managing performance: encouragement and recognition of
TRANSCRIPT
CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, NORTHRIDGE
Managing Performance: Encouragement and Recognition of Public Sector Employees
A graduate project submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements
For the degree of Master of Public Administration, Public Sector Management and
Leadership
By
Devon Zatorski
August 2019
iii
The graduate project of Devon Zatorski is approved: ________________________________________ _______________ Dr. Rhonda Franklin Date ________________________________________ _______________ Dr. Philip Nufrio Date ________________________________________ _______________ Dr. Michael J. Carter, Chair Date
California State University, Northridge
iv
Table of Contents
Copyright Page ii
Signature Page iii
Abstract v
Introduction 1
Review of the Literature 3
Review of the Literature Introduction 3
Previous Gaps and Studies 4
Public Sector Employee Motivations and Satisfaction 4
Employee Incentive and Recognition Programs 7
Employee Feedback on Performance 9
Leadership Styles on Performance 10
Managing Employee Performance 14
Research Question 17
Method 19
Research Design 19
Selection of Subjects 22
Ethical Considerations 24
Discussion/Expected Findings 27
Limitations 30 Conclusion 31 References 33
v
Abstract
Managing Performance: Encouragement and Recognition of Public Sector Employees
By
Devon Zatorski
Master of Public Administration, Public Sector Management and Leadership
Public sector organizations rely on their employees to meet organizational goals,
achieve their mission, and make them fully functioning and effective organizations. The
management of those employees will determine the effectiveness of an organization.
Employees are the core of any organization and recruiting, training, and retaining talented
and motivated employees is no easy task. To determine how to incentivize current public
sector employees, this research takes a deeper look into factors that affect motivation.
This paper aims to find how those motivational factors can increase an employee’s job
performance and what techniques can be implemented to accomplish that goal. Through a
survey using non-probability purposive sampling, researchers will collect data regarding
current public sector employee’s views towards current incentive programs. Additionally,
how those incentive programs motivate their job performance. It is expected to find that
public sector employees want increased performance feedback that allows them to
perform their job roles with all the tools they need to succeed.
1
Introduction
Efficiency and effectiveness of governments depend on the talent of employees
and their knowledge (Mandelbaum & Zehavi, 2014, p. 117). Public sector employees are
the reason public organizations run the way they do –either good or bad. Management
plays a key factor into organizational operation and influence on organizational
performance (Johansen & Hawes, 2016, p. 592; Johansen, 2012; Meier & O’Toole,
2002). Public sector employees, at all levels of an organization, can either help or hinder
an organization’s overall effectiveness. Johansen and Hawes conducted a study of how
middle management affected an organization and found that middle management has a
positive impact on performance levels (Johansen & Hawes, 2016, p. 593). Since
employees are so critical to the operation of public organizations, it is important to know
what motivates them.
Research has explained that students’ interest, specifically those studying public
policy and public affairs, in government work has declined (Bright & Graham, 2015).
Compared to the private sector, there are fewer extra incentives to encourage and
motivate employees to perform at higher levels. Increased jobs in the non-profit sector
that allow employees to meet their needs of public service have led to a decline in interest
in government job opportunities. There are expansive opportunities in the non-profit and
business sector now that provide the delivery of public service in a different way than
traditional government jobs. (Bright & Graham, 2015, p. 576; Rafael, 2009; Light, 1999).
The public sector has a challenge to recruit motivated, talented employees and still
encourage and incentivize their current employees. Again, information on motivational
2
and incentive programs will provide insight to find solutions that public administrators
face.
Compared to private organizations, public organizations do not have the same
leniency to incentivize their employees with monetary compensations. However, public
organizations can use incentives to create meaningful change such as written or formal
performance feedback and information. This information can assist public organizations
growth in their effectiveness and output of services (Onesti, Angiola, & Bianchi, 2016, p.
844; Van Dooren, 2008; Pollitt, 2000; Hatry, 1999).
This proposal will focus on the factors that can lead to improved employee morale
and ultimately leading to increased employee performance. By looking at what public
organizations currently implement employee recognition or motivation programs, we can
measure the effects those programs may have on the organization’s productivity.
Leadership styles, attitudes toward incentive programs, position type, and demographic
information will be studied to see what impact that has on their commitment to the
organization.
This research aims to look at employee’s attitudes toward performance
management techniques like incentive programs. It will focus specifically on how those
programs encourage employees to perform at higher levels. It is crucial for researchers to
uncover new ways that help promote increased effectiveness in public organizations.
Public administrators and researchers can look at public sector employees by studying
their motivations to determine how to provide increased services to the public. This
research aims to find how motivators and incentives encourage public sector employees,
3
and how these incentives play a role in determining an organizations efficiency and
effectiveness.
Review of the Literature
Review of the Literature Introduction
The literature review focuses on aspects that affect public sector organizations,
specifically public sector employees. The key areas of review are public sector employee
motivations and satisfaction, incentive and recognition programs, leadership styles in the
public sector, and performance management techniques. These aspects were chosen as
they all play a crucial role in determining the level of effectiveness that public sector
employees provide to their organization. The study of job satisfaction of public
professionals is relevant as it plays and important predictor of job performance (Steijn &
van der Voet, 2019, p. 64). This literature review looks at motivation factors that play a
role in an employee’s satisfaction and ultimate job performance.
The importance of efficacy in serving the public has increased, especially with
increased demands for government transparency (Hassan & Hatmaker, 2014, p. 1130;
Vigoda-Gadot & Golembiewski, 2001). Leadership styles can affect how public
employees perform their expected job and those who are willing to go beyond those
expectations to meet the needs of the organization and the public (Hassan & Hatmaker,
2014, p. 1130). As public organizations constantly evolve, it is crucial for public
managers and administrators to review ways that can lead to increased efficacy of public
organizations. By further looking into engagement techniques, motivational factors, and
incentive programs, public administrators have insight into methods and studies that
show direct links. This literature review explores research related to how these
4
incentivizing factors can ultimately increase public sector employee’s performance,
engagement, and service to an organization.
Previous Studies and Gaps
Throughout the review of the current literature, there is a lack in how incentive
programs encourage employees specifically in the public sector. Studies on how
performance evaluation and feedback in public organizations impact directly influences
employee performance is minimal. Throughout the literature, the concept of different
factors like leadership style are studied in detail to determine the effect that it has on
employee behaviors and performance. However, there are fewer studies on specific
behavior leaders or organizations are using to motivate, recognize, and encourage public
sector employees.
Employees that build positive relationships with supervisors and have
organization support become more committed to the organization through increased
learning opportunities (Jin & McDonald, 2017, p. 881). This research shows there is a
correlation of performance and leaders. However, less literature exists on finding how to
increase employee commitment and motivation levels.
Public Sector Employee Motivations and Satisfaction
Fredrick Taylor’s Principles of Scientific Management theorized that workplace
efficiency would increase if organizations, and in turn the people who worked for those
organizations, were run like machines to gain the greatest output of production (Taylor,
1911). Many private sector organizations follow a similar business model as profits and
deliverables are much easier to quantify (Caillier, 2010, p. 139; Bohnet & Eahton, 2003).
For public organizations, complex theories are regularly studied with a focus on human
5
relations, leadership styles, employee motivations, and employee satisfaction. Public
Service Motivation (PSM) is a specialized branch of research that looks at the nature of
public sector jobs and employees to determine public servant’s behavior (Jacobson, 2011,
p. 215). The most widely used definition of PSM comes from James Perry and Lois Wise,
as an “individuals’ predisposition to respond to motives grounded primarily or uniquely
in public institutions and organizations” (Jacobson, 2011, p. 215; Perry & Wise, 1990).
Using this definition, Jacobson theorizes why that public sector organizations can use
these motives to the organizations advantage by using those motivations to create a
proactive and engaged workforce. Jacobson conducted interviews and surveys of current
public sector employees to determine why certain individuals were more attracted to
public sector work. Common PSM principles included factors such as; public policy
making, public interest, compassion, and self-sacrifice (Jacobson, 2011, p. 5). Public
sector employees were more motivated to join the public sector rather than the private
sector due to their high levels of PSM (Jacobson, 2011, p. 221). As research, and
common knowledge, shows that public sector employees have a greater calling to serving
the public. However, not all public sector employees fall into the categories of PSM.
Many public sector employees choose this employment due to job security and benefits
(Jacobson, 2011, p. 221-222). Much of the following research focuses on how to nurture
the motivations of public sector employees and encourage increased work performance.
Many public sector employees have higher levels of PSM and are more likely to engage
to beneficial behaviors, especially when it comes to jobs that directly service the public
(Hsieh, Yang, & Fu, 2011, p. 245-246). These researchers focused on employees
“emotional labor” defined as how workers detect the affective state of the citizen and
6
adjust their own affective state, and exhibit work-appropriate emotive behaviors (Hsieh,
Yang, & Fu, 2011, p. 241; Newman, Guy, and Mastracci, 2009). Employees with higher
PSM are more likely to interact with more meaningful actions and behaviors to better
serve the needs of the public sector clients (Hseih, Yang, & Fu, 2011, p. 247-248). Again,
at the core of most public sector workers, there are higher levels of PSM that encourage
those employees.
There are many approaches on how to encourage increased job performance from
public sector agencies. James Caillier discusses the factors that affect job performance
and how employees’ attitudes towards certain factors can determine an employees’ job
performance. For this research, job performance is defined as how well an employee
performs his or her work-related duties (Caillier, 2010, p. 140). The theoretical model
explained that job performance had three major factors. First, job characteristics and
outcomes that encompassed job satisfaction, role ambiguity, mission contribution, and
fairness. Secondly, the work environment which included agency funding, adequate
funding, efficient use of funding, and participation. Lastly, an individual’s public service
motivation played a role in their job performance (Caillier, 2010, p.141-143). These
factors allow for managers or organizations a greater understanding of employee
motivators to determine how to produce increased job performance (Caillier, 2010, p.
142). The research validated that employees who have a greater understanding of the role
they have in the organization and have clear duties and expectations of what they are
involved in are more likely to perform better. Furthermore, role ambiguity, or lack
thereof, had the strongest causal relationship with job performance. When employees
know they are contributing directly to their organization’s mission and goals, they are
7
more likely to value the quality of their job performance and perform at higher levels.
These results indicate that managers and leaders in the organization should clearly
indicate the organization’s mission and provide clear direction to employees regarding
their work tasks and how those tasks lead to the betterment of the organization (Caillier,
2010, p. 156-157). This research was conducted on state government workers to close the
gap on job performance research between public and private sector and provide a greater
insight into what motivates public sector employees.
It is important for employees to feel they are part of the organization and having a
positive relationship with leaders is one way that can happen. A study by Hassan, Wright,
and Park looked to find under what conditions are leaders likely to empower their
employees. The research found that managers are more likely to engage employees who
show cues that they are eager to learn, solve problems, or proactively seek feedback
(Hassan, Wright, & Baker, 2016, p. 73). As seen, employees with greater sense of
motivation (e.g. willingness to learn, seek feedback) are more likely to experience
positive relationship with supervisors most likely leading to a positive relationship with
the organization.
Employee Incentives and Recognition Programs
Another incentivizing factor to increase job performance in public sector
employees are specific reward programs. Research into reward systems has shown how
different reward programs or other motivators can encourage or discourage employee
performance. Individuals want to be seen, recognized, appreciated, and valued and it the
role of a leader to recognize and appreciate individuals who make up the organization
(Hall-Ellis, 2014, p. 66). This research for library administrators (often public sector
8
employees) shows that conveying the message that employees matter and will be
rewarded on merit will ultimately improve morale, build trust and expand opportunities
for growth, and through challenging assignments will improve performance and build
skill development. The rewards can consist of monetary or non-monetary recognition and
even modest cost rewards will be worth the increased performance from employees
(Hall-Ellis, 2014, p. 67-68). In contrast, Douglas A. Johnson and Alyce M. Dickinson
studied Employee-of-the-Month Programs and recreated an incentive-based program
where one person was rewarded per week based on who was able to generate the greatest
output of work. Their data found that while some participant’s performance increased, it
was often the case that performance plateaued or even declined after the participant
received the recognition (Johnson & Dickinson, 2010, p. 319). The few positive increases
they did find in their research they attributed directly to performance feedback rather than
the monetary prize that came with the “employee of the week” simulation they created in
their experiment. This suggests that organizations with a comprehensive performance
feedback system are more likely to see greater results from their employees rather than
implementing a prize-based employee of the month program (Johnson & Dickinson,
2010, p. 320).
