CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, NORTHRIDGE

Managing Performance: Encouragement and Recognition of Public Sector Employees

A graduate project submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements

For the degree of Master of Public Administration, Public Sector Management and

Leadership

By

Devon Zatorski

August 2019

ii

Copyright by Devon Zatorski 2019

Signature g

iii

The graduate project of Devon Zatorski is approved: ________________________________________ _______________ Dr. Rhonda Franklin Date ________________________________________ _______________ Dr. Philip Nufrio Date ________________________________________ _______________ Dr. Michael J. Carter, Chair Date

California State University, Northridge

iv

Table of Contents

Copyright Page ii

Signature Page iii

Abstract v

Introduction 1

Review of the Literature 3

Review of the Literature Introduction 3

Previous Gaps and Studies 4

Public Sector Employee Motivations and Satisfaction 4

Employee Incentive and Recognition Programs 7

Employee Feedback on Performance 9

Leadership Styles on Performance 10

Managing Employee Performance 14

Research Question 17

Method 19

Research Design 19

Selection of Subjects 22

Ethical Considerations 24

Discussion/Expected Findings 27

Limitations 30 Conclusion 31 References 33

v

Abstract

Managing Performance: Encouragement and Recognition of Public Sector Employees

By

Devon Zatorski

Master of Public Administration, Public Sector Management and Leadership

Public sector organizations rely on their employees to meet organizational goals,

achieve their mission, and make them fully functioning and effective organizations. The

management of those employees will determine the effectiveness of an organization.

Employees are the core of any organization and recruiting, training, and retaining talented

and motivated employees is no easy task. To determine how to incentivize current public

sector employees, this research takes a deeper look into factors that affect motivation.

This paper aims to find how those motivational factors can increase an employee’s job

performance and what techniques can be implemented to accomplish that goal. Through a

survey using non-probability purposive sampling, researchers will collect data regarding

current public sector employee’s views towards current incentive programs. Additionally,

how those incentive programs motivate their job performance. It is expected to find that

public sector employees want increased performance feedback that allows them to

perform their job roles with all the tools they need to succeed.

1

Introduction

Efficiency and effectiveness of governments depend on the talent of employees

and their knowledge (Mandelbaum & Zehavi, 2014, p. 117). Public sector employees are

the reason public organizations run the way they do –either good or bad. Management

plays a key factor into organizational operation and influence on organizational

performance (Johansen & Hawes, 2016, p. 592; Johansen, 2012; Meier & O’Toole,

2002). Public sector employees, at all levels of an organization, can either help or hinder

an organization’s overall effectiveness. Johansen and Hawes conducted a study of how

middle management affected an organization and found that middle management has a

positive impact on performance levels (Johansen & Hawes, 2016, p. 593). Since

employees are so critical to the operation of public organizations, it is important to know

what motivates them.

Research has explained that students’ interest, specifically those studying public

policy and public affairs, in government work has declined (Bright & Graham, 2015).

Compared to the private sector, there are fewer extra incentives to encourage and

motivate employees to perform at higher levels. Increased jobs in the non-profit sector

that allow employees to meet their needs of public service have led to a decline in interest

in government job opportunities. There are expansive opportunities in the non-profit and

business sector now that provide the delivery of public service in a different way than

traditional government jobs. (Bright & Graham, 2015, p. 576; Rafael, 2009; Light, 1999).

The public sector has a challenge to recruit motivated, talented employees and still

encourage and incentivize their current employees. Again, information on motivational

2

and incentive programs will provide insight to find solutions that public administrators

face.

Compared to private organizations, public organizations do not have the same

leniency to incentivize their employees with monetary compensations. However, public

organizations can use incentives to create meaningful change such as written or formal

performance feedback and information. This information can assist public organizations

growth in their effectiveness and output of services (Onesti, Angiola, & Bianchi, 2016, p.

844; Van Dooren, 2008; Pollitt, 2000; Hatry, 1999).

This proposal will focus on the factors that can lead to improved employee morale

and ultimately leading to increased employee performance. By looking at what public

organizations currently implement employee recognition or motivation programs, we can

measure the effects those programs may have on the organization’s productivity.

Leadership styles, attitudes toward incentive programs, position type, and demographic

information will be studied to see what impact that has on their commitment to the

organization.

This research aims to look at employee’s attitudes toward performance

management techniques like incentive programs. It will focus specifically on how those

programs encourage employees to perform at higher levels. It is crucial for researchers to

uncover new ways that help promote increased effectiveness in public organizations.

Public administrators and researchers can look at public sector employees by studying

their motivations to determine how to provide increased services to the public. This

research aims to find how motivators and incentives encourage public sector employees,

3

and how these incentives play a role in determining an organizations efficiency and

effectiveness.

Review of the Literature

Review of the Literature Introduction

The literature review focuses on aspects that affect public sector organizations,

specifically public sector employees. The key areas of review are public sector employee

motivations and satisfaction, incentive and recognition programs, leadership styles in the

public sector, and performance management techniques. These aspects were chosen as

they all play a crucial role in determining the level of effectiveness that public sector

employees provide to their organization. The study of job satisfaction of public

professionals is relevant as it plays and important predictor of job performance (Steijn &

van der Voet, 2019, p. 64). This literature review looks at motivation factors that play a

role in an employee’s satisfaction and ultimate job performance.

The importance of efficacy in serving the public has increased, especially with

increased demands for government transparency (Hassan & Hatmaker, 2014, p. 1130;

Vigoda-Gadot & Golembiewski, 2001). Leadership styles can affect how public

employees perform their expected job and those who are willing to go beyond those

expectations to meet the needs of the organization and the public (Hassan & Hatmaker,

2014, p. 1130). As public organizations constantly evolve, it is crucial for public

managers and administrators to review ways that can lead to increased efficacy of public

organizations. By further looking into engagement techniques, motivational factors, and

incentive programs, public administrators have insight into methods and studies that

show direct links. This literature review explores research related to how these

4

incentivizing factors can ultimately increase public sector employee’s performance,

engagement, and service to an organization.

