RESEARCH PROPOSAL Performance appraisal politics and turnover intensions in Hospitality Industry INTRODUCTION: Hospitality organizations need to constantly

ensure the satisfaction of their employees (Berry, 1997). Organizations tend to be more effective when they satisfy their employees (Robbins & Judge, 2007). Satisfied employees are deemed to be an effective labour force and become an important asset for the organization's effectiveness (Masri, 2009). According to Bharwani and Butt (2012), Human resources are one of the main parts of the product performing the difficult role of enhancing the organizational image. Unlike other industries, hospitality highly depends on humans having direct contact with their customers (Bharwani & Butt, 2012). With the help of human resources, an organization will be able to enhance their business but due to employees various needs it becomes difficult to retain their employment, therefore, the focus on understanding their needs to achieve their satisfaction is essential (Masri, 2009). The employee's dissatisfaction will affect their commitment to work and lead them to turnover from the organization physically and/or mentally (Pathak, 2012). Tracey and Hinkin (2008) stated that employee turnover rates are influenced by employee dissatisfaction within the job environment and reduce their contribution to the job (Tracey & Hinkin, 2008). In Human Resource (HR) research and practice, employee retention or turnover, involves the question of organization employee movement. Research in this area by the mainstream organizational behaviour school has evolved to the research of factors affecting employee turnover. The positive or negative influences from these factors may either result in employee retention or turnover (Zhang, 2005). In the research on employee retention, voluntary turnover attracts attention, because employee movement such as recruitment (exterior inflow), personnel allocation, position adjustment (internal inflow), job displacement and disemployment (involuntary turnover) are all controlled by the organization. However, the loss of employees who have relatively high human capital value who choose to leave an organization can cause serious loss and difficulty, especially when the turnover numbers are on the rise (Zhang & Zhang, 2006).

Studies on the voluntary turnover model have attracted much attention amongst academic and practitioners for a long time, making voluntary turnover of knowledge and management talents two major research dimensions (Eriksson, 2001) (Potter & Timothy, 2003). PURPOSE OF STUDY: For an organizations human resource management, this kind of research pattern could be useful for talent retention, because it reveals comprehensive determining factors, helping managers analyze and diagnose the organizations core employee movement (Xie, 2003). RESEARCH OBJECTIVES AND HYPOTHESES: The objectives of this study are; 1. To find out the differences between the employee turnover intentions based on following parameters such as gender, age, length of services, education level and job position of respondents; 2. To determine the relationship between motivational motive and employee turnover intention; 3. To determine the relationship between punishment motive and employee turnover intention; and 4. To establish relationship between multiple independent variables such as motivational and punishment motives with employee turnover intention as the dependent variable. This study will test the following hypotheses; H1: There exist difference between the employee turnover intentions when

following demographic parameters such as gender, age, length of services, education level and job position are taken in to consideration; H2: There exists relationship between motivational motive and employee turnover intention; H3: There exists relationship between punishment motive and employee turnover intention; H4: There exist relationship between multiple independent variables such as

motivational and punishment motives with employee turnover intention as the dependent variable;

LITERATURE REVIEW In any organization, high performance and productivity of all the employees and the management should be a focus if that organization is going to accomplish its mission. One way to gauge how a person is performing is through the use of performance appraisals. Performance appraisals let every employee, whether they are subordinates or management, know what is expected of them in the particular job they are doing. Performance appraisal is a process designed to evaluate, manage and eventually improve employees performance. It should allow the employer and its employee to openly discuss expectations of the organization and the employees achievements especially for future development of the employee (Rasuli & Camelia, 2010). Performance appraisal quantifies and develops performance and productivity in organizations. Performance appraisal is the systematic description of the job related strengths and weaknesses of an individual or a group. According to Rusli Ahmad (2007), performance appraisal involves the use of various types of political influences and power and that the relationship between employee and manager or super ordinates and subordinates or ratters and ratees will build an internal political relationship. KEY ELEMENTS OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL There are five key points of performance appraisal, these are listed here as (Cipd.co.uk, 2011); 1. Measuring performance against set goals and objectives. 2. Providing feedback to individual on their performance. 3. Providing positive reinforcement for improvement. 4. Discussing what has happened, how employees can improve their performance, asking what support they need to improve their skills to advance the career. 5. Coming on consensus after discussion to improve overall performance. There are two important types of measures that a manager always took in to consideration while appraising any employee in the organisation. These measures are; Objective measures - These are fact based numerical counts and can be counted in number value (Koys, 2001).

Subjective measures These are based on perception of individual and take behaviour, traits of personality in account for the purpose of appraisal. These can be biased. Thus while using these for appraisal, managers or supervisors should be careful.