Similarly, Sergio Fernandez and Tima Moldogaziev researched what encouragers
could the public sector use to motivate employees. This research focused on an
employee’s likeliness to innovate rather than perform, but they also found that rewarding
short-term performance fostered a myopic mindset that caused employees to sabotage or
cut corners to gain the reward but did not produce behaviors that would increase the
employee or the organization in the long-term (Fernandez & Moldogaziev, 2012, p. 177).
9
In their research, they hypothesized that providing information about goals and
performance, providing access to job knowledge and skills, allowing employee input in
work processes, and empowering employees would all be positively related to an
employee’s likelihood to innovate. They also theorized that offering a rewards program
could would be related with encouragement to innovate but could have negative or
positive relationship (Fernandez & Moldogaziev, 2012, p. 160-161). As seen through this
research and other research aimed at motivating employees, it is more likely that
employees feel rewarded when they are given to the tools to be a greater part of the
organization and feel as though they are making a difference in the work they do.
Employee Feedback on Performance
Feedback opportunities and performance evaluations have been common
workplace procedure, especially in the last two decades (Kuhnen & Tymula, 2011, p. 94;
Prewitt, 2007). The impact of performance can determine how employees see themselves
and how they view themselves within the organization. Employees who are told that is
likely they will receive feedback on their performance of a task are more likely to
increase their output and performance (Kuhnen & Tymula, 2011, p. 109). While this
research was not specific to public sector organizations, it still shines an interesting light
on how employees view themselves are often interested in receiving feedback on their
work to determine how they are seen by the organization. Leonie Gerhards and Neele
Siemer focus directly on the impact that performance feedback has when it is done in
private compared to when it is provided publicly. While performance feedback is a
positive incentive to employees, performance feedback when given publicly can have an
adverse effect based on specific employees and may fear peer responses when being
10
recognized publicly. They found that some employees are willing to go as far as
sabotaging others performance to gain the public recognition (Gerhards & Siemer, 2015,
p. 1188). That similar information was also found in the research about employee
incentive programs (such as employee of the month programs) where employees were
willing to sabotage to gain the public reward or recognition. There were no significant
differences found between performance levels when feedback was provided publicly or
privately, however, the greatest indicator was personal characteristics of how employees
would take to public feedback versus private feedback. Overall, performance feedback,
either public or private, increased greater performance levels among employees.
(Gerhards & Siemer, 2015, p. 1199-1200). It seems that private feedback had less adverse
side effects when compared to public performance feedback.
Leadership Styles on Performance
Transformational Leadership is a more recent style of leadership but often studied
practice and viewed to have a direct, positive impact on the performance of workers
(Caillier, 2014, p. 218; Bass, Jung Avolio, & Bernson, 2003; Howell & Avolio, 1993;
Lowe, Kroeck & Sivasubramaniam, 1996; Waldman, Bass, & Einstein, 1987;
Walumbwa, Avolio, & Zhu, 2008). Transformational leadership is rooted in the idea of
organizational goal setting (Wright, Moynihan, & Pandey, 2012) but little is known about
the interaction between transformational leadership and public service motivation
(Caillier, 2014, p. 218). Caillier argues that public sector employees are more reliant on
an individual’s importance within an organization due to the nature and common PSM
aspects of public sector employees (Caillier, 2014, p. 220). Authors Wright & Moynihan
also find that transformational leadership has often been linked with increased employee
11
performance and satisfaction. Their research shows that leaders who offer vision, set a
positive example, encourage innovation, and create a sense of organizational pride can
increase public employee motivations, performance, and commitment. Public sector
leaders who use transformational leadership styles can often encourage their employees
to do better for the organization and the population they serve (Wright & Moynihan,
2011, p. 207-213).
Characteristics of transformational leadership can also be defined as empowering
or participative leadership. Research focused on if participative leadership enhanced
work performance by increasing empowerment and trust found that task performance was
more mediated by individual empowerment rather than trust of one’s supervisor. Two
groups were studied (middle management and lower level employees) and it was found
that middle managers who had more autonomy and responsibility felt they were doing
more meaningful work and were competent to do the tasks. For lower level employees, it
was found that allowing them to give ideas and suggestions for change and respecting
when they expressed those suggestions encouraged those employees to devote extra
effort to their work (Huang, Iun, Liu, Gong, 2009, 136-138). The research on leadership
styles on workplace performance shows how critical of a role that effective leadership is
in public organizations. Scott L. Martin, Hui Liao, and Elizabeth M. Campbell compare
the effects that directive versus empowering leadership styles have on job performance.
This research was conducted in the United Arab Emirates, which was explained to have
lacking research on leadership in the Middle East. A pretest-posttest experiment was
designed with a control group to measure the impact that directive versus empowering
leadership styles had on employee’s task proficiency and proactivity (Martin, Liao &
12
Campbell, 2013, p.1378). The researchers found that both directive and empowering
leadership had a positive impact on the amount of work performed but empowering
leadership was the only leadership that increased the group’s proactive behavior in the
workplace. The leaders in the empowering leadership group led by example and worked
to motivate their employees to do more than just perform the work, they were able to
inspire employees to be proactive (Martin, Liao & Campbell, 2013, p. 1386). The
researchers also explained the limitations and downfalls of this research as that there are
many leadership theories and research aimed at telling leaders that empowering and
transformative leadership styles are the best way to go, however, as seen with this
research, directive leadership also had positive impacts on employee performance. The
researchers caution from labeling directive leadership as negative term because it is often
crucial to use this type of leadership to meet certain goals and monitor employees to drive
the performance of work (Martin, Liao & Campbell, 2013, p. 1388).
