M.PHIL THESIS FINAL PRESENTATION

Presented by:Masroor Ali Soomro 8532Supervisor: Dr. Siraj Jamal Siddiqui

Management Styles and Employee PerformanceA Case study of public Sector Company

Sui Southern Gas Company (SSGC)SSGC

M.Phil Research Thesis

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

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.

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

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

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

SSGC

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

Determination of EMPLOYEE

PERFORMANCE

COMPARATIVE EVLUATION OF

BOTH THEPERFORMANCEMANAGEMENT

BY WALK AROUND

ACTUAL PERFORMANCE

AUTOCRATICOR

AUTHORITARIAN

EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE

(PRECIEVED BY EMPLOYEE)

MANAGEMENT STYLES

HRIS-RECORD of Performance

MANAGEMENT STYLES

Independent Variable:Autocratic Management StyleManagement By walk-Around/About

Dependent Variable:Employee Performance

Intervening Variable:Culture- Human Resource Department

MAINTAINING ORGANIZATIONAL

CULTURE

HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

INTERVENING DEPARTMENT BETWEEN MANAGEMENT

AND EMPLOYEES

Exogenous (Direct) Variables

Endogenous (In-direct) Variables

SSGC

METHOD OF DATA COLLECTIONStudy 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 department’s record of employees performance.

3. Previously published research paper related to the topic

SSGC

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/hourIf 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?

THE SAMPLE

The size of the sample was 200 respondents that were interviewed and 158respondents 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

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

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

Validity and Reliability testAfter 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

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

Critical Analysis

Evaluation

SSGC

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

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

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

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

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

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

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, it’s 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

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

SSGC

Employees at SSGC have job security but they don’t 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 don’t 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

SSGC

That would BE All