Feasibility of New Performance Management System Adoption in Nigeria.

Feasibility of New Performance Management System Adoption in Nigeria.

Mohammad Rasheed Aliyu and Ahmed Musa Ciroma
Department of Business Administration and Management
Abubakar Tatari Ali Polytechnic, Bauchi, Bauchi State Nigeria

ABSTRACT

Performance management system PMS is an approach of managing performance and development throughout the year as against to annual or bi-annual basis. Recently the Nigerian government proposes to introduce the PMS as part of an effort to increase efficiency in service delivery. However, given that its employees were quite conversant with the old traditional appraisal system this study assess the feasibility of PMS adoption among its employees. A cross sectional survey of 162 respondents among both uniform and non-uniform staff of the federal government using an adapted version of UTUAT models was conducted. After performing logistic regressions, result indicated that majority 71.1% were willing to adopt the PMS whenever is introduced by the government. Three constructs of demographics of respondents, performance expectancy and effort expectancy positively influences the adoption of PMS. However, social influence as well as facility constructs were not significant predictors of behavioral intention to adopt PMS. It was recommended that government should look for ways to enhance and improve PMS benefits and the learning process of the proposed PMS. It should also look at the issues of work place relationship among employees and promote social interaction as it may be lacking in the work place. More so, as earlier stated government should equally look at the needed facility required before introducing the proposed system even when employees did not percept it as something.

Keywords: performance, management, system, appraisal, traditional

INTRODUCTION

Across the globe, enhancing employee productivity through performance management has become very difficult and challenging process. Historically, several attempts were made to evaluate and improve employee performance using variety approaches. Koozt (1971) wrote that in the years 221-265 AD the WEI dynasty in china employed some sort of an imperial rater to evaluate the performance of his official family. Centuries later King Ignatius Loyola 1491-1556 established an evaluation system were members of the Society of Jesus were formally appraised and rated. While the motive behind theses evaluations were not explicitly drawn, however, as societies progressed, a result oriented approach to performance management came in to effect in the eighteenth and nineteenth centauries. Furham (2004) wrote that evidence showing armies across the United States of America and Britain were recognized implementing some sort of performance management. He, further showed that as of 1950s and 1960 two third of companies in the USA and Europe had some form of performance appraisal system in place. This concept of performance management also term traditional performance management[TPM] was limited only at determining an employee wages, salary and even in most cases organizations use it to shape the behavior of their employees to achieve specific targets or goals. Traditional performance management is an appraisal process that revolves annually usually at the end of the year. It is an appraisal process were managers are expected to show how employees was able to meet their set out objectives and what objectives they may pursue in the following years. It also expect managers to identify how effective employees’ were at showing organizational competencies or values, what their career focus are and what their personal development plan should be in a single meeting usually at the end of the year. Traditional performance management [TPM] has been criticized by experts. For instance, TPM is associated with setting rigid goals annually which may not be updated by time annual appraisal is to be conducted; feedback on what has been achieved over the year is usually saved against annual appraisal meeting (Stuart, 2018).TPM was also criticized for been inefficient in improving and measuring employee’s performance and their contribution to business. So, given these hurdles and the fact that modern organizations are mostly technologically driven, attention has now shifted to new continue performance management systems [PMS]. PMS is an approach of managing performance and development throughout the year as against to annual or bi-annual basis (Stuart, 2018).

The “system relies on a combination of technologies and methodologies to ensure people across the organization are aligned with- and contributing to – the strategic objectives of the business” (sap.com, 2022) It is a formal performance management process where managers and employees sit face to face and discuss about expectations, goals, and career progress, including how an individual’s work aligns with the organization’s overall vision. It is a process whereby performance management turns every interaction between manager and employee in to an occasion to learn because is not based on traditional paradigm of year- end review (Carla, 2022). Effective performance management can best be achieve when certain universally accepted elements are observed. For instance, Carla (2022) revealed that “ aligning employee’s activities with the company’s mission and goals; developing specific job- performance outcomes; creating measurable performance – based expectations; defining job- development plan and “meeting regularly ie instead of waiting for an annual appraisal, managers and employees should engage actively year- round to evaluate progress”. New continue performance management system has provided substantial benefits where it was effectively implemented by companies or government agencies. In 2018, companies that manage via PMS generated about 30% higher returns on investment and are twice as likely to beat their competitors compared to companies that use annual traditional performance management. There was about 30% drop in voluntary staff turnover when PMS was introduce by companies.

A remarkable 95% of managers were dissatisfied with the TPM as the approach isn’t filling managers with confidence thus preferred to use PMS (Stuart, 2018). These straits have prompted both public and private organizations to opt in for the new PMS. Currently, 75% of organizations across the globe have move to continue performance management system to help adapt, improve and drive performance rather than evaluating the process (Natalie, 2022). Over 6% of fortune 500 companies have abandon the traditional performance management in favor of PMS according to (Engagedly, 2022). While PMS benefits were astonishing, however, implementing PMS requires every organizations to observed and address some very key important issues. For instant, Stuart (2018) suggested that organizations contemplating the PMS system should first and famous get their people on board ie management team and employees need to buy-into the benefits and understand why the organization is making the transition. Secondly, provide the right training i.e. since PMS involves a shift in thinking and behavior therefore management team will need to be train to know and understand how to conduct the process. Thirdly, create a dynamic goal setting i.e. SMART objectives approach need to be modify from a 12 month objectives to employees near term and aligned it to the overall organization objectives. Fourthly, provide development opportunity i.e. employees should understand how PMS will assist them fulfil personal development objectives and their career development. Finally, conduct regular reviews of your PMS i.e. continue to monitor the adoption levels and address concern where reason for low adoption was identify. While these issues are mostly theoretical, however, in developing countries, implementing PMS requires organizations to tackle even more difficult practical issues. For instant, Litetukeni, (2018) while investigating the Challenges in the implementation of performance management system in the ministry of urban and rural development in Namibia discovered that lack of clear goal setting, poor alignment of personal objectives with organizational goals, lack of communication and strong leadership, lack of training and personal development, lack of change management initiatives, and lack of exceptional performance reward and performance feedback were some important critical issue that need attention.

Recently, the Nigerian government announces its intention to introduce PMS in federal government’s owned ministries, departments and agencies before March 2023. The decision was informed by the government desire for enhance service delivery as well as holding public office holders accountable and detecting faults in the delivery of service (Olawale, 2022). However, implementing a new system where history of programs implementation failure was prevalent partly due to lack or inappropriate feasibility study to determine both employees and organizational readiness and the capacity of stakeholder’s ability to handle proposed programs requires serious attention. Favor, (2022) reported that 60% of most programs or projects embarked by the federal government fail because of lack of communication between stakeholders and defective planning. More so, it was further observed that PMS project fail to be implemented due to  lack of technical knowledge and awareness of clear goal setting, aligning personal objectives with organizational goals, communication, training and personal development, change management initiatives, and rewarding exceptional performance and performance feedback methods (Kaplan &Norton,1995). (Bryson, 2018) also suggested that lack of stakeholders’ involvement in the planning of PMS which is expected to stimulate adoption and ownership and better performance towards goal attainment can further erode the chances of success of a given program or project. Above all, lack of  applicable appropriate theoretical underpinning particularly theories related to the acceptance of new system and technology can affect the selection of variables most likely to predict respondents’ acceptance of the new system in question. Therefore, examining factors such as employees performance expectancy ie perceive usefulness of the PMS; effort expectancy ie ease associated with the use of the system; social influence ie the perception that important others believe employee should use the new system and facilitating conditions ie employees’ believes that an organization’s and technical structure exists to support the use of the system can shed light on the feasibility of PMS.

Objective of the study:

The main objective of the study is to assess the feasibility of new continues performance management system adoption in Nigeria. Specifically it aims at

1. Determine the effect of employees’ socio demographics on PMS adoption in public organizations.
2. Determine the extent to which performance expectancy or perceive usefulness of PMS can affect employees’ intention to adopt PMS.
3. Determine the extent to which ease associated with the use of the system can affect the adoption of PMS.
4. Determine the extent to which important others believe employee should use the new system can affect the adoption of PMS.
5. Determine the extent to which organization’s and technical structure exists to support the use of the system can affect the adoption of PMS.

The following hypotheses were used to assess the objectives.

H₁ Employees’ socio demographics do not significantly affect PMS adoption in public organizations

H₂. Perceive usefulness of PMS does not significantly affect employees’ adoption of PMS.

H₃. Ease associated with the use of the PMS system does significantly affect employees’ adoption of PMS.

H₄. Important others’ believe that employee should use the new system does not significantly affect employees’ adoption of PMS.

H₅. Existence of organization’s and technical structure to support the use of the system does not significantly affect employees’ of PMS.

Scope of the study.

The focus of this study are federal government employees serving in Bauchi state Nigeria. Both uniform and non-uniform staff were selected. Their selection was based on the recent proclamation by the head of the federal civil service to introduce PMS among its staff. The variables selected to be tested in the hypotheses were anchored by unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (Davit & Savvas, 2021). This study has added important information to the adoption of PMS in public sector organization.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Concept of performance management system.

The idea of when and how PMS emerged cannot precisely be settled. Management historians have contributed a variety of antecedent to its evolution. Kootz (1971) and Furnham (2004) have all shared their views to its evolutionary process. While it history was in contention so is it definition. Several definitions of the concept were proposed, (hrhelpboard.com, 2022). However the definition that seem to serve the purpose of this work was captured by hr.berkeley.edu (2022). PMS was defined as an ongoing process of communication between a supervisor and employee that occurs throughout the year, in support of accomplishing the strategic objectives of organization. The communication process includes clarifying expectations, setting objectives, identifying goals, providing feedback, and reviewing result. Armstrong (2017) while contrasting the new PMS and the traditional management state that PMS can be seen as the provision of a holistic ongoing advances to the management of performance. PMS emphasis was on a continually improving organizational performance which can best be achieve through improved individual employee performance.