Further research on leadership styles and the public sector find that the
meaningfulness of work is important to employees and can determine the outcomes they
provide in their work performance. Additionally, employees who have good relationships
with leaders (LMX theory) can positively affect their perception of their role in their
organization and feel as though they are an important aspect and what to perform better
work to enhance their relationship with their leaders and the organization. Leaders who
also provide employees with insight into how the organization works and how decisions
are made are more likely to have employees with greater organizational commitment,
often leading to increased employee performance. Employees who find meaning in their
work are more likely to be committed to perform better to their higher levels of public
13
service motivation. The researchers make note of other motivators such as job security
and regular pay increase that can decrease the employees feeling of meaningful work and
not necessarily be inclined to provide increased performance (Tummers & Knies, 2013,
p. 865-866). Montgomery Van Wart discusses the role of leaders on employee and
organizational effectiveness by stating that leaders are a significant factor in influencing
organizational success, follower happiness, and constituent satisfaction and often the
leader is the most important factor of these variables (Van Wart, 2013, p. 555). Van
Wart’s review of leadership theories and practice find that leadership styles involve a
constant practice and that leadership styles should be updated and reviewed. Leaders
need to continue to grow and update their skills to show their followers that their success
relies on the ability to continue to learn and develop new skills (Van Wart, 2013, p. 561).
Public sector management and leadership techniques have research devoted
specifically devoted to how public managers and how management reform plays a part in
public sector employee’s behaviors and work performance. Government managerial
practices have a direct effect on public employee’s job performance. The research by
Jonathan P. West and Evan M. Berman suggest that good managerial work habits will
have a positive outcome on an organization’s performance and bad habits will have
adverse effects (West & Berman, 2011, p. 65). This research conducted a survey of high-
level government administrators who answered surveys based on management habits of
their direct reports who were managers or supervisors. The findings from this research
suggest that even when good management habits are active (i.e. being proactive, setting
high standards) any trace of bad management work habits (overly passive, judgmental,
defensive, close-minded) will outweigh the positive that come from good management
14
habits. Having good management habits require continued management and active
monitoring of those habits. Managers also need more training and support when it comes
to disciplining employees as they find this to be the most difficult task in their role as a
supervisor (West & Berman, 2011, p. 72-73).
As stated above, there are many research and public administration theories on
how to increase efficiency and job performance. However, Kaifeing Yang and Anthony
Kassekert felt that there was a gap in how these reforms to create more efficient
organizations impacted employees in the organization. The research they conducted aims
to explain how management reforms affect employees and specifically employee
satisfaction and performance. The researchers hypothesize that positive attitudes towards
performance feedback evaluations will be positively associated with job satisfaction
(Yang & Kassekert, 2009, p. 419). The results of their research show decision makers
should aim to make government agencies more attractive places to work by creating an
innovative culture and providing effective performance feedback. These factors have can
have in impact on employee’s attitudes and an impact on their job performance. Most
importantly, organizational leaders need to not only ask how management reforms can
make our organization more efficient but also what will this management reform look
like for our employees and what effects will it have on our people (Yang & Kassekert,
2009, p. 431-432).
Managing Employee Performance Performance Management systems have been implemented across various public
administration organizations and government agencies to ensure more efficiency and find
more effective ways to strategize and reach organizational goals. Patrina Clark’s take on
15
performance management includes involving employees in performance management
reforms. She states that most government employees feel as though their suggestions and
thoughts will not be used to create agency wide change, therefore, employees feel less
engaged and part of the organization. Organizations should share information about
organization reform to the lowest level and engage all employees in discussion. If
employees can be part of the discussion it will feel like a win for the employees, who
were able to have their opinions heard (Clark, 2015, p. 31). Government agencies who
are likely to use a performance management system as their management philosophy are
more likely to reap more benefits from the organizational changes (Ammons, Liston, &
Jones, 2013, p. 172). Government agencies, who implement performance management
reforms, specifically where executive leaders are involved in engagement throughout the
organization, are more likely to see benefits of greater performance and benefits of that
increased performance (Ammons, Liston, & Jones, 2013, p. 178).
Research on how performance management drives employee engagement aims to
take a closer look at how employee engagement is measured and driven, specifically by
performance management techniques. This research is an interesting take on performance
management because the majority of performance management literature focuses solely
on organizational effectiveness due to performance management rather than engaging
employees during the process. This literature lists the five following factors to
performance management: setting performance and development goals, providing
ongoing feedback and recognition, managing employee development, conducting mid-
year and year-end appraisals, building a climate of trust and empowerment (Mone,
Eisinger, Guggenheim, Price, & Stine, 2011, p. 206). The researchers confirm that
16
employee feedback and recognition is a major aspect of employee engagement, as
pointed out by other literature in this review. The act of receiving feedback is generally
considered a positive and motivating experience (Mone, Eisinger, Guggenheim, Price, &
Stine, 2011, p. 207; London, 2003; Smither & London, 2009). Additionally, recognition
can be in the form of positive feedback. Managers need to ensure there is positive as well
as constructive feedback to observe their accomplishments but also recognize areas for
performance. Another aspect of employee engagement is employee development and
opportunities for employees to advance, train, and promote. Employee’s engagement and
satisfaction is directly correlated with their opportunities for progression and promotion
(Mone, Eisinger, Guggenheim, Price, & Stine, 2011, p. 208; Mone & London, 2009). The
researchers believe that performance management serves as a basis for managers to guide
their employees’ performance and expect high levels of engagement and commitment.
A question found throughout the research of this topic of employee motivations in
today’s public administration is how do employers motivate their employees in today’s
climate? James L. Perry, Debra Mesch, and Laurie Paarlberg reviewed and researched
ways to motivate employees in the current public sector climate. Their research of
motivational programs included; financial incentives, job design, goal setting, and
participation. Regarding employee performance, the research suggests that the type of
job, if found to be meaningful to the employee, can lead to better job performance (Perry,
Mesch, & Paarlberg, 2006, p. 507). Compared to job design, participation from
employees has a link to employee performance but the link between participation and
employee performance is less significant. The research suggests that there is a lot of room
for public administration research to continue studying employee motivations.
