1932

Abstract

This article reviews the history of performance management (PM), beginning with performance evaluation. We discuss various strategies that have been used to enable accurate ratings as well as cognitive processes and contextual factors that have been shown to significantly impact ratings. We raise questions about the concept of true performance and whether raters can be enabled and motivated to make accurate ratings. We progress to discussing more structured and comprehensive PM processes that typically involve cascading goals, goal setting, competency modeling, evaluation of behavior and results, and implementation. These systems have proven to be tedious and low-value, resulting in unprecedented, wide-spread experimentation with innovative practices to move companies away from heavy PM processes to simpler, cost-effective strategies that actually drive performance. These have ranged from abandoning ratings to implementing innovations in goal-setting, real-time feedback, coaching, and PM behavior change. Directions for future research and practice are discussed.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012218-015009
2019-01-21
2024-05-23
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/orgpsych/6/1/annurev-orgpsych-012218-015009.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012218-015009&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Adler S, Campion M, Colquitt A, Grubb A, Murphy K et al. 2016. Getting rid of performance ratings: Genius or folly? A debate. Ind. Organ. Psychol. 9:2219–52
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Aguinis H 2013. Performance Management Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall, 3rd ed..
  3. Baldassarre L, Finken B 2015. GE's real-time performance development. Harvard Business Review Aug. 12. https://hbr.org/2015/08/ges-real-time-performance-development
  4. Bartram D 2007. Increasing validity with forced-choice criterion measurement formats. Int. J. Sel. Assess. 15:263–72
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Beer M 1981. Performance appraisal: dilemmas and possibilities. Organ. Dyn. 9:324–36
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bernardin HJ, Beatty RW 1984. Performance Appraisal: Assessing Human Behavior at Work Boston: Kent
  7. Blanz F, Ghiselli EE 1972. The mixed standard scale: a new rating system. Pers. Psychol. 25:185–99
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Bock L 2015. Work Rules! Insights from Google that Will Transform How You Live and Lead New York: Twelve
  9. Borman WC 1974. The rating of individuals in organizations: an alternate approach. Organ. Behav. Hum. Perform. 12:105–24
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Borman WC 1975. Effects of instructions to avoid halo error on reliability and validity of performance evaluation ratings. J. Appl. Psychol. 60:5556–60
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Borman WC 1977. Consistency of rating accuracy and rating errors in the judgment of human performance. Organ. Behav. Hum. Perform. 20:238–52
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Borman WC, Buck E, Hanson MA, Motowidlo SJ, Stark S, Drasgow F 2001. An examination of the comparative reliability, validity, and accuracy of performance ratings made using computerized adaptive rating scales. J. Appl. Psychol. 86:965–73
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Boyatzis RE 1996. Consequences and rejuvenation of competency-based human resource and organization development. Research in Organizational Change and Development 9 RW Woodman, WA Pasmore 101–22 Greenwich, CN: JAI Press
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Boyatzis RE 2016. Unleashing the Power of Intentional Change New York: Korn Ferry, Hay Group
  15. Boyatzis RE, Rochford K, Taylor SN 2015. The role of the positive emotional attractor in vision and shared vision: toward effective leadership, relationships, and engagement. Front. Psychol. 6:670
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Bracken D, Timmreck C, Church A 2001. Handbook of Multisource Feedback San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
  17. Bridges W, Bridges S 2016. Managing Transitions: Making the Most of Change Boston: Perseus Book Group
  18. Bryant A 2011. Google's quest to build a better boss. New York Times Mar. 12. https://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/13/business/13hire.html
  19. Buckingham M, Goodall A 2015. Reinventing performance management. Harvard Business Review April. https://hbr.org/2015/04/reinventing-performance-management
  20. Burke RJ, Weitzel W, Weir T 1978. Characteristics of effective employee performance review and development interviews: replication and extension. Pers. Psychol. 31:4903–19
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Cascio WF 1998. Applied Psychology in Human Resource Management Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall
  22. CEB. 2004. Driving employee performance and retention through engagement: a quantitative analysis of the effectiveness of employee engagement strategies Washington, DC: CEB https://www.stcloudstate.edu/humanresources/_files/documents/supv-brown-bag/employee-engagement.pdf
  23. CEB. 2016. The real impact of eliminating performance ratings: insights from employees and managers Washington, DC: CEB https://www.cebglobal.com/content/dam/cebglobal/us/EN/best-practices-decision-support/human-resources/pdfs/eliminate-performance-ratings.pdf
  24. CEB. 2017. The power of context in driving leader success Washington, DC: CEB https://www.cebglobal.com/corporate-leadership-council/power-of-context-in-driving-leader-success.html
  25. Cederblom D 1982. The performance appraisal interview: a review, implications, and suggestions. Acad. Manag. Rev. 7:2219–27
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Church AH, Ginther NM, Levine R, Rotolo CT 2015. Going beyond the fix: taking performance management to the next level. Ind. Organ. Psychol. 8:121–29
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Cohen D 2005. The Heart of Change Field Guide: Tools and Tactics for Leading Change in Your Organization Boston: Harv. Bus. Rev. Press
  28. Cooper WH 1981. Ubiquitous halo. Psychol. Bull. 90:218–44
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Culbert SA, Rout L 2010. Get Rid of the Performance Review: How Companies Can Stop Intimidating, Start Managing—And Focus on What Really Matters New York: Bus. Plus
  30. Culbertson SS, Henning JB, Payne SC 2013. Performance appraisal satisfaction: the role of feedback and goal orientation. J. Pers. Psychol. 12:189–95
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Cunningham L 2015. In big move, Accenture will get rid of annual performance reviews and rankings. Washington Post July 21. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/on-leadership/wp/2015/07/21/in-big-move-accenture-will-get-rid-of-annual-performance-reviews-and-rankings/?tid=pm_pop_b
  32. Dane E 2011. Paying attention to mindfulness and its effects on task performance in the workplace. J. Manag. 37:997–1018
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Dane E, Brummel BJ 2013. Examining workplace mindfulness and its relations to job performance and turnover intention. Hum. Relat. 67:105–28
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Daniels AC 2000. Bringing Out the Best in People: How to Apply the Astonishing Power of Positive Reinforcement. New York: McGraw-Hill
  35. Davachi L, Kiefer T, Rock D, Rock L 2010. Learning that lasts through AGES. NeuroLeadership J 3:53–63
    [Google Scholar]
  36. DeCotiis T, Petit A 1978. The performance appraisal process: a model and some testable propositions. Acad. Manag. Rev. 3:635–46
    [Google Scholar]
  37. DeNisi AS 2006. A Cognitive Approach to Performance Appraisal New York: Routledge
  38. DeNisi AS, Murphy KR 2017. Performance appraisal and performance management: 100 years of progress. ? J. Appl. Psychol. 3:421–33
    [Google Scholar]
  39. DeRue DS, Nahgang JD, Hollenbeck JR, Workman K 2012. A quasi-experimental study of after-event reviews and leadership development. J. Appl. Psychol. 97:997–1015
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Dubois DD 1993. Competency-Based Performance Improvement: A Strategy for Organizational Change Amherst, MA: HRD Press
  41. Duhigg C 2012. The Power of Habit: Why We Do What We Do New York: Random House
  42. Dunnette MD 1963. A note on the criterion. J. Appl. Psychol. 47:251–54
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Drucker PF 1954. The Practice of Management New York: Harper & Row
  44. Effron M, Ott M 2010. One Page Talent Management: Eliminating Complexity, Adding Value Cambridge, MA: Harv. Bus. Press
  45. Ericsson KA, Krampe RT, Tesch-Romer C 1993. The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychol. Rev. 100:363–406
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Feldman JM 1981. Beyond attribution theory: cognitive processes in performance appraisal. J. Appl. Psychol. 66:2127–48
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Fitts PM, Posner MI 1967. Human Performance Oxford, UK: Brooks/Cole
  48. Gelles D 2012. Mindful Work: How Meditation Is Changing Business from the Inside Out New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt
  49. Gregory JB, Levy PE, Jeffers M 2008. Development of a model of the feedback process within executive coaching. Consult. Psychol. J. 60:142–56
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Greguras GJ, Robie C, Schleicher DJ, Goff M 2003. A field study of the effects of rating purpose on the quality of multisource ratings. Pers. Psychol. 56:11–21
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Grote RC 1996. The Complete Guide to Performance Appraisal New York: Am. Manag. Assoc.
