Research Method - Identify Research Factors 2013


Published on

Research Method - Identify Research Factors 2013

Published in: Education, Technology, Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Research Method - Identify Research Factors 2013

  1. 1. Research Method Investigating the Determinants of Perceived Procedural Fairness in Performance Evaluation 1. Introduction Relatively little research has been conducted on the factors which affect perceived procedural fairness; and their results are inconclusive. The objective of this paper is to investigate the main determinants of perceived procedural fairness. 2. Research Approach: Quantitative, questionnairewas distributed to three companies, and qualitative method of interview was also conducted because some variables were measured using a single item, the interview was conducted to compensate this. Overall the research is a mixed method approach 3. Research Design: Cross Sectional design, the approached three major companies in the same time period and collected data. 4. Population: The organizations were approached to participate in the study because they were leading companies in their sector that had been operating PMERS for some time with varying degree of satisfaction. 5. Sampling Technique: Purposive Sampling, for the purpose of filling in the questionnaire, purposive sampling was employed. The principle in this type of sampling is to get all possible cases that fit particular criteria (Neuman, 2003). The criteria to be included as the samples are: 1) Managers have been working for the organizations for more than one year; 2) They have been evaluated by their superiors; and 1|Page
  2. 2. Research Method Investigating the Determinants of Perceived Procedural Fairness in Performance Evaluation 3) They have received the performance evaluation feedback. These criteria are to ensure that the samples are valid. 6. Sample Size: The distribution of the survey instruments is as follows: 102 to company 1, 99 to the company 2, and 95 to company 3. Of 296 questionnaires distributed, 174 were returned, 55 from company 1, 52 from company 2, and 67 from company 3. Total response rate of 59% was achieved. 7. Pilot Study: To increase the validity of the measures and to be more comparable with the previous studies, all measures were taken from previous literature. All the instruments were pilottested prior to the distribution to the respondents, on executive MBA students of a UK University. 8. Measurement of Variables Used: The measurements of the variables in this study are done separately using two different measurement systems. The dependent variable of the study procedural fairness was measured using a four-item instrument developed by McFarlin and Sweeney (1992).The independent variables are participation in target setting, the transparency of the goalattainment-reward link and the goal specifies. These independent variables were measured using seven-point Likert type scale. 9. A survey approach The researcher collected data via questionnaires and complimented the limitations of his questionnaire through a brief interview with selected managers. 2|Page
  3. 3. Research Method Investigating the Determinants of Perceived Procedural Fairness in Performance Evaluation 10. Data collection technique Working closely with managers from the three organizations, a preliminary notification was circulated encouraging managers to participate in the survey. After obtaining senior management permit to conduct the independent research study the survey instrument was distributed to potential respondents, together with the assurance of confidentiality. Reminders were sent one, three and seven weeks after the original mailing. The survey package and reminder letters were sent via e-mail. Respondentscould return the completed questionnaires electronically by e-mail or send a hard copy version by post. 11. Reliability and validity of the variables used The model is then tested using a PLS regression approach. The results of the PLS approach are broadly consistent with the results of the OLS approach. Procedural fairness is significantly affected by participation in target setting, goal-attainment reward link, and goal specificity. On the other hand, procedural fairness is not affected by the type of performance measure (either financial or nonfinancial measures) used to evaluate performance. 12. Response Rate: Total response rate of 59% was achieved.After a careful examination there was 9 responses, 1 from company 1, 2 from company 2, and 6 from company 3 were not usable, yielding a total of 165 usable responses, 56%. 13. Analysis Technique: To test the hypotheses, data were analyzed using both multiple regressions and PLS. prior to the main analysis, ANOVA tests between groups were performed to see whether there are and differences among sub-samples. It was found that variability of variance between 3|Page
  4. 4. Research Method Investigating the Determinants of Perceived Procedural Fairness in Performance Evaluation the groups (i.e.Organizations) for procedural fairness, participation, transparency of goal attainment- reward link and goal specificity is significant. Therefore in running regression we controlled the organization effect.(Sholihin & Pike, 2013) 14. Conclusion and Recommendation The study contributes to the literature of procedural fairness in the context of PMERS by providing empirical evidence on the factors which influenced perceived procedural fairness. Article Reviewed: Sholihin, M., & Pike, R. (2013). Investigating the Determinants of Perceived Procedural Fairness in Performance Evaluation. Journal of Applied Management Accounting Research, 11(1), 29–42. 4|Page