17
Research Question
Public sector employees are motivated my multiple factors, but a major factor of
public service is the desire to work for an organization that does good for the public.
Many public sector employees enter public service because of personal characteristics
that draw them to the public field. There are also public sector employees who do not
have these same motivations. This proposal looks to find what incentives motivate
different types of public sector employees.
The literature review discussed many ways public sector employees are
motivated, incentivized, and other techniques to help encourage work performance. A
key point in encouraging employees is to find their motivational factors. These
motivational factors will help organizations determine what type of incentives will
positively affect public sector employees. Public sector organizations should aim to
incentive employee’s long-term performance and finding ways to engage employees to
ensure they feel that their efforts are contributing towards the organizational goals.
A specific aspect of the literature review as looking at employee incentive and
recognition programs to determine their outcomes and effectiveness. The literature
suggests that encouraging and incentivizing employees should focus on programs that
will ultimately increase employee behavior and motives, rather than focusing on short
term or superficial rewards. Employees want their opinions heard, their work valued, and
to feel as though that they are a crucial part of an organization. The idea of productive
and constructive employee feedback was overwhelming in the research and many
researchers continued to find that feedback and performance evaluations continue to
18
provide employees with the information they need to determine their place in an
organization and use that feedback to improve.
Another aspect of the research focuses on leadership styles. Leadership styles play
a crucial role in employee motivation and employee performance since leaders can
influence and encourage the way employees behave and perform. Leadership styles,
especially transformative, engaging, and empowering leadership styles are shown to
incentivize and inspire employees to perform at higher levels. This is due to
transformational leaders often set the example for their employees to be engaged and
motivated.
Statement of the Question How do incentive programs increase job performance among public sector employees?
Independent Variable: Incentive Programs
Attributes: Employee Recognition Programs, Employee Feedback
Dependent Variable: Job Performance
Attributes: Increased Job Performance, Decreased Job Performance
19
Method
Research Design
Introduction This research is designed to be a qualitative cross sectional study of employee’s
attitudes towards recognition and feedback programs. The data will examine employee’s
attitudes towards employee feedback and recognition. The purpose of this study is to
determine how certain employees view receiving performance feedback and recognition.
By determining how employees view feedback and recognition, motivational factors that
drive employees to perform can also be determined. Certain factors such as job
characteristics, work environment, and individual attributes can be indicators on how
well an employee will perform (Caillier, 2010). As shown in the literature review,
multiple studies determine what factors motivate and encourage employees to perform at
higher levels. This research will focus specifically on how employee performance
feedback and recognition affects employee’s attitudes, motivations, and ultimately job
performance. The data collected provides researchers with updated information about
public sector employees’ attitudes towards incentives and feedback affecting their levels
of performance.
The public sector is wide-ranging with a diverse group of employees. This study
will measure City of Los Angeles civil-service employees (full-time, regular employment
as defined by City of Los Angeles Civil Service Rules) to gauge specific employee’s
attitudes towards employee recognition programs and performance feedback. The City of
Los Angeles is comprised of 36 departments with positions ranging from clerical
classifications to technical positions to supervisory roles and executive management staff.
20
Various employees for the City of Los Angeles will be surveyed to measure their
attitudes towards employee recognition programs and performance feedback. That
information will determine how those factors play a role in their job performance.
Data Collection
The data will be collected by researchers from Cal State University, Northridge
who are studying the affects of how public sector employees feel that incnetive programs
affect their job performance. The reserachers will first obtain approval from the
Institutional Review Board (IRB) to conduct the study. The reserach will specifically
focus on the City of Los Angeles civil service employees. Since Northridge is located
within the City of Los Angeles limits, this reserach will be beneficial to see the results
locally and make potential recommendations on how to enhance local government
practices.
The research will contain a self-reported survey of City of Los Angeles
employees. The employees who take the survey will be part of one of four following
classifications: clerical, technical, supervisory, or management. The City of Los Angeles
employs over 60,000 employees in 36 different departments. The survey will be
administered through an online survey via the City’s email system. Each potential
participant has access to City’s email system as a current employee. Survey questions
will be the same for all participants, regardless of their classification. The survey will
gauge employee’s attitudes towards the topic of incentive programs (feedback and
recognition).
Survey respondents will fill out their position title and the researchers will
determine which of the four classifications each respondent belongs. Additionally, survey
21
questions will contain demographic information, questions about their preferred
leadership style, questions about the current leadership style experience, questions about
their motivation levels and reasons for choosing a public service career, questions about
monetary incentive programs, questions about performance feedback, and questions
about recognition by supervisors/department/organization. The survey will be a measured
on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 – “Strongly Disagree/Rarely” to 5 – “Strongly
Agree/Always” (Hsieh, Yang, & Fu, 2011).
This cross sectional study will measure employee’s attitudes towards recognition
and feedback. This data will be used to analyze how those attitudes affect public sector
job performance. All respondents will have the commonality of being a public sector
employee and by asking questions about their demographics and job classifications, we
can analyze across different factors that may affect how certain public sector employees
view recognition and feedback. Additionally, this cross analyzation allows researchers to
find correlations among certain factors (age, gender, job type, and years of service) and
attitudes towards recognition affecting job performance. This study is an appropriate way
to determine certain trends among public sector employees. The trends in employee’s
attitudes, motivational factors, and incentives to improve work performance are gathered
through this survey.
The timeline of the research will take place within a three-month period. This
timeframe allows the researchers enough time to collect responses and analyze the data to
determine the findings of what specific motivational factors increase job performance. As
stated, the survey will be sent via City of Los Angeles email, which all City employees
22
have access to. The participants will then have one month to respond to the survey
allowing two months of review and analysis by the researchers.
