Open AccessKey Performance Indicators vs Key Intangible Performance Among Academic Staff: A Case Study of a Public University in Malaysia
Author(s) -
Tajul Ariffin Masron,
Zamri Ahmad,
Norizan Baba Rahim
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
procedia - social and behavioral sciences
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 1877-0428
DOI - 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.681
Subject(s) - performance indicator , nonprobability sampling , key (lock) , plan (archaeology) , public university , element (criminal law) , business , population , public relations , medical education , psychology , political science , sociology , medicine , marketing , computer science , public administration , geography , computer security , demography , archaeology , law
Very often academic staff at any university is much evaluated based on their key performance indicators (KPI) such as teaching, research, supervision, publication and consultancy. While these indicators are crucial element in justifying academic staff performance, there is another aspect of performance which has been neglected and is anticipated to have a negative consequence if university's authority does not plan to strictly observe this issue. Hence, unlike KPI that has been commonly researched in the past, this study is specifically devoted to the key intangible performance (KIP) of academic staff with respect to their contribution to the academic staff KPI. The population of this study is determined by purposive sampling and comprises all categories of staff, namely professors, associate professors, senior lecturers and lecturer of a public university in Malaysia. The results demonstrate that KIP has a positive and significant implication on academic staff KPI
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom