Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Managing the Interpersonal Aspect of Performance Management

  • Jisoo Ock (a1) and Frederick L. Oswald (a1)
Extract

It is safe to assume that an accurate performance appraisal (PA) is an important prerequisite to an effective performance management (PM) system, because with accurate PA information, management, teams, and employees can engage in the process of identifying and developing a wide range of job-relevant knowledge or skills to improve job performance. However, researchers and practitioners alike must continue to push for PA to be something other an administrative ritual; the ideal goal for PA is for it to contribute to a reliable process that can offer practical help to organizational operations, including PM. As Pulakos, Mueller Hanson, Arad, and Moye (2015) have pointed out, supervisors are concerned about demotivating or disengaging employees by providing PA ratings that are too much lower than the highest rating or ranking that is available, so having ratings that are clustered at the high end of the rating scale is quite common across organizations (Bretz, Milkovich, & Read, 1992).

Copyright
Corresponding author
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Jisoo Ock, Department of Psychology, Rice University, 6100 Main Street, MS-25, Houston, TX 77005. E-mail: jisoo.ock@gmail.com
References
Hide All
Baldwin, T. T. (1992). Effects of alternative modeling strategies on outcomes of interpersonal-skills training. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 147154. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.77.2.147
Bernardin, H. J., Tyler, C. L., & Villanova, P. (2009). Rating level and accuracy as a function of rater personality. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 17, 300310. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2389.2009.00472.x
Borman, W. C. (1974). The rating of individuals in organizations: An alternative approach. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 12, 105124. doi:10.1016/0030-5073(74)90040-3
Bretz, R. D., Milkovich, G. T., & Read, W. (1992). The current state of performance appraisal research and practice: Concerns, directions, and implications. Journal of Management, 18, 321352. doi:10.1177/014920639201800206
Buttny, R. (1993). Social accountability in communication. London, UK: Sage.
Dahling, J. J., Chau, S. L., & O’Malley, A. (2012). Correlates and consequences of feedback orientation in organizations. Journal of Management, 38, 531546. doi:10.1177/0149206310375467
Dahling, J. J., & O’Malley, A. L. (2011). Supportive feedback environments can mend broken performance management systems. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 4, 201203. doi:10.1111/j.1754-9434.2011.01327.x
Gist, M. E., & Stevens, C. K. (1998). Effects of practice conditions and supplemental training method on cognitive learning and interpersonal skill generalization. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 75, 142169. doi:10.1006/obhd.1998.2787
Goodman, S. A., & Svyantek, D. J. (1999). Person-organization fit and contextual performance: Do shared values matter. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 55, 254275. doi:10.1006/jvbe.1998.1682
Gregory, J. B., Levy, P. E., & Jeffers, M. (2008). Development of a model of the feedback process within executive coaching. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 60, 4256. doi:10.1037/1065-9293.60.1.42
Jamieson, B. D. (1973). Behavioral problems with management by objective. Academy of Management Review, 16, 496505. doi:10.2307/255009
Jawahar, I. M., & Williams, C. R. (1997). Where all the children are above average: The performance appraisal purpose effect. Personnel Psychology, 50, 905926. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1997.tb01487.x
Kupritz, V. W. (2002). The relative impact of workplace design on training transfer. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 13, 427477. doi:10.1002/hrdq.1042
Laker, D. R., & Powell, J. L. (2011). The differences between hard and soft skills and their relative impact on training transfer. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 22, 111122. doi:10.1002/hrdq.20063
Lam, W., Huang, X., & Snape, E. (2007). Feedback-seeking behavior and leader-member exchange: Do supervisor-attributed motives matter? Academy of Management Journal, 50, 348363. doi:10.5465/AMJ.2007.24634440
Levy, P. E., & Williams, J. R. (2004). The social context of performance appraisal: A review and framework for the future. Journal of Management, 30, 881905. doi:10.1016/j.jm.2004.06.005
Linderbaum, B. G., & Levy, P. E. (2010). The development and validation of the Feedback Orientation Scale (FOS). Journal of Management, 36, 13721405. doi:10.1177/0149206310373145
London, M. (2003). Job feedback: Giving, seeking and using feedback for performance improvement (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
London, M., & Smither, J. W. (2002). Feedback orientation, feedback culture, and the longitudinal performance management process. Human Resource Management Review, 12, 81100. doi:10.1016/S1053-4822(01)00043-2
Longenecker, C. O., Sims, H. P., & Gioia, D. A. (1987). Behind the mask: The politics of employee appraisal. Academy of Management Executive, 1, 183193. doi:10.5465/AME.1987.4275731
Mero, N. P., Guidice, R. M., & Brownlee, A. L. (2007). Accountability in a performance appraisal context: The effect of audience and form of accounting on rater response and behavior. Journal of Management, 33, 223252. doi:10.1177/0149206306297633
Mero, N. P., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1995). Effects of rater accountability on the accuracy and the favorability of performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 517524. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.80.4.517
Mohrman, A. M., & Lawler, E. E. (1983). Motivation and performance appraisal behavior. In Landy, F., Zedeck, S., & Cleveland, J. (Eds.), Performance measurement and theory (pp. 173189). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Moss, S. E., Sanchez, J. I., Brumbaugh, A. M., & Borkowski, N. (2009). The mediating role of feedback avoidance behavior in the LMX–performance relationship. Group & Organization Management, 34, 645664. doi:10.1177/1059601109350986
Murphy, K. R., & Cleveland, J. N. (1995). Understanding performance appraisal: Social, organizational, and goal-oriented perspectives. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Murphy, K. R., & DeShon, R. P. (2000). Interrater correlations do not estimate the reliability of performance ratings. Personnel Psychology, 53, 873900. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2000.tb02421.x
Pulakos, E. D., Mueller Hanson, R., Arad, S., & Moye, N. (2015). Performance management can be fixed: An on-the-job experiential learning approach for complex behavior change. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 8, 5176.
Roch, S. G., Ayman, R., Newhouse, N., & Harris, M. (2005). Effect of identifiability, rating audience, and conscientiousness on rating level. International Journal Selection and Assessment, 13, 5362. doi:10.1111/j.0965-075X.2005.00299.x
Steelman, L. A., Levy, P. E., & Snell, A. F. (2004). The Feedback Environment Scale: Construct definition, measurement, and validation. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64, 165184. doi:10.1177/0013164403258440
Tata, J. (2002). The influence of managerial accounts of employees’ reactions to negative feedback. Group & Organizational Management, 27, 480503. doi:10.1177/1059601102238358
Tett, R. P., & Burnett, D. D. (2003). A personality trait-based interactionist model of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 500517. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.3. 500
VandeWalle, D., Ganesan, S., Challagalla, G. N., & Brown, S. P. (2000). An integrated model of feedback-seeking behavior: Disposition, context and cognition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 9961003. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.85.6.996
Villanova, P., Bernardin, H. J., Dahmus, S. A., & Sims, R. L. (1993). Rater leniency and performance appraisal discomfort. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 789799. doi:10.1177/0013164493053003023
Viswesvaran, C., Ones, D. S., & Schmidt, F. L. (1996). Comparative analysis of the reliability of job performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 557574.
Williams, J. R., Miller, C. E., Steelman, L. A., & Levy, P. E. (1999). Increasing feedback seeking in public contexts: It takes two (or more) to tango. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 969976. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.84.6.969
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Industrial and Organizational Psychology
  • ISSN: 1754-9426
  • EISSN: 1754-9434
  • URL: /core/journals/industrial-and-organizational-psychology
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed