The Perceived Affordances and Challenges in the Newly Introduced OKR-Based Performance Appraisal System in an Omani HEI

Abstract

Performance appraisal (PA) is a valuable tool used by organizations to improve and enhance their employees’ competencies and ensure their organizational capability to cope with a dynamic world. The newly introduced Objectives and Key Results (OKR) PA system in Oman has been a source of concern and controversial debate among governmental employees, particularly academics. This exploratory study aims to address the following research questions: (1) What are the perceived affordances of OKR metrics? (2) What difficulties have most academics experienced with the new PA system? (3) What are the perceived challenges in coping with the requirements of OKR metrics? The necessary data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 11 academic staff members at University of Technology and Applied Sciences—Rustaq. The findings of this study have the potential to inform decisions of line managers and any developing performance appraisal system to incorporate types of training suitable to the needs of employees.

Introduction

Effective performance appraisal (PA) mechanisms could be, though this has been controversial, argued for as a way to mitigate defective traditional systems of monitoring performance, if well established (Roberts, 2003). Undoubtedly, appraising performance is one of the most significant practices in human resource management. Based on its outcomes, a wide range of decisions concerning not only recruitment but also professional development, appointments, promotion, and productivity are taken (Alharbi, 2013; Dasanayaka et al., 2021; Khtere, 2020; Sułkowski et al., 2020). While not a new practice, PA is becoming increasingly important in the public sector in Oman because the government needs appropriate and reliable data about how well its employees are performing and to what extent they are meeting the targets and their responsibilities. In short, the data generated by PA play an important role in maintaining current operations and planning future ones in Oman as much as elsewhere.

Due to the aspiration and plans of His Majesty Sultan Haitham bin Tariq, ruler of Oman, invigorated in the Oman 2040 Vision, many transformations were conceived. One of which is the nationally unified individual performance and institutional excellence system, to monitor operational expenditures and regulate expenditure in the financial balance plan. The system is to be widely implemented by more than 57 governmental bodies and entities. According to the Ministry of Labor, the body in charge of developing, launching, executing, and reviewing the new system, the system’s main goals are to develop the human resources system by creating a culture of work performance competency, improving performance appraisal systems, and linking productivity to incentives. The previous performance appraisal was personal in nature, as the criteria utilized were primarily focused on the employees’ personal traits rather than their actual workplace performance. Every employee was promoted in a certain year or specific years and received the same yearly allowance, with a few exceptions. The new system, on the other hand, places a greater emphasis on accountability by ensuring that responsibilities are distributed properly and fairly. Group promotions will no longer be available in the new system; instead, a yearly promotion category will be established based on each institution’s annual budgetary allocation/allowance.

According to the Ministry of Labor, the newly developed system would benefit employees, the managers, the institution, and the community in a variety of ways. As for the employees, the new system will enable them to clarify their tasks and responsibilities, align their objectives with their institutional objectives, achieve transparency in their jobs, assist them in following up on their tasks, and receive continuous feedback from their managers. This will allow employees to complete their tasks more efficiently and be rewarded for their outstanding performance (Doerr, 2018; Mangipudi et al., 2021; Niven & Lamorte, 2016). Furthermore, the newly established system is expected to assist managers in leading their staff more effectively, developing their talents, encouraging and inspiring them, rewarding those who thrive, and determining alternatives and an appropriate mechanism for dealing with those who perform poorly. It also allows managers to track and analyze their employees’ performance to ensure that everyone is working efficiently (Doerr, 2018; Niven & Lamorte, 2016). In terms of the institution, the new system contributes to the implementation of the institutional plan, the maintenance of competencies, and the increase of production and employee loyalty, as well as the effective use of human resources within the institution (Al Thinyan et al., 2022; Mangipudi et al., 2021; Zhou & He, 2018). Moreover, it benefits institutions on a variety of levels, including creating a positive work environment, implementing a system that effectively utilizes employees’ skills, and identifying qualified individuals for leadership roles (Doerr, 2018; Niven & Lamorte, 2016). Communities will benefit from the new system as well, since it aims at improving the quality of government services provided to them, hence increasing public confidence in the government.

The measurement tool employed in Oman is OKRs, an acronym for objectives and key results, which is the tool used for accumulating employee performance involving feedback from a direct employer or leader. The tool was first introduced by Doerr (2018). It sets high decision makers’ goals and effectively aligns the respective goals of individual employees (De Waal et al., 2011). In essence, individual employee’s objectives should not only be consistent with the institution’s goals, but strive to achieve them through stated key results, OKRs (Geraghty, 2014). Generally, each objective is followed by three to five OKRs (Odongo & Wang, 2019). Individual employees must set three to five SMART objectives, each with three key objectives (Odongo & Wang, 2019). SMART means that the objectives should be specific, measurable, achievable, and relevant to the institution’s main goal and within a specified time frame. Employees can develop their plan using a variety of resources, including the institution’s yearly plan, the employees’ job descriptions, and the institution’s goals. Employees must determine the sort of indicator that will be used to assess the progress of their objectives, as well as the target and actual accomplishments of their goals.

Given that OKR has been implemented within Omani governmental bodies, the researchers are interested in highlighting the development and changes in academics’ trajectories as a result of adopting OKRs as an integral part of career development in Oman. Therefore, clarifying and understanding employees’ perceptions, fears, and levels of apprehension are major factors that should be tracked from the earliest opportunity in order to promote and make headway toward proper implementation and support. It is indeed a focus that has rarely been explored in previous research as can be seen in the following literature review.

Theoretical Underpinnings

PA is generally defined as a formal process or practice of evaluating an employee’s performance in light of the institution’s goals. Employers’ expectations of their employees’ growth, productivity, and attitudes toward work are important aspects of PA (Alharbi, 2013; Ragupathi & Christy, 2017). PA is implemented regularly in many organizations to enhance and develop employees’ competencies with a view to promoting the quality of production and profits and to cope with the rapidly changing world (Alharbi, 2013; Alhassan & Ali, 2019). PA also has a significant impact on employee satisfaction in the organization. Establishment, implementation, communication, administration, and review are just a few of the processes involved in PA. Although understanding the consequences of PA is important, knowing how to establish and develop more effective PA systems remains also significant. This is because an ineffective performance assessment system can result in erroneous PA, which can lead to dissatisfaction, mediocre performance, low motivation, and a lack of dedication from the employees (Alharbi, 2013; Alhassan & Ali, 2019; Biswakarma, 2017; Dasanayaka et al., 2021).

In response to calls for accountability and transparency in higher education, academic staff performance appraisal has received considerable attention. PA is increasingly being used by higher education institutions (HEIs) throughout the world to assure high-quality educational outcomes and to effectively implement the standards of national and international quality assurance and academic accreditation bodies (Alhassan & Ali, 2019; Dasanayaka et al., 2021; Khtere, 2020; Kimanje et al., 2019; Sułkowski et al., 2020). Academic staff appraisal has long been seen as a critical issue that academic professionals must successfully address and embrace as a vital aspect of their work. The implementation of PA has been a controversial issue among both academic and non-academic staff (Alhassan & Ali, 2019). This is because concerns have been raised about the extent to which the ways in which PA is carried out are comprehensive, transparent, and fair to truly and effectively reflect employees’ performance and improve their performance and engagement (Alhassan & Ali, 2019). Clearly, the academic staff involvement in such a process should be embedded in their daily roles and responsibilities. However, it was evident that some PA systems do not positively enact teachers’ growth and training as is required (e.g., Arinaitwe et al., 2021; Boachie-Mensah & Seidu, 2012).

PA is significant to an organization’s success because it provides low-performers with suggestions for improvement and high-performers with tools to maintain and even surpass their already high levels of performance (Alharbi, 2013). The outcomes of PA can have a profound impact on employees’ perceptions, satisfaction, and motivation, not only toward their job but also their organization (Alhassan & Ali, 2019; Khtere, 2020; Kimanje et al., 2019; Ragupathi & Christy, 2017). Therefore, employees’ understanding, perceptions, and satisfaction with PA are significant to its effectiveness and success. Employees’ dissatisfaction with the PA system has been documented in a variety of industries. Employees’ dissatisfaction was linked mostly to the inability of the PA policy to motivate, promote, and improve employee performance (see, i.e., Awan et al., 2020; Cadez et al., 2017; K. Kallio & Kallio, 2014; T. Kallio et al., 2021; Turk, 2010).

Considering the psychometric approach as the only model to improve PA was shown to be less effective in reaching the desired results in enhancing the PA process. As a result, taking into account employees’ perspectives might play an important role to enhance the PA process and outcomes (Alharbi, 2013; Dasanayaka et al., 2021; Ragupathi & Christy, 2017). Furthermore, there appears to be a scarcity of studies in this area in the Middle East and Arab world, notably in the Gulf State of Oman, as the majority of research in this area has taken place in the United States (Alharbi, 2013; Dasanayaka et al., 2021). In this regard, additional research into employees’ views of PA in the Middle East and specifically Oman needs to be examined. On this basis, it can be ascertained whether their concerns and perceptions are comparable to other employees’ perspectives in different contexts reported in earlier studies. Given that a new PA system was introduced and was officially implemented by January 2022, associated research can provide insights into how implementation of the process can be enhanced. Indeed, the perceptions of academic staff are of considerable value to further improve and implement the newly introduced PA system more effectively to meet both the expectations of academics and robust international practices in this regard. Considering employees’ perceptions regarding the performance management system has been emphasized throughout the literature (see, i.e., Cadez et al., 2017; K. Kallio & Kallio, 2014; T. Kallio et al., 2021; Turk, 2010)

OKRs as a Tool for Managing Staff Performance

As has been explained, Objectives and Key Results (OKRs) have been widely used as a performance appraisal tool. Although Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and OKRs might overlap, they are two distinct concepts. KPI is a type of performance measurement used to assess how well a current procedure or a particular activity is working. For example, a KPI assesses the effectiveness of a continuous process or activity in terms of quantity or quality. OKRs can be considered as a framework by itself whereas KPIs are seen as a measurement within this framework. For instance, to evaluate the degree to which each key result has been accomplished, it is crucial to specify a clear and measurable key performance indicator for each key result. OKRs are ambitious since they are based on overarching aims and objectives that are meant to develop both employees and organization. They involve an ongoing cycle of rapid and dynamic growth for the organization and its employees (Al Thinyan et al., 2022; Mangipudi et al., 2021; Zhou & He, 2018). There are a number of features that distinguish OKRs from KPIs, including their greater potential to enhance employees’ accountability, engagement, motivation, and productivity. First, the system is considered transparent because the assessment criteria used are well-defined, and individuals are aware of and understand them (Doerr, 2018; Niven & Lamorte, 2016). The system is designed to enable individuals to set a number of clear and measurable objectives based on the plan and goals of the organization or department. Individuals’ success, according to OKRs, is largely determined by their ability to create clear, quantifiable, realistic, and achievable objectives that are consistent with their job description and organizational goals. Jose (2011) found that when job descriptions and organizational goals are utilized as the bases for performance evaluation, employees become more motivated toward their work and have a better understanding of their responsibilities and what is expected of them. Similarly, Mangipudi et al. (2021) maintain that OKRs provide employees with a sense of awareness and transparency because OKRs are observable and transparent for those involved in the mechanism. This enables the employees of an organization on every hierarchy level to align themselves with the OKRs. As a result, employees will first and foremost be reminded of and committed to the organization’s vision, mission, and core values.

Second, OKRs are believed to effectively enhance accountability since employees’ progress is frequently checked and discussed (Al Thinyan et al., 2022; Zhou & He, 2018). For example, OKRs enable employees to assess their own progress because they are required to meet certain objectives within a specific time frame, thereby improving their sense of responsibility and engagement (Al Thinyan et al., 2022; Balitalli & Bhushi, 2019; Doerr, 2018; Mangipudi et al., 2021). Additionally, discussing employees’ OKRs and performance evaluation results is an important component of the OKRs tool, which is considered to be a healthy practice that enhances employee satisfaction (Al Fazari & Firdouse, 2016). Employees are more likely to be satisfied with their performance assessment outcomes if they are given the opportunity to openly discuss it with their managers (Akinbowale et al., 2013).

Third, OKRs help employees and their managers to focus more on the organizational plan and eliminate uncertainty. This is due to the fact that employees are expected to establish a certain number of goals that are in line with the organization’s goals. Thus, more priority is given to goal achievement by the employees themselves. For example, using OKRs has been a significant contributor to Google’s success since 1999: incorporating OKRs as the main management approach in performance appraisal has enabled the company to focus more on a collaborative effort to achieve the organizational desirable objectives and goals more effectively. Other leading organizations, such as Oracle, Netflix, and LinkedIn have also included OKRs in their everyday operations to emphasize the link between individual employees’ goals and the organization’s goals (Balitalli & Bhushi, 2019; Doerr, 2018; Niven & Lamorte, 2016).

Fourth, the OKRs tool allows individuals and organizations to frequently establish and update their priorities because it adopts regular goals setting, as most OKRs practitioners will create objectives quarterly (Doerr, 2018; Mangipudi et al., 2021; Niven & Lamorte, 2016). This frequent setting of goals is vital to the organization to cope with the rapidly changing world where it is essential that new information be acquired, processed, and transformed into knowledge that can be used to innovate and potentially improve the organization strategy plan (Niven & Lamorte, 2016). Niven and Lamorte (2016) report that companies which establish quarterly goals are almost four times more likely to perform better. Furthermore, the frequent setting of goals is a particularly useful practice for employees to reflect on and improve their performance more regularly. Employees’ development should be understood as a continual cycle of setting goals, with performance being evaluated based on achieving those goals and then setting new higher goals (Nurse, 2005).

Fifth, OKRs is an important tool that promotes a culture of positive competition and innovation among employees and organizations. Adopting a growth mindset is important for organizations to compete in today’s global economy. Therefore, stepping out of any predefined comfort zone and setting more challenging goals is vital. The OKRs tool is designed to push the organization’s teams to fundamentally rethink how work is done, which contributes to developing human resources performance and empowering innovation (Doerr, 2018; Niven & Lamorte, 2016).

Human Capital Theory and Performance Management

The success of the organization is significantly influenced by the human aspect. In today’s rapidly changing, globalized world, human resources are seen as a crucial facilitator for an organization’s ability to compete and survive (Isychou et al., 2016). Allui and Sahni (2016) argue that human capital is more significant than new technologies or financial and material resources. Indeed, they emphasize that human capital is more important than ever before due to the changing nature of work in the knowledge-based economy of the 21st century, particularly in terms of organizational, technological, and competitive development (Allui & Sahni, 2016). This suggests that organizations are likely to face a constant struggle to find and keep a sufficient number of qualified employees (Akoi & Yediltas, 2020; Allui & Sahni, 2016). Human capital is broadly defined by Edvinsson and Malone (1997) as “the combined knowledge, skill, creativity, and individual capability of the employees, used for the duty accomplishment, as people are those resources that can learn, change, innovate, and provide creativity in such a way that, if properly, motivated, are able to ensure competitive advantage and survival of the organization” (Isychou et al., 2016, p. 88). This definition underlines how human capital should be seen as “the integration of knowledge, learning, experience, core competencies, skills, ability to be possessed by every employee that exists within an organization or company” (Sari, 2015, p. 284). Employees’ knowledge, motivation, creativity, and skills are clearly crucial factors for an organization to perform highly and successfully (Isychou et al., 2016)