Previous Studies and Gaps

Throughout the review of the current literature, there is a lack in how incentive

programs encourage employees specifically in the public sector. Studies on how

performance evaluation and feedback in public organizations impact directly influences

employee performance is minimal. Throughout the literature, the concept of different

factors like leadership style are studied in detail to determine the effect that it has on

employee behaviors and performance. However, there are fewer studies on specific

behavior leaders or organizations are using to motivate, recognize, and encourage public

sector employees.

Employees that build positive relationships with supervisors and have

organization support become more committed to the organization through increased

learning opportunities (Jin & McDonald, 2017, p. 881). This research shows there is a

correlation of performance and leaders. However, less literature exists on finding how to

increase employee commitment and motivation levels.

Public Sector Employee Motivations and Satisfaction

Fredrick Taylor’s Principles of Scientific Management theorized that workplace

efficiency would increase if organizations, and in turn the people who worked for those

organizations, were run like machines to gain the greatest output of production (Taylor,

1911). Many private sector organizations follow a similar business model as profits and

deliverables are much easier to quantify (Caillier, 2010, p. 139; Bohnet & Eahton, 2003).

For public organizations, complex theories are regularly studied with a focus on human

5

relations, leadership styles, employee motivations, and employee satisfaction. Public

Service Motivation (PSM) is a specialized branch of research that looks at the nature of

public sector jobs and employees to determine public servant’s behavior (Jacobson, 2011,

p. 215). The most widely used definition of PSM comes from James Perry and Lois Wise,

as an “individuals’ predisposition to respond to motives grounded primarily or uniquely

in public institutions and organizations” (Jacobson, 2011, p. 215; Perry & Wise, 1990).

Using this definition, Jacobson theorizes why that public sector organizations can use

these motives to the organizations advantage by using those motivations to create a

proactive and engaged workforce. Jacobson conducted interviews and surveys of current

public sector employees to determine why certain individuals were more attracted to

public sector work. Common PSM principles included factors such as; public policy

making, public interest, compassion, and self-sacrifice (Jacobson, 2011, p. 5). Public

sector employees were more motivated to join the public sector rather than the private

sector due to their high levels of PSM (Jacobson, 2011, p. 221). As research, and

common knowledge, shows that public sector employees have a greater calling to serving

the public. However, not all public sector employees fall into the categories of PSM.

Many public sector employees choose this employment due to job security and benefits

(Jacobson, 2011, p. 221-222). Much of the following research focuses on how to nurture

the motivations of public sector employees and encourage increased work performance.

Many public sector employees have higher levels of PSM and are more likely to engage

to beneficial behaviors, especially when it comes to jobs that directly service the public

(Hsieh, Yang, & Fu, 2011, p. 245-246). These researchers focused on employees

“emotional labor” defined as how workers detect the affective state of the citizen and

6

adjust their own affective state, and exhibit work-appropriate emotive behaviors (Hsieh,

Yang, & Fu, 2011, p. 241; Newman, Guy, and Mastracci, 2009). Employees with higher

PSM are more likely to interact with more meaningful actions and behaviors to better

serve the needs of the public sector clients (Hseih, Yang, & Fu, 2011, p. 247-248). Again,

at the core of most public sector workers, there are higher levels of PSM that encourage

those employees.

There are many approaches on how to encourage increased job performance from

public sector agencies. James Caillier discusses the factors that affect job performance

and how employees’ attitudes towards certain factors can determine an employees’ job

performance. For this research, job performance is defined as how well an employee

performs his or her work-related duties (Caillier, 2010, p. 140). The theoretical model

explained that job performance had three major factors. First, job characteristics and

outcomes that encompassed job satisfaction, role ambiguity, mission contribution, and

fairness. Secondly, the work environment which included agency funding, adequate

funding, efficient use of funding, and participation. Lastly, an individual’s public service

motivation played a role in their job performance (Caillier, 2010, p.141-143). These

factors allow for managers or organizations a greater understanding of employee

motivators to determine how to produce increased job performance (Caillier, 2010, p.

142). The research validated that employees who have a greater understanding of the role

they have in the organization and have clear duties and expectations of what they are

involved in are more likely to perform better. Furthermore, role ambiguity, or lack

thereof, had the strongest causal relationship with job performance. When employees

know they are contributing directly to their organization’s mission and goals, they are

7

more likely to value the quality of their job performance and perform at higher levels.

These results indicate that managers and leaders in the organization should clearly

indicate the organization’s mission and provide clear direction to employees regarding

their work tasks and how those tasks lead to the betterment of the organization (Caillier,

2010, p. 156-157). This research was conducted on state government workers to close the

gap on job performance research between public and private sector and provide a greater

insight into what motivates public sector employees.

It is important for employees to feel they are part of the organization and having a

positive relationship with leaders is one way that can happen. A study by Hassan, Wright,

and Park looked to find under what conditions are leaders likely to empower their

employees. The research found that managers are more likely to engage employees who

show cues that they are eager to learn, solve problems, or proactively seek feedback

(Hassan, Wright, & Baker, 2016, p. 73). As seen, employees with greater sense of

motivation (e.g. willingness to learn, seek feedback) are more likely to experience

positive relationship with supervisors most likely leading to a positive relationship with

the organization.

Employee Incentives and Recognition Programs

Another incentivizing factor to increase job performance in public sector

employees are specific reward programs. Research into reward systems has shown how

different reward programs or other motivators can encourage or discourage employee

performance. Individuals want to be seen, recognized, appreciated, and valued and it the

role of a leader to recognize and appreciate individuals who make up the organization

(Hall-Ellis, 2014, p. 66). This research for library administrators (often public sector

8

employees) shows that conveying the message that employees matter and will be

rewarded on merit will ultimately improve morale, build trust and expand opportunities

for growth, and through challenging assignments will improve performance and build

skill development. The rewards can consist of monetary or non-monetary recognition and

even modest cost rewards will be worth the increased performance from employees

(Hall-Ellis, 2014, p. 67-68). In contrast, Douglas A. Johnson and Alyce M. Dickinson

studied Employee-of-the-Month Programs and recreated an incentive-based program

where one person was rewarded per week based on who was able to generate the greatest

output of work. Their data found that while some participant’s performance increased, it

was often the case that performance plateaued or even declined after the participant

received the recognition (Johnson & Dickinson, 2010, p. 319). The few positive increases

they did find in their research they attributed directly to performance feedback rather than

the monetary prize that came with the “employee of the week” simulation they created in

their experiment. This suggests that organizations with a comprehensive performance

feedback system are more likely to see greater results from their employees rather than

implementing a prize-based employee of the month program (Johnson & Dickinson,

2010, p. 320).

