International Journal of of Management (IJM) International JournalManagement (IJM), ISSN 0976 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 6510(Online), Volume 2, Issue

ue 2, May- July (2011), pp. 125-133 ISSN 0976 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 6510(Online) Volume 2, Issue 2, May- July (2011), pp. 134-143 IAEME IAEME, http://www.iaeme.com/ijm.html

IJM

BUILDING COMPETENCIES FOR BETTER PERFORMANCE AN EMPIRICAL STUDY ON FACULTY COMPETENCIES

S. Srividhya (Corresponding author) Assistant Professor, School of Management Studies, Anna University of Technology, Coimbatore Jothipuram Post, Coimbatore 641 047 Email: ssautcbe@gmail.com Dr. M.Saravanakumar Dean, Anna University of Technology, Coimbatore Jothipuram Post, Coimbatore 641 047. Email: saravanakumar.1968@gmail.com ABSTRACT This article seeks to examine more comprehensively the competencies that are required for effective teaching. Educational institutions are becoming more selective in tenuring new faculty. In this scenario, it is very imperative to impart and analyze the competency gap between the expectation and perception of the employer. Higher selectivity means that administrators need objective performance appraisal systems to defend their tenure decisions. The competencies presented here help faculty and institutions define skills needed for particular faculty roles, plan for faculty evaluation, mentoring and advancement, and design faculty development programs based on identified needs. This study is confined to colleges affiliated to Anna University of Technology, Coimbatore and the respondents are heads of the department or principals of that college. 168 supervisors were interviewed across the nine zones with the help of an interview schedule. This paper briefs on six dimensions that were considered for the study. The reliability and validity of variables were tested in order to evolve a competency model for faculty appraisal. The results showed that there is a gap in the competencies possessed and expected by the supervisors from their faculty members. Key words: faculty, performance appraisal, competencies, competency gap, engineering colleges. 1. INTRODUCTION Performance management systems including performance appraisals or evaluations are critical linchpins for human resources management (Guest 1997). The basic purpose of performance assessment is to facilitate decision making for rewards, promotions, firings and layoffs. Performance appraisals can also be used to validate the competencies required for faculties of a particular discipline of education. Competence is commonly viewed as being able to perform a work role to a defined standard with reference to real
134

International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 6510(Online), Volume 2, Issue 2, May- July (2011), pp. 125-133

working environments (IFAC 2001). Assessments should be made for every element of competence under conditions as close as possible to those under which it would normally be practised (Jessup 1991). 1.1. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

There is a mushroom growth of engineering colleges and technological institutions in Tamil Nadu, India. Especially, Coimbatore has seen an enormous growth in the educational sector, which leads to higher acquisition of knowledge. When the demand is high, and supply is limited, a tendency of low quality creeps in. In order to increase the quality of teaching in these colleges, the analysis of the problem therein, shows that most of the faculties working in engineering colleges are inexperienced and possess lesser skills in teaching. It is because; they learn only technical papers and subjects related to their discipline and not pedagogy. Therefore, this study aims at finding out what could be the required competencies and skills for improving the quality of teaching in higher education. 1.2. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 1. An assessment of teacher performance involves assessing if a teacher has the competencies in general areas required of a teacher (David and Macayan, 2010). 2. Effective teaching is said to be brought about by the inner drive of the faculty to guide students learning equipped by his or her mastery of subject content and competence in utilizing appropriate pedagogical requirements (de Guzman, 2000). 3. Indeed, outside of the teaching competencies and other professional responsibilities that help define what makes an effective faculty, a faculty must also have certain traits or characteristics that are imperative to make his or her teaching effective (David and Macayan, 2010). 1.3. Objectives of the study 1. To reveal the profile of the supervisors and their level of expectation and perception on the various dimensions of facultys competencies; 2. To analyze if any competency gap exists. 2. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 168 engineering colleges affiliated to Anna University of Technology, Coimbatore were selected for the study. One supervisor from each college was selected. An interview schedule was used for data collection. T test was administered to find out the significant differences between variables and means of the variables. Cronbach Alphas were utilized to determine the validity of the constructs. 3. SUPERVISORS EVALUATION ON FACULTY PERFORMANCE A traditional and common way of assessing a faculty is done through the supervisor. A supervisor is a person who works closely and watches his faculty perform in the class. If
135

International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 6510(Online), Volume 2, Issue 2, May- July (2011), pp. 125-133

a faculty is able to fulfill the expectations of the supervisor, then it means that he has almost made his way to excellence. A check into the basic appraisal systems also helps in the framing of competencies for effective teaching. But there is always a negative thought on the assessment made by the supervisor. There is a possibility of inducing fear in the evalutee due to the perceptual dilemma and may be sporadic (Nhundu 1999). In this study, the assessment of faculty competencies was made by the supervisors on the basis of following constructs: Involvement, Relationship, Administration, Availability, Documentation, and Teaching. Here, the supervisors may be heads of department/Principals of educational institutions. The supervisors were asked to rate the variables included in the six dimensions of their faculties at five point scale on two dimensions namely expectation and perception. The score of perception and expectation on the variables in different dimensions have been used for the purpose of competency gap analysis. Initially, the background of the supervisors has been analyzed. The mean score of each variable in six dimensions among male and female supervisors have been computed separately. 3.1. Expectation on facultys competences among the supervisors: The highly expected variable in involvement among the male and female supervisors is organization role in seminars/symposium and contributions to department tasks since their mean scores are 3.9907 and 3.9946 respectively. There is no significant difference among the male and female supervisors regarding their level of expectation on variables in involvement. Among the male and female supervisors, the highly expected variables in relationship are cordial relationship with head/principal since their mean scores are 3.8673 and 3.2055 respectively. Regarding the level of expectation on variables in relationship, the significant difference among the male and female supervisors have been noticed in their level of expectation on four variables in it since their respective t statistics are significant at five percent level. Among the male and female supervisors, the highly expected variable by the male and female supervisors is timely execution of routine work and admission works since their mean scores are 3.8994 and 3.3039 respectively. Regarding the level of expectation on variables in administration, the significant differences among the male and female supervisors have been noticed in all five variables. Table-1: Level of Expectation on Faculties Competencies: Supervisors Assessment (FCSA): S.No FCSA Mean score among t supervisors statistics Male Female I Involvement : 1 Involvement in academic activities 3.8684 3.6646 0.7379 2 Organization role in seminars / 3.9907 3.8142 0.4147 symposium 3 Contribution in department tasks 3.7664 3.9946 -0.5082 4 Promotes the interest of department in 3.6942 3.4409 0.3144
136

International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 6510(Online), Volume 2, Issue 2, May- July (2011), pp. 125-133

the college Relationship Cordial relationship with faculties 3.5591 3.1147 1.9949* Cordial relationship with head/principal 3.8673 3.2055 2.4059* Appropriate rapport with students 3.7349 3.1918 2.6447* Acts as a liaison between department 3.6642 3.0889 2.3918* and college III Administration : 1 Timely execution of routine work 3.8994 3.2093 2.6897* 2 Number of guest lecturers/seminars/workshop 3.8082 3.1179 2.7749* Organized 3 Maintenance of department discipline 3.7977 3.2194 2.6155* 4 Admission work 3.8145 3.3039 2.5027* 5 Keeps the principal informed 3.7376 3.1559 2.7088* *Significant at five percent level: The highly expected variable in availability among the male and female supervisors is attend the meeting regularly and collaborates with other heads for effective functioning since their mean scores are 3.3448 and 3.9334. Regarding the level of expectation on variables in availability, the significant differences among the male and female supervisors have been noticed in all variables in availability. The highly expected variables in documentation among the male and female supervisors are accurate in maintenance of relevant records since their mean scores are 3.6639 and 3.8997 respectively. In the case of teaching the highly expected variables among the male and female supervisors are promotion of academic excellence since their mean scores are 3.9096 and 3.3886 respectively. Significant differences among the male and female supervisors have been noticed in the level of expectation on all variables included in teaching. II 1 2 3 4 Table-2: Level of expectation on Faculties Competencies: Supervisors Assessment (FCSA). FCSA Mean score among t S.No supervisors statistics Male Female IV Availability: 1 Availability in campus during working hours 3.2667 3.9196 -2.5667* 2 Attend the meeting regularly 3.3448 3.8083 -2.2673* 3 Collaborates with other heads for effective 3.1994 3.9334 -2.6683* functioning V Documentation: 1 Accurate in maintenance of relevant, records 3.6639 3.8997 -0.9194 2 Timely submission of documents 3.3884 3.7089 -1.3839 3 Highly informative 3.2441 3.8442 -2.4408* VI Teaching : 1 Innovation in teaching 3.8804 3.2664 2.3996*
137

International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 6510(Online), Volume 2, Issue 2, May- July (2011), pp. 125-133