How new performance management works.

Performance management works in a multistage process manner. Valamis, (2022) elaborated the following. Planning stage – in this human resource and management are expected to sit and define the job required to be done. It includes a comprehensive job description, long and short- term goals, identify key objectives and develop a clear metric for how those objectives and goals will be assessed. Once management has completed this stage, managers are expected to sit face to face with employees and discuss the skills, competencies required to assist in achieving organizational goals. This has to be approved by both of them. The second step of the process is coaching i.e. organizing meeting at regular basis usually monthly which should focus on solution and coaching opportunities, soliciting feedback on both side, revisiting objectives to see if adjustments should be made as necessary. This step should also review the overall performance of the employee to see how well the process itself worked, and may include the reward of exceptional performance. The third step deals with what is called reviewing stage. Here, monthly check – in record are assess to help employee with problem – solving, adjust goals and other future looking tasks. The stage also review performance management process to examine how well the performance management worked in terms of whether organizational objectives were met, challenges faced by employees, training was instrumental in helping employees perform better. It also seek to examine the role of management feedback. This stage equally review the overall goals completion in terms of whether employee have reach their goals and the stage ends by seeking actionable feedback from management and employee. The final stage tagged the ‘ACTION’ stage is mainly concern with the aspects related to reward and recognition. Employees are presented by either monetary or non-monetary reward as motivation. It finally ends with setting a stage for the next performance management cycle utilizing thoughts and feedback earlier collected.

New performance management system [PMS] VS traditional performance appraisal/ management.

Most organizations opted for PMS because the traditional appraisal model did not promote efficiency, productivity and it has substantial short comings. Stuart (2018), observed that TPM doesn’t enjoy a glowing reputation ie is inefficient in improving and measuring employee performance. It revolves around annual appraisal where managers find it extremely difficult to appraise employee at only one meeting. In contrast, PMS enables mangers to appraise employee periodically over time during check in- meetings. Similarly, TPM was often associated with rigid goals, set annually which most a times becomes irrelevant by the time the appraisal comes around. In contrast, PMS goals are set with a near term focus, often quarterly, ensuring they stay relevant to the shifting priorities of the organization. Under TPM model, feedback is typically saved up for the appraisal meeting, thus impacting very little as too much time has passed between the event and the feedback being given. PMS involves the exchange of frequent feedback ie something that employees today admire and crave for.

Theoretical framework.

The theoretical model seem appropriate for this study was unified theory of acceptance and usage of technology/system [UTAUT]. This theory integrated eight models and theories including social cognitive theory[SCT], model of PC utilization[MPCU], theory of reason action [TRA], innovation diffusion theory[IDT], theory of planned behavior[TPB], motivation model [MM], and combine technology acceptance model [TMA] and theory of planned behavior[TPB] to predict new technology/system adoption, acceptance, and usage (Venkatesh, Morris, Davis & Davis 2003). The theory suggests that, use of technology/system was determine by behavioral intention and four key constructs were instrumental in affecting the likelihood of adopting a new system/technology in either voluntary or mandatory situations. The constructs were performance expectancy [PE] define as ‘the degree to which an individual believes that using the system will help him or her to attain gains in job performance (Venkatesh et al, 2003). Previous studies have shown that PE was strong predictor of use intention (Venkatesh, Thong & Xu, 2016). The next construct was effort expectancy [EE], define as the degree of ease of use of the system. The third construct was social influence [SI] define as the degree to which an individual perceives that important others believe he or she should use the new system. SI has been found to strongly influence the use of a system particularly in mandatory setting where individuals are compel to use the system due to compliance requirement (Venkatesh et al , 2003). Lastly, the construct of facilitating conditions [FC] which was define as the degree to which an individual believes that an organization’s and technical infrastructure exist to support the use of the system. UTAUT has contributed empirical evidence to predict system and technology acceptance in literature. It further illustrated that UTAUT proposed constructs have accounted for about 70% in the variance in use intention (Venkatesh, et al, 2003).

Fig.1 Theoretical and conceptual model of the study. PE performance expectancy, EE effort expectancy, SI social influence FC facilitating condition and BI behavior intention.

Empirical review

Previous studies examining pre implementation of new performance management system or traditional performance management were quite rare. Most studies were conducted at the post implementation stages of PMS/TPM and results were mixed. For instance, in a study examining whether PMS has improve performance in organization, Elaine (2004), reported that one recent study observed that only three out of ten workers agree their company’s PMS helps improve performance, less than 40 percent also agree PMS established clear goals, generated honest feedback or used technology to streamline the process. More so, in line with her finding Zhang, (2012) also revealed that PMS was not found to improve performance among employees. Despite this however, Morris & Jane (2022) still believes that PMS was instrumental in cascading organizational mission, vision and objectives. Evidence from recent adoption rate also show that PMS was a critical success factor in achieving organizational goals. For instance, we discovered that Baird, Schoch &Chen (2012) indicated that 13% of local governments in Australia adopted Balance Score Card which is one subset of PMS.  Assish (2018) further reported that a higher adoption rate were similarly found by Rigby & Bilodeau (2009) 53%, Chung, Gibbons & Schoch (2006) 31%, Tung, Baird & Schoch (2011) 33%, and Debusk (2008) 35% in private organizations.

