M.PHIL THESIS FINAL PRESENTATION

  • Published on
    10-Nov-2014

  • View
    273

  • Download
    3

DESCRIPTION

Management Styles and Employee Performance A Case study of public Sector Company Sui Southern Gas Company (SSGC)

Transcript

  • 1. Presented by: Masroor Ali Soomro 8532 Supervisor: Dr. Siraj Jamal Siddiqui Management Styles and Employee Performance A Case study of public Sector Company Sui Southern Gas Company (SSGC) SSGC M.Phil Research Thesis
  • 2. Objective of the Study Case Description Problem Statement Variables Under Observation Research Frame Work Research Overview Research Hypotheses Research Methods Results Analysis & Interpretation Scope & Future Research Conclusion & Limitations
  • 3. SSGC There were four main objectives of this research study: 1. To find out relationship between management and the employees and To find out the level of trust between them and how it effects employee performance? 2. To find out through which management styles employees are governed. 3. To find out, Is their any culture exists inside the organization and does it have any impact on employee performance? 4. And Find Out difference Between Employee Perceived Performance and HRIS Employee Performance Record, How does this difference is used as means of retributive justice.
  • 4. Company management believes To serve consumers efficiently and effectively and to raise good gains, it has to employ people from diverse backgrounds and to keep and manage such a group of People; Company has to employ various different management styles. Company management claims to have culture which is a blend of management styles but at the core Autocratic , and MBWA, management styles have significant impact on employees performance so the problem statement that we established was: To examine this claim of the company and to study the relationship between Management Styles, Culture and Employee Performance in a Public sector company. SSGC
  • 5. Independent variables Autocratic or Authoritarian Management by Walking Around (MBWA) Intervening variable Culture- Human Resource Department HRIS Employees Performance Records Dependent variable Employee Perceived Performance (Perceived by Employees) SSGC
  • 6. H1: There is SIGNIFICANT relationship between Autocratic management style and employee Performance H2: There is SIGNIFICANT relationship between MBWA style and employee Performance H3: There is SIGNIFICANT impact of culture on employee Performance H4: There is SIGNIFICANT difference between Employee Perceived Performance and HRIS-employee Performance Record SSGC
  • 7. SSGC
  • 8. Marcoulides, George A. & Heck, Ronald H. (1993), Organizational Culture and Performance: Proposing and Testing a Model. Organizational Science, 4, 2, 209-225. Page 215 Direct Variables In-direct Variables SSGC
  • 9. Determination of EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE COMPARATIVE EVLUATION OF BOTH THE PERFORMANCEMANAGEMENT BY WALK AROUND ACTUAL PERFORMANCE AUTOCRATIC OR AUTHORITARIAN EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE (PRECIEVED BY EMPLOYEE) MANAGEMENT STYLES HRIS-RECORD of Performance MANAGEMENT STYLES Independent Variable: Autocratic Management Style Management By walk- Around/About Dependent Variable: Employee Performance Intervening Variable: Culture- Human Resource Department MAINTAINING ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INTERVENING DEPARTMENT BETWEENMANAGEMENT AND EMPLOYEES Exogenous (Direct) Variables Endogenous (In-direct) Variables SSGC
  • 10. METHOD OF DATA COLLECTION Study is based upon the analysis of three types of data sources available for data collection i.e. 1. Primary data, which was self monitored and administered survey technique. Procedure was based upon four weeks of official visits of the Head office of SSGC and its regional offices (SITE) and their owne Gas training institute-GTI. 2. Than comes Secondary data from Human Resource Management information system - HRIS departments record of employees performance. 3. Previously published research paper related to the topic SSGC
  • 11. SAMPLING TECHNIQUE As far as the sampling techniques were concerned, a convenient sampling was employed since we were limited with the number of respondents by the HR department of organization. SSGC IF an Executive employee is paid= Rs.800/hour If you take half an Hour get Questionnaire filled it would cost=Rs. 800/2=Rs.400 If you take a sample of 300 respondents= Rs.400x300respondents=Rs.120000 Why should a company spend Rs.120000 on you?
  • 12. THE SAMPLE The size of the sample was 200 respondents that were interviewed and 158 respondents were selected as sample for questionnaires to be filled. Besides this another 158 employee performance records were includes in to the sample, which helped in making a comparative analysis between variables this makes a total of 316. SSGC
  • 13. SSGC Grades Positions X Deputy Managing Director IX Senior General Manager VIII General Manager VII Deputy General Manager/Chief Medical Officer VI Chief Engineer/Chief Manager / Chief Medical Officer V Deputy Chief Engineer/Deputy Chief Manager / Secretary IV Senior Engineer / Manager / Senior Medical Officer / Executive Assist / Secretary III Engineer / Deputy Manager / Medical Officer / Secretary II Assist. Engineer / Assist. Manager / Assist. Medical Officer / Secretary . I Junior Engineer / Junior Executive / Junior Medical Officer / Secretary