IMPORTANCE OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL To provide useful opportunity to management in conducting check on different developmental issues related to workforce. As these issues have a direct impact on the effectiveness and the wellbeing of employees of organisation. Normally the performance appraisal is used to; 1. Recognize effective performance and making decision related to reward there off. Thus mainly used to develop effective reward system in organisation for the performance to be effective (Ripley, 2003). 2. Identify and manage issues which can affect the retention of employees. The open constructive performance appraisals can be useful to identify issues that are likely to impact most of the workers (Ripley, 2003). EMPLOYEE TURNOVER Many practitioners have defined turnover as the change in jobs and careers done by the employees who have received salaries from organizations (Kuria, et al., 2012) (Mobley, 1982) (Ronra & Chaisawat, 2010) (WeiBo, et al., 2010). Many researchers have illustrated that job satisfaction will lead to employee retention while the job dissatisfaction forces turnover intention. Whether the turnover was voluntary or involuntary, a turnover crisis will influence the employee retention affecting the service quality and customer loyalty (Cho, et al., 2006). Certain aspects of organizational politics can be detrimental to job satisfaction, such as mistrust between employees and their employers, and between co-workersthis results in high turnover in most organizations. Ilgen and Favero (1985) emphasize the usefulness of performance appraisal, which an essential factor for motivating employees and, in turn, leading to low turnover (Ilgen & Favero, 1985). Organizations such as educational institutions need to provide their employees with equal, merit-based promotion opportunities. Price and Mueller (1981) find that organizations that

provide such opportunities and define employees working hours face lower turnover intentions (Price & Mueller, 1981). Bordia et al. (2004) pointed out that uncertainty among employees can cause emotional stress, lack of motivation, and lower concentration, which in turn leads to poorer job performance. It is, therefore, very important for an employee to feel mentally and physically satisfied with his or her job (Bordia, et al., 2004). Bushra A. (2012) reported that Dunn (1990) investigated the relationship between organizational culture and three elements of employee behaviour: (i) commitment, (ii) group work cohesion, and (iii) job satisfaction, all of which are found to be significant with respect to turnover intentions (Bushra, 2012). Mitchell, Holtom, Lee, and Graske (2001) argue that employees who leave their organization create a problem for other employees and for the organization itself. The latter has to bear the extra cost of hiring and training new workers from scratch, while other employees also begin to feel discontent with their jobs (Mitchell, et al., 2001). Pearson (1991) explained that it is difficult to know why labour turnover occurs because it is related to human factors (Pearson, 1991). Howard (1966) points out the importance of fringe benefits in retaining employees (Howard, 1966). RESEARCH METHOD The research will be carried out using mixed method that is qualitative as well as quantitative utilising both secondary and primary data. Thorough understanding of the concepts will be developed by reviewing ample amount of secondary data in form of earlier work carried out by others in the area of study; this will help in developing solid foundation for the study by identifying the gap. To collect the primary data for the research survey method will be used utilising questionnaire. Questionnaire will be used in this study because not only it was less expensive, but it is also stable, consistent and could help to avoid bias or errors caused by the attitudes of the interviewer (Sarantakos, 1993). Questionnaire will be developed after consultation with experts of in the relevant field and guided by existing literature on the subject. The questionnaire will be designed with a view to make it easy for respondents to answer all questions and, thereby, ensure maximum and accurate feedback while reducing the possibility of non-response bias. It will be designed in such a way so that it gives

respondent freedom to express their view accurately; the responses will be recorded on a scale of 1-10 using lickert scale. This can increase the accuracy of the findings. The disadvantage of questionnaires is that partial response is unavoidable due to lack of supervision (Sarantakos, 1993). A quantitative research method will be adopted to analyse the data collected. The conceptual issues will be identified and tested through relationship among different variables by means of quantitative approach. Interpretation of data collected through quantitative analysis using different statistical methods will help researcher in arriving on logical conclusions. This study helps the human resource managers to decide the most appropriate way to conduct a good appraisal practices that administered based on justice principles. Managers can also identify potential factors which may affect the level of job satisfaction among employees and subsequently influence their intention to quit. TIME LINE Activity Final Proposal Literature Review & Methodology Data Collection Analysis & Interpretation Result & Conclusion Introduction Executive Summary Corrections Total (Ex. Proposal) 77,000 22,000 18,000 5000 2000 Words 5,000 30,000 Duration (Months) 2 Months 10 Months 10 months 6 Months 3 Months 2 Months 1 Month 2 Months 36 Months (3 years)