Similarly, Sergio Fernandez and Tima Moldogaziev researched what encouragers

could the public sector use to motivate employees. This research focused on an

employee’s likeliness to innovate rather than perform, but they also found that rewarding

short-term performance fostered a myopic mindset that caused employees to sabotage or

cut corners to gain the reward but did not produce behaviors that would increase the

employee or the organization in the long-term (Fernandez & Moldogaziev, 2012, p. 177).

9

In their research, they hypothesized that providing information about goals and

performance, providing access to job knowledge and skills, allowing employee input in

work processes, and empowering employees would all be positively related to an

employee’s likelihood to innovate. They also theorized that offering a rewards program

could would be related with encouragement to innovate but could have negative or

positive relationship (Fernandez & Moldogaziev, 2012, p. 160-161). As seen through this

research and other research aimed at motivating employees, it is more likely that

employees feel rewarded when they are given to the tools to be a greater part of the

organization and feel as though they are making a difference in the work they do.

Employee Feedback on Performance

Feedback opportunities and performance evaluations have been common

workplace procedure, especially in the last two decades (Kuhnen & Tymula, 2011, p. 94;

Prewitt, 2007). The impact of performance can determine how employees see themselves

and how they view themselves within the organization. Employees who are told that is

likely they will receive feedback on their performance of a task are more likely to

increase their output and performance (Kuhnen & Tymula, 2011, p. 109). While this

research was not specific to public sector organizations, it still shines an interesting light

on how employees view themselves are often interested in receiving feedback on their

work to determine how they are seen by the organization. Leonie Gerhards and Neele

Siemer focus directly on the impact that performance feedback has when it is done in

private compared to when it is provided publicly. While performance feedback is a

positive incentive to employees, performance feedback when given publicly can have an

adverse effect based on specific employees and may fear peer responses when being

10

recognized publicly. They found that some employees are willing to go as far as

sabotaging others performance to gain the public recognition (Gerhards & Siemer, 2015,

p. 1188). That similar information was also found in the research about employee

incentive programs (such as employee of the month programs) where employees were

willing to sabotage to gain the public reward or recognition. There were no significant

differences found between performance levels when feedback was provided publicly or

privately, however, the greatest indicator was personal characteristics of how employees

would take to public feedback versus private feedback. Overall, performance feedback,

either public or private, increased greater performance levels among employees.

(Gerhards & Siemer, 2015, p. 1199-1200). It seems that private feedback had less adverse

side effects when compared to public performance feedback.

Leadership Styles on Performance

Transformational Leadership is a more recent style of leadership but often studied

practice and viewed to have a direct, positive impact on the performance of workers

(Caillier, 2014, p. 218; Bass, Jung Avolio, & Bernson, 2003; Howell & Avolio, 1993;

Lowe, Kroeck & Sivasubramaniam, 1996; Waldman, Bass, & Einstein, 1987;

Walumbwa, Avolio, & Zhu, 2008). Transformational leadership is rooted in the idea of

organizational goal setting (Wright, Moynihan, & Pandey, 2012) but little is known about

the interaction between transformational leadership and public service motivation

(Caillier, 2014, p. 218). Caillier argues that public sector employees are more reliant on

an individual’s importance within an organization due to the nature and common PSM

aspects of public sector employees (Caillier, 2014, p. 220). Authors Wright & Moynihan

also find that transformational leadership has often been linked with increased employee

11

performance and satisfaction. Their research shows that leaders who offer vision, set a

positive example, encourage innovation, and create a sense of organizational pride can

increase public employee motivations, performance, and commitment. Public sector

leaders who use transformational leadership styles can often encourage their employees

to do better for the organization and the population they serve (Wright & Moynihan,

2011, p. 207-213).

Characteristics of transformational leadership can also be defined as empowering

or participative leadership. Research focused on if participative leadership enhanced

work performance by increasing empowerment and trust found that task performance was

more mediated by individual empowerment rather than trust of one’s supervisor. Two

groups were studied (middle management and lower level employees) and it was found

that middle managers who had more autonomy and responsibility felt they were doing

more meaningful work and were competent to do the tasks. For lower level employees, it

was found that allowing them to give ideas and suggestions for change and respecting

when they expressed those suggestions encouraged those employees to devote extra

effort to their work (Huang, Iun, Liu, Gong, 2009, 136-138). The research on leadership

styles on workplace performance shows how critical of a role that effective leadership is

in public organizations. Scott L. Martin, Hui Liao, and Elizabeth M. Campbell compare

the effects that directive versus empowering leadership styles have on job performance.

This research was conducted in the United Arab Emirates, which was explained to have

lacking research on leadership in the Middle East. A pretest-posttest experiment was

designed with a control group to measure the impact that directive versus empowering

leadership styles had on employee’s task proficiency and proactivity (Martin, Liao &

12

Campbell, 2013, p.1378). The researchers found that both directive and empowering

leadership had a positive impact on the amount of work performed but empowering

leadership was the only leadership that increased the group’s proactive behavior in the

workplace. The leaders in the empowering leadership group led by example and worked

to motivate their employees to do more than just perform the work, they were able to

inspire employees to be proactive (Martin, Liao & Campbell, 2013, p. 1386). The

researchers also explained the limitations and downfalls of this research as that there are

many leadership theories and research aimed at telling leaders that empowering and

transformative leadership styles are the best way to go, however, as seen with this

research, directive leadership also had positive impacts on employee performance. The

researchers caution from labeling directive leadership as negative term because it is often

crucial to use this type of leadership to meet certain goals and monitor employees to drive

the performance of work (Martin, Liao & Campbell, 2013, p. 1388).

Further research on leadership styles and the public sector find that the

meaningfulness of work is important to employees and can determine the outcomes they

provide in their work performance. Additionally, employees who have good relationships

with leaders (LMX theory) can positively affect their perception of their role in their

organization and feel as though they are an important aspect and what to perform better

work to enhance their relationship with their leaders and the organization. Leaders who

also provide employees with insight into how the organization works and how decisions

are made are more likely to have employees with greater organizational commitment,

often leading to increased employee performance. Employees who find meaning in their

work are more likely to be committed to perform better to their higher levels of public

13

service motivation. The researchers make note of other motivators such as job security

and regular pay increase that can decrease the employees feeling of meaningful work and

not necessarily be inclined to provide increased performance (Tummers & Knies, 2013,

p. 865-866). Montgomery Van Wart discusses the role of leaders on employee and

organizational effectiveness by stating that leaders are a significant factor in influencing

organizational success, follower happiness, and constituent satisfaction and often the

leader is the most important factor of these variables (Van Wart, 2013, p. 555). Van

Wart’s review of leadership theories and practice find that leadership styles involve a

constant practice and that leadership styles should be updated and reviewed. Leaders

need to continue to grow and update their skills to show their followers that their success

relies on the ability to continue to learn and develop new skills (Van Wart, 2013, p. 561).

Public sector management and leadership techniques have research devoted

specifically devoted to how public managers and how management reform plays a part in

public sector employee’s behaviors and work performance. Government managerial

practices have a direct effect on public employee’s job performance. The research by

Jonathan P. West and Evan M. Berman suggest that good managerial work habits will

have a positive outcome on an organization’s performance and bad habits will have

adverse effects (West & Berman, 2011, p. 65). This research conducted a survey of high-

level government administrators who answered surveys based on management habits of

their direct reports who were managers or supervisors. The findings from this research

suggest that even when good management habits are active (i.e. being proactive, setting

high standards) any trace of bad management work habits (overly passive, judgmental,

defensive, close-minded) will outweigh the positive that come from good management

14

habits. Having good management habits require continued management and active

monitoring of those habits. Managers also need more training and support when it comes

to disciplining employees as they find this to be the most difficult task in their role as a

supervisor (West & Berman, 2011, p. 72-73).

As stated above, there are many research and public administration theories on

how to increase efficiency and job performance. However, Kaifeing Yang and Anthony

Kassekert felt that there was a gap in how these reforms to create more efficient

organizations impacted employees in the organization. The research they conducted aims

to explain how management reforms affect employees and specifically employee

satisfaction and performance. The researchers hypothesize that positive attitudes towards

performance feedback evaluations will be positively associated with job satisfaction

(Yang & Kassekert, 2009, p. 419). The results of their research show decision makers

should aim to make government agencies more attractive places to work by creating an

innovative culture and providing effective performance feedback. These factors have can

have in impact on employee’s attitudes and an impact on their job performance. Most

importantly, organizational leaders need to not only ask how management reforms can

make our organization more efficient but also what will this management reform look

like for our employees and what effects will it have on our people (Yang & Kassekert,

2009, p. 431-432).

Managing Employee Performance Performance Management systems have been implemented across various public

administration organizations and government agencies to ensure more efficiency and find

more effective ways to strategize and reach organizational goals. Patrina Clark’s take on

15

performance management includes involving employees in performance management

reforms. She states that most government employees feel as though their suggestions and

thoughts will not be used to create agency wide change, therefore, employees feel less

engaged and part of the organization. Organizations should share information about

organization reform to the lowest level and engage all employees in discussion. If

employees can be part of the discussion it will feel like a win for the employees, who

were able to have their opinions heard (Clark, 2015, p. 31). Government agencies who

are likely to use a performance management system as their management philosophy are

more likely to reap more benefits from the organizational changes (Ammons, Liston, &

Jones, 2013, p. 172). Government agencies, who implement performance management

reforms, specifically where executive leaders are involved in engagement throughout the

organization, are more likely to see benefits of greater performance and benefits of that

increased performance (Ammons, Liston, & Jones, 2013, p. 178).

Research on how performance management drives employee engagement aims to

take a closer look at how employee engagement is measured and driven, specifically by

performance management techniques. This research is an interesting take on performance

management because the majority of performance management literature focuses solely

on organizational effectiveness due to performance management rather than engaging

employees during the process. This literature lists the five following factors to

performance management: setting performance and development goals, providing

ongoing feedback and recognition, managing employee development, conducting mid-

year and year-end appraisals, building a climate of trust and empowerment (Mone,

Eisinger, Guggenheim, Price, & Stine, 2011, p. 206). The researchers confirm that

16

employee feedback and recognition is a major aspect of employee engagement, as

pointed out by other literature in this review. The act of receiving feedback is generally

considered a positive and motivating experience (Mone, Eisinger, Guggenheim, Price, &

Stine, 2011, p. 207; London, 2003; Smither & London, 2009). Additionally, recognition

can be in the form of positive feedback. Managers need to ensure there is positive as well

as constructive feedback to observe their accomplishments but also recognize areas for

performance. Another aspect of employee engagement is employee development and

opportunities for employees to advance, train, and promote. Employee’s engagement and

satisfaction is directly correlated with their opportunities for progression and promotion

(Mone, Eisinger, Guggenheim, Price, & Stine, 2011, p. 208; Mone & London, 2009). The

researchers believe that performance management serves as a basis for managers to guide

their employees’ performance and expect high levels of engagement and commitment.

A question found throughout the research of this topic of employee motivations in

today’s public administration is how do employers motivate their employees in today’s

climate? James L. Perry, Debra Mesch, and Laurie Paarlberg reviewed and researched

ways to motivate employees in the current public sector climate. Their research of

motivational programs included; financial incentives, job design, goal setting, and

participation. Regarding employee performance, the research suggests that the type of

job, if found to be meaningful to the employee, can lead to better job performance (Perry,

Mesch, & Paarlberg, 2006, p. 507). Compared to job design, participation from

employees has a link to employee performance but the link between participation and

employee performance is less significant. The research suggests that there is a lot of room

for public administration research to continue studying employee motivations.