  • 14. INSTRUMENT FOR DATA COLLECTION Questionnaire was designed and divided in to four parts: Part 1 & 2 questioned about independent variables i-e management styles Part 3 on intervening variable organizational culture set by Human Resource department and Part 4 which was purely based on the their performance appraisal to access employee performance SSGC
  • 15. Validity and Reliability test After collecting data its reliability and validity was measured and it was made sure that data will fulfill the requirements of this research study and will help researcher to reach at some conclusion and attain designed objective of this study. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha N of Items .680 8 The above table indicates that the reliability of the data collected from SSGC Employees , 68% responses are reliable from the sample. SSGC
  • 16. To access the model empirically two of the statistical techniques were employed named: 1. Multiple Linear Regression (MLR) and 2. Paired Sample T-test. SSGC
  • 17. Critical Analysis Evaluation SSGC
  • 18. Model Summaryb Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 .307a .094 .074 3.443 a. Predictors: (Constant), culture, Walkaround, Autocratic b. Dependent Variable: Sum of All (Employee Perceived Performance) SSGC
  • 19. ANOVAb Model Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig. 1 Regression 166.169 3 55.390 4.674 .004a Residual 1599.961 135 11.852 Total 1766.129 138 a. Predictors: (Constant), Culture (HR-int.), MBWA, Autocratic Mgt. Styles b. Dependent Variable: Sum of All (Employee Perceived Performance) SSGC
  • 20. Coefficientsa Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig.B Std. Error Beta 1 (Constant) 36.712 2.019 18.180 .000 Autocratic .493 .186 .310 2.651 .009 Walkaround .095 .113 .091 .844 .400 Culture -.059 .062 -.109 -.951 .343 a. Dependent Variable: Sum of All(Employee Perceived Performance) SSGC
  • 21. Paired Samples Statistics Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean Pair 1 EPP 42.97 152 3.633 .295 HRIS Employee Performance Record 32.8553 152 4.42698 .35908 SSGC
  • 22. Paired Samples Test Paired Differences t df Sig. (2- tailed)Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper Pair 1 Sum of All - HRIS Employee Performance Record 10.11184 6.12864 .49710 9.12968 11.09401 20.342 151 .000 SSGC
  • 23. Hypotheses Status Sig. Values H1: There is SIGNIFICANT relationship between Autocratic management style and employee Performance Accepted 0.009 H2: There is SIGNIFICANT relationship between MBWA style and employee Performance Rejected 0.400 H3:There is SIGNIFICANT impact of culture on employee Performance Rejected 0.343 H4:There is SIGNIFICANT difference between Employee Perceived Performance and HRIS-employee Performance Record Accepted 0.000 SSGC
  • 24. Final statistical results revealed that only autocratic management style do affects the employees performance while MBWA another management style practiced at SSGC has no significant impact over employee performance and so is the case with HR (the intervening variable to create a Culture) again has no influence on Employee Performance. Hence it could be said, employee performance at SSGC is independent of any management style, culture or any other motivational factors, its because there are many employees that are highly motivated and satisfied and at the same time there are many employees that highly de-motivated and dissatisfied, there is no place for any neutrality in between. SSGC
  • 25. Employee performance, management styles are no doubt strongly correlated as the previous researches have shown and have proved by Sharkie (2009), Beil-Hildebrand (2006), Van-fleet & Griffin (2006), Poon, Evangelista, & Albaum (2005), Brookfield (2000), Tixier (1994), Marcoulides & Heck (1993) and Morris & Pavett (1992). But in the organization like Sui Southern Gas Company in which there are all the factors of a dysfunctional organization such as: Elitism, Paranoia, Hypocrisy, Employee Anger, frustration, Retributive justice, Nepotism and Cronyism (Special favoritism), political interference, corruption all these factors eventually leads to lack of trust between management and employees which a have negative impact on employee performance. SSGC
  • 26. SSGC
  • 27. Employees at SSGC have job security but they dont have trust on management. They have high salaries and compensation but they are not motivated, They have excellent parks and benefits but they have no job loyalty, They have very well integrated IT communication system but there is no communication or information sharing, They daily come to work but they dont like see their face, Their departmental heads changes every five to six months because of political intervention, they have a very good training department for employees but there are no significant results or effect on employee performance And each statement is followed by a big WHY??? These questions remains still un- answered that needs to be answered these mysteries still remains unrevealed. SSGC
  • 28. SSGC That would BE All