REFERENCES
Al Battat, A. & Mat Som, A., 2013. Employee Dissatisfaction and Turnover Crises in the Malaysian Hospitality Industry. International Journal of Business and Management, 16 February, 8(5), pp. 63-71. Berry, L., 1997. Psychology at work. San Francisco: McGraw-Hill Companies Inc. Bharwani, S. & Butt, N., 2012. Challenges for the global hospitality: an HR perspective. Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes, 4(2), pp. 150-162. Bordia, P. et al., 2004. Uncertainty during organizational change: Types, consequences, and management strategies. Journal of Business and Psychology, 18(4), p. 507532. Bushra, A., 2012. Job Satisfaction and Womens Turnover Intentions in Pakistans Public Universities. The Lahore Journal of Business, Volume Summer, pp. 59-70. Cho, S., Woods, R. H., Jang, S. & Erdem, M., 2006. Measuring the impact of human resource management practices on hospitality firms performances. International Journal ofHospitality Management, 25(2), pp. 262-277. Cipd.co.uk, Available at: 2011. Performance Appraisal. [Online]

http://www.cipd.co.uk/subjects/perfmangmt/appfdbck/perfapp.htm

[Accessed 29 January 2011]. Eriksson, T., 2001. Empirical determinants of CEO and Board Turnover. Empirical, Volume 28, pp. 243-257. Howard, A. W., 1966. Salaries are not enough: Fringe benefits also count. The Clearing House, Volume 40, p. 525528. Ilgen, D. R. & Favero, J. L., 1985. Limits in generalization from psychological research to performance appraisal processes. Academy of Management Review, 10(2), p. 311321. Koys, D. J., 2001. The effects of employee satisfaction, organizational citizenship behavior, and turnover on organizational effectiveness: A unit-level, longitudinal study. Personnel Psychology, Volume 54, pp. 101-114. Kuria, S., Alice, O. & Wanderi, P., 2012. Assessment of causes of Labour Turnover in Three and five Star-Rated Hotel in Kenya. International Journal of Bussiness and Social Science, 3(15), pp. 311-317.

Masri, 2009. International Journal of Business and Management, 8(5). Mitchell, T. R., Holtom, B. C., Lee, T. W. & Graske, T., 2001. How to keep your best employees: Developing an effective retention policy. Academy of Management Executive, 15(4), p. 96109.

Mobley, W., 1982. Employee Turnover, Causes, Consequences, and Control. s.l.:AddisonWesley.

Pathak, D., 2012. Role of perceived organizational support on stress-satisfaction relationship: An empirical study. Asian Journal of Management Research, 3(1), pp. 153-177.

Pearson, R., 1991. The human resource: managing people and work in the 1990's. London: McGraw-Hill.

Potter, J. & Timothy, J., 2003. Executive Turnover and the Legal Environment: The Case of California Hospitals, 1960-1995. Sociological Forum, 18(3), pp. 441-464.

Price, J. L. & Mueller, C. W., 1981. A causal model of turnover for nurses.. Academy of Management Journal, 24(3), p. 543565.

Rasuli, A. & Camelia, L., 2010. Performance appraisal politics and employee turnover intention. Jurnal Kemanusiaan bil, December.

Ripley, D. E., 2003. A methodology for determining employee perceptions of factors in the work environment that impact employee development and performance. Human Resource Development International, 6(1), pp. 85-100.

Robbins, S. & Judge, T., 2007. Organizational Behaviour. 12th ed. New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc..

Ronra, B. & Chaisawat, M., 2010. Factors Affecting Employee Turnover and Job Satisfaction: A Case Study of Amari Hotels and Resorts. Bangkok, Thailand, Paper presented atthe 3rd International Colloquium on Business & Management (ICBM).

Rusli, A., 2007. Performance appraisal: everything you have always wanted to know, Kuching: RS Group.

Sarantakos, S., 1993. Social research. Australia: Macmillan Education Australia Pty Ltd..

Tracey, B. & Hinkin, T., 2008. Contextual factors and cost profiles associated with employee turnover. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 49(1), pp. 12-27.

WeiBo, Z., Kaur, S. & Zhi, T., 2010. A critical review of employee turnover model (1938-2009) and development in perspective of performance. African journal of Business Management, 4(19), pp. 4146-4158.

Xie, J., 2003. The analysis of employees turnover model. J. Econ. Manage, Volume 5, pp. 1421.

Zhang, M. & Zhang, D., 2006. The new development of voluntary turnover model. J. Econ. Manage. Abroad, 25(9), pp. 24-28.

Zhang, Q., 2005. The new economic socialistic. Beijing Soc, Sci., Volume 18, pp. 54-75.