You are here

Home » Content

KURULACAK BİR PERFORMANS DEĞERLENDİRME SİSTEMİ HAKKINDA AKADEMİK PERSONELİN GÖRÜŞLERİ: BİR KAMU ÜNİVERSİTESİNDE YÜRÜTÜLEN ANKET ÇALIŞMASI

The Opinion of the Academic Personnel About a Future Performance Appraisal System: A Survey Study Conducted in a Public University

Journal Name:

  • İstanbul Üniversitesi Psikoloji Çalışmaları Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2009

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author Name
Abstract (2. Language): 
The aim of this survey study is to obtain the opinion of the faculty of letters academic personnel of a public university about a performance appraisal system that is planned to be set up in this faculty. For the purpose of the study, a questionnaire was prepared including questions about several aspects of employee performance appraisal: performance criterions, appraisal methods and frequency, barriers preventing efficient academic performance and potential groups or individuals who could appraise performance and possible, performance aspects they could appraise. The questionnaire was replied by 125 academic personnel that consists of professors, associate professors, and assistant professors. Results show that the great majority of academic personnel have positive attitudes towards the appraisal of their performance on a regular basis. Results also demonstrate important points in relation to the identification of performance criterions and employees who could appraise the performance of academic personnel. The consideration of these findings would make some important contributions in designing a well accepted and healthy performance appraisal system for the academicians of the faculty in which the study was conducted.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Bu anket çalışmasının amacı bir kamu üniversitesinin Edebiyat Fakültesi'ndc görevli akademik personelin, bu. fakültede kurulması düşünülen performans değerlendirme sisteminin tasarımına dair fikirlerini elde etmektir. Araştırmanın amacı doğrultusunda hazırlanan anket formunda performans kriterlerine, değerlendirme yöntemleri ve sıklığına, etkili performans önündeki engellere, performansın kimler ve hangi alanlarda değerlendirilebileceğine ilişkin sorular yer almıştır. Anket formunu aralarında profesör, doçent, yardımcı doçentlerin okluğu 125 kişiden oluşan bir grup yanıtlamıştır. Sonuçlar fakülte akademik personelinin çok büyük bir kısmının performanslarının düzenli olarak değerlendirilmesi fikrine olumlu baktığını göstermiştir. Araştırmanın bulguları performansın hangi kriterlere göre ve kimler tarafından yapılabileceğine dair önemli veriler ortaya koymakladır. Elde edilen sonuçların göz önüne alınmasının bu fakültenin akademisyenleri tarafından benimsenen ve sağlıklı işleyen bir performans değerlendirme sisteminin kurulmasına katkı sağlayacağı düşünülmektedir.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-kurulacak-bir-performans-degerlendirme-sistemi-hakkinda-akademik-personelin-gorusleri-bir-kamu-universitesinde-yurutulen-anket-calismasi.pdf
  • 1
1-24
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

BamLçııgil, İ. (2002). Performans Yönetimi. İstanbul: Kariyer Yayıncılık.
Borman, W. C.
&
Motowidio, S. J. (1997). Task performance and contextual performance: The meaning for personel selection research. Human Performance, JO, 99-109.
Bretz Jr., Ii. D., Milkovich, G. T. & Read, W. (1992). The current state of performance appraisal research and practice, Concerns, directions, and implications. CAHRS Working Paper Series, 92, 1-57.
Brignalİ,
S.
, & Model, S, (2000). An institutional perspective on performance measurement and management in the 'new public sector'. Management Accounting Research, 11, 281¬306.
Çakır, M. (2008). Vakıf Üniversitelerinde Akademik Personelin Performans Değerlendirmelerinin Eğitim Kalitesine Katkısı. Yaymlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi, Ankara.
Erdoğan, B.
(2002)
. Antecedents and consequences of justice perceptions in performance appraisals. Human Resource Management Review, 12, 555-578.
Finucane, P. M., Barron, S. R., Davies, H. A., Hadficld-Jones, R. S., & Kaigas, T. M. (2002).
Towards an acceptance of performance assessment. Medical Education,36, 959-964.
Flint, D. H. (1999). The role of organizational justice in multi-source performance appraisal: Theory-based applications and directions for research. Human Resource Management Review, 9, 1-20.
Fox, R. J., Crask, M. R., & Kim, J. (1988). Mad survey response rate. A meta-analysis of selected techniques for inducing response. Public Opinion Quarterly, 52, 467-491.
Greguras, G. J. (2007). Performance appraisal. Encyclopedia of Industrial and Organizational Psychology içinde (s. 597-598). ABD: Sage Publications.
Haslara,
C
, Bryman, A., & Webb, A. L. (1992). The introduction of university staff appraisal. Public Money and Management, 12, 57-62.
Hoftsedc, G. (1980). Culture's consequences: International differences in work-related values. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage.
Keeping, L. M., & Levy, P. E. (2000). Performance appraisal reactions: Measurement, modeling, and method bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 708-723.
Kcpir-Sinangii, H. (1998).
Örgütse
l performans: Değerlendirmesi ve yönetimi. S. Tevrüz (Ed.), Endüstri ve Örgüt Psikolojisi 2 içinde (s.87-100). Ankara: Türk Psikologlar Derneği Yayınları.
Kozan, M. K.,
&
liter, S. S. (1994). Third party roles played by Turkish managers in subordinates' conflicts. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15, 453-466.
Landy, E. J., Barnes, J. L., & Murphy, K. R. (1978). Correlates of perceived fairness and accuracy of performance evaluation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63, 751-754.
24
GÖKÇ
E BAŞBUĞ, PINAR ÜNSAL
Levy, P. E., & Williams, J. R. (2004). The social context of performance appraisal: A review and framework for the future. Journal of Management 30, 881-905.
Mackay, L. (1995). The personnel function in the universities of northern England. Personnel Review, 24, 41-53.
Radnor, Z., & McGuire, M. (2004). Perfomancc management in the public sector: Fact or fiction? International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 53, 245-260.
Rutherford, D. (1988). Performance appraisal: A survey of academic staff opinion. Studies in Higher Education, 13, 89-100.
Silverman, S. B., & Wexley, K. N. (1984). Reaction of employees to performance appraisal interviews as a function of their participation in rating scale development. Personel Psychology, 37, 703-710.
Simmons, J. (2002). An "expert witness" perspective on performance appraisal in universities and colleges. Employee Relations, 24, 86-100.
Smith, R. (1995). Staff appraisal in higher eucation - a study of performance review al Nene College, Northampton. Hihger Education, 30, 189-205.
Sümer, H. C, (2000). Performans değerlendirmesine tarihsel bir bakış ve kültürel bir yaklaşım.
Zeynep Ayçan (Ed.), Türkiye'de yönetim liderlik ve insan kaynaklan uygulamaları içinde (s. 58-90). Ankara: Türk Psikologlar Demeği Yayınları.
Sümer, H. C. & Bilgiç, R. (2006). Performans değerlendirmelerinde geleneksel olmayan değerlendirici kaynaklarının kullanımı. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 21, 25-40.
Taylor, J.
(2001)
. The impact of performance indicators on the work of university academics: Evidence from Australian universities. Higher Education Quarterly, 55/1,42-61.
Tziner, A., & Kopelman, R. E. (2002). Is there a preferred performance rating format'? A non-psychometric perspective. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 51, 479-503.
Uyargil, C. (2008). İşletmelerde performans yönetimi sistemi (2. baskı). İstanbul: Arıkan Basım Yayım.
http://www.kamudan.com/TopicPicture/%5B5945935%5D2005-563.pdf, (Çevrimiçi), 08 Mayıs 2009.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com