By PETER C KAMURI
Performance-based management is all the rage today, especially in the corporate world and the public service. And this is because managers and workers understand the need for regular performance appraisals as a benchmark for assessing performance.
A performance contract is a written agreement between an employer and employee about the employee’s responsibilities and performance over agreed targets, that are pegged on a specified period of time under review.
That is why as early as 1990, the Government approved the introduction of performance-based management in public agencies.
However, this was to be actualised in 2003 when the Narc Government took power.
Performance contacting was then re-introduced as a management tool to ensure accountability for results and transparency in the management of public resources.
The Performance Contracts Steering Committee (PCSC) was also established with the mandate to spearhead the introduction and implementation of performance contracts in the public sector. Today, performance Based Contracting is anchored in the Prime Minister’s office.
Although public servants in the other sectors have been signing performance contracts for year’s, teachers and lecturers in public institutions have been among the very few public officers who have not been enlisted in this performance-based initiative.
But that might be about to change. Parliament wants teachers in all public schools to sign performance contracts that will largely determine promotion and salary increases. The teachers themselves have rejected this move, setting the stage for an epic battle.
Expecting too much?
However, before teachers are forced to sign performance contract, some basic elements need to be taken care of. For example, the employer should explain what they expect from the teachers once they sign these contracts.
The employer must also ensure that teachers are paid well so that they can justify their take-home package. Expecting too much from an underpaid teacher is simply asking for trouble.