Selection of Subjects
The data used for this research will consist of non-probability purposive sampling
techniques. Non-probability sampling will be used because the participant pool is specific
and participants need to meet specific criteria to be involved in the research. There is a
specific population in mind that needs to be sampled. That population is public sector
employees specifically working for the City of Los Angeles. This research is also
purposeful because it is clearly defined who will be surveyed, explained later. The
sample will be able to measure the difference in how different classifications of
employees feel towards recognition and feedback programs and how those programs
improve job performance.
This sample will allow researchers to understand specifically the motivations
behind City of Los Angeles employees. While difficult to generalize to a larger
population with certainty, the research may be able to translate to a larger grouping of
public sector employees overall.
To conduct the survey, the research will need to approved through the City of Los
Angeles’ Personnel Department who is responsible for the hiring and classification
system within the City. By working with the Personnel Department, the researchers will
be able to understand the subjects they are seeking to study. Additionally, the Personnel
Department will grant access to the researchers to contact the employees via the City’s
email system.
23
For the purpose of this research, the four classifications of employees that will be
selected to participate in the research are clerical employees, technical employees,
supervisory employees, and executive management employees. The City of Los Angeles
consists of 36 departments and each department has at least one employee that falls into
each classification selected for sampling. The researchers will identify five job positions
within each category. Then, the survey will be sent to all employees who fall within the
selected job position. Since participation is optional, the survey will sent to all employees
who fall within the classification to maximize the amount of the responses received.
Clerical employees are classified as administrative employees who work on the
day-to-day operations. Of the four classifications being studied, clerical employees
generally report to either technical employees or supervisory employees. Comparing the
starting salary among the four classifications, clerical employees have the lowest wages.
This classification generally does not require a full college degree or post-college degree.
For this research, the five job positons chosen within this classification are
Administrative Clerk, Accounting Clerk, Legal Secretary, Benefits Specialist, and
Executive Secretary.
Technical employees are classified as positions that perform specific tasks that are
technical in nature. Generally, to qualify for these positions, applicants require a college
degree or post-college degree in a specific field of study. The positions chosen are
Management Analyst, Systems Analyst, Accountant, City Planner, and Civil Engineer.
For the purpose of this research, supervisory employees are classified as positions
who are responsible for supervising one or more of the positions that fall would into the
clerical or technical employee category. The positions chosen for this category are Senior
24
Management Analyst, Senior Systems Analyst, Senior Accountant, Senior City Planner,
and Senior Civil Engineer.
Executive Management employees make up the top management of each
department. These are positions oversee a large number of employees and are responsible
for entire departments or divisions within departments and oversee the supervisory
classification. Of the four classifications, this is the highest paid group. The job positions
in this classification are General Manager, Assistant General Manager, Chief
Management Analyst, Chief Financial Officer, and Director of Systems.
Ethical Considerations
The greatest ethical consideration of this study is that the data collected from
survey responses are from human subjects. Since human participants are used, the study
needs to ensure the rights and well-being of those participants are protected during the
survey. With this in mind, the researchers need to make sure the survey is non-biased and
non-discriminatory in nature. The questions will be reviewed for bias or for potential
questions that could trigger emotions of the subjects participating in the survey. Due to
the nature of the research, there are no foreseen questions that are likely to trigger
emotions that could harm the well-being of the participants. However, if there were, the
researchers would ensure that the participants are aware of any potential questions that
could prompt an adverse response. While the survey questions will ask about
demographic information, they will not be discriminatory in nature. The purpose of the
demographic is to determine a correlation between people who work for the same
organization but have different demographic backgrounds that could influence their
behaviors towards employee recognition and feedback. All responses deemed fully
25
complete will be used for the data analysis. This is to ensure that no survey respondents
are discriminated based on demographic information such as race, sex, age, etc.
In addition to ensuring the protection of the participants in this research, the
research needs to inform all participants of what they can expect from the survey they
will be taking. To inform participants, the survey will clearly outline who is
administering the survey, the purpose of the survey, and how the participant’s data is
used to meet the objectives of the research. Prior to taking the survey, the potential
participants will be informed of how long the survey is expected to take. By doing this,
the researchers take into account the research participant’s time and needs. Prior to taking
the survey, it will be clearly stated that participation is optional and no employee who has
been selected is required to participate in the survey. This allows potential participants to
determine their involvement and ensures that no participants are forced against their will
to participate in research that they do not want to be involved with. In addition to the
survey being optional, it will also be stated that the participants can leave any time once
beginning the survey. This is a further step to ensure that participants are fully informed
of their rights when taking the survey and that no participant is forced into an
uncomfortable position.
Another ethical consideration is to ensure that survey participant’s trust remains
intact and that their results are kept confidential to only those who are analyzing the
information. Participants will be informed, prior to taking the survey that this information
is for research purposes and it will not be shared with anyone other than the researchers.
If any conclusions or analysis is shared, the participants will be ensured that all personal
data will be redacted and information cannot be traced back to a specific participant.
26
Another way to ensure that participants are trustful of the researchers conducting the
survey is that the results will be available to the participants. Since the survey is
administered via internet, the participants will receive a confirmation that the survey has
been completed and once completed; they can view the answers they selected. This step
makes the research transparent to those who participated and allows the participants to
build trust with the researchers. The participants will be ensured their information is not
to be shared outside of the purpose of the research and the ability to view their results
allows them to see that the researchers will be using the exact information they inputted.
27
Discussion/Expected Findings
Data Interpretation
Data collected from the surveys will be classified based on the 5-point Likert
scale and open-ended questions will be recorded and classified into certain categories of
the research based on the topic. The categories affecting job performance will be
incentive programs, public service motivation (personal characteristics), leadership
styles, and demographic information. Some of the independent variables that can have an
effect on the research question are race, sex, age, job classification, education level, and
years of service. If there is a substantial difference between results of participants within
the same classification, we will know that there are outlying factors that affect how those
employees feel incentive programs will motivate them to perform at higher levels.
However, if the responses amongst are similar within the groups, the researchers will be
able to theorize potential best practices of implementing incentive programs to encourage
increased job performance.
