Results of a Study

As indicated earlier in this study, two research samples were selected, each including 35 individuals. In the nonsupervisory sample, only 32 of the 35 individuals (91.4 percent) participated in the study, while in the supervisory sample, only 33 of the 35 individuals (94.3 percent) of the individuals participated in the study.

Mean perceptions of the two sample groups with respect to the characteristics (objectivity, validity, reliability, relevancy, equitability, and accountability) of the performance evaluation process are presented in table 1, which may be found on the following page. The terms objectivity, validity, reliability, relevancy, equitability, and accountability, as they apply to the personnel performance evaluation process were defined in chapter 3 of this study. On each of the questionnaires, items number one, four, seven, 10, 13, and 16 developed data pertaining to perceptions of the performance evaluation process, as opposed to the effects of that process on the morale and motivation of nonsupervisory employees

As the data presented in the table indicate, neither of the sample groups gave high marks to the existing performance evaluation process. Most perceptions of each of the sample groups indicated that the existing perfo

. . .
did not exert positive effects on the motivation of the nonsupervisory civilian workers. With respect to each of the six characteristics, however, the nonsupervisory sample held stronger negative perceptions than did the supervisory sample.Table 5 Summary of Chi Square Results: Extent to Which the Performance Evaluation Process Affected Motivation =============================================================== Characteristic Degrees of Critical Calculated Significant Freedom Value @ Value @ p<.05 p<.05      Objectivity 5 11.070 4.800 No Validity 5 11.070 4.300 No Reliability 5 11.070 1.900 No Relevancy 5 11.070 6.440 No Equity 5 11.070 5.670 No Accountability 5 11.070 4.350 No =============================================================== As the data presented in table
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Nonsupervisory Supervisory, , Force Base, performance evaluation, evaluation process, performance evaluation process, Question Evaluation, existing performance evaluation, Characteristic Sample, Perceptions Sample, Affected Morale, existing performance, Evaluation Process, Freedom Value, validity reliability relevancy, personnel performance, reliability relevancy, validity reliability, objectivity validity, perceptions sample, objectivity validity reliability, personnel performance evaluation, accountability apply, apply personnel, Performance Evaluation,
Approximate Word count = 4395
Approximate Pages = 18 (250 words per page)

More Essays on Results of a Study