It is widely accepted that human capital has gained importance due to the significant requirement for an organization to perform and compete successfully. According to Collins and Clark (2003), there is a significant relationship between organizational performance and human management. As a result, implementing effective human capital practices has a significant effect on the productivity and performance of an organization (Isychou et al., 2016; Tanveer & Karim, 2018). These practices include employees’ selection and recruitment, performance appraisal, employees training and development, reward, and benefits. It is crucial that employees are aware of what is expected of them as well as how their work and performance are evaluated. Consequently, achieving high levels of employees’ productivity is thought to depend significantly on the adoption of an effective and reliable performance appraisal system (Isychou et al., 2016; Tanveer & Karim, 2018). In theory, a well-designed performance appraisal system makes it possible to highlight strengths and deficiencies, identify training needs, incentives, professional development, and improve employees’ performance in general by giving them constructive feedback (Allui & Sahni, 2016; Isychou et al., 2016; Tanveer & Karim, 2018). A well-designed performance appraisal also enables organizations to prioritize tasks, develop policies, and take corrective action to continuously improve the quality of work produced (Isychou et al., 2016; Sari, 2015). This reiterates how performance appraisal has become a useful tool for improving both organizational and employee professional development (Zeb et al., 2018).

Recently more emphasis has been placed on Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) to demonstrate their importance, effectiveness, and strategies for accomplishing their goals. Furthermore, in response to calls of accountability, HEIs are also requested to provide students, their parents/legal guardians and the public in general information regarding how their resources and priorities are allocated (Allui & Sahni, 2016; Tanveer & Karim, 2018). In response to these growing demands, HEIs need to work tirelessly to improve the quality and the efficiency of their human management systems. For example, they need to improve the performance of their staff—particularly academics, their recruitment, training, reward, motivation, and evaluation. Tanveer and Karim (2018) convincingly argued that these management practices are highly important in enhancing HEIs’ overall effectiveness and competitiveness.

Methodology

Research Design

This study utilized a qualitative research design which was underpinned by a case study approach. Yin (2009) argues that the case study as a research strategy enables the researcher to gain a deep understanding of their participants’ experiences, views, and perspectives in a natural context (p. 13). Qualitative research tends to use purposive sampling to study small samples which allows particular insights into social processes in order to ensure the richness of the data gathered (Prior, 2004). Therefore, this study utilizes a purposive sampling procedure.

Participants

A qualitative case study is employed with academic faculty members where the researchers currently work. The data were collected via a semi-structured interview that is divided into three main sections: perceptions, experiences, and realities, potential for improvement. Ethical approval was gained from the college where the study took place before conducting any interview. The ethical number is 2021ENGL4.

The participants who took part in study were university professors with substantial managerial and teaching experiences in Oman and beyond. The selected groups of teachers were relatively homogenous in educational level and the number of years in management and teaching. The research tool seeks to elicit participants’ perspectives on the following three main research questions: (1) What are the perceived affordances of OKR metrics? (2) What are the perceived challenges in coping with the requirements of OKR metrics? (3) What difficulties have most academics experienced with the new PA system?

The participants comprise 11 academic faculty members from four academic departments namely, English Language and Literature (ELL), Science, Math, and General Requirements at UTAS-Rustaq (see Table A1 in the appendix). This number of participants is considered sufficient for qualitative preliminary study (Boddy, 2016) as the focus is to understand and produce a thick description. The interview checklist was developed with a consultation of quality assurance officers and drawing on departmental meetings and discussions as the researchers are academic faculty who are coordinating academic quality operations and processes.

Participants were selected using purposive sampling as being involved in many of the college activities and committees. All participants are experienced with quality-assurance related tasks which require management and reflective practice—skills that enrich the discussion, which not only draws on their experiences but also their judgment.

Trustworthiness of the Data

Trustworthiness is of utmost importance in qualitative research to establish, assure, and enhance research credibility and quality. Several strategies were taken into account to sustain trustworthiness and increase confidence in the data and study findings to disambiguate and give insights to the researchers, thereby strengthening the research argument (Guba & Lincoln, 1994; Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Shenton, 2004, p. 67).

In particular, Lincoln and Guba (1985) suggest “trustworthiness” criteria (qualitative criteria) as alternatives to “validity” and “reliability” (quantitative criteria) which includes credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability. These criteria enable the researcher to ensure that there is a logical link between different steps throughput the research process and increase confidence on study findings.

As for credibility, the researchers employed different strategies to ensure that there greater was congruence between the findings and reality. Both peer scrutiny and member checking—in which participants are asked to confirm the accuracy of accounts representing them (Creswell & Creswell, 2023)—were used to increase the credibility of the findings and strengthen the quality of the data analysis. Moreover, honesty was assured by giving the participants the opportunity to withdraw from the study at any time. Moreover, care was taken to establish and sustain the trustworthiness of the study and to address ethical issues arising during the data collection and analysis process. Some important ethical considerations were taken into account including confidentiality, anonymity, and sensitivity and consent of study participants. The data gathered and information on respondents’ identities were kept confidential and password protected when stored electronically.