17

Research Question

Public sector employees are motivated my multiple factors, but a major factor of

public service is the desire to work for an organization that does good for the public.

Many public sector employees enter public service because of personal characteristics

that draw them to the public field. There are also public sector employees who do not

have these same motivations. This proposal looks to find what incentives motivate

different types of public sector employees.

The literature review discussed many ways public sector employees are

motivated, incentivized, and other techniques to help encourage work performance. A

key point in encouraging employees is to find their motivational factors. These

motivational factors will help organizations determine what type of incentives will

positively affect public sector employees. Public sector organizations should aim to

incentive employee’s long-term performance and finding ways to engage employees to

ensure they feel that their efforts are contributing towards the organizational goals.

A specific aspect of the literature review as looking at employee incentive and

recognition programs to determine their outcomes and effectiveness. The literature

suggests that encouraging and incentivizing employees should focus on programs that

will ultimately increase employee behavior and motives, rather than focusing on short

term or superficial rewards. Employees want their opinions heard, their work valued, and

to feel as though that they are a crucial part of an organization. The idea of productive

and constructive employee feedback was overwhelming in the research and many

researchers continued to find that feedback and performance evaluations continue to

18

provide employees with the information they need to determine their place in an

organization and use that feedback to improve.

Another aspect of the research focuses on leadership styles. Leadership styles play

a crucial role in employee motivation and employee performance since leaders can

influence and encourage the way employees behave and perform. Leadership styles,

especially transformative, engaging, and empowering leadership styles are shown to

incentivize and inspire employees to perform at higher levels. This is due to

transformational leaders often set the example for their employees to be engaged and

motivated.

Statement of the Question How do incentive programs increase job performance among public sector employees?

Independent Variable: Incentive Programs

Attributes: Employee Recognition Programs, Employee Feedback

Dependent Variable: Job Performance

Attributes: Increased Job Performance, Decreased Job Performance

19

Method

Research Design

Introduction This research is designed to be a qualitative cross sectional study of employee’s

attitudes towards recognition and feedback programs. The data will examine employee’s

attitudes towards employee feedback and recognition. The purpose of this study is to

determine how certain employees view receiving performance feedback and recognition.

By determining how employees view feedback and recognition, motivational factors that

drive employees to perform can also be determined. Certain factors such as job

characteristics, work environment, and individual attributes can be indicators on how

well an employee will perform (Caillier, 2010). As shown in the literature review,

multiple studies determine what factors motivate and encourage employees to perform at

higher levels. This research will focus specifically on how employee performance

feedback and recognition affects employee’s attitudes, motivations, and ultimately job

performance. The data collected provides researchers with updated information about

public sector employees’ attitudes towards incentives and feedback affecting their levels

of performance.

The public sector is wide-ranging with a diverse group of employees. This study

will measure City of Los Angeles civil-service employees (full-time, regular employment

as defined by City of Los Angeles Civil Service Rules) to gauge specific employee’s

attitudes towards employee recognition programs and performance feedback. The City of

Los Angeles is comprised of 36 departments with positions ranging from clerical

classifications to technical positions to supervisory roles and executive management staff.

20

Various employees for the City of Los Angeles will be surveyed to measure their

attitudes towards employee recognition programs and performance feedback. That

information will determine how those factors play a role in their job performance.

Data Collection

The data will be collected by researchers from Cal State University, Northridge

who are studying the affects of how public sector employees feel that incnetive programs

affect their job performance. The reserachers will first obtain approval from the

Institutional Review Board (IRB) to conduct the study. The reserach will specifically

focus on the City of Los Angeles civil service employees. Since Northridge is located

within the City of Los Angeles limits, this reserach will be beneficial to see the results

locally and make potential recommendations on how to enhance local government

practices.

The research will contain a self-reported survey of City of Los Angeles

employees. The employees who take the survey will be part of one of four following

classifications: clerical, technical, supervisory, or management. The City of Los Angeles

employs over 60,000 employees in 36 different departments. The survey will be

administered through an online survey via the City’s email system. Each potential

participant has access to City’s email system as a current employee. Survey questions

will be the same for all participants, regardless of their classification. The survey will

gauge employee’s attitudes towards the topic of incentive programs (feedback and

recognition).

Survey respondents will fill out their position title and the researchers will

determine which of the four classifications each respondent belongs. Additionally, survey

21

questions will contain demographic information, questions about their preferred

leadership style, questions about the current leadership style experience, questions about

their motivation levels and reasons for choosing a public service career, questions about

monetary incentive programs, questions about performance feedback, and questions

about recognition by supervisors/department/organization. The survey will be a measured

on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 – “Strongly Disagree/Rarely” to 5 – “Strongly

Agree/Always” (Hsieh, Yang, & Fu, 2011).

This cross sectional study will measure employee’s attitudes towards recognition

and feedback. This data will be used to analyze how those attitudes affect public sector

job performance. All respondents will have the commonality of being a public sector

employee and by asking questions about their demographics and job classifications, we

can analyze across different factors that may affect how certain public sector employees

view recognition and feedback. Additionally, this cross analyzation allows researchers to

find correlations among certain factors (age, gender, job type, and years of service) and

attitudes towards recognition affecting job performance. This study is an appropriate way

to determine certain trends among public sector employees. The trends in employee’s

attitudes, motivational factors, and incentives to improve work performance are gathered

through this survey.

The timeline of the research will take place within a three-month period. This

timeframe allows the researchers enough time to collect responses and analyze the data to

determine the findings of what specific motivational factors increase job performance. As

stated, the survey will be sent via City of Los Angeles email, which all City employees

22

have access to. The participants will then have one month to respond to the survey

allowing two months of review and analysis by the researchers.