  52. Guion RM 1961. Criterion measurement and personnel judgments. Pers. Psychol. 4:141–49
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Harter JK, Schmidt FL, Hayes TL 2002. Business unit-level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: a meta-analysis. J. Appl. Psychol. 87:2268–79
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Heath D, Heath C 2010. Switch: How to Change Things When Change Is Hard New York: Broadway Books
  55. Hillgren JS, Cheatham DW 2000. Understanding Performance Measures: An Approach to Linking Rewards to the Achievement of Organizational Objectives Scottsdale, AZ: WorldatWork
  56. Ilgen DR, Feldman JM 1983. Performance appraisal: a process focus. Research in Organizational Behavior 5 L Cummings, B Staw 141–97 Greenwich, CT: JAI Press
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Ilgen DR, Fisher CD, Taylor MS 1979. Consequences of individual feedback on behavior in organizations. J. Appl. Psychol. 64:4349–71
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Ilgen DR, Peterson RB, Martin BA, Boeschen DA 1981. Supervisor and subordinate reactions to performance appraisal sessions. Organ. Behav. Hum. Perform. 28:3311–30
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Institute for Corporate Productivity (i4cp). 2011. Tying pay to performance. i4cp Sept. 8. https://www.i4cp.com/productivity-blog/2011/09/08/companies-tying-employee-pay-to-performance-increases-17-in-last-two-years
  60. Jamieson BD 1973. Behavioral problems with management by objective. Acad. Manag. Rev. 16:496–505
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Kantor J, Streitfeld D 2015. Inside Amazon: wrestling big ideas in a bruising workplace. New York Times Aug. 15. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/16/technology/inside-amazon-wrestling-big-ideas-in-a-bruising-workplace.html
  62. Kirkland K, Manoogian S 2007. Ongoing feedback, how to get it, how to use it Greensboro, NC: Cent. Creat. Leadersh.
  63. Klein AL 1996. Validity and reliability for competency-based systems: reducing litigation risks. Compens. Benefits Rev. 28:431–37
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Kluger AN, DeNisi AS 1996. The effects of feedback interventions on performance: a historical review, meta-analysis and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychol. Bull. 119:254–84
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Kotter JP 2007. Leading change: why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Business Review Jan. https://hbr.org/2007/01/leading-change-why-transformation-efforts-fail
  66. Landy FJ, Farr JL 1980. Performance rating. Psychol. Bull. 87:72–107
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Landy FJ, Farr JL 1983. The Measurement of Work Performance New York: Academic
  68. Latham G, Wexley K 1977. Behavioral observation scales. J. Appl. Psychol. 30:255–68
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Latham GP, Locke EA 2007. New developments and directions for goal-setting research. Eur. Psychologist 123:290–300
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Latham GP, Wexley KN, Pursell ED 1975. Training managers to minimize rating errors in the observation of behavior. J. Appl. Psychol. 60:5550–55
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Ledford GE, Benson GS, Lawler EE III. 2016. A Study of Cutting-Edge Performance Management Practices: Ongoing Feedback, Ratingless Reviews and Crowdsourced Feedback Scottsdale, AZ: WorldatWork
  72. Locke EA, Latham GP 1990. A Theory of Goal Setting and Task Performance Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall
  73. Locke EA, Shaw KN, Saari LM, Latham GP 1981. Goal setting and task performance, 1969–1980. Psychol. Bull. 90:125–52
    [Google Scholar]
  74. London M, Mone EM 2014. Performance management processes that reflect and shape organizational culture and climate. The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Climate and Culture B Schneider, KM Barbera, 79–100 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Lopez FM 1968. Evaluating Employee Performance Chicago, IL: Public Personnel Association
  76. Maier NR 1958. The Appraisal Interview: Objectives, Methods and Skills New York: Wiley
  77. McIntyre RM, Smith DE, Hassett CE 1984. Accuracy of performance ratings as affected by rater training and perceived purpose of rating. J. Appl. Psychol. 69:1147–56
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Mosley E 2015. Creating an effective peer review system. Harvard Business Review Aug. 19. https://hbr.org/2015/08/creating-an-effective-peer-review-system?cm_sp=Article-_-Links-_-Top%20of%20Page%20Recirculation
  79. Mueller-Hanson RA, Garza M, Riordan BG 2016. Performance Management Transformation Arlington, VA: CEB
  80. Mueller-Hanson RA, Pulakos ED 2018. Transforming Performance Management to Drive Performance: An Evidence-based Roadmap New York: Routledge
  81. Murphy KR, Balzer WK 1989. Rater errors and rating accuracy. J. Appl. Psychol. 74:619–24
    [Google Scholar]
  82. Murphy KR, Cleveland JN 1991. Performance Appraisal. An Organizational Perspective Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon
  83. Murphy KR, Cleveland JN 1995. Understanding Performance Appraisal: Social, Organizational and Goal-Oriented Perspectives Newbury Park, CA: Sage
  84. Murphy KR, Cleveland JN, Skattebo AL, Kinney TB 2004. Raters who pursue different goals give different ratings. J. Appl. Psychol. 89:158–64
    [Google Scholar]
  85. Murphy KR, Jako RA, Anhalt RL 1993. Nature and consequences of halo error: a critical analysis. J. Appl. Psychol. 78:218–25
    [Google Scholar]
  86. Murphy KR, Martin C, Garcia M 1982. Do behavioral observation scales measure observation. ? J. Appl. Psychol. 67:562–67
    [Google Scholar]
  87. Nathan BD, Mohrman AM, Milliman J 1991. Interpersonal relations as a context for the effects of appraisal interviews on performance and satisfaction: a longitudinal study. Acad. Manag. J. 34:2352–69
    [Google Scholar]
  88. O'Boyle E, Aguinis H 2012. The best and the rest: revisiting the norm of normality of individual performance. Pers. Psychol. 65:79–119
    [Google Scholar]
  89. O'Leary RS, Pulakos ED 2017. Defining and measuring results of workplace behavior. The Handbook of Employee Selection JL Farr, N Tippins 509–29 New York: Psychology Press, 2nd ed..
    [Google Scholar]
  90. Patterson DG 1922. The Scott Company graphic rating scale. J. Pers. Res. 1:361–76
    [Google Scholar]
  91. Pearce JL, Porter LW 1986. Employee responses to formal performance appraisal feedback. J. Appl. Psychol. 71:2211–18
    [Google Scholar]
  92. Pearson CAL 1991. An assessment of extrinsic feedback on participation, role perceptions, motivation, and job satisfaction in a self-managed system for monitoring group achievement. Hum. Relat. 44:5517–37
    [Google Scholar]
  93. Pink DH 2009. Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us New York: Riverhead Books
  94. Ployhart RE, Weekley JA, Ramsey J 2009. The consequences of human resource stocks and flows: a longitudinal examination of unit service orientation and unit effectiveness. Acad. Manag. J. 52:5996–1015
    [Google Scholar]
  95. Pulakos ED 1984. A comparison of rater training programs: error training and accuracy training. J. Appl. Psychol. 69:581–88
    [Google Scholar]
  96. Pulakos ED 1986. The development of a training program to increase accuracy with different rating formats. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 38:76–91
    [Google Scholar]
  97. Pulakos ED 2009. Performance Management: A New Approach for Driving Business Results Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell
  98. Pulakos ED, Mueller-Hanson RA, Arad S, Moye N 2015. Performance management can be fixed: an on-the-job experiential learning approach for complex behavior change. Ind. Organ. Psychol. 8:51–76
    [Google Scholar]
  99. Pulakos ED, Mueller-Hanson RA, O'Leary RS, Meyrowitz MM 2012. Practice Guidelines: Building a High-Performance Culture: A Fresh Look at Performance Management Alexandria, VA: Soc. Hum. Resour. Manag. Found.