The findings of this small scale study was may be transferrable to similar contexts; however, generalization was not the aim of this qualitative study. To support transferability in this study, sufficient description on the methods of data collection, procedures, sample, and context were provided. All the procedural and analytical aspects of the data were described thoroughly in order to help the reader to judge whether or not such findings might be applied to other similar settings by employing the same methods.

To ensure this study has dependability, all the processes were described in detail, namely, the research design and its execution so that the reader could gain a thorough understanding of the methods and their effectiveness. All coding differences among the study researchers were discussed and resolved and my initial codes were then revisited, refined, and modified.

Confirmability refers to the extent to which researchers are explicit and aware of their influences on the data in the research (Miles & Huberman, 1994; Patton, 2002). For this study, the researchers adopted a qualitative method with a case study approach which were appropriate to the research aims and questions. A detailed methodological description was provided to enable the reader to determine how far the data and construct emerging from the study are accepted. Additionally, sufficient extracts from the data were provided to support the confirmability in this study.

Data collection and Analysis

The semi-structured interviews in this study were conducted in order to explore participants’ experiences and perspectives about the newly-introduced performance management system. Several opportunities were provided throughout the interviews for the participants to expand and add any information that they wished to share with regard to their experience or the new system. The interviews with the teachers were conducted in English, as all participants were able to express their ideas and experiences clearly in English, and lasted approximately 1 hour on average.

Semi-structured interviews were employed because they were appropriate for this study and allowed the researchers to be flexible and responsive. They also allowed the researchers to follow up the interviewees’ answers and provide an opportunity to ask for clarification if necessary or to probe unexpected responses (Kvale, 2007). The semi-structured interviews helped the participants to express themselves freely and discuss wider issues related to the newly-introduced performance appraisal system, rather than having their responses guided or limited by a more structured format. As Kvale and Brinkmann (2009) advocate:

Interviews are particularly well-suited for studying people’s understanding of the meanings in their lived world, describing their experiences and self-understanding, and clarifying an elaborating their own perspectives on their lived world. (p. 116)

The recorded interviews were transcribed via an online website called otter.ai and checked for accuracy by the three authors of this paper. There were some inconsistencies which were required manual correction due to interviewees using fillers in Arabic and redundancy of spoken words. After that, thematic analysis was utilized (Braun & Clarke’s, 2006; Bell et al., 2022) and the researchers coded and double-checked the codes of the interviews; this required them to convene and agree to follow similar mechanisms for assuring inter-rater reliability. Finally, the codes and themes were checked and generated in collaboration.

The six phases of Braun and Clarke’s (2006) thematic analysis were carried out, namely, familiarization with data including the transcription of the recorded interviews and generating initial themes by coding, categorizing and sorting out codes in relation to research questions. Subsequently, generated codes, sub-codes, and emerging themes were further scrutinized, reviewed, and organized to fit the overarching objective of the study. Then the themes were further refined and reviewed to establish internal coherences among them and some were broken to sub-themes. Finally, the themes were further rephrased, reorganized, and refined to capture key aspects of data.

Findings

This section presents the themes uncovered during data analysis which are organized under the two main foci of the paper. The analysis reveals interconnected themes which did not necessarily fall under one category as will be presented below. In the interests of anonymity, participants will be referred to as “P” followed by a corresponding number.

Perceived affordances of the New OKRs-based Performance Appraisal System

Theme 1: Opportunity for Change

Code 1: Outcome Oriented Work

Outcomes oriented work is explained by the participants as productivity toward achieving institutional goals and focus on publications and other professional related activities. Evidence from the interviews with the selected academic participants suggests that some participants perceived the new OKRs-based performance appraisal system as a catalyst for action and subsequent outcomes. P1 emphasized the clarity and usefulness for the whole organization:

The new system will force everybody to do something. Similarly, I was so happy about it because I was working for the private sector, and really know what exactly it means, really know what kind of outcomes would be there for the Institute, for the employees, for the society, for customers, for everybody, for all stakeholders” (P1).

Likewise, P4 was aware of previous implementation of OKR and noted that its users from across the workforce were largely unanimous in their positive evaluation of it: “OKR is the system used in the private sector and it works successfully. Many people are happy with it.”

The above comments are promising and suggest that the new performance appraisal system has the potential to push employees to work harder and this in turn will likely improve the HEIs productivity. Another participant echoed this view:

“The new system is that we know that we need to provide evidence of achieving the objectives, and we need to work on it from the beginning…… This makes us more serious about achieving the objectives.” (P4).

This comment illustrates that the new system is evidence-based and faculty members have to work harder to meet the requirements of the system. The participants appreciated the role of the new system in helping them to take things seriously and achieve their long-term and short-term objectives.

Another participant believed that the new PA would increase staff productivity through improved tracking of the process and outcomes:

“So, each employee will work hard and will be committed to achieve these outcomes that they have prepared. So, yeah, so it will increase productivity and since the duties will be followed or let’s like to be monitored maybe by employees. So of course (P3)

Similarly, another participant agreed that the implementation of the new PA will promote a more positive competitive academic environment.

“It, you know, gives us the opportunity to distinguish between people who are serious in their work, who are moving forward, who are developing themselves and developing their workplace.” (P11)

As a result of implementation of the new performance appraisal (PA), some participants expected more publications, more involvement in scientific and professional development events, and more progress in teaching (integrating new-methods and technologies) at the College.

Code 2: Recognition

The increase in productivity might be explained in terms of the promotion mechanism of the new system which links productivity with incentives and promotion. Unlike the previous PA system, which promoted all employees regardless of their performance or productivity and accountability in certain years, the new PA system links high performance and production to incentives. As one participant pointed out,

“If there is no quality, you will not be promoted.” (P1)

Code 3: Motivated to Compete

Individuals are expected to compete to produce the best they can in order to achieve particular standards in order to be promoted and rewarded. The following excerpt from one of the participants clearly highlights the positive perception of this approach and its relevance to academic work:

“The old system in fact was treating everyone similar. ……. After four years, everybody will be promoted…regardless of whether you have done outstanding efforts or not….it is no longer now. It is about how much you spent, how much effort you give, how creative you are… how much you are willing to go out of the box that will be rewarded.” (P1)

Another participant said:

“The employee will be motivated to work hard towards achieving these objectives.”(P3)

This finding supported the claim made in previous research that an efficient performance appraisal system may be utilized to successfully motivate and lead academic staff members’ activities while also ensuring that such activities are in line with their institution’s strategic planning (Alharbi, 2013, Allui & Sahni, 2016, Zeb et al., 2018). According to the human capital perspective, employees should be encouraged and motivated to use their skills, ability, knowledge, and education to improve their performance, increase the productivity of their organization and promote the competitiveness between organizations. This can best be done by designing and implementing an effective PA system that promotes employee motivation and innovation (Allui & Sahni, 2016; Isychou et al., 2016).

Code 4: Affordance of Technology

A participant reported how Objectives and Key Results (OKRs) was aligned to technological factors and the changing work environment:

And we are connected to technology by using this system, rather than doing things on paper and now everyone can see what is going on the system, actually myself or HoDs [Head of Departments] and managers. Everything will be consistent for everyone.” (P7)

It is quite evident that implementing a digital PA system has helped in this regard. The new PA is an electronic one, which positively contributes to streamlining the follow-up and documentation processes. Previous research suggested that a digital performance appraisal system is a two-way communication tool which documents employees’ involvement and offers evidence of their performance and contribution on the one hand, while facilitating the coordination process between staff members and management on the other (Geshkov, 2021).

Code 5: Prioritizing Responsibilities

Moreover, some participants stated that implementing the OKRs system will help them organize their work because they will only have to focus on a few objectives (three to five objectives with three key results for each objective) every period. These goals should, in reality, be in line with the institution’s aims as well as the department’s operational plan which would increase employees’ understanding and awareness of the institution’s strategic goals and operational strategy as one of the participants highlighted.

Another participant referred directly to the dynamic nature of the feedback process and its benefits:

“And the good thing is that you will get feedback from your HoD. And this is good that after getting the feedback, you will try to improve to work for the better.” (P6)

This interview extract indeed illustrates that the new system can offer opportunities for faculty members and employees to receive timely feedback on their performance. Participants emphasized the importance of feedback in enhancing staff performance, which is a key component of the new PA system. They believe that receiving regular feedback will greatly improve their performance and help them identify their needs. This finding is consistent with previous studies (Al Fazari & Firdouse, 2016; Akinbowale et al., 2013)

RQ2. What are perceived difficulties or challenges in coping with the requirements of the PA and how have they adjusted and adapted to the new PA?

Theme 1: Opportunities for Quantity and Quality Measures

Code1: Reduced Quality

Some participants, however, expressed concerns about the quality of the work that will be produced. The reason articulated for this issue was that the new performance appraisal system does not simply comprise quality as an integral component of the new PA. “For example, what are the possible repercussions of poor performance (e.g., in cases where teaching and scientific research activities were poor)?” (P3)

This participant explained this point further:

“However, the focus is only on the achievements…. How about the efficiency of doing it? Is it evaluated? Is it assessed…Yes, we will teach one course or two, but the quality of teaching is assessed in this system?” (P3)

Similar findings were also reported by previous studies (Alhassan & Ali, 2019; Sułkowski et al., 2020) indicating that HEIs do not adequately define and distinguish between the quality and quantity of scientific work in the PA system, particularly in regard to research components.

