A Study of Employee Empowerment and its Impact on Employee’s Performance in Hospital


S Abdul Sajld

Principal, P.G. & Research Department of Commerce, Melvisharam, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India

M Satheesh Kumar

Research Scholar, Department of Commerce, C.Abdul Hakeem College (A), Melvisharam, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India

Peer Review Report

Received Date

13.12.2018

Accepted Date

05.01.2019

Published Date

31.01.2019

Plagiarism

Accepted Level

Reviewer’s Comments to Authors

This analytical study was done to analyse the Employee Empowerment and its Impact on Employee’s Performance in Hospital. The paper explicates about the employee empowerment and its impact on employee performance and the factors which contributes more on employee performance. Study has been done by using both primary (100 samples, Non-Probability Sampling) and secondary sources of data collections.

Major Comments

  1. Abstract is not fulfilling its purpose. The researchers have given the general few lines about the title, but not covering the details of the study. Abstract should cover the complete need of the study. So the readers of the article can get narrative view of the entire study.
  2. It is mentioned that the researcher has excluded the employees of hospital such as Doctors, Nurses and Lab technicians who are the most primary employees of the hospital. Then from whom the 100 samples were taken for the study has not mentioned clearly. The researcher has to mention the detail of 100 samples and their professionals.
  3. The researcher has taken 100 samples under non-probability sampling. But, there was no any calculative detail for the non-probability sampling method. So the researcher has to include the method of calculation for the selection of sampling.
  4. The researcher has highlighted the two hypotheses for the study but there were no any analysis has been shown in the paper. It is highly recommended to the researcher to give the analysis for the hypotheses or can remove the hypotheses content from the paper.
  5. The objectives of the study have not been fulfilled in the paper. There was no information regarding the factors which contributes more on employee performance. The researcher has to add the required details to fulfil the requirements of the objectives.
  6. In the table ‘Relationship between employee empowerment and its impact of employee performance’ the contents of variables is not matching with the title of the table. So the researcher has to change the contents as needed for the title of the table or the title of the table can change as matched for the contents of variables.
  7. Given conclusion of the study is not concluding the title properly and it should include the findings from the analysis done.

Minor Comments

  1. In the title it was mentioned that the research has been done in the hospital. But there were no any information about the area of the study like name of the hospital or the district or state or the country of the study. And the period of the study was also not mentioned anywhere of the paper.
  2. There was no mention of the limitations of the study, one of which is the apparently high dropout rate. Also, mention how your results compare to (reference given to author) another study which was published very recently.
  3. For each reference and the reviews of literature the researcher can add footnote in the concerned page.

Associate Editor’s Critique

The title of the study is not mentioning any particular area of the study which is being the very big weakness of the study. And the sample population has been taken from the hospital employees who exclude the Doctors, Nurses and Lab technicians. It directly creates a question from whom the study has been taken. So, the researcher has to clear this point of suspect in anywhere of the study.

Constructiveness of Comments

The review committee has given the constructive comments to the author /researcher.

Level of Detail of the Review

The review is fairly detailed, but the reviewer missed data inconsistence in the required field. There are some corrections to be taken place before the final review.

Substantiation of Comments

The reviewer made comments on the paper with references.

Was the Review Biased?

The study was reviewed under ‘nil’ biased basis.

Recommendation from the Reviewer

I recommend that, this paper be accepted after the above mentioned minor revisions.