Selection of Subjects

The data used for this research will consist of non-probability purposive sampling

techniques. Non-probability sampling will be used because the participant pool is specific

and participants need to meet specific criteria to be involved in the research. There is a

specific population in mind that needs to be sampled. That population is public sector

employees specifically working for the City of Los Angeles. This research is also

purposeful because it is clearly defined who will be surveyed, explained later. The

sample will be able to measure the difference in how different classifications of

employees feel towards recognition and feedback programs and how those programs

improve job performance.

This sample will allow researchers to understand specifically the motivations

behind City of Los Angeles employees. While difficult to generalize to a larger

population with certainty, the research may be able to translate to a larger grouping of

public sector employees overall.

To conduct the survey, the research will need to approved through the City of Los

Angeles’ Personnel Department who is responsible for the hiring and classification

system within the City. By working with the Personnel Department, the researchers will

be able to understand the subjects they are seeking to study. Additionally, the Personnel

Department will grant access to the researchers to contact the employees via the City’s

email system.

23

For the purpose of this research, the four classifications of employees that will be

selected to participate in the research are clerical employees, technical employees,

supervisory employees, and executive management employees. The City of Los Angeles

consists of 36 departments and each department has at least one employee that falls into

each classification selected for sampling. The researchers will identify five job positions

within each category. Then, the survey will be sent to all employees who fall within the

selected job position. Since participation is optional, the survey will sent to all employees

who fall within the classification to maximize the amount of the responses received.

Clerical employees are classified as administrative employees who work on the

day-to-day operations. Of the four classifications being studied, clerical employees

generally report to either technical employees or supervisory employees. Comparing the

starting salary among the four classifications, clerical employees have the lowest wages.

This classification generally does not require a full college degree or post-college degree.

For this research, the five job positons chosen within this classification are

Administrative Clerk, Accounting Clerk, Legal Secretary, Benefits Specialist, and

Executive Secretary.

Technical employees are classified as positions that perform specific tasks that are

technical in nature. Generally, to qualify for these positions, applicants require a college

degree or post-college degree in a specific field of study. The positions chosen are

Management Analyst, Systems Analyst, Accountant, City Planner, and Civil Engineer.

For the purpose of this research, supervisory employees are classified as positions

who are responsible for supervising one or more of the positions that fall would into the

clerical or technical employee category. The positions chosen for this category are Senior

24

Management Analyst, Senior Systems Analyst, Senior Accountant, Senior City Planner,

and Senior Civil Engineer.

Executive Management employees make up the top management of each

department. These are positions oversee a large number of employees and are responsible

for entire departments or divisions within departments and oversee the supervisory

classification. Of the four classifications, this is the highest paid group. The job positions

in this classification are General Manager, Assistant General Manager, Chief

Management Analyst, Chief Financial Officer, and Director of Systems.

Ethical Considerations

The greatest ethical consideration of this study is that the data collected from

survey responses are from human subjects. Since human participants are used, the study

needs to ensure the rights and well-being of those participants are protected during the

survey. With this in mind, the researchers need to make sure the survey is non-biased and

non-discriminatory in nature. The questions will be reviewed for bias or for potential

questions that could trigger emotions of the subjects participating in the survey. Due to

the nature of the research, there are no foreseen questions that are likely to trigger

emotions that could harm the well-being of the participants. However, if there were, the

researchers would ensure that the participants are aware of any potential questions that

could prompt an adverse response. While the survey questions will ask about

demographic information, they will not be discriminatory in nature. The purpose of the

demographic is to determine a correlation between people who work for the same

organization but have different demographic backgrounds that could influence their

behaviors towards employee recognition and feedback. All responses deemed fully

25

complete will be used for the data analysis. This is to ensure that no survey respondents

are discriminated based on demographic information such as race, sex, age, etc.

In addition to ensuring the protection of the participants in this research, the

research needs to inform all participants of what they can expect from the survey they

will be taking. To inform participants, the survey will clearly outline who is

administering the survey, the purpose of the survey, and how the participant’s data is

used to meet the objectives of the research. Prior to taking the survey, the potential

participants will be informed of how long the survey is expected to take. By doing this,

the researchers take into account the research participant’s time and needs. Prior to taking

the survey, it will be clearly stated that participation is optional and no employee who has

been selected is required to participate in the survey. This allows potential participants to

determine their involvement and ensures that no participants are forced against their will

to participate in research that they do not want to be involved with. In addition to the

survey being optional, it will also be stated that the participants can leave any time once

beginning the survey. This is a further step to ensure that participants are fully informed

of their rights when taking the survey and that no participant is forced into an

uncomfortable position.

Another ethical consideration is to ensure that survey participant’s trust remains

intact and that their results are kept confidential to only those who are analyzing the

information. Participants will be informed, prior to taking the survey that this information

is for research purposes and it will not be shared with anyone other than the researchers.

If any conclusions or analysis is shared, the participants will be ensured that all personal

data will be redacted and information cannot be traced back to a specific participant.

26

Another way to ensure that participants are trustful of the researchers conducting the

survey is that the results will be available to the participants. Since the survey is

administered via internet, the participants will receive a confirmation that the survey has

been completed and once completed; they can view the answers they selected. This step

makes the research transparent to those who participated and allows the participants to

build trust with the researchers. The participants will be ensured their information is not

to be shared outside of the purpose of the research and the ability to view their results

allows them to see that the researchers will be using the exact information they inputted.

27

Discussion/Expected Findings

Data Interpretation

Data collected from the surveys will be classified based on the 5-point Likert

scale and open-ended questions will be recorded and classified into certain categories of

the research based on the topic. The categories affecting job performance will be

incentive programs, public service motivation (personal characteristics), leadership

styles, and demographic information. Some of the independent variables that can have an

effect on the research question are race, sex, age, job classification, education level, and

years of service. If there is a substantial difference between results of participants within

the same classification, we will know that there are outlying factors that affect how those

employees feel incentive programs will motivate them to perform at higher levels.

However, if the responses amongst are similar within the groups, the researchers will be

able to theorize potential best practices of implementing incentive programs to encourage

increased job performance.

The main goal of this research is find what incentive programs would incentivize

public sector employees to provide increased job performance. This will be accomplished

by directly asking public sector employees what incentive programs would motivate them

to perform. To gain a better understanding of what incentive programs would work,

researchers need a better understanding of public sector employees. Through the

research, the public sector employees have been broken down into specific job

classifications that will allow researchers to find patterns among certain classes and any

potential patterns across all four classifications. Additionally, demographic information

may play a role in how to incentivize public sector employees, and lastly leadership style

28

can have an effect on how public sector employees want to be recognized and

incentivized.

Among the different classifications of job positions, the researchers can expect to

see differing results amongst different groups. This is because there are different

perspectives among the groups. For example, the supervisory and executive management

groups would be the job classifications that administer incentive programs and

performance feedback so they may think they are doing a great job, while the positions

they supervise are experiencing it firsthand and think that the management does a poor

job of performance feedback. This study provides a varied view of perspectives on the

topic of incentive programs. However, there could concerns that translate across all levels

of the organization. If that is the case, there may be an effective way to implement an

incentive program that helps everyone. Another factor that plays a role amongst the

different classification groups would be educational level; generally, the higher positions

will have higher levels of education. Expected results may be that the supervisory or

executive management groups have good suggestions to create incentive programs due

their experience and education level. Especially since they are public sector employees,

they may have studied public sector organizations and will have insight into effective

strategies. Also, there is an assumption that there are different commitment levels among

each group. For example, the executive management and supervisory employees are

salaried employees rather than hourly employees so they may have to have a greater

commitment to the organization because they are expected to be available when needed.

By having a different perspective, it may change the way they view the organization and

their programs.

29

Another expectation is to see different opinions on incentive programs amongst

different age groups, especially among the younger work force. There is research

dedicated on how to recruit, work with and incentivize the millennial generation. This

study will provide further insight directly from young public sector employees.

Millennials place higher value on performing meaningful work, having a work/life

balance, and like having good co-workers and supervisors (Ertas, 2016). These

conclusions will be beneficial recommendations to public organizations as a large portion

of the workforce is currently retiring and are seeing younger employees come in.

Additionally, research finds that both Millennial and Generation X participants score

higher on public service motivation scales than prior generations (Einolf, 2016).

Lastly, responses are expected to vary amongst participants that witness different

leadership styles. Tummers & Montgomery (2013) discuss how Leader-Member

Exchange Theory (LMX) can positively affect an employee’s job satisfaction and

performance. Per LMX Theory, researchers find that employees who a have a strong

connection with their leader are more likely to perform tasks at higher levels or do extra

work for that leader, and ultimately for the organization. This is because the employee

perceives a positive relationship with the leader and they are willing to perform at a

higher level knowing that in exchange they will continue to be in good standing and keep

that employee-leader relationship intact. This study will provide information on how

different leadership styles affect motivations and job performance. It will allow the

researchers to see if there are incentives (feedback and recognition) that any leader can

implement to encourage increased job performance. In addition, it may show that certain

30

leadership styles that are deemed more effective can be the incentive since the leadership

style is what is motivating employees to produce high performance levels.

For this study, an average response rate of 50% (Baruch & Brooks, 2008) can be

expected. This is why the City of Los Angeles was chosen to be studied so that a greater

data set could be obtained.

Limitations

This data set and research have credibility because the participants completing the

survey are confirmed public sector employees. The participants experience falls directly

into the topic of research and their input will be valuable to the researcher’s outcomes.

The participants can add valuable first-hand knowledge about current public sector

practices.

However, as a self-reported survey there is potential for participants to report

false or inaccurate information, skewing the results. Additionally, since survey

respondents are taking the survey as an employee they could feel inclined to answer

untruthfully because they want they want to appear in a different light. For example, a

may not like respondent their supervisor’s leadership style but they may not put that

down for fear of information being seen by their supervisor. This type of response could

skew the data. This is why is it is important the participants have a sense of trust with the

researcher that the information will only be seen by the people it is intended for.

Lastly, this survey is administered to all 36 departments within the City of Los

Angeles and these departments vary in size. This could affect the results of the survey

because while all participants will fall into the same classifications, they will have

different experiences based on the size of their department. For example, a clerical

31

employee who works for a smaller department may have a better relationship with

executive management staff because there is the ability for co-mingling while someone in

the large department may not know their executive staff. Researchers can manage this, as

they will know which department each respondent is from and have the ability to control

to these threats to validity.

Conclusion

Caillier (2008) found that public sector employees had certain characteristics to

motivate them towards greater outputs of increased job performance. While the

connection between certain job characteristics and job performance have been studied

before, there was a large gap in the literature of this topic studied in the public sector.

Through the research, it is easy to find incentive and recognition programs studies and

experiments that focus on the private sector. Most likely because in the private sector it is

easier for an employer to create a recognition or feedback program, specifically one with

monetary value. Public sector organizations require increased creativity when it comes to

employee recognition and feedback due to constraints of being a public organization.

Through this research, the study will provide insightful information on how public

sector organizations can engage employees at all levels of the organization to maximize

job performance. In addition to increasing job performance, this study looks at the

motivating factors that will encourage employees to perform better so if the employee’s

needs are met and they are motivated correctly, the hope is that these motivation and

incentive techniques will lead to increased job satisfaction. This research will provide the

City of Los Angeles, and possibly other public sector organizations, with data about

32

factors that affect different types of employees based and what incentivizing them to

perform at a higher level.

33

References Ammons, D., Liston, E., & Jones, J. (2013). Performance management purpose,

executive engagement, and reported benefits among leading local governments. State & Local Government Review, 45(3), 172-179. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/42002379

Baruch, Y., & Holtom, B. C. (2008). Survey response rate levels and trends in

organizational research. Human Relations, 61(8), 1139–1160. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726708094863

Bright, L., & Graham, C. (2015). Why Does Interest in Government Careers Decline

Among Public Affairs Graduate Students? Journal of Public Affairs Education, 21(4), 575-594. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/24615546

Caillier, J. (2010). Factors affecting job performance in public agencies. Public

Performance & Management Review, 34(2), 139-165. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/41104055

Caillier, J. G. (2014, June). Toward a better understanding of the relationship between

transformational leadership, public service motivation, mission valence, and employee performance: a preliminary study. Public Personnel Management, 43(2), 218+. http://link.galegroup.com.libproxy.csun.edu/apps/doc/A369128715/ITOF?u=csunorthridge&sid=ITOF&xid=5ffa1340

Clark, P. M. (2015, Spring). Bringing meaningful change to performance management.

The Public Manager, 44(1), 30+. http://link.galegroup.com.libproxy.csun.edu/apps/doc/A404895496/ITOF?u=csunorthridge&sid=ITOF&xid=383b86b8

Einolf, C. (2016). Millennials and public service motivation: findings from a survey of

master’s degree students. Public Administration Quarterly, 40(3), 429-457. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/24772878

Ertas, N. (2016). Millennials and volunteering: sector differences and implications for

public service motivation theory. Public Administration Quarterly, 40(3), 517-558. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/24772881

Fernandez, S., & Moldogaziev, T. (2013). Using employee empowerment to encourage

innovative behavior in the public sector. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: J-PART, 23(1), 155-187. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/23321088

34

Gerhards, L., & Siemer, N. (2016). The Impact of Private and Public Feedback on Worker Performance-Evidence from the Lab. Economic Inquiry, 54(2), 1188–1201. https://doi-org.libproxy.csun.edu/10.1111/ecin.12310

Hall-Ellis, S. D. (2014). Reward systems promote high-performance work teams

achieving library mission. Bottom Line: Managing Library Finances, 27(2), 66–69. https://doi-org.libproxy.csun.edu/10.1108/BL-04-2014-0011

Hassan, S., & Hatmaker, D. M. (2014). Leadership and performance of public

employees: effects of the quality and characteristics of manager-employee relationships. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(4), 1127-1155. https://academic.oup.com/jpart/issue/25/4

Hassan, S., Wright, B. E., & Park, J. (2016). The role of employee task performance and

learning effort in determining empowering managerial practices: evidence from a public agency. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 36(1), 57–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X15570061

Hsieh, C., Yang, K., & Fu, K. (2012). Motivational bases and emotional labor: assessing

the impact of public service motivation. Public Administration Review, 72(2), 241-250. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/41433299

Huang X., Iun, J., Liu, A., & Gong, Y. (2010). Does participative leadership enhance

work performance by inducing empowerment or trust? The differential effects on managerial and non-managerial subordinates. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(1), 122-143. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/41683897

Jin, M. H., & McDonald, B. (2017). Understanding employee engagement in the public

sector: the role of immediate supervisor, perceived organizational support, and learning opportunities. The American Review of Public Administration, 47(8), 881–897. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074016643817

Kuhnen, C., & Tymula, A. (2012). Feedback, self-Esteem, and performance in

organizations. Management Science, 58(1), 94-113. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/41406374

Jacobson, W. S. (2011, Fall). Creating a motivated workforce: how organizations can

enhance and develop public service motivation (PSM). Public Personnel Management, 40(3), 215+. http://link.galegroup.com.libproxy.csun.edu/apps/doc/A266139762/ITOF?u=csunorthridge&sid=ITOF&xid=684f0540

Johansen, M., & Hawes, D. (2016). The effect of the tasks middle managers perform on

organizational performance. Public Administration Quarterly, 40(3), 589-616. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/24772883

35

Johnson, D., & Dickinson, A. (2010). Employee-of-the-Month Programs: Do They

Really Work? Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 30(4), 308–324. https://doi-org.libproxy.csun.edu/10.1080/01608061.2010.520144

Mandelbaum, R., & Zehavi, A. (2014). Recession as a window of opportunity for public

sector recruitment. Policy Studies, 35(2), 115–130. https://doi-org.libproxy.csun.edu/10.1080/01442872.2013.875142

Martin, S., Liao, H., & Campbell, E. (2013). Directive versus empowering leadership: a

field experiment comparing impacts on task proficiency and proactivity. The Academy of Management Journal, 56(5), 1372-1395. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/43589221

Mone, E., Eisinger, C., Guggenheim, K., Price, B., & Stine, C. (2011). Performance

management at the wheel: driving employee engagement in organizations. Journal of Business and Psychology, 26(2), 205-212. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/41474869

Onesti, T., Angiola, N., & Bianchi, P. (2016). Learning by using performance measures

in local governments: the perspective of public managers. Public Administration Quarterly, 40(4), 842-881. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/26383374

Pandey, S., Wright, B., & Moynihan, D. (2012). Pulling the levers: transformational

leadership, public service motivation, and mission valence. Public Administration Review, 72(2), 206-215. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/41433294

Perry, J., Mesch, D., & Paarlberg, L. (2006). Motivating employees in a new governance

era: the performance paradigm revisited. Public Administration Review, 66(4), 505-514. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/3843936

Steijn, B., & van der Voet, J. (2017). Relational job characteristics and job satisfaction of

public sector employees: When prosocial motivation and red tape collide. Public Administration, 97(1), 64– 80. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/padm.12352

Taylor, Frederick W. (1911). Principles of scientific management. Norwood, MA: Plimpton Press.

Tummers, L., & Knies, E. (2013). Leadership and meaningful work in the public

Sector. Public Administration Review, 73(6), 859-868. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/42003134

36

Van Wart, M. (2013). Lessons from leadership theory and the contemporary challenges of leaders. Public Administration Review, 73(4), 553-565. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/42003076

West, J. P., & Berman, E. M. (2011, Spring). The impact of management work habits on

public sector performance: a study of local government managers. Public Personnel Management, 40(1), 63+. http://link.galegroup.com.libproxy.csun.edu/apps/doc/A269776286/ITOF?u=csunorthridge&sid=ITOF&xid=20ff2f47

Yang, K., & Kassekert, A. (2010). Linking management reform with employee job

satisfaction: evidence from federal agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: J-PART, 20(2), 413-436. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.csun.edu/stable/40732517