Advertisement

The Perceived Effect of Delegation on Employee Performance at Stanbic Bank Uganda Ltd., Mbale Branch

  • Rashid Kinsambwe
  • Zabia Kauma
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Complexity book series (SPCOM)

Abstract

The study was about an analysis of the effect of succession planning on the performance of employees at Stanbic Bank Uganda Ltd., Mbale branch. The study was guided by the following objectives: to establish the effect of delegation on employee performance at SBU Ltd., Mbale branch, to analyze the effect of job rotation on employee performance at SBU Ltd., Mbale branch, and to examine the effect of mentoring/coaching on employee performance at SBU Ltd., Mbale branch. The study adopted both case study and descriptive research designs where both qualitative and quantitative approaches were used. A census survey technique was applied. Questionnaires, interviews, and documentary reviews were used to collect data. The findings generally revealed that there was a reduced number of shortages and absenteeism among employees as a result of delegation. It also established that employee delegation contributes to customer care and timeliness in service delivery which led to decreased complaints from clients toward the kind of services offered to them. As regards job rotation, findings revealed that there were improved interpersonal skills, reduced number of shortages, and improved customer care among employees. However, it was established that delegation did not reduce absenteeism or enhanced creativity among employees at SBU Ltd., Mbale branch. In light of the above findings, the researchers recommended that the heads of units should delegate responsibility and authority without feeling threatened; management should create more branches in the new districts like Manafwa and Bulambuli to reduce pressure on the Mbale branch, due to large number of clients.

Keywords

Delegation Management Performance Staff Job Rotation Mentoring Succession Planning Customer Care 

References

  1. Advian, W. (2007). Empowerment, theory and practice, school of management. Manchester: UMIST.Google Scholar
  2. Armstrong, M. (2006). A handbook of human resource management practice (9th ed.). London: Kogan Page Ltd.Google Scholar
  3. Armstrong, M. (2009). A handbook of human resource management practice (11th ed.). London: Ðogan Page Ltd..Google Scholar
  4. Aswathappa, K. (2002). Human resource management (5th ed.). New Delhi: The McGraw-Hill Companies Ltd.Google Scholar
  5. Axley, S. R. (1992). Delegate: Why we should, why we don’t and how we can. Industrial Management, 34(5), 16.Google Scholar
  6. Baer, J. (1999). You can’t do it all: Effective delegation for supervisors. Virginia Beach: Coastal Training Technologies Corp. 23452.Google Scholar
  7. Campion, M. A., Cheraskin, L., & Stevens, M. J. (1994). Career related antecedents and contrast with non-mentoring counter parts. Personnel Psychology, 37, 1518–1567.Google Scholar
  8. Chester, A. S., Linda, L. N., & Scandura, T. A. (1998). Delegation and leader-member exchange: Main effects, moderators, and measurement issues. Academy of Management Journal, 41(3), 298–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. FME. (2013). Successful delegation: Productivity skills. http://www.stanbicbank.co.ug. Accessed on 14 July 2012.
  10. Lean, C. R. (1987). Predictors and consequences of delegation. Academy of Management Journal, 29, 754–774.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Nelson, R. B. (1994). Empowering employees through delegation. Burr Ridge: Irwin Professional Pub., the University of Michigan.Google Scholar
  12. Penrose, E. T. (1959). The theory of the growth of the firm. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Roger, C. (2010). Empowerment. Journal of Political Economy, 88, 446–461.Google Scholar
  14. Rothwell, W. J. (2010). Effective succession planning ensuring leadership continuity and building talent from within (4th ed.). New York: Amacom.Google Scholar
  15. Stanbic Bank Uganda (SBU) Annual Report. (2009).Google Scholar
  16. Suma, J. (2004). Determinants of delegation. Vikalpa, 29(4), 42–55.Google Scholar
  17. Yukl, G., & Fu, P. P. (1999). Determinants of delegation and consultation by managers. Journal of Organizational Behavior Journal Organizations Behavior, 20, 219–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Islamic University in UgandaMbaleUganda

Personalised recommendations