The main goal of this research is find what incentive programs would incentivize
public sector employees to provide increased job performance. This will be accomplished
by directly asking public sector employees what incentive programs would motivate them
to perform. To gain a better understanding of what incentive programs would work,
researchers need a better understanding of public sector employees. Through the
research, the public sector employees have been broken down into specific job
classifications that will allow researchers to find patterns among certain classes and any
potential patterns across all four classifications. Additionally, demographic information
may play a role in how to incentivize public sector employees, and lastly leadership style
28
can have an effect on how public sector employees want to be recognized and
incentivized.
Among the different classifications of job positions, the researchers can expect to
see differing results amongst different groups. This is because there are different
perspectives among the groups. For example, the supervisory and executive management
groups would be the job classifications that administer incentive programs and
performance feedback so they may think they are doing a great job, while the positions
they supervise are experiencing it firsthand and think that the management does a poor
job of performance feedback. This study provides a varied view of perspectives on the
topic of incentive programs. However, there could concerns that translate across all levels
of the organization. If that is the case, there may be an effective way to implement an
incentive program that helps everyone. Another factor that plays a role amongst the
different classification groups would be educational level; generally, the higher positions
will have higher levels of education. Expected results may be that the supervisory or
executive management groups have good suggestions to create incentive programs due
their experience and education level. Especially since they are public sector employees,
they may have studied public sector organizations and will have insight into effective
strategies. Also, there is an assumption that there are different commitment levels among
each group. For example, the executive management and supervisory employees are
salaried employees rather than hourly employees so they may have to have a greater
commitment to the organization because they are expected to be available when needed.
By having a different perspective, it may change the way they view the organization and
their programs.
29
Another expectation is to see different opinions on incentive programs amongst
different age groups, especially among the younger work force. There is research
dedicated on how to recruit, work with and incentivize the millennial generation. This
study will provide further insight directly from young public sector employees.
Millennials place higher value on performing meaningful work, having a work/life
balance, and like having good co-workers and supervisors (Ertas, 2016). These
conclusions will be beneficial recommendations to public organizations as a large portion
of the workforce is currently retiring and are seeing younger employees come in.
Additionally, research finds that both Millennial and Generation X participants score
higher on public service motivation scales than prior generations (Einolf, 2016).
Lastly, responses are expected to vary amongst participants that witness different
leadership styles. Tummers & Montgomery (2013) discuss how Leader-Member
Exchange Theory (LMX) can positively affect an employee’s job satisfaction and
performance. Per LMX Theory, researchers find that employees who a have a strong
connection with their leader are more likely to perform tasks at higher levels or do extra
work for that leader, and ultimately for the organization. This is because the employee
perceives a positive relationship with the leader and they are willing to perform at a
higher level knowing that in exchange they will continue to be in good standing and keep
that employee-leader relationship intact. This study will provide information on how
different leadership styles affect motivations and job performance. It will allow the
researchers to see if there are incentives (feedback and recognition) that any leader can
implement to encourage increased job performance. In addition, it may show that certain
30
leadership styles that are deemed more effective can be the incentive since the leadership
style is what is motivating employees to produce high performance levels.
For this study, an average response rate of 50% (Baruch & Brooks, 2008) can be
expected. This is why the City of Los Angeles was chosen to be studied so that a greater
data set could be obtained.
Limitations
This data set and research have credibility because the participants completing the
survey are confirmed public sector employees. The participants experience falls directly
into the topic of research and their input will be valuable to the researcher’s outcomes.
The participants can add valuable first-hand knowledge about current public sector
practices.
However, as a self-reported survey there is potential for participants to report
false or inaccurate information, skewing the results. Additionally, since survey
respondents are taking the survey as an employee they could feel inclined to answer
untruthfully because they want they want to appear in a different light. For example, a
may not like respondent their supervisor’s leadership style but they may not put that
down for fear of information being seen by their supervisor. This type of response could
skew the data. This is why is it is important the participants have a sense of trust with the
researcher that the information will only be seen by the people it is intended for.
Lastly, this survey is administered to all 36 departments within the City of Los
Angeles and these departments vary in size. This could affect the results of the survey
because while all participants will fall into the same classifications, they will have
different experiences based on the size of their department. For example, a clerical
31
employee who works for a smaller department may have a better relationship with
executive management staff because there is the ability for co-mingling while someone in
the large department may not know their executive staff. Researchers can manage this, as
they will know which department each respondent is from and have the ability to control
to these threats to validity.
Conclusion
Caillier (2008) found that public sector employees had certain characteristics to
motivate them towards greater outputs of increased job performance. While the
connection between certain job characteristics and job performance have been studied
before, there was a large gap in the literature of this topic studied in the public sector.
Through the research, it is easy to find incentive and recognition programs studies and
experiments that focus on the private sector. Most likely because in the private sector it is
easier for an employer to create a recognition or feedback program, specifically one with
monetary value. Public sector organizations require increased creativity when it comes to
employee recognition and feedback due to constraints of being a public organization.
Through this research, the study will provide insightful information on how public
sector organizations can engage employees at all levels of the organization to maximize
job performance. In addition to increasing job performance, this study looks at the
motivating factors that will encourage employees to perform better so if the employee’s
needs are met and they are motivated correctly, the hope is that these motivation and
incentive techniques will lead to increased job satisfaction. This research will provide the
City of Los Angeles, and possibly other public sector organizations, with data about
32
factors that affect different types of employees based and what incentivizing them to
perform at a higher level.
33
References Ammons, D., Liston, E., & Jones, J. (2013). Performance management purpose,
executive engagement, and reported benefits among leading local governments. State & Local Government Review, 45(3), 172-179. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/42002379
Baruch, Y., & Holtom, B. C. (2008). Survey response rate levels and trends in
organizational research. Human Relations, 61(8), 1139–1160. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726708094863
Bright, L., & Graham, C. (2015). Why Does Interest in Government Careers Decline
Among Public Affairs Graduate Students? Journal of Public Affairs Education, 21(4), 575-594. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/24615546
Caillier, J. (2010). Factors affecting job performance in public agencies. Public
Performance & Management Review, 34(2), 139-165. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/41104055
Caillier, J. G. (2014, June). Toward a better understanding of the relationship between
transformational leadership, public service motivation, mission valence, and employee performance: a preliminary study. Public Personnel Management, 43(2), 218+. http://link.galegroup.com.libproxy.csun.edu/apps/doc/A369128715/ITOF?u=csunorthridge&sid=ITOF&xid=5ffa1340
Clark, P. M. (2015, Spring). Bringing meaningful change to performance management.
