ArticleF1000Research2025
Evaluating the Types of Performance Monitoring Used in Private Chartered Universities in Uganda: A Mixed-Methods.
Article in F1000Research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Performance monitoring is essential for enhancing academic staff productivity and institutional accountability in higher education. In Uganda, private chartered universities face challenges in implementing effective performance monitoring systems. This study examines the types and effectiveness of these systems in private chartered universities in Western Uganda. Methods: The study was guided by Fayol's Administrative Management Theory and Vroom's Expectancy Theory. A concurrent triangulation mixed-methods design was employed. Quantitative data were collected from 386 academic staff using structured questionnaires, while qualitative data were gathered through in-depth interviews with 10 academic deans from four selected universities. Ethical approval was obtained from institutional review boards and the Uganda National Council for Science and Technology (SS3145ES). Descriptive statistics, correlation, and regression analyses were used to analyze quantitative data, while thematic analysis was used for qualitative responses. Results: Findings indicate that various performance monitoring tools are in use, including student evaluations, peer reviews, and supervisory assessments. However, their application is often inconsistent, with limited feedback loops and weak integration into staff development initiatives. Quantitative analysis revealed a moderate positive correlation between effective performance monitoring and academic staff performance (r = 0.48, p < 0.05). Regression analysis showed that performance monitoring accounted for 21.3% of the variance in staff performance. Conclusions: While performance monitoring tools are present in private chartered universities in Western Uganda, their inconsistent implementation undermines their effectiveness. Strengthening the integration of monitoring outcomes into professional development and decision-making processes could enhance academic staff performance. These findings underscore the need for systematic policy enforcement and capacity-building in performance management practices within the sector.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.