2 3

Promotes the academic excellence 3.9096 3.3886 2.6644* Effective co-ordination in teaching and 3.8117 3.1845 2.7109* administration *Significant at five percent level 4. Level of perception on facultys competence among the supervisors: The highly perceived variables in involvement among the male and female supervisors are promotes the interest of department in the college and constitution in departmental tasks. Regarding the level of perception on variables in involvement, the significant difference among the male and supervisors have been noticed in the case of promotes the interest of department in the college. The highly perceived variable in relationship among the male and female supervisors are cordial relationship with head/principal and cordial relationship with faculties since their mean scores are 3.4408 and 2.8441 respectively. Regarding the level of perception on variables in relationship, the significant difference among the male and female supervisors has been noticed in three variables out of four variables in relationship since their respective t statistics are significant at five percent level. The highly perceived variables in administration among the male and female faculties are maintenance of department, discipline and timely execution of routine work since their mean scores are 3.8086 and 2.9917 respectively. The significant difference among the male and female supervisors has been noticed in the level of perception on all five variables in administration. The results are given below: Table-3: Level of Perception on Facultys Competencies-Supervisors Assessment: S.No FCSA Mean score among t supervisors statistics Male Female I Involvement: 1 Involvement in academic activities 3.3667 3.0087 0.9917 2 Organization role in seminars / 3.2518 3.1889 0.3918 symposium 3 Contribution in department tasks 3.4507 3.2667 0.4229 4 Promotes the interest of department in 3.5117 3.0163 2.0947* the college II Relationship 1 Cordial relationship with faculties 3.2317 2.8441 1.9904* 2 Cordial relationship with head/principal 3.4408 2.7339 2.7349* 3 Appropriate rapport with students 3.1199 2.6697 2.5217* 4 Acts as a liaison between department 3.0997 2.8218 0.7399 and college III Administration : 1 Timely execution of routine work 3.6684 2.9917 2.8219* 2 Number of guest between/ seminars/workshop organized 3.7117 2.5086 3.4667* 3 Maintenance of department discipline 3.8086 2.6673 3.0449* 4 Administration works 3.6676 2.8014 3.1142* 5 Keeps the principal informed 3.5088 2.6649 3.3393*
138

International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 6510(Online), Volume 2, Issue 2, May- July (2011), pp. 125-133

The highly perceived variables in availability among the male and female supervisors are availability in campus during working hours and attend the meeting regularly since their mean scores are 3.4453 and 3.6117 respectively. The significant difference among the male and female supervisors has been noticed in the level of perception on collaborates with other heads for effective functioning. The highly perceived variables in documentation among the male and female supervisors are accurate in maintenance of relevant records. In the case of teaching, these variables are effective co-ordination in teaching and administration and promote the academic excellence since their mean scores are 3.2947 and 2.9144 respectively. Table No-4: Level of Perception on Faculty Competencies-Supervisors Assessment: S.No FCSA Mean score among t supervisors statistics Male Female IV Availability: 1 Availability in campus during working 3.4453 3.6032 -0.5197 hours 2 Attend the meeting regularly 3.3962 3.6117 -0.6609 3 Collaborates with other heads for effective 3.0079 3.4334 -2.0498* functioning V Documentation: 1 Accurate in maintenance of relevant, 3.5887 3.6604 -0.3917 records 2 Timely submission of documents 3.4384 3.5089 -0.1988 3 Highly informative 3.3039 3.5144 -0.4032 VI Teaching : 1 Innovation in teaching 3.2164 2.8046 2.1149* 2 Promotes the academic excellence 3.1997 2.9144 1.3938 3 Effective co-ordination in teaching and 3.2947 2.7334 2.0949* administration *Significant at five percent level 5. Mean Score of expectation on facultys competencies by the supervisors: The highly expected dimensions of facultys competency by the male supervisors are teaching and involvement. Among the female supervisors, these are availability and documentation. Regarding the level of expectation on the dimension of competencies, the significant differences among the male and female supervisors have been noticed in the case of relationship, administration, availability and teaching. The results are given in table 5.