Performance expectancy.

The first construct proposed by UTAUT model was performance expectancy. This construct proposes the degree to which an individual believes that using the system will help him or her to attain gains in job performance (Venkatesh, Morris, Davis & Davis (2003). Several studies have looked in to the influence of performance expectancy on behavioral intention [BI]. Kleopatra & Konstantinos (2021) revealed that performance expectancy PE among other variables was a significant predictor of teacher’s intention to adopt mobile internet system in Greece. Also, Shrafat & Rizwan (2018) discovered that PE influences significantly BI among users of mobile commerce in Pakistan. Mansour, Samir, Bilal & Feker (2016) while studying the influence of PE on e- government adoption in Oman reported that PE significantly influences their respondents’ behavioral intention to the system. While studies exploring the influence PE on PMS was quite rare particularly in Nigeria however, we discovered that PE has significant influence on other issues as well. Oladipupo & Ajayi (2022) revealed that PE was significantly instrumental in predicting E- commerce adoption in Nigeria.

Effort expectancy [EE]

The second construct proposed by UTAUT was effort expectancy theory i.e. the degree of ease of use of the system or technology. Researches about EE influence on system adoption was done in combination with other constructs of the model. For instance, Mansour, Samir, Bilal & Feker (2016) and Shrafat & Rizwan (2018) have shown that effort expectancy [EE] was significantly influential in predicting BI in their studies. More so, in line with these finding we similarly observed that Blessing & Chinwe (2020) have reported that a highly positive significant relationship exist between EE and behavioral intention BI to adopt open access scholarly publishing among lecturers of five state universities in South Eastern Nigeria. A similar finding was also reported in Iran (Kamal, 2012).

Social influence [SI]                         

Venkatesh, Morris, Davis & Davis (2003) used constructs of subjective norms such as planned behavior theory, technology acceptance theory, rational action theory, decomposed planned behavior theory, social factor theory and innovation diffusion theory in the formulation of the construct. Social influence mean the degree to which to individuals perceives that others people are important to him/her in making the use of the new system. Researches exploring the influence of SI on a new system adoption were numerous. Ahmet & Mustafa (2020) while investigating the effect of UTUAT constructs on lecturers’ adoption of electronic data management system [EDMS] discovered that SI positively and significantly influences EDMS adoption. More so, Majhural, Ali, & Dede (2013) also show that SI was strong determinant of individual SMEs owners to adopt social networks.

Facilitating conditions [FC]

This construct entails the degree to which an individual believes that an organization’s and technical infrastructure exist to support the use of the system. Most studies pertaining to this construct revolve around organizational resources. It seek to explore whether resources are available or adequate to facilitate the actual use of a system. Muneer (2021) discovered that FC was strongly instrumental in e-learning system adoption among undergraduate students in developing countries. Raza,Qazi, Khan & Salam (2021) and Boontarig, Chutimaskul, chongsuphajaisiddhi & Papasratorn (2012) reported FC’s influence on system adoption in their studies.

Behavior intention BI

The concept of behavioral intention has been interpreted differently. Ajzen (1985), define BI as a person‘s perceived likelihood or subjective probability that he/she will engage in a given behavior. This definition was later criticized by Warshow, Bagozzi & Davis (1985) where they describe that the word intention was not meant to reflect every day usage of the word. So, they proposed that BI should be seen as the degree to which a person has formulated conscious plans to perform or not perform some specified future behavior.thus, given such description of BI it can mesaered as both as a dicotonous and ordinal scale variable (Tomczyk et al 2020) Several scholars have found that BI was always measured as an outcome variable and in most of these studies BI was revealed to be an important proximal determinant of behavior and its best predictor, (Roxana, Kim, Jiajie, Hsu & John, 2021).

METHODOLOGY

This study was a cross sectional quantitative survey research conducted in Bauchi, Bauchi state Nigeria. Entire federal employees working in the state numbering 6206 were the participating population. Sample size was determined based on Hair, Hult, Ringle & Sarstedt (2014) suggestion for using G* power analyses derived from Cohen (1992). Hence, given researcher’s intention  to detect minimum R² value of 0.10 at 5% level of significance assuming a statistical power of 80% and given the maximum number of arrows pointing at a construct in the partial least square PLS path model is 5, the sample size was arrived at 147. However, an attrition rate of 10% was added to take care of nonresponse and incomplete questionnaires, thus the sample size was finally arrived at 162 respondents. Sample was shared among the uniform paramilitary and non-uniform employees proportionally using the p/P*n formula. Since there was no reported variability observed among different employees’ cadre with respect to the PMS adoption in recent studies, therefore, both recruitment of respondents as well as face to face distribution of questionnaires was done consecutively.

