Governança Judiciária e prêmios de produtividade: uma análise da percepção dos servidores do Tribunal de Justiça da Paraíba

Abstract

The creation and regulation of the annual productivity bonus to reward employees of the Paraíba Court of Justice, through State Law nº 11,651/2020, represents a significant milestone in recognition policies and the promotion of efficiency and effectiveness in public service. The awarding of the bonus aims to recognize the work of employees and judicial units that excel with the best productivity and efficiency indices in the reference year, according to predetermined criteria and indicators. Therefore, this study aims to assess the perception of the employees of the Paraíba Court of Justice regarding the productivity bonus and its relationship with functional performance, identifying how judicial governance is being implemented. For this purpose, an exploratory, descriptive study with a quantitative and qualitative approach was conducted. The study population comprised employees occupying the positions of judicial technicians and analysts (judicial area) who carry out their activities in first-degree judicial offices. Data collection was carried out on the Paraíba Judiciary's portal, through the productivity panel, resolutions, reports, and spreadsheets. Additionally, a questionnaire was administered to 129 employees of the Paraíba Court of Justice via institutional email, with a link provided via Google Forms. The results revealed a significant distrust among employees of the Paraíba Court of Justice regarding the transparency, objectivity, and fairness of the criteria used for awarding productivity bonuses. The analysis of the indicators and parameters of Resolution No. 16/2023 indicates a need for significant improvements in the definition and communication of these criteria. Moreover, the lack of stakeholder participation in formulating the criteria contributed to the employees' negative perception. The results also highlighted a division in employees' opinions about the justice and fairness of the bonus, with some considering it fair and others pointing out flaws in the evaluation criteria and the bonus amount. The study shows that the current bonus model has a negative motivational impact, harming the organizational climate and generating distrust, demotivation, and internal conflicts. The perception is that the current criteria do not adequately capture the complexity of employees' activities, overvaluing certain procedural tasks and neglecting other important tasks, which distorts performance evaluation and can encourage unfair competition. The linkage of the bonus to external factors and the lack of predictability in the evaluation rules are pointed out as factors that compromise the justice and transparency of the process, resulting in a demotivating and uncooperative work environment. In light of these issues, it is clear that a joint effort is needed to review and improve the productivity evaluation parameters. This includes ensuring transparency and objectivity of the criteria used, as well as adequately considering the complexity and particularities of the work performed by employees. Only then will it be possible to establish a fairer, more reliable, and effective evaluation system that properly recognizes and values each individual's effort and contribution to the proper functioning of the judiciary.