The Public Manager, 44(1), 30+. http://link.galegroup.com.libproxy.csun.edu/apps/doc/A404895496/ITOF?u=csunorthridge&sid=ITOF&xid=383b86b8
Einolf, C. (2016). Millennials and public service motivation: findings from a survey of
master’s degree students. Public Administration Quarterly, 40(3), 429-457. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/24772878
Ertas, N. (2016). Millennials and volunteering: sector differences and implications for
public service motivation theory. Public Administration Quarterly, 40(3), 517-558. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/24772881
Fernandez, S., & Moldogaziev, T. (2013). Using employee empowerment to encourage
innovative behavior in the public sector. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: J-PART, 23(1), 155-187. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/23321088
34
Gerhards, L., & Siemer, N. (2016). The Impact of Private and Public Feedback on Worker Performance-Evidence from the Lab. Economic Inquiry, 54(2), 1188–1201. https://doi-org.libproxy.csun.edu/10.1111/ecin.12310
Hall-Ellis, S. D. (2014). Reward systems promote high-performance work teams
achieving library mission. Bottom Line: Managing Library Finances, 27(2), 66–69. https://doi-org.libproxy.csun.edu/10.1108/BL-04-2014-0011
Hassan, S., & Hatmaker, D. M. (2014). Leadership and performance of public
employees: effects of the quality and characteristics of manager-employee relationships. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(4), 1127-1155. https://academic.oup.com/jpart/issue/25/4
Hassan, S., Wright, B. E., & Park, J. (2016). The role of employee task performance and
learning effort in determining empowering managerial practices: evidence from a public agency. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 36(1), 57–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X15570061
Hsieh, C., Yang, K., & Fu, K. (2012). Motivational bases and emotional labor: assessing
the impact of public service motivation. Public Administration Review, 72(2), 241-250. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/41433299
Huang X., Iun, J., Liu, A., & Gong, Y. (2010). Does participative leadership enhance
work performance by inducing empowerment or trust? The differential effects on managerial and non-managerial subordinates. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(1), 122-143. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/41683897
Jin, M. H., & McDonald, B. (2017). Understanding employee engagement in the public
sector: the role of immediate supervisor, perceived organizational support, and learning opportunities. The American Review of Public Administration, 47(8), 881–897. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074016643817
Kuhnen, C., & Tymula, A. (2012). Feedback, self-Esteem, and performance in
organizations. Management Science, 58(1), 94-113. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/41406374
Jacobson, W. S. (2011, Fall). Creating a motivated workforce: how organizations can
enhance and develop public service motivation (PSM). Public Personnel Management, 40(3), 215+. http://link.galegroup.com.libproxy.csun.edu/apps/doc/A266139762/ITOF?u=csunorthridge&sid=ITOF&xid=684f0540
Johansen, M., & Hawes, D. (2016). The effect of the tasks middle managers perform on
organizational performance. Public Administration Quarterly, 40(3), 589-616. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/24772883
35
Johnson, D., & Dickinson, A. (2010). Employee-of-the-Month Programs: Do They
Really Work? Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 30(4), 308–324. https://doi-org.libproxy.csun.edu/10.1080/01608061.2010.520144
Mandelbaum, R., & Zehavi, A. (2014). Recession as a window of opportunity for public
sector recruitment. Policy Studies, 35(2), 115–130. https://doi-org.libproxy.csun.edu/10.1080/01442872.2013.875142
Martin, S., Liao, H., & Campbell, E. (2013). Directive versus empowering leadership: a
field experiment comparing impacts on task proficiency and proactivity. The Academy of Management Journal, 56(5), 1372-1395. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/43589221
Mone, E., Eisinger, C., Guggenheim, K., Price, B., & Stine, C. (2011). Performance
management at the wheel: driving employee engagement in organizations. Journal of Business and Psychology, 26(2), 205-212. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/41474869
Onesti, T., Angiola, N., & Bianchi, P. (2016). Learning by using performance measures
in local governments: the perspective of public managers. Public Administration Quarterly, 40(4), 842-881. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/26383374
Pandey, S., Wright, B., & Moynihan, D. (2012). Pulling the levers: transformational
leadership, public service motivation, and mission valence. Public Administration Review, 72(2), 206-215. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/41433294
Perry, J., Mesch, D., & Paarlberg, L. (2006). Motivating employees in a new governance
era: the performance paradigm revisited. Public Administration Review, 66(4), 505-514. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/3843936
Steijn, B., & van der Voet, J. (2017). Relational job characteristics and job satisfaction of
public sector employees: When prosocial motivation and red tape collide. Public Administration, 97(1), 64– 80. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/padm.12352
Taylor, Frederick W. (1911). Principles of scientific management. Norwood, MA: Plimpton Press.
Tummers, L., & Knies, E. (2013). Leadership and meaningful work in the public
Sector. Public Administration Review, 73(6), 859-868. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/42003134
36
Van Wart, M. (2013). Lessons from leadership theory and the contemporary challenges of leaders. Public Administration Review, 73(4), 553-565. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/42003076
West, J. P., & Berman, E. M. (2011, Spring). The impact of management work habits on
public sector performance: a study of local government managers. Public Personnel Management, 40(1), 63+. http://link.galegroup.com.libproxy.csun.edu/apps/doc/A269776286/ITOF?u=csunorthridge&sid=ITOF&xid=20ff2f47
Yang, K., & Kassekert, A. (2010). Linking management reform with employee job
satisfaction: evidence from federal agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: J-PART, 20(2), 413-436. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/40732517