 The research instrument was questionnaire which consisted of two parts. The first part contain questions pertaining to respondents demographic characteristics. The second section had 14 indicators measuring the latent variables mentioned in figure 1 below. All indicators were measured on five point likert scale of strongly agree, agree, neutral, strong disagree and disagree. The dependent variable which measures the feasibility of the behavioral intention to adopt PMS considering PE, EE, SI and FC is YES. YES is equal to 1 if respondent would adopt the PMS and 0 otherwise. Since the dependent variable is discrete, the ordinary least squares regression can be used to fit a linear probability (LP) model. However, the linear probability model is heteroskedastic and may predict probability values beyond the (0, 1) range, the logistic regression model is used to estimate the factors which influence PMS adoption (Geene, 1997). Categorical variables were summarized as frequencies and percentages while numerical variables with known normal distribution were summarized as mean and standard deviation. Constructs’ reliability were checked via the traditional cronbach’s alpha a value. The variables and construct considered relevant are performance expectancy PE, effort expectancy EE, social influence SI and facilitating conditions FC independent exogenous construct measured by indicators expected to have positive relationship with Behavior intention BI. The constructs are conceptualized as first order constructs. On the basis of previous research it was discovered that PE, EE, SI and FC will have a significant relationship with BI Ahmet, & Mustafa, (2020) and Boontarig, Chutimaskul, Chongsuphajaisiddhi, & Papasratorn, (2012).

RESULT

A total of 170 questionnaires were distributed, 164 were retrieved yielding a response rate of 96.5%. Out of the 164 questionnaires retrieved 159 were deem for analysis. Table 1 shows the distribution of respondents according to demographic characteristics. More than half of the respondent were males (57.9%). 62.3% were respondents with tertiary level education, 73.6% were non-paramilitary personnel. Majority 81.1% were married couples with almost equal distribution of years of experience among less than 10 years; 20 to less than 25 years and 30 and above years (25.8%),( 23.3%)  and (22.6%) respectively. Majority (71.1%) indicated their intention to adopt the PMS whenever is introduce by the government.

Table 1. Distribution of demographic characteristics of respondents

Source: researcher’s field work 2023.

Reliability of the adapted UTAUT scale

Table 2 presents cronbach alpha reliability of the model constructs. All constructs had reliability of more than 0.600. Pallant (2001) reported that a cronbach’s alpha value above 6 is considered high reliability and an acceptable index.

Table 2

Source: researcher’s field work 2023.

Given that the outcome variable Behavioral Intention BI (whether federal government employees would adopt PMS whenever is introduced by the government) is a binary variable, logistic regression was performed to answer the earlier stated hypotheses. For each hypothesis a different block of independent variable was included.

H₁ Employees’ socio demographics do not significantly affect PMS adoption in public organizations

Table 3. Result of logistic regression for behavioral intention and respondents’ demographics

Source: Researcher’s survey 2023.

From the logistic regression result of table 3, it was observed that the regression model was statistically significant x² (df 7) = 6.608 p <0.047. The model explained 13% (Nagelkerke R²) of the variance in behavioral intention BI and correctly classified 73.6% of cases. Additional or increasing age was associated with a reduction in the likelihood of adopting PMS. Males were almost 100% more likely to adopt the PMS than females. More so, non-paramilitary personnel were 100% likely to adopt than paramilitary personnel. The result of this analysis indicates that demographic characteristics of respondent significantly effects PMS adoption thus, hypothesis one is confirm.

H₂. Perceive usefulness of PMS does not significantly affect employees’ adoption of PMS.

Table 4 Result of logistic regression for behavioral intention BI and performance expectancy

Source: researcher’s field work 2023.

 Logistic regression result of table 4 shows that the regression model was statistically significant x² (df 5) = 44.77 p > 0.005. The model explained 35% (Nagelkerke R²) of the variance in behavioral intention BI and correctly classified 81.8% of cases. All items in the construct statistically and significantly influence the likelihood of adopting PMS 100 and more times. The result show that performance expectancy or perceive usefulness of PMS significantly affect employees’ adoption of PMS thus, hypothesis two is confirm.

H₃. Ease associated with the use of the PMS system does not significantly affect employees’ adoption of PMS.

Table 5.

Source: researcher’s field work 2023.

 Result from table 4 shows that the regression model was statistically significant x² (df 5) = 12.83 p = 0.05. The model explained 11% (Nagelkerke R²) of the variance in behavioral intention BI and correctly classified 71.1% of cases. With the exception of eexptcy 1(I expect learning to work with PMS will be easy for me) all other items in the construct statistically and significantly influence the likelihood of adopting PMS. The result show that effort expectancy significantly affect employees’ adoption of PMS thus, hypothesis three is confirm.

H₄. Important others or social influence does not significantly affect employees’ adoption of PMS.

Table 6 result of regression analysis for behavioral intention and social influence

Source: researcher’s field work 2023.

Result from table 6 shows that the regression model was statistically significant x² (df 2) = 10.48 p = 0.05. The model explained 9% (Nagelkerke R²) of the variance in behavioral intention BI and correctly classified 69.8% of cases. However all the items in the construct do not statistically and significantly influence the likelihood of adopting PMS. The result show that social expectancy does not significantly affect employees’ adoption of PMS thus, the null hypothesis is accepted.

