علاقة أنموذج التميز الاوربي بفاعلية أنظمة تقييم الاداء

Abstract

The main idea of this study is embodied in the researcher’s attempt to identify the role played by the European model of differentiation within the Federal Iraqi Financial Supervision Bureau by applying the European discrimination model as an independent variable and a mediator at the same time, The importance of the study is represented by presenting a set of recommendations that would address this problem, while the objectives of this study are to diagnose the reality of these variables and the relationship between them within the Federal Financial Supervision Bureau / Iraq. In order to complete this study with its theoretical and applied aspects, the descriptive analytical approach was adopted. As for the data, it was It was collected through the use of a questionnaire that was prepared based on a set of ready-made indicators and standards that were adapted to suit the local environment, and which were distributed to a sample of (267) employees at the Federal Financial Supervision Bureau / Iraq. After processing the data statistically using a set of statistical tools available in the spss-v23, with an agreement rate of (86%). The results showed that the investigated institution applies all dimensions of the European model of differentiation, and that the dimensions’ arithmetic averages ranged between (3.7-3.3), where the leadership perspective came in first place with an agreement rate of (88%), followed by the three dimensions: human resources, partnerships, and the external community, sharing the same order and with an agreement rate (88%). 86%), then strategic dimension and products, with an agreement rate of (85%), and finally the dimension of organizational performance, with an agreement rate of (84%). The study also showed that the investigated institution applies the dimensions of effectiveness of performance evaluation and its arithmetic averages range between (3.7-3.6), where the dimension of creativity came in first place with an agreement rate of (87%), followed by the dimensions of competitive advantage, efficiency and effectiveness with an agreement rate of (86%).