MODEL

Performance appraisal Employee Performance

 QUESTIONNAIRE

1. GENDER
i. Male
ii. Female

2. Age
i. 21-25
ii. 26-30
iii. 031 and above

3. Department
i. HR
ii. Marketing
iii. Finance
iv. Other

4. Performance is effectively monitored ?d

i. Highly disagree
ii. Disagree
iii. Neutral
iv. Agree
v. Highly agree

5. Performance evaluation in your opinion should be conducted in a year? in

i. Highly disagree
ii. Disagree
iii. Neutral
iv. Agree
v. Highly agree

6. Promotion opportunities are fair and satisfactory. in

i. Highly disagree
ii. Disagree
iii. Neutral
iv. Agree
v. Highly agree

7. When employees are rewarded, they seek for the tools and processes which
may be beneficial for the organization and so the performance and interest
on the work increases? d
i. Highly disagree
ii. Disagree
iii. Neutral
iv. Agree
v. Highly agree
 8. Appreciation and being praised by their managers for successful employees
increase their success at work? in
i. Highly disagree
ii. Disagree
iii. Neutral
iv. Agree
v. Highly agree

9. When your performance has not met minimum standards, your manager
discusses with you the reasons?d
i. Highly disagree
ii. Disagree
iii. Neutral
iv. Agree
v. Highly agree

10.Change in rewarding mechanism affects performance success at work? in

i. Highly disagree
ii. Disagree
iii. Neutral
iv. Agree
v. Highly agree

Frequency Tables

Performance is effectively monitored?

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid highly disagree 4 8.0 8.0 8.0
disagree 18 36.0 36.0 44.0
 neutral 11 22.0 22.0 66.0
agree 11 22.0 22.0 88.0
highly agree 6 12.0 12.0 100.0
Total 50 100.0 100.0

Promotion opportunities are fair and satisfactory

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid highly disagree 5 10.0 10.0 10.0
disagree 17 34.0 34.0 44.0
neutral 10 20.0 20.0 64.0
agree 14 28.0 28.0 92.0
highly agree 4 8.0 8.0 100.0
Total 50 100.0 100.0

Appreciation and being praised by their managers for successful employees

increase their success at work?
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid highly disagree 4 8.0 8.0 8.0
disagree 17 34.0 34.0 42.0
neutral 10 20.0 20.0 62.0
agree 14 28.0 28.0 90.0
highly agree 5 10.0 10.0 100.0
Total 50 100.0 100.0

Performance evaluation in your opinion should be conducted in a year?

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid highly disagree 6 12.0 12.0 12.0
disagree 18 36.0 36.0 48.0
neutral 12 24.0 24.0 72.0
agree 10 20.0 20.0 92.0
highly agree 4 8.0 8.0 100.0
 Total 50 100.0 100.0

Your manager discusses with you the reasons when your performance has
not met minimum standards,
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid highly disagree 6 12.0 12.0 12.0
disagree 11 22.0 22.0 34.0
neutral 14 28.0 28.0 62.0
agree 13 26.0 26.0 88.0
highly agree 6 12.0 12.0 100.0
Total 50 100.0 100.0

Rewarding mechanism affects performance success at work?

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid highly disagree 4 8.0 8.0 8.0
disagree 17 34.0 34.0 42.0
neutral 13 26.0 26.0 68.0
agree 12 24.0 24.0 92.0
highly agree 4 8.0 8.0 100.0
Total 50 100.0 100.0

When employees are rewarded, they seek for the tools and processes which
may be beneficial for the organization and so the performance and interest
on the work increases?
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid highly disagree 2 4.0 4.0 4.0
disagree 17 34.0 34.0 38.0
neutral 10 20.0 20.0 58.0
agree 15 30.0 30.0 88.0
highly agree 6 12.0 12.0 100.0
Total 50 100.0 100.0
 gender
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid male 21 42.0 42.0 42.0
female 29 58.0 58.0 100.0
Total 50 100.0 100.0

department
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid HR 9 18.0 18.0 18.0
marketing 14 28.0 28.0 46.0
finance 15 30.0 30.0 76.0
other 12 24.0 24.0 100.0
Total 50 100.0 100.0

Descriptives

Descriptive Statistics
N Mean Std. Deviation
age 50 29.3600 10.04837
Valid N (listwise) 50
Promotion opportunities are fair and satisfactory

Promotion opportunities are fair and satisfactory Stem-and-Leaf Plot

Frequency Stem & Leaf

5.00 1 . 00000
.00 1 .
17.00 2 . 00000000000000000
.00 2 .
10.00 3 . 0000000000
.00 3 .
14.00 4 . 00000000000000
.00 4 .
 4.00 5 . 0000

Stem width: 1.00

Each leaf: 1 case(s)
 Tests of Normality
Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk
Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.
Promotion opportunities are .220 50 .000 .900 50 .000
fair and satisfactory
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction
 Descriptives
Statistic Std. Error
Promotion opportunities are Mean 2.9000 .16475
fair and satisfactory 95% Confidence Interval for Lower Bound 2.5689
Mean Upper Bound 3.2311
5% Trimmed Mean 2.8889
Median 3.0000
Variance 1.357
Std. Deviation 1.16496
Minimum 1.00
Maximum 5.00
Range 4.00
Interquartile Range 2.00
Skewness .121 .337
Kurtosis -1.006 .662