Summer 1991 // Volume 29 // Number 2 // Research in Brief // 2RIB1
 |  |
 |
Time Management and Performance
Abstract
This study was conducted to examine the time management practices of Pennsylvania CEDS (county Extension directors) and analyze the relationships between CED time management practices and job performance.
How do county Extension directors (CEDs) manage the most critical, scarce, and elusive resource-time? What time management skills do they possess? How do they allocate their time in performing responsibilities? Is there a relationship between time management practices and job performance? Answers to these questions should help formulate educational programs for enhancing CED managerial effectiveness. This study was conducted to examine the time management practices of Pennsylvania CEDs and analyze the relationships between CED time management practices and job performance.
Fifty-two CEDs were selected following a combination of cluster and stratified random sampling procedures. A final response rate of 94% (49/52) was obtained through a mail questionnaire. The questionnaire had three parts: perceptions of CEDs on five time management dimensions (work environment, staff supervision, planning and goals, communications, and self- management); CEDs' perceptions of seven job performance dimensions (budget, job knowledge, coordination, leadership, supervision, planning, and communication); and demographic characteristics. Questionnaire face and content validity were established using a panel of experts (faculty and administrators at Penn State). A Cronbach's alpha reliability of .93 was obtained for the questionnaire in a pilot test with 24 CEDs in a neighboring state.
The mean scores for the five time management dimensions ranged form a low of 2.89 (work environment dimension) to a high of 3.81 (communications dimension). Results are shown in Table 1. The response scale ranged from one to five, with one being "never" and five "always." The findings suggest that Pennsylvania CEDs "sometimes" to "very often" practice the skill of time management. A mean score of 3.81 for the communications dimension indicates frequent and competent use of time-saving communication practices and skills. The mean score of 3.23 for all time management practice statements indicates that Pennsylvania CEDs recognize the importance of time through the effective use of time management practices. Similar findings were reported by Distasio for school superintendents in Connecticut1 and Radhakrishna for Maryland CEDs.2
Table 1. County Extension directors' time management practices.
| Time management dimensions | n | Mean | SD |
|---|---|---|---|
| Work environment | 47 | 2.89 | .46 |
| Staff supervision | 49 | 3.03 | .35 |
| Planning and goals | 47 | 2.98 | .39 |
| Communications | 48 | 3.81 | .42 |
| Self-management | 47 | 3.02 | .48 |
| Total score | 44 | 3.23 | .31 |
| Note: Rating scale for time management practices: 1=never, 2=rarely, 3=sometimes, 4=very often, 5=always | |||
Table 2 shows the mean ratings of self (CED) and superior (assistant regional directors) perceptions of CED job performance. The mean scores for the seven CED job performance dimensions ranged from a low of 3.52 (supervision dimension) to a high of 4.38 (budget dimension). The scale ranged from one to five, with one being "strongly disagree" and five "strongly agree." This indicates that CEDs perceived themselves as good performers in their jobs. The mean score of 4.38 for the budget dimension suggests that CEDs generally perceived themselves as managing the county resources well and operating the budget efficiently. The supervision dimension mean (3.52) indicates that CEDs perceived themselves as good supervisors. Based on the findings, it's possible to conclude CEDs perceived themselves to perform their CED responsibilities at a high level and generally their superiors agreed.
Table 2. Self (CED) and superior (ARD) perception scores.
| CED job performance dimensions | Self (CED) ratings | Superior (ARD) ratings | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | SD | Mean | SD | |
| Budget | 4.38 | .45 | 3.89 | .59 |
| Programming | 4.19 | .40 | 3.74 | .73 |
| Coordination | 4.12 | .55 | 3.65 | .73 |
| Job knowledge | 4.04 | .44 | 3.66 | .85 |
| Communications | 4.02 | .49 | 3.83 | .89 |
| Leadership | 3.66 | .35 | 3.36 | .66 |
| Supervision | 3.52 | .30 | 3.01 | .59 |
| Note: Rating scale for CED job performance: 1=strongly disagree, 2=disagree, 3=neutral, 4=agree, 5=strongly agree | ||||
A significant relationship (r=.64, p<.001) was found between the overall job performance score and time management score. This meant CEDs who scored high on time management likewise scored high on job performance, suggesting that those CEDs who perceived they managed time well also perceived themselves to perform better in their CED job responsibilities. Furthermore, it seems logical to expect similar relationships between time management scores and superior's ratings of CED job performance.
Literature also supports the relationship between time management and job performance as evidenced by the earlier studies of Islam3 for rural development officers, Noon,4 and Schriber and Gutek5 for business executives, and Radhakrishna for Maryland CEDs. These researchers found significant relationships between management of time or allocation of time to managerial tasks and job performance-concluding management of time is a key to managerial performance.
Implications for Extension
In a time when planning, organizing, and coordinating educational programs, budgeting to build and maintain program support, and accountability are some of the issues burdening CEDs, it's important to know how CEDs allocate their time in performing their assigned responsibilities, and how they perform on their job.
The CEDs may recognize the importance of time in performing their day-to-day managerial tasks, but may not be aware of how planning, setting priorities and deadlines, and practicing time- saving habits and behaviors will help in enhancing their managerial performance.
Footnotes
1. W. A. Distasio, "Time Management, Leadership Styles, and Selected Demographic Factors of Connecticut School Superintendents" (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs, 1985).
2. R. B. Radhakrishna, C. D. Baggett, and E. P. Yoder, "Time Management and Job Performance of Maryland County Extension Directors" (University Park: Penn State, Department of Agricultural and Extension Education, 1989).
3. M. M. Islam, W. C. Depositario, and J. B. Valera, "Factors of Job Performance of the Barangay Council Officials of Laguna Province, Philippines," Indian Journal of Extension Education, XXIII (Nos. 3 and 4, 1987), 7-18.
4. J. Noon, A Time: The Busy Manager's Action Plan for Effective Self Management (England: Van Nostrand Reinhold (UK) Co., Ltd., 1985).
5. J. B. Schriber and B. A. Gutek, "Some Time Dimensions of Work: Measurement of an Underlying Aspect of Organizational Culture," Journal of Applied Psychology, LXXII (No. 4, 1987), 642 -50.