Conditions necessary for implementation of Performance contract strategy: the case of the Kenyan judiciary

Abstract

The objective of the study was to determine whether the Kenyan Judiciary meets the conditions necessary for implementation of performance contract, to establish whether there are any unique circumstances that make it difficult for the Kenyan judiciary to be placed on performance contract, and to determine how the Kenyan Judiciary could be placed on performance contract without compromising its independence. To achieve the aim of the study, the researcher used a case study in which the Kenyan Judiciary was the unit of study. Primary data was collected using structured questionnaires and interview schedules. The questionnaires were self administered. Once the pertinent data were collected the researcher carried out analysis of the same using percentages and frequencies. Where appropriate, the study results are presented in tables, pie charts and graphs. The study established that the judiciary met the conditions necessary for an organization to be placed on performance contract as 33 percent of the respondents indicated that they agreed to large extent with the statement that the judiciary had prioritised objectives for performance. About 67 percent respondents indicated that they agreed to moderate extent with statement that the judiciary had a clear strategic plan. The study also established that there was political will to place judiciary under performance contract. But due to phobia of being held accountable, institutional resistance (52%) and tradition, the difficulty in target setting (47%). Also cited as a hindrance was need to preserve independence of the judiciary. These have made in not possible to place the judiciary under performance contract. The judiciary could only be successfully evaluated within the institutional context. The study recommended that the judicial performance evaluation should be carried out within the judicial constitutional context and should be done in accordance with judicial, executive and public expectations in order not to compromise the independence of the judiciary.