IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rom/rampas/v2014y2014i22p26-40.html

Analysis of employees’ perceptions of performance contracting in the ministry lands, Kenya

Author

Listed:
  • Chelang’a James KIPROP

    (Chelang’a James Kiprop, Moi University, School of Arts and Social Sciences, Edoret, Kenya)

  • Duncan Kiboyye OKOTH-YOGO

    (Duncan Kiboyye Okoth-Yogo, Moi University, School of Arts and Social Sciences, Eldoret, Kenya)

  • Kariuki G. CHARAGU

    (Kariuki G. Charagu, Civil Service, Kenya)

Abstract

Performance contract (PC) is a negotiated agreement, arrived at after a meeting of minds, between a government and a respective ministry, department, agency or a public officer, clearly specifying short-term implementation goals, obligations and responsibilities between the two parties (GOK, 2004a) . It is an integral part of both bureaucratic law and management renewal in the public services, useful in identifying priorities and required inputs, for improved service delivery. The study was an endeavor to establish the employees’ perception of the relevance of PC as a tool for improving service delivery, its impact in the ministry of lands and the challenges it encounters. It was guided by the agency theory. Data was collected from 91 respondents who were employees in the department of land adjudication and settlement at its Nairobi headquarters, 16 respondents from Thika and 13 from Machakos districts respectively. Secondary data was sourced from existing literature after which descriptive statistics was proffered. The study established that employees think positively of PC as useful in advancing effective governance but face the challenge of inadequate resources and lack of ownership. The study recommends changes in the fiscal allocation regulations by providing for increased budgetary provisions for PC implementation programs and increased rewards based on performance in order to improve both quantity and quality of output.

Suggested Citation

  • Chelang’a James KIPROP & Duncan Kiboyye OKOTH-YOGO & Kariuki G. CHARAGU, 2014. "Analysis of employees’ perceptions of performance contracting in the ministry lands, Kenya," REVISTA ADMINISTRATIE SI MANAGEMENT PUBLIC, Faculty of Administration and Public Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 2014(22), pages 26-40, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:rom:rampas:v:2014:y:2014:i:22:p:26-40
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ramp.ase.ro/en/_data/files/articole/2014/22-02.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gill, David & Stone, Rebecca, 2010. "Fairness and desert in tournaments," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 346-364, July.
    2. Mallon, Richard D., 1994. "State-owned enterprise reform through performance contracts: The Bolivian experiment," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 22(6), pages 925-934, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jean-Michel Benkert, 2025. "Bilateral trade with loss-averse agents," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 79(2), pages 519-560, March.
    2. Hoffmann, Magnus & Kolmar, Martin, 2017. "Distributional preferences in probabilistic and share contests," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 120-139.
    3. Paetzel, Fabian & Sausgruber, Rupert, 2018. "Cognitive ability and in-group bias: An experimental study," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 280-292.
    4. Biao Luo & Chengyuan Wang & Tieshan Li, 2018. "Inequity-averse agents’ deserved concerns under the linear contract: a social network setting," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 268(1), pages 129-148, September.
    5. Francesco Fallucchi & Francesco Trevisan, 2024. "Tullock contest with reference‐dependent preferences," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 62(4), pages 1618-1628, October.
    6. Gill, David & Stone, Rebecca, 2015. "Desert and inequity aversion in teams," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 42-54.
    7. Gill, David & Stone, Rebecca, 2010. "Fairness and desert in tournaments," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 346-364, July.
    8. Tonin, Mirco & Vlassopoulos, Michael, 2017. "Sharing one’s fortune? An experimental study on earned income and giving," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 112-118.
    9. Chen, Daniel L., 2016. "Tastes for Desert and Placation: A Reference Point-Dependent Model of Social Preferences," IAST Working Papers 16-60, Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse (IAST).
    10. Drichoutis, Andreas C. & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Lusk, Jayson L. & Lazaridis, Panagiotis, 2012. "When a risky prospect is valued more than its best possible outcome," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(1), pages 1-18, January.
    11. Astrid Gamba & Elena Manzoni & Luca Stanca, 2017. "Social comparison and risk taking behavior," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 82(2), pages 221-248, February.
    12. Edoardo Grillo, 2014. "Reference Dependence and Politicians' Credibility," Carlo Alberto Notebooks 353, Collegio Carlo Alberto.
    13. Kidd, Michael & Nicholas, Aaron & Rai, Birendra, 2013. "Tournament outcomes and prosocial behaviour," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 387-401.
    14. Hoffmann, Magnus & Kolmar, Martin, 2013. "Intention-based fairness preferences in two-player contests," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 120(2), pages 276-279.
    15. Alex Dickson & Colin Jennings & Gary Koop, 2016. "Domestic Violence and Football in Glasgow: Are Reference Points Relevant?," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 78(1), pages 1-21, February.
    16. Benno Torgler & Markus Schaffner & Bruno S. Frey & Sascha L. Schmidt, 2008. "Looking Awkward When Winning and Foolish When Losing: Inequity Aversion and Performance in the Field," CREMA Working Paper Series 2008-11, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    17. Gill, David & Stone, Rebecca, 2009. "Fairness and desert in tournaments," Discussion Paper Series In Economics And Econometrics 903, Economics Division, School of Social Sciences, University of Southampton.
    18. Cason, Timothy N. & Masters, William A. & Sheremeta, Roman M., 2020. "Winner-take-all and proportional-prize contests: Theory and experimental results," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 314-327.
    19. Xile Yin & Siyu Chen & Dahui Li & Feng Zhang, 2021. "Social norms for fairness and board voting behavior: An experimental investigation," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 110-133, March.
    20. Alex Krumer & Felix Otto & Tim Pawlowski, 2025. "Varying reference-point salience," Papers 2506.13382, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2025.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • R38 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Real Estate Markets, Spatial Production Analysis, and Firm Location - - - Government Policy
    • R52 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Regional Government Analysis - - - Land Use and Other Regulations
    • R58 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Regional Government Analysis - - - Regional Development Planning and Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rom:rampas:v:2014:y:2014:i:22:p:26-40. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Androniceanu Armenia (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ccasero.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.