D ISEÑO DE LOS LENGUAJES P SI PARA P SI M ODEL

1. Conclusion

In light of the findings that were presented in the last chapter, one can say that UNRWA's area staffs are unsatisfied about the current performance appraisal system. This unsatisfaction on performance appraisal is attributed to different reasons as revealed through out the analysis of the study.

The system as revealed through the analysis of the data is not based on job analysis and the job description does not contain clear standards upon which employees' performance can be measured. Furthermore, the report currently in use by UNRWA contains qualitative rather than quantitative standards, and contains unclear or measurable statements. In addition, part of the daily tasks assigned to employees is not included in the report, and the report does not evaluate the employees' competencies.

Another point of major concern is that no due process is formulated in UNRWA to discuss performance appraisal issues. Employees who have some complaints about the process are not legally authorized to discuss their own issues in front of a legal committee. Besides there is no post assigned for performance appraisal which is a major function of human resource, thus employees do not know to whom there complaints should be carried and raters do not know whom to consult.

In the first hypothesis we assumed that there is a correlation between UNRWA's area staff satisfaction on performance appraisal and the fairness of the report we found out that the sig. is .000 < .05 which clearly indicates that the relationship between satisfaction on performance appraisal and the fairness of the report exist. We also found out that the correlation is (.741**) which evidently indicates that the correlation is positive.

Data compiled from employees through questionnaire revealed that the Agency does not designate specific incentive package for employees whose performances are rated as outstanding. Moreover, employees do not receive verbal incentives when they deserve or when their performances are rated as outstanding. In addition, employees are not promoted for higher post based on the results of their performance. The personnel directive does not clearly state that employees with outstanding performance are eligible for a kind of rewards or incentives.

In the second hypothesis we assumed that there is a correlation between UNRWA's area staff satisfaction on performance appraisal and the incentives provided to them we found out that the sig. is .000 < .05 which clearly indicates that the relationship between satisfaction on performance appraisal and incentives exist. We also found out that the correlation is (.778**) which evidently indicates that the correlation is positive.

Data compiled from respondents indicates that some mistakes are committed by raters when they evaluate the performance of employees under their supervision. Some of the mistakes are: using previous year performance appraisal report to evaluate the performance of employees, appraisers tend to use central tendency, appraisers are affected by general characteristics and political affiliation, raters are positively and negatively affected by

recent actions of appraisees, the relationship between appraisers and appraisees affect the subjectivity of the report, raters are not trained on the current report of performance appraisal and they do not observe and monitor the performance of employees and appraise them accordingly.

In addition, the performance appraisal interviews which are conducted by the supervisors do not brief employees on their merits and demerits. They are viewed as a complementary part to the appraisal process.

In the third hypothesis we assume that there is a correlation between UNRWA's area staff satisfaction on performance appraisal and the reduction of raters' errors. We found out that the sig. is .000 < .05 which indicates that the relationship between satisfaction on performance appraisal and the fairness of the report exist. We also found out that the correlation is (-.302**) which evidently indicates that the correlation is negative. This clearly means that there is a negative relationship between raters' errors that are committed by supervisors during the appraisal process and the satisfaction of employees on performance appraisal.

In the fourth dimension of the questionnaire different statements have been formulated to measure whether the output of the performance appraisal report is thoroughly used for developmental purposes, career planning, planning of UNRWA's human resource strategies and succession planning. Data compiled from respondents indicates that the output of performance appraisal report is not properly used by the Agency.

Based on the results that were presented in chapter seven, the output of the performance appraisal report is not used for planning UNRWA's human resource strategies. The output is not also used to evaluate the subjectivity of the recruitment process. Moreover, the output of the performance appraisal report is not used to assess the training needs of employees which clearly indicate that there is shortfall in both human resource functions: training and performance appraisal. The data compiled from respondents also indicates that the output is not used for succession planning, promotion or disciplinary measures against employees whose performance is appraised as below standards.

In the fourth hypothesis we assumed that there is a significant correlation between the satisfaction of employees on UNRWA’s appraisal system and the utilization of performance appraisal output for career planning and development.We found out that the sig. is .000 < .05 which indicates that the relationship between satisfaction on performance appraisal and the utilization of performance appraisal output for career planning and development exist. We also found out that the correlation is (.741**) which evidently indicates that the correlation is positive. This clearly means that there is a positive relationship between the satisfaction of employees on performance appraisal and the use of the report for career planning and development.

Analysis of the fifth dimension showed that the current performance report is unsuitable as viewed by the respondents. In addition, we also found out that the current appraisal report does not achieve the objectives, for which it was designed. Moreover, the report does not

help employees fulfill their ambitions and needs, neither it helps employees develop and enhance their performance.

In the last hypothesis we assume that there a significant difference among employees regarding their satisfaction on UNRWA's appraisal system attributed to the following independent variables:

þ Age

þ Qualification þ Grade þ Experience

Analysis of this hypothesis revealed that there is a significant difference among age groups on performance appraisal. The difference was in favor of the group from 40 to < 50. This group is considered as more satisfied about performance appraisal than the three other groups. In qualification, we also found out that there is a significant difference among employees regarding their satisfaction on performance appraisal. Results revealed that Diploma holders are the least unsatisfied group among the six qualification group categories. In grade, we found out that there is insignificant difference among employees in regard to their satisfaction on performance appraisal. In addition, when we examined whether there is a significant difference among employees in experience categories in regard to their satisfaction on performance appraisal, we found out that there is a significant difference in favor of employees who spent more than nine years of experience.

2. Recommendations

In light of the aforementioned results the researcher recommends the following, wishing from top management levels to take them into account and put them into action:

1. Establishing a post for performance appraisal officer, whose tasks include compiling and sorting data about performance appraisal, training raters and ratees on performance appraisal to ensure avoiding some of the mistakes, coordinating with the administration in regard to the proper utilization of performance appraisal output, and liaison with training officer in regard to conducting training courses for employees.

2. Developing software for compiling data about employees' performance appraisal report that can be easily obtained when needed.

3. Amending the job description of posts to include performance indicators that can easily be measured through performance appraisal.

4. Appraising the performance of employees at the end of each year and not on the anniversary of employees' entry on duty date. Because among the purposes behind conducting appraisal is to compare the performance of employees within a specific period and because this will benefit the Agency on the budgetary level.

5. Changing the current report of performance appraisal and replace it by other reports that can truly measure the performance of employees.

6. Developing a manual for performance appraisal at UNRWA and stating clearly the package of incentives assigned for outstanding performance employees and the disciplinary measures that might be taken against employees when the performance is rated as poor.

7. Training raters and ratees on performance appraisal system.

8. Ensuring that performance appraisal interviews are conducted in accordance with norms and regulations.

9. Increasing and diversifying the performance appraisal incentives in order to motivate employees.

10. Honoring employees by holding celebrations for employees whose performance is rated as outstanding and distributing the incentives on them before their colleagues. 11. Providing employees with feedback about their performance either through

interview or through an official letter indicating the degree that the employee achieved and the consequences of this result.

12. Using the output of performance appraisal to assess the training needs of employees.

13. Using the output of performance appraisal to evaluate the transparency of the recruitment process.

14. Using performance appraisal output for succession planning.

15. Formulating a due process to negotiate the performance of employees when they complain about the fairness of the process.

16. Examining the reliability and validity of the new approach of performance appraisal that will be adopted by the Agency through the OD, to ensure that the new system will meet the expectations of the employees and will be consistent with the strategic mission of UNRWA.