139

International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 6510(Online), Volume 2, Issue 2, May- July (2011), pp. 125-133

Table-5 Level of expectation on faculties competencies among supervisors: S.No Competencies (FC SA) Mean score among supervisor Male 1 Involvement 2 Relationship 3 Administration 4 Availability 5 Documentation 6 Teaching *Significant at five percent level 3.8299 3.7064 3.8115 3.2703 3.4321 3.8672 female 3.7286 3.1502 3.2013 3.8871 3.8176 3.2798 t statistics 0.8739 2.3994* 2.4469* -2.6309* 1.8997 2.0143*

5.1. Mean Score of perception on dimension of facultys competencies among the supervisors: Highly perceived dimensions of facultys competencies among the male supervisors are administration and documentation. Among the female supervisors, these are documentation and availability. Regarding the level of perception on dimensions of faculty competencies, the significant difference among the male and female supervisors have been noticed in the case of relationship, administration and teaching. The results are given below: Table - 6: Mean Score of perception on dimensions of facultys competencies among supervisors. FCSA Mean score among supervisor S.No Male 1 Involvement 2 Relationship 3 Administration 4 Availability 5 Documentation 6 Teaching *Significant at five percent level 3.3952 3.2230 3.6730 3.2831 3.4437 3.2369 Female 3.1202 2.7674 2.7268 3.5494 3.5612 2.8175 t statistics 0.5397 2.0443* 2.6679* -0.9946 -0.3087 2.1818*

6. Association between profile of supervisors and their level of expectation on faculties competencies: The profile of the faculties may be associated with their level of expectation on faculties at their institutions. The present study has made an attempt to measure the association with the help of one way analysis of variance the included profile variables are gender, age, years of experience, years of experience on the present college, number of departments under control, number of faculties under control, frequency of Performance Appraisal made so for and monthly income. The result of one way analysis of variance is given in table-7.
140

International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 6510(Online), Volume 2, Issue 2, May- July (2011), pp. 125-133

Table -7: Association between profile of supervisors and their level of expectation on faculty competency
S.No Profile variables
involvement Relationship

F statistics
Administration Availability Documentation Teaching

1 2 3 4

7 8

Gender Age Years of Experience Years of experience in The present college. Number of department Under control Number of faculties Under control. Frequency of PA made so far Monthly Income

3.1664 2.0239 2.2556 2.0111

3.2673 2.1944 2.8664* 1.3894

2.9088 2.2667 2.0179 1.9969

3.6087 2.4889* 2.5017* 2.0331

1.4569 2.1142 2.0447 2.2556

2.6408 1.9842 2.5049* 2.4967*

2.9117

2.6067

3.1177*

2.2673

2.0865

1.9676

2.4566*

1.6677

1.9349

2.2197

2.0239

1.9369

2.5133 2.6087*

1.9949 2.5586*

2.4337 2.0887

2.6886* 1.8844

1.9348 2.0557

1.8551 2.2017

*Significant at five percent level Regarding the level of expectation on involvement, the significantly associating profile variables are number of faculties under control and monthly income of the supervisors, since their respective F statistics are significant at five percent level where as in the expectation on relationship, these profile variables are years of experience and monthly income. The significantly associating profile variables with the level of expectation on administration is number of department under control whereas in the case of availability, these are age, years of experience and frequency of Performance Appraisal made so for. Regarding the level of expectation on teaching, the significantly associating profile variables are years of experience and years of experience in the present college. 6.1. Association between the profile of supervisors and their level of perception on Faculty Competencies: Regarding the level of perception on involvement, the significantly associating profile variables are age and number of faculties under control whereas in the expectation on relationship, these profile variables are years of experience, years of experience in the present college number of departments under control, frequency of Performance Appraisal made so for and monthly income. The significantly associating profile variables with the level of expectation on administration is gender, years of experience in the present college and number of faculties under control whereas in the perception on documentation, these profile variables are age, number of departments under control, years of experience and monthly income. Regarding the level of perception on teaching, the significantly associating profile variables are gender, years of experience in the
141

International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 6510(Online), Volume 2, Issue 2, May- July (2011), pp. 125-133

present college number of faculties under the control and frequency of Performance Appraisal made so for. The results are given in table 8. Table-8: Association between profile of supervisors and their perception on Faculty Competency:
S.No Profile variables involvemen t 3.1445 2.6884* 2.5889* 2.0337 2.7665 2.7317* 2.5446 2.1144 Relationship 3.6645 2.0411 2.8045* 2.9143* 3.1887* 2.0886 2.7314* 2.5846* F statistics Administra tion 3.9904* 1.8973 2.0455 2.6173* 2.8045 3.0899* 2.1739 2.0049 Availa bility 2.6644 2.4417 * 2.2696 2.6604 * 2.9949 3.1842 * 2.9092 * 1.8846 Documenta tion 3.1446 2.8664* 2.7338* 2.0334 3.3884* 1.8446 2.4404 2.3997* Teaching 4.1887* 1.9493 2.0584 2.8184* 2.9114 2.6099* 2.8144* 1.6949

