lems concern vague and misrepresentative job descriptions and specifications, poor
links between job descriptions, specification, selection tools and the job requirement in
the present and in the future. One of the research findings shows that fifty seven percent
of staff in one of the local authorities had not read their job descriptions although they
had jobs to perform (Hassan 2007). However, reading job descriptions may not add val-
ue to what they do because of the mismatch between what they do and what they are
officially employed to do.
There are also negative attitudes among employees and employers on the content,
processes, objectivity, and usefulness of performance appraisals. Tanzania shares the
same experiences, which this chapter further elaborates. It focuses more on these limita-
tions not necessarily in terms of the differences between what is done as opposed to
what ought to be done, but rather the often forgotten mismatch between the reality and
expectations of both employers and employees as an inbuilt process in recruitment and
open performance appraisals. The following section is devoted to exploring the mis-
match.
The link between recruitment and open performance appraisals
Institutional framework for recruitment and appraisal
Before we look at the mismatch between recruitment and performance appraisals, it is
worth highlighting the institutional framework that guides the process. In Tanzania,
recruitment and performance appraisal are guided by several regulations. These are:
public service management and employment policy 1999, public service act no. 8 of
2002, presidential circular no 1 of 1998. Others are the public service regulations 2003
(government notice 168) and public service scheme 2003 and the guidelines on the em-
ployment practices in the public service no. 1 2004. The employment committee in the
ministry, local authority or executive agency is responsible for ensuring that there is
competitive and fair recruitment procedure and practice. Therefore, the process of ap-
praisal is conventional in terms of procedures and instruments used to get people into
the public office. These include job vacancy creation, advertisement, short listing, and
selection. It is also important to note that fairness here does not mean that other prob-
lems raised in other African countries are lacking. It is fair in the sense that there are
better formal procedures and guidelines used compared to before the reforms, which is a
step forward.
On performance management, the government uses performance management tech-
nique abbreviated as OPRAS (Open Performance Review and Appraisal System) in
order to monitor and assess individual job performance. It is a contract between the em-
ployer and employee to deliver quality services to the people. The thrust is on perform-
ance improvement based on joint problem solving rather than evaluation and control,
although at the end there are also ‘carrots and sticks’. Whilst this technique is plausible,
there are problems such as a lack of serious preparation for the appraisals, negative atti-
tudes towards the utility of the exercise, and lack of serious commitment for some key
staff in the appraisal work.
Recruitment
The starting point in exploring the mismatch between employee recruitment and open
performance appraisal expectations is to answer two related questions. The first one is
why does a public office need to recruit? The answer to this question may seem simple