H₅. Existence of organization’s and technical structure to support the use of the system does not significantly affect employees’ of PMS.

Table 7 result of logistic regression for behavioral intention and facility condition

Source: researcher’s field work 2023.

Result from table 7 shows that the regression model was statistically significant x² (df 2) = 4.817 p > 0.05. The model explained 4% (Nagelkerke R²) of the variance in behavioral intention BI and correctly classified 71.7% of cases. However all the items in the construct do not statistically and significantly influence the likelihood of adopting PMS? The result show that facility condition does not significantly affect employees’ adoption of PMS thus, the null hypothesis is accepted.

DISCUSSION

In Nigeria, public servants are used to the traditional performance appraisal system since independence. Therefore, employees’ perception of the new performance management system is likely to have strong influence on the successful adaptation of PMS. In this study we discovered that an overwhelming number of respondents showed their behavioral intention to adopt the new system whenever is introduce by the government. Thus, the feasibility of PMS adoption in the Nigerian civil service is highly feasible. We also discovered that across respondents’ demographics all factors substantially agree to adopt the PMS. This finding was in line with result of Suha & Anne (2008) were they found using UTAUT, 60% of employees agreed to use E-government services in Kuwait. Higher percentage of behavioral intention to adopt PMS was also reported by (Assih 2018). The finding of this result further support that apathy to traditional management appraisal system is substantially prevalent among employees in the Nigerian civil service. According to gallup only 14% of employees strongly agreed that their performance appraisal review inspire them to improve their performance (Robert & Ben, 2019). This further support the assertion that TPM was not fully acknowledged even in advance economies.

 We also noticed that the empirical test of the adapted UTAUT model identified construct determining the behavioral intention to adopt PMS. For instance, the influence of performance expectancy construct (i.e. the extent to which employee believes that using the PMS system will help him/her to attained gains in job performance) on behavioral intention was statistically significant. This finding indicates that employees have realized the advantages and the benefits inherent in the use of PMS as against the TPM. This finding was in line with those observed by (Sumak & Sorgo 2016; Hoque & Sorwar, 2017; Khalilzadeh, Ozturk & Bilgihan 2017). It was also in line with the findings of Stanton & Liew (2012); Akanni & Adetimirin (2017) and Blessing & chinwe (2020) where they all revealed that performance expectancy significantly related very well with university lecturers’ behavioral intention to use open access resources.  More so with respect to effort expectancy construct and its relationship with the behavioral intention we found that out of three items presented, only one item i.e.” I expect learning to work with PMS will be easy” was not statistically significant. This may be due the fact that respondents view PMS as a new concept and employees were only hearing it for the first time through this research thus, may not fully comprehend the actual working of the new system in question. This finding was in line with work of Suha & Anne (2008) where they revealed that effort expectancy was significant in one situation but less significant in others. With respect to social influence effect on behavioral intention we found that none of the items of this construct related significantly well with the outcome variable. The finding may not be a surprise as all subjects were civil servant and may anticipate the introduction of PMS as a mandatory policy thus whether a significant other supported it or not it will still be made possible. This was one of the biases earlier identified when using UTAUT in a mandatory situations. The finding was contrary to that of Kamal (2012) where he revealed a significant positive effect of social influence on e- banking users’ behavioral intention. But it was not in line with the findings of (Carlsson, Carlsson, Hyvonen, Puhakainen & Walden 2006). Facility condition did not correlate well with behavioral intention in this study. In fact none of the items presented significantly affect BI. This was contrary to the finding of Muneer (2021) where he discovered that FC was strongly instrumental in e-learning system adoption among undergraduate students in developing countries. It was also dissimilar to the result obtained by Raza,Qazi, Khan & Salam (2021) and Boontarig, Chutimaskul, chongsuphajaisiddhi & Papasratorn (2012) where they all  reported FC’s influence on system adoption in their studies. One of the likely reason for this perception was that employees think that the PMS does not required specialized facility or they may likely think that PMS is mandatory system and that government can introduce it even when facility condition are lacking. However, government needs to be aware and assess the required facility needed to implement the new system.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This study was initially meant to assess the feasibility of new performance management system among federal civil servant. We used the UTAUT model to frame questionnaires which were distributed to both uniform and none uniform civil servant in Bauchi state Nigeria. .From the result we substantially discovered that PMS is quite feasible as over 70% of respondents were willing to adopt the system whenever is introduced by the government. However, we equally found that not all of the UTAUT construct showed significant effect on the behavioral intention to adopt. In particular social influence as well as facility condition do lend themself to BI to adopt the new system. Thus, in view of this we recommend that government should look at working relationship among employees and promote social interaction as it may be lacking in the work place. More so, as earlier stated government should equally look at the needed facility required before introducing the proposed system.

