Individual work role performance drives the entire economy. It is organizational psychology and organizational behavior’s (OP/OB’s) most crucial dependent variable. In this review, alternative specifications for the definition and latent structure of individual performance are reviewed and summarized. Setting aside differences in terminology, the alternatives are remarkably similar. The Campbell (2012) model is offered as a synthesized description of the content of the latent structure. Issues pertaining to performance dynamics are then reviewed, along with the role played by individual adaptability to changing performance requirements. Using the synthesized model of the latent content structure and dynamics of performance as a backdrop, issues pertaining to the assessment of performance are summarized. The alternative goals of performance assessment, general measurement issues, and the construct validity of specific methods (e.g., ratings, simulations) are reviewed and described. Cross-cultural issues and future research needs are noted.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


Literature Cited

  1. Aguinis H, O’Boyle E. 2014. Star performers in twenty-first century organizations. Pers. Psychol. 67:313–50 [Google Scholar]
  2. Austin JT, Villanova P. 1992. The criterion problem: 1917–1992. J. Appl. Psychol. 77:836–74 [Google Scholar]
  3. Baard SK, Rench TA, Kozlowski SWJ. 2014. Performance adaptation: a theoretical integration and review. J. Manag. 40:48–99 [Google Scholar]
  4. Barron LG, Sackett PR. 2008. Asian variability in performance rating modesty and leniency bias. Hum. Perform. 21:277–90 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bartram D. 2005. The great eight competencies: a criterion centric approach to construct validation. J. Appl. Psychol. 90:1185–203 [Google Scholar]
  6. Beal DJ, Weiss HM, Barros E, MacDermid SM. 2005. An episodic process model of affective influences on performance. J. Appl. Psychol. 90:1054–68 [Google Scholar]
  7. Beck JW, Beatty AS, Sackett PR. 2014. On the distribution of job performance: the role of measurement characteristics in observed departures from normality. Pers. Psychol. 67:531–66 [Google Scholar]
  8. Bennett RJ, Robinson SL. 2000. Development of a measure of workplace deviance. J. Appl. Psychol. 85:349–60 [Google Scholar]
  9. Berry CM, Ones DS, Sackett PR. 2007. Interpersonal deviance, organizational deviance, and their common correlates: a review and meta-analysis. J. Appl. Psychol. 92:410–24 [Google Scholar]
  10. Beus JM, Whitman DS. 2012. The relationship between typical and maximum performance: a meta-analytic examination. Hum. Perform. 25:355–76 [Google Scholar]
  11. Bommer WH, Johnson JL, Rich GA, Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB. 1995. On the interchangeability of objective and subjective measures of employee performance: a meta-analysis. Pers. Psychol. 48:587–605 [Google Scholar]
  12. Borman WC, Motowidlo SJ. 1993. Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual performance. See Schmitt & Borman 1993, pp. 71–98 [Google Scholar]
  13. Borman WC, Motowidlo SJ. 1997. Task performance and contextual performance: the meaning for personnel selection research. Hum. Perform. 10:99–109 [Google Scholar]
  14. Borsboom D, Mellenberg GJ, van Heerden J. 2003. The theoretical status of latent variables. Psychol. Rev. 110:203–19 [Google Scholar]
  15. Brumback GB, Vincent JW. 1970. Factor analysis of work-performed data for a sample of administrative, professional, and scientific positions. Pers. Psychol. 23:101–7 [Google Scholar]
  16. Campbell JP. 2012. Behavior, performance, and effectiveness in the twenty-first century. See Kozlowski 2012, pp. 159–96 [Google Scholar]
  17. Campbell JP. 2013a. Assessment in I/O psychology: an overview. See Geisinger et al. 2013, pp. 355–95 [Google Scholar]
  18. Campbell JP. 2013b. Leadership, the old, the new, and the timeless: a commentary. See Rumsey 2013, pp. 401–22 [Google Scholar]
  19. Campbell JP, Hanson MA, Oppler SH. 2001. Modeling performance in a population of jobs. See Campbell & Knapp 2001, pp. 307–34 [Google Scholar]
  20. Campbell JP, Knapp DJ. 2001. Exploring the Limits in Personnel Selection and Classification Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
  21. Campbell JP, Kuncel NR. 2001. Individual and team training. Handbook of Industrial, Work & Organizational Psychology Vol. 1 Personnel Psychology Anderson N, Ones DS, Sinangil HK, Viswesvaran C. 278–313 Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage [Google Scholar]
  22. Campbell JP, McCloy RA, Oppler SH, Sager CE. 1993. A theory of performance. See Schmitt & Borman 1993, pp. 35–70 [Google Scholar]
  23. Campion MA, Fink AA, Ruggeberg BJ, Carr L, Phillips GM, Odman RB. 2011. Doing competencies well: best practices in competency modeling. Pers. Psychol. 64:225–62 [Google Scholar]
  24. Carhart MM. 1997. On persistence in mutual fund performance. J. Financ 52:57–82 [Google Scholar]
  25. Chan D. 2014. Individual Adaptability to Changes at Work: New Directions in Research New York: Routledge
  26. Colegrove CM, Bennett W Jr. 2006. Competency-based training: adapting to warfighter needs Mesa, AZ: Air Force Res. Lab. [Google Scholar]
  27. Conway JM. 1996. Additional construct validity evidence for the task/contextual performance distinction. Hum. Perform. 9:309–29 [Google Scholar]