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Gender Age Years of Experience Years of experience in The present college Number of department Under control Number of faculties Under control Frequency of PA made so far. Monthly income *Significant at five percent level

7. Competency gap analysis on faculties competency: The competency gap has been measured with the help of the difference between the level of expectation and perception on the facultys competencies as per the view of the supervisors. Since the competency gap analysis reveals a meaningful conclusion for managerial implications, the present study has made an attempt on this aspect. The results are presented in table-9. Table 9: Competency gap analysis on faculties competencies: Supervisors view: FCSA Level of Level of Mean t statistics S.No expectation perception difference 1 Involvement 3.7871 3.2789 0.5082 3.1339* 2 Relationship 3.4713 3.0305 0.4408 2.9941* 3 Administration 3.5536 3.2731 0.2805 2.3449* 4 Availability 3.5309 3.3956 0.1353 1.5862 5 Documentation 3.5950 3.4934 0.1016 1.0045 6 Teaching 3.6189 3.0596 0.5593 3.9039* *Significant at five percent level Higher mean differences are noticed in the case of teaching and involvement. Significant mean differences between level of expectation and perception have been noticed in the case of involvement, relationships, administration and teaching. The analysis reveals that the level of expectation on the facultys competencies by the supervisors is not fulfilled by the existing competencies of the faculties regarding all six dimensions.

142

International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 6510(Online), Volume 2, Issue 2, May- July (2011), pp. 125-133

8. CONCLUSION Achieving organizational excellence in an educational institution largely depends upon the competencies possessed by the faculty members. In the process of assessing the competencies of faculties, the basic purpose of improving the quality of each faculty has to be given top most priority. Required training, workshops and faculty development programmes has to be imparted for the same. Boice and Kleiner (1997) suggested that overall purpose of performance assessment is to let an employee know how his or her performance compares with the managers expectations. A holistic competency model can be developed for practical implications. Knowledge and assessment thereof should be an integral part of competency specifications for professionals (Boritz and Carnaghan 2003). 9. REFERENCES 1. Boice, D and Kleiner, B.H (1997). Designing Effective Performance Appraisal System, Work study, Vol 4 (6), pp 197-201. 2. Boritz, J Efrim and Carla A Carnaghan, 2003, Competency Based Education and Assessment for the Accounting Profession: A Critical Review, Canadian Accounting Prespectives, Vol 2, No-1, Perspective Compatibles Canadiennes, Vol 2 No.1, pg no.7 42. 3. Caruth, D.L. & Humphreys, J.H, (2008), Performance Appraisal; essential characteristics for strategic control, Measuring Business Excellence, Vol.12 (3), pp: 24-32. 4. David P Adonis and Macayan V Jonathan, 2010, Assessment of Teacher Performance, The Assessment Handbook, Vol 3, pp 65-76. 5. De Guzman E 2000, Evolving and Testing of a Faculty Performance Evaluation Model, Siyasik, 7(1), pp: 1-26. 6. Fencer, R.M (2005), The Evaluation of University Faculty and Administrators: A case study, Personnel Journal, 2 (1), pp: 114-118. 7. Goe L, Bell C and Little.O, (2008), Approaches to Evaluating Teacher Effectiveness: A Research Synthesis, Education, 122(1), pp: 135-144. 8. Guest, D, 1997, Human Resource Management and Performance: A review and Research Agenda, International Journal of Human Resource Management, 8(3): 263-276. 9. International Federation of Accountants (IFAC) Education Committee, 2001, Competence Based Approaches to the Preparation and Work of Professional Accountants, Exposure draft discussion paper, IFAC, New York. 10. Jessup, G. 1991, Outcomes: NVQs and the Emerging Model of Education and Training, London: Falmer Press. 11. McDermott, P and Rothenberg, J (2000), The Characteristics of effective teachers in high parity schools: Triangulating our data, paper presented at the annual meeting of American Educational Research Association, New Orleans. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED442887). 12. Nhundu, T.J. 1999, Assessing Faculty Performance: A Comparison of Self And Supervisor Rating On Leniency, Halo, and Restriction of Range Errors, Zamperia, 26(1), pp: 35 53.
143