REFERENCE

1. Ahmet, A., & Mustafa, Y. (2020). Computer in human behavior reports. Available at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2020.100032
2. Ajzen, I. (1985). From intention to action: A theory of planned behavior. In: Kuhl,J. and Beckman, J., Eds., Action-control: From cognition to behaviou, Springer- Verlag, Heidelberg. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-69746-3_2
3. Akanni, O.T., & Adetimirin, A.E. (2017). Performance expectancy as a determinant of use of open access resources by lecturers in university of Ibadan, Nigeria. Int. journal of academic lib.info. Sci.5 (2)
4. Amstrong,M. (2017). Armstrong on reinventing performance management: Building a culture of continuous improvement, Kogan page publishers
5. Assish, J. (2018). Factors that influence the effectiveness of performance management system adoption in organization. Global journal of human resource management. Vol.6, No.1
6. Baird, K., Schoch, H., & Chen, Q. (2012). Performance management system effectiveness in Australian Local Government. Pacific Accounting Review, Vol. 24, No. 2
7. Blessing, N.O., & Chinwe, V.A. (2020). A critique of relationship between performance and effort expectancy of lecturer’s and their adoption of open access scholarly publishing in Nigerian universities. Library, philosophy and practice e- journal 4797. Available at https://digitalcommons.unc.edu/lipphi/4795
8. Boontarig, W., Chutimaskul, W., Chongsuphajaisiddhi, V., & Papasratorn, B. (2012). Factors influencing the thai elderly intention to use smartphone for e-health services. IEEE Symposium on Humanities, Science and Engineering research. Doi.10.1109/SHUSER.20211.6268881
9. Bryson, J.M. (2018). Strategic planning for public and nonprofit organizations: A guide to strengthening and sustaining organizational achievement. John Willey & Sons
10. Carla, T. (2022).Performance management: Definition, how it works, and examples of programs. Available at https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/performance-management.asp
11. Carlsson, C.H., Carlsson, J., Hyvonen, K., Puhakainen J., & Walden, P. (2006). Proceedings of the 39^th Hawaii international conference of system sciences
12. Cheng, M. (2019). Factors determining the behavioral intention to use mobile teaching: An application and extension of UTUAT model. Available at https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01652
13. Chung, L.H., Gibbon, P.T., & Schoch, H.P.,(2006). The management of information and managers in subsidiaries of Multinational Corporation. British journal of management, Vol. 17, No 2
14. Chin, W. W., (1998). Commentary: issues and opinion on structural equation modeling. Journal of management information system. Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. vii-xvi. https://www.jstor.org/stable/249674.
15. Davis, F.D., Bogozzi. R.P., & Warshow, P.R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical model. Management science.35, https://doi:10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982
16. Davit, M. & Savvas, P (2021). Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology: A review. In S. Papagianidis (Ed), TheoryHub Book. Available at http://open.ncl.ac.uk
17. Debusk, C. (2008). BSC Adoption boosts shareholder returns, findings from a recent study, vol. 12, No. 3
18. Elaine, D.P. (2004). Performance management: A road map for developing, implementing and evaluating performance management systems. SHRM foundation, Alexandria, VA, USA.
19. Engagedly, (2022). Why these 8 top companies redefined their performance management systems. Available at https://www.engagadly.com/8-top-companies-redefined-thier-performance-management-systems/
20. Favour, N. (2022). 60% of projects fail in Nigeria. Available https://www.vanguardngr.com/2015/08/60-projects-fail-in-nigeria
21. Fornell, C. & Bookstein, F. L. (1982). Two structural equation models: LISREL and PLS applied to consumer exit-voice theory. Journal of marketing research Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 440-452.
22. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 382-388. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800313
23. Furnham, A. (2004). Performance management systems. European Business Journal, Vol. 16, No.2.
24. Greene, W.H (1997). Econometrics analysis, 3^rd ed. Prentice Hall, USA.
25. hr.berkeley.edu (2022). Performance management: concepts and definition. Available at https://hr.berkely.edu/hr-network/central-guide
26. Hrhelpboard.com (2023). What performance management system? Available at https://www.hrhelpboard.com/performance-mabagement-system.htm
27. Jacob, C. (1992). Statistical power analysis. Journal of Current directions in psychological science. Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 98-101.
28. Kamal, G. (2012). The effect of performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence and facility conditions on acceptance of E- banking service in Iran: the moderating role of age and gender. Middle-east journal of scientific research 12 (6). https://Doi:10.5829/idosi.mejsr.2012.12,6.2536
29. Kaplan, R &Norton, D. (1995). The balance scorecard: Translating strategy in to action. Harvard Business school press, USA.
30. Kleopatra, N. & Konstantinos, L. (2021). Habit, hedonic motivation, performance expectancy and technological pedagogical knowledge affect teacher’s intention to use mobile internet. Available at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2021.100041
31. Koozt,H. (1971). Appraising managers as managers. McGraw-Hill, New York, USA
32. Litetukeni, N.S., (2018). Challenges in the implementation of performance management system in the ministry of urban and rural development in Namibia. Available at https://www.grin.com/document/464300
33. Morris, N.M., Jane, M.W. (2017). The influence of performance management system on employee performance in commercial banks in Kitui town, Kitui County, Kenya. Int. journal of humanities and social science.Vol.7 (6)
34. Mujharul,T, Ali, Q., & Dede, D. (2013). Impact of social influence on individuals’ adoption of social networks in SMEs. Journal of computer science 9 (12)
35. Muneer, M.M.A. (2021). Using the UTAUT model to understand students’ usage of e-learning system in developing countries. Edu Inf Technol 26. Available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-105735
36. Mansour, N.A, Samir, H., Bilal, C. & Fekir, S. (2016) the influence of effort and performance expectancy on employees to adopt E-government: evident from Oman. Int. review of management and marketing 6 (4)
37. Natallie, W. (2022). What is performance management system and how to choose one? Available at  https://www.quanuworkplace.com/future-of-work/
38. Oladipupo, J.K.& Ajayi, C.O (2022). Influence of performance expentancy and government regulation on electronic communication adoption in Nigeria. Int. Academic Journal of Management and marketing. Vol.7 (1)
39. Olawale, A. (2022). Federal Government to introduce performance management system in civil service before march, 2023. Available at https://www.thisdaylive.com/index.php/2022/12/16/fg-to- introduce-performance-mangement-system-civil-service-before-march/
40. Pallant;J.(2001), Spss survival manual- a step by step guide to data analysis using spss for Windows (version 10), Buckinggham Open University Press.
41. Radnor, Z. & McGuire, M., (2004). Performance management in public sector: Fact or fiction?, International journal of productivity & performance management. Vol. 53. No. 3, pp. 245-260, https://doi.org/10.1108.17410400410523783. emerald.com
42. Raza, S.A, Qazi, W., Khan, K.A.,& Salam J. (2021). Social isolation and acceptance of learning Management system in the time of COVID-19 pandemic: an expansion of the UTUAT model. Journal Edu. Comput. Res. 59
43. Robert,S. & Ben, W. (2019). More harm than good: the truth about performance review. Available at  https://www.gallup.com/workplace/249332/harm-good-truth-performance-review.aspx.
44. Rossiter, J. R. (2002). The C-OAR-SE Procedure for scale development in marketing. International journal of research in marketing. Vol. 19. Issue 4, pp. 305-335. https://doi.org/10.1016/50167-8116(02)00097-6
45. Roxana, M., Kim, D., Jiajie, Z., Hsu, C.E, & John, H. 2021). Understanding behavioral intent to participate in shared decision –making in medically uncertain situation. Methods Inf. Med, Vol. 51(4).  https://Doi:103414/ME11-01-0077
46. Rigby, D & Bilodeau (2001). Management tools and techniques: a survey. California management review 43 (2) Available at DOI: 10.2307/41166079
47. Sap.com (2022). What is performance management system and how can it help? Available at  https://www.sap.com/insights/what-is-a-performance-management-system.
48. Scott, B. MacKenzie & Podsakoff (2003). The dangers of poor construct conceptualization, Journal of the academy of marketing science. Vol. 31 No.30, pp. 323-326.
49. Sharon, R. W., Jeffrey, G. W., Torsten, M. P., Joseph, F. H., Joseph, H. A. & Marko, S. (2014). Method trends & method needs: Examining methods needed for accelerating the field, Journal of family Business strategy. Vol. 5, Issue 1, pp. 4-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfbs.2014.01.011.
50. Shrafat, A.S., & Rizwan, Q.D. (2018). Effect of performance expectancy and effort expectancy on mobile commerce adoption intention through personal innovativeness among Pakistani consumers. Pakistan Journal of commerce and social sciences, Vol. 12 (2).
51. Stanton, K., & Liew, C.Y. (2012). Institutional repository: review and information systems perspective. Library management, 27 (4/5)
52. Stuart, H. (2018). Exploring agile performance management. Available at https://www.clearreview.com/agile-performance-management-guide
53. Stewart & Sulaiman (2020). Challenges in the implementation of performance management system in Namibia public sector. Int. journal of innovation and economic development Vol.6, issue 2.
54. Tomczyk, et al (2020). Ready, Willing and Able? An investigation of the Theory of Planned Behavior in help – seeking for a community sample with current untreated depressive symptoms. Prevention science 21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121=020-01099=2
55. Tung, A., Baird, K., & Schoch, H. P. (2011). Factors influencing the effectiveness of performance measurement systems. International journal of operations & production management, Vol. 31(12), pp. 1287-1310.  https://doi.org/10.1108/01443571111187457. emerald.com
56. Valamis.com (2020). What is the performance management process? Available at https://www.valamis.com/hub/performance-management-process
57. Venkatesh, V., Morris, G., Davis, G., & Davis, F., (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Towards a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27 (3)
58. Venkatesh, V., James, Y. L., & Xin, X. (2016). Unified theory of acceptance & use of technology: A synthesis & the road ahead. Journal of the association for information systems. Vol. 17, no. 5 pp328-376. Papers, ssrn.com
59. Warshow & Davis (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982.
60. Zhang, Y.Y. (2012). Impact of performance management system on employee performance. Master thesis.