  100. Pulakos ED, O'Leary RS 2010. Defining and measuring results of workplace behavior. The Handbook of Employee Selection JL Farr, N Tippins 513–29 New York: Psychology Press
    [Google Scholar]
  101. Pulakos ED, O'Leary RS 2011. Why is performance management so broken. ? Ind. Organ. Psychol. 4:2146–64
    [Google Scholar]
  102. Rock D 2008. SCARF: a brain-based model for collaborating with and influencing others. NeuroLeadership J 1:44–52
    [Google Scholar]
  103. Rock D, Jones B 2015. Why more and more companies are ditching performance ratings. Harvard Business Review Sept. 8. https://hbr.org/2015/09/why-more-and-more-companies-are-ditching-performance-ratings
  104. Rodgers R, Hunter JE 1991. Impact of management by objectives on organizational productivity. J. Appl. Psychol. 76:322–36
    [Google Scholar]
  105. Rodgers R, Hunter JE, Rogers DL 1993. Influence of top management commitment on management process success. J. Appl. Psychol. 78:151–55
    [Google Scholar]
  106. Saal FE, Landy FJ 1977. The mixed standard rating scale: an evaluation. Organ. Behav. Hum. Perform. 18:19–35
    [Google Scholar]
  107. Schippmann JS 1999. Strategic Job Modeling: Working at the Core of Integrated Human Resource Systems Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.
  108. Schneider RJ, Goff M, Anderson S, Borman WC 2003. Computerized adaptive rating scales for measuring managerial performance. Int. J. Sel. Assess. 11:237–46
    [Google Scholar]
  109. Schneier CE, Shaw DG, Beatty RW 1991. Performance measurement and management: a tool for strategy execution. Hum. Resour. Manag. 30:279–301
    [Google Scholar]
  110. Scott WD, Clothier RC, Spriegel WR 1941. Personnel Management New York: McGraw-Hill
  111. Smith PC, Kendall LM 1963. Retranslation of expectations: an approach to the construction of unambiguous anchors for rating scales. J. Appl. Psychol. 47:149–55
    [Google Scholar]
  112. Smither JW, London M 2009. Performance Management: Putting Research into Action New York: Wiley
  113. Smither JW, London M, Reilly RR 2005. Does performance improve following multisource feedback? A theoretical model, meta-analysis, and review of empirical findings. Pers. Psychol. 58:33–66
    [Google Scholar]
  114. Strauss G 1972. Management by objectives: a critical review. Train. Dev. J. 26:10–15
    [Google Scholar]
  115. Taylor FW 1911. The Principles of Scientific Management New York: Harper & Brothers
  116. Tziner A, Murphy K 1999. Additional evidence of attitudinal influences in performance appraisal. J. Bus. Psychol. 13:407–19
    [Google Scholar]
  117. Viswesvaran C, Ones DS, Schmidt FL 1996. Comparative analysis of the reliability of job performance ratings. J. Appl. Psychol. 81:557–74
    [Google Scholar]
  118. Wexley KN, Klimoski R 1984. Performance appraisal: an update. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management KM Rowland, GD Ferris 35–79 Greenwich, CN: JAI Press
    [Google Scholar]
  119. Winters D, Latham GP 2006. The effect of learning versus outcome goals on a simple versus a complex task. Group Organ. Manag. 21:236–50
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012218-015009
Loading
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012218-015009
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error