g36 _tYears Worked by Respodents in the Institution
505	1		_g37 _tAre There Any Performance Expectations Set by the Institute During Planning Session at the Start of a Rating Period?
505	1		_g40 _tEmployee's View of Halo Error Committed By Raters
505	1		_g42 _tMethod Two Using Frequency /Percentage Table
505	1		_g43 _tEmployee's View of Horn Error Committed By Raters
505	1		_g46 _tEmployees' View of Recency Error Commited By Raters
505	1		_g48 _tEmployee's View of Strictness Error Committed By Raters
505	1		_g50 _tEmployee's View of Leniency Error Committed By Raters
505	1		_g52 _tEmployee's View of Similarity Error Committed by Raters
505	1		_g53 _tEmployee's Views of Performance Appraisal Importance to Their Career Goals
505	1		_g54 _tEmployee's View of Performance Appraisal Importance to Institute's Objective
505	1		_g55 _tEmployee's Level of Commitment to the Performance Appraisal System
505	1		_g58 _tEmployees'Level of Willingness to Submit to the Performance Appraisal System
505	1		_g62 _tCHAPTER FIVE
505	1		_g62 _tCONCLUSION AND RECCOMENDATION
505	1		_g66 _tRESEARCH LIMITATION
505	1		_g67 _tREFERENCES
999			_c403 _d403