Performance management and diversity in higher education: an introduction

Exploring Academics’ Performance Management Experiences at a University of Technology in South Africa

“…Furthermore, Seyama and Smith (2015) assert that first-hand evidence out of South African research indicates that academics are fearful of and oppose the idea of PMS, viewing it as a corporate tool unsuitable in the context of higher education, which is structured to generate knowledge, not profit. Corroborating these views, Melo and Figueiredo (2020) argue that it is not so much about employee participation in the goal-setting exercise, rather, HEIs have become fixated on PMS due to rankings, attempts to create national centres of excellence based on exceptional performance and performance funding, mostly in association with research performance.…”

“…Such actions by the institution's various departments could lay a sturdy foundation for improved performance (Gupta and Kumar, 2012). Melo and Figueiredo (2020), as well as Maimela and Samuel (2016), contend that, although a substantial number of researchers argue that performance information contributes to organisations being more strategic and efficient, enabling service users to hold them more accountable, a growing body of the literature illuminates potential design and implementation problems. These problems are highlighted in the goal-setting theory, as: (i) the organisational goals could conflict with managerial goals; if such a conflict exists, it is assumed that it will be detrimental to performance and could cause unsuited action drift (Jenega, 2022); (ii) hard and complicated goals provoke riskier behaviour; (iii) if employees do not have skills and competencies required to perform the set goals, goal setting could fail, leading to crippling of performance; (iv) there is no proof to confirm that goal setting enhances job satisfaction (Jenega, 2022).…”

“…Studies conducted on PM include those by Melo and Figueiredo (2020) who argue that PM systems in public service organisations, including higher education, are poorly applied due to politics, limited resources, institutional differences, organisational capacity and the nature of public goods and services that create several complications. These complications, according to Melo and Figueiredo, may make implementing PM systems ineffective or harmful for public organisations.…”

“…In their study on PM, Maimela and Samuel (2016) found that although academics were happy with the execution of the PMS by the managers, performance bonuses payment was not contemplated as adequately motivating, thus requiring a pragmatic appraisal by management. Thus, Melo and Figueiredo (2020) offer that PM systems may introduce perverse incentives, induce gaming and divert attention from unmeasured, yet important organisational outputs or outcomes, such as contributions to social outcomes, considering the complex and multi-mission nature of higher education institutions (HEIs). However, a study on PM by Irwan et al (2020) found that an individual's performance becomes a function of ability and motivation.…”

Steering the Direction of Research through Organizational Identity Formation

“…However, recent studies focusing on less market-centered research systems have nuanced this image (Melo & Figueiredo 2020). Studies show that the impact on collegiality is both more complex and mediated by academic units' reputation in French universities (Mignot-Gérard 2022), and that the enactment of organizational control regimes is mediated by the national environments of European universities (Bleiklie et al 2015).…”