PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT IN HIGHER EDUCATION: LEADERSHIP PREDICAMENT?

Performance management (PM) is an institutional instrument introduced in higher education institutions (HEIs) to manage academic staff performance in line with the institutional vision and strategic goals. Congruent to the managerial approach, higher education leaders are mandated to operationally function within the limited financial resources and implement PM to control outputs. Within the execution of PM, academic heads of departments (HoDs) are at a pivotal position in view of them cascading the process lower and to a broader academic personnel. As such, their leadership of the process becomes the crux of the success of PM implementation. However, evidence has shown that since the implementation of PM in HEIs, it has not fully achieved its intended purpose; in fact it has resulted in discontent. It appears that HoDs have implemented PM as an institutional process without proper interrogation of its possible limitations on academic autonomy and the leadership itself. The argument is that in so doing they are facilitating oppressive hegemonic power of new managerialism, with negative consequences for staff motivation and performance. Therefore, critical analysis of their leadership is imperative to understand the power relations within PM engagements and expose the hindrances to HoDs' potential to exploit critical leadership.