A further concern from Participant 11 related to perceptions around a product rather than process approach to appraisal:

“When teachers are only evaluated by the products and the final results if you are not achieving whatever you have claimed, you know, as a process within the process, within the evidence, still you are not going to obtain whatever you have your plan … they don’t come to you and observe your classroom on a daily basis or a weekly basis, but eventually they want to see the learners feedback, course feedback, courses feedback, and they would see that.”(P11)

This participant believed that teachers deal with students so there are some cases where their planned objectives might be achieved successfully but with poor results. Little et al. (2009) and Stronge (2010) pointed out that teacher effectiveness cannot be explained only by teachers’ observable characteristics and achievement (education and experience) or by value-added models (statistical models) to identify teachers’ contribution to students test score gains. It seems that a holistic approach is required when gauging how successfully goals have been achieved. A further implication is that it is important to recognize academic work as complex and multifaceted. Consequently, the Objectives and Key Results (OKRs) systems must be adequately adapted to fit the intended purpose.

Code2: Intensified Quality

Some participants, on the other hand, believed that the new PA would improve work quality. Promotion linked to the new PA system might be a key motivator that fosters improvements in the quality of work produced. One of the participants cogently explained the synergy between quality and progression:

“…you will realize that there is no room for people who are not producing quality, quality teaching, and quality research of whatever they do. Because now it is going to be a kind of survival. If you want to be part of those people who are promoted, you will need to improve the quality of whatever you do”.(P1)

As can be seen from the above interview extracts, participants have mixed views about the new PA’s role in improving work quality. This could be due to the fact that individuals might define quality differently. Lack of consistent definition of quality might affect the way people think about work quality. This indicates that the new PA is intended to improve employees’ knowledge and awareness of their institutions’ goals and encourage them to work toward them, thereby ensuring that the institution continues to progress toward its strategic plan. This finding lends support to previous studies (Allui & Sahni, 2016; Isychou et al., 2016; Zhou & He, 2018) in that integrating job descriptions and organizational goals with performance appraisals is a key motivator for employees to obtain a better understanding of their roles.

Code 3 Condensed Objectives not Suitable for Academic Practice

A participant revealed personal concerns about the new system in terms of how it relates to existing procedures:

“I think sometimes it is very difficult to do it. I mean to choose which objectives to put there, because there are so many objectives, and all of them are important for us as academics. So when I tried to put my objectives for the first time, yeah, I was so confused, actually, I mean, I needed to look at the OP (Operational Plan) and SP (Strategic Plan), and my own job description, and to look at all of the objectives there. So, it’s somehow confusing for me to narrow those objectives.” (P 6)

This participant voiced concern about the fact that they only need to include three to five objectives in each period of their plan. This indicates that academics need to prioritize some objectives over others, which is a difficult task because academics have many tasks on their agendas that require a significant amount of planning and effort to be completed over the academic year.

The participant went on to express concerns about how duties beyond stated OKRs would be treated:

“There is no control by the system if other important duties (if not in OKR) are neglected.” (P2)

The participant also clarified,

“Academic work that is of quality requires longer time e.g., conferences and research papers.” (P2)

A participant also added,

“So sometimes that would make me maybe step down from writing these objectives, because I am not sure what I am going to achieve in this short period of time, so I will always try to choose 5 objectives which I am sure I am going to achieve.” (P 6)

This quote illustrates that the new system might make some faculty members compromise their academic work at the expense of achieving few objectives which do not reflect the dynamic nature of the academic work.

Another participant voiced a concern regarding the reduction of their working life to merely a few objectives:

“What about the other tasks? Yes, so employees might not focus on them. Yes, let’s say teaching, maybe community services and research, so three objectives. Yes. What about other duties? So, since the employee is not going to be assessed, just no evidence on that. I think the other part will be affected.” (P3)

This, however, may have some negative implications, as it may lead to overlooking other duties that are difficult to achieve and measure but are critical to the continuation and success of the work. Some participants expressed concern that some tasks and duties would not be attended to as a result of the new system’s requirement that employees need to achieve a certain number of goals in a certain amount of time and provide evidence of their accomplishments.

Code4: Lack of Proper Training

Another participant’s comments revealed:

“Line managers need to be thoroughly trained in order to handle the new system more effectively. Otherwise, their evaluation will be rather subjective and unfair. Offering an appropriate training on the new system would be another challenge for the HEIs. Moreover, prioritized objectives would be another serious challenge.” P2

This participant had concerns about the lack of training on how the new system might invalidate the whole process. Evaluators without proper training might impair validity in the evaluation instrument (Little et al., 2009), with a risk of subjectivity. Isychou et al., (2016), in their study, conclude that a gap sometimes exists between how employees evaluate their performance and how their senior managers evaluate them. They explain that this gap could originate from the fact that employees are unable to evaluate their abilities objectively as they have high expectations about their own ability. However, senior managers can fail to evaluate their employees objectively if they are not well trained. Zhou and He (2018) argued that implementing the OKRs-based performance appraisal is particularly challenging at the leadership and management levels since it requires different leadership abilities and styles. They believed that an OKRs-based system is not adequate for authoritarian leadership. Therefore, training senior managers is key to improving managers’ evaluation and leadership skills to assess their employees’ performance more objectively (Ahmad & Bujang, 2013).

Code 5 Subjectivity of Evaluation

Participant 2 crystallized below some of these management concerns on how objectives are selected and objectively evaluated:

“I’m quite scared that it might go through I don’t know, definitely they are trying to go toward this objectivity more, but I still believe that subjectivity is going to be there. Because of the subjectivity in evaluating which objectives to choose from teachers’ side, and limited period teachers are given to accomplish their objectives, teachers stated (per interview) that they prioritized their objectives based on their ability to achieve them within the time limit. It is being mentioned that although academic work is more than 3 OKRs, teachers have the freedom to choose whatever they want. They will evaluate me only according to my plan’’ (P2).

Overall, the study has two main themes: opportunities for change, and opportunities for quality and quantity measures. Under those themes, there are 11 codes which show perception of the faculty toward positive change alongside concerns regarding the measures such as quality, condensed, and unrepresentative objectives of the academic work, and subjectivity of evaluation. Those concerns are, nonetheless, legitimate considering the system is new to them and widely used for profit-oriented purposes.

Discussion and Recommendations

The potential to guide HR and HE education managers efficiently has to incorporate and manage the human factors (Akoi & Yediltas, 2020; Allui & Sahni, 2016) properly to effect change toward priorities, as it is applied in Oman which is directed toward achieving 2040 national and educational priorities. Beyond the Omani context, there are managerial facets and the implications that lie in the insights offered to the managers on how to handle and manage their employees to minimize any possible confrontation and conflicts when implementing a new system.

A major finding of this study is the perceived opportunities toward change based on the new OKRs appraisal system that are manifested in outcome driven work, recognition, motivation toward competition, technologized system, prioritizing responsibilities, and feedback integration into the system. Notably, the employees see positive potential for both personal and departmental achievements that are meaningful to them. It seems that the clarity of the system and systematic reiteration and preparedness are major driving factors for successful implementation.

On the other hand, the findings highlight that the main concerns of the participants in regards to OKRs implementation is the lack of training and their fears of being evaluated subjectively. Training is a key aspect in improving employee performance, particularly when new management practices are introduced. Furthermore, we believe that training the appraisers is an important first step to make the PA work more effectively. For instance, subjectivity can be reduced or eliminated by training the appraisers and this will improve the accuracy of rating the outcomes. Moreover, sufficient training for appraisers on how to guide their appraisees toward effective OKRs construction is an important priority. The training types this study is suggesting is bi-directional in nature: employers-employees and the opposite, that is, appraisees-to appraisers. While the former type is commonly addressed (i.e., Ndambakuwa & Jacob, 2006), the latter is a new emerging type of training which focuses on training individuals to manage their own concerns and issues.

Tracking changes in the conceptualizations and behaviors is part of an effective performance appraisal system. There should be a shift which places the academic faculty at the center of their own outcomes. This cannot be enacted without honest attempts to allow a degree of autonomy (i.e., K. Kallio & Kallio, 2014; T. Kallio et al., 2021; Turk, 2010), freedom (i.e., K. Kallio & Kallio, 2014; Turk, 2008), and intellectual involvement in building objectives to be transformed into productive key results.

Conclusion

This study investigated academic faculty members’ perceptions regarding the performance appraisal system, which was introduced by the Ministry of Labor in Oman in 2021 and will be fully in effect as of January 2022. Ultimately, the research has offered new insights into how the system is understood and operationalized which, if taken into account by the decision makers and relevant governmental bodies, could sustain positive outcomes of the PA procedures and tools and other previously adopted systems worldwide. Although the number of study participants was insufficient for findings to be generalizable, it is argued that it can be illuminative and potentially have some transferability for other HEIs. Therefore, it is put forward that the study calibrates and provides a contribution to literature on performance appraisal from an Omani HEI, thereby also filling a gap in the literature.

In this study, several affordances and challenges were revealed in regard to the newly introduced system. The challenges include lack of full awareness and training of the new system, difficulties in formulating achievable objectives and not all academic duties being included—such as research production which is time consuming. The current study was conducted at one Omani university only; thus, including other higher educational institutions will give more insights about the usefulness and the challenges related to the newly introduced appraisal performance system in Oman. The study advances critical insights into the line managers’ training and preparation of their fellow employees. Finally, since this study has addressed the academic faculty members’ perceptions only in regard to the newly introduced OKR-based performance appraisal system, the research suggests that it is crucial to conduct another study which focuses on the non-academic staff faculty members to assist in the implementation of the new system. A significant contribution to existing literature is providing academic faculty members’ perspectives on the newly OKR-based performance appraisal system as they are experienced. While this new system is pioneered in an Omani HEI, this paper has attempted to provide a snapshot of how employees engage with it and can be active partners to drive forward its transformative potential.

This study makes a significant contribution to the literature related to staff performance management and review, particularly in the Arabian Gulf and the Omani context, from the perspective of academic faculty members. There is no previous research on the newly implemented system, particularly in Oman and therefore, this a small scale study has succeeded in addressing some aspects of that gap. However, this study has some limitations which merit consideration. One of the limitations is that the findings of this study are not representative of the experiences of all faculty members, focusing solely on academics. Therefore, much investigation is needed into employing OKR metrics in Oman. Another limitation is that the study relied on interviews only and the sample of was relatively small. Future studies may offer follow-up studies to provide a more comprehensive picture of the potential performance management policies development in Oman and beyond.