  28. Conway JM, Huffcutt AI. 1997. Psychometric properties of multisource performance ratings: a meta-analysis of subordinate, supervisor, peer, and self-ratings. Hum. Perform. 10:331–60 [Google Scholar]
  29. Cravens DW, Ingram TN, LaForge RW, Young CE. 1993. Behavior-based and outcome-based salesforce control systems. J. Mark. 57:47–59 [Google Scholar]
  30. Dalal RS. 2005. A meta-analysis of the relationship between organizational citizenship behavior and counterproductive work behavior. J. Appl. Psychol. 90:1241–55 [Google Scholar]
  31. Dalal RS, Bhave DP, Fiset J. 2014. Within-person variability in job performance: a theoretical review and research agenda. J. Manag. 40:51396–436 [Google Scholar]
  32. Deadrick DL, Bennett N, Russell CJ. 1997. Using hierarchical linear modeling to examine dynamic performance criteria over time. J. Manag. 23:745–57 [Google Scholar]
  33. Deadrick DL, Gardner DG. 2008. Maximal and typical measures of job performance: an analysis of performance variability over time. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 18:133–45 [Google Scholar]
  34. DeChurch LA, Mesmer-Magnus JR. 2010. The cognitive underpinnings of effective teamwork: a meta-analysis. J. Appl. Psychol. 95:32–53 [Google Scholar]
  35. DeNisi AS, Kluger AN. 2000. Feedback effectiveness: Can 360-appraisals be improved?. Acad. Manag. Perspect. 14:129–39 [Google Scholar]
  36. DeNisi AS, Pritchard RD. 2006. Performance appraisal, performance management and improving individual performance: a motivational framework. Manag. Organ. Rev. 2:253–77 [Google Scholar]
  37. DeNisi AS, Sonesh S. 2011. The appraisal and management of performance at work. See Zedeck 2011, pp. 255–79 [Google Scholar]
  38. Diamantopoulos A, Riefler P, Roth KP. 2008. Advancing formative measurement models. J. Bus. Res. 61:121203–18 [Google Scholar]
  39. DuBois CL, Sackett PR, Zedeck S, Fogli L. 1993. Further exploration of typical and maximum performance criteria: definitional issues, prediction, and White-Black differences. J. Appl. Psychol. 78:205–11 [Google Scholar]
  40. Dunning D, Heath C, Suls JM. 2004. Flawed self-assessment implications for health, education, and the workplace. Psychol. Sci. Public Interest 5:69–106 [Google Scholar]
  41. Facteau JD, Craig SB. 2001. Are performance ratings from different rater sources comparable?. J. Appl. Psychol. 86:215–27 [Google Scholar]
  42. Farr JL, Tippins NT. 2010. Handbook of Employee Selection New York: Routledge
  43. Festing M, Knappert L, Dowling PJ, Engle AD. 2012. Global performance management in MNEs: conceptualization and profiles of country-specific characteristics in China, Germany, and the United States. Thunderbird Int. Bus. Rev. 54:825–43 [Google Scholar]
  44. Fisher CD. 2008. What if we took within-person performance variability seriously?. Ind. Organ. Psychol. 1:185–89 [Google Scholar]
  45. Fleishman EA, Quaintance MK. 1984. Taxonomies of Human Performance: The Description of Human Tasks Orlando, FL: Academic
  46. Frese M. 2008. The word is out: We need an active performance concept for modern workplaces. Ind. Organ. Psychol. 1:67–69 [Google Scholar]
  47. Gable SL, Reis HT, Ward AJ. 2003. Evidence for bivariate systems: an empirical test of appetition and aversion across domains. J. Res. Personal. 37:349–72 [Google Scholar]
  48. Geisinger KF, Bracken BA, Carlson JF, Hansen JIC, Kuncel NR. et al. 2013. APA Handbook of Testing and Assessment in Psychology Vol. 1 Test Theory and Testing and Assessment in Industrial and Organizational Psychology Washington, DC: Am. Psychol. Assoc.
  49. Goodman PS, Devadas R, Griffith-Hughson TL. 1988. Groups and productivity: analyzing the effectiveness of self-management teams. Productivity in Organizations: New Perspectives from Industrial and Organizational Psychology Campbell JP, Campbell RJ. 295–327 San Francisco: Jossey-Bass [Google Scholar]
  50. Griffin MA, Neal A, Parker SK. 2007. A new model of work role performance: positive behavior in uncertain and interdependent contexts. Acad. Manag. J. 50:327–47 [Google Scholar]
  51. Gruys ML, Sackett PR. 2003. Investigating the dimensionality of counterproductive work behavior. Int. J. Sel. Assess. 11:30–42 [Google Scholar]
  52. Haertel EH. 2013. Reliability and validity of inferences about teachers based on student test scores. William H. Angoff Meml. Lect. Ser. 14, Cent. Res. Hum. Cap. Educ., ETS Res. Dev., Mar. 22, Washington, DC
  53. Halpin AL, Biggs WD. 2009. Evaluating business plans in a simulation environment. Dev. Bus. Simul. Exp. Learn. 36:149–54 [Google Scholar]
  54. He P. 2012. Counterproductive work behavior among Chinese knowledge workers. Int. J. Sel. Assess. 20:119–38 [Google Scholar]
  55. Heidemeier H, Moser K. 2009. Self–other agreement in job performance ratings: a meta-analytic test of a process model. J. Appl. Psychol. 94:353–70 [Google Scholar]
  56. Heinrichs WL, Youngblood P, Harter PM, Dev P. 2008. Simulation for team training and assessment: case studies of online training with virtual worlds. World J. Surg. 32:161–70 [Google Scholar]
  57. Hermelin E, Lievens F, Robertson IT. 2007. The validity of assessment centres for the prediction of supervisory performance ratings: a meta-analysis. Int. J. Sel. Assess. 15:405–11 [Google Scholar]
  58. Hoffman BJ, Gorman CA, Blair CA, Meriac JP, Overstreet B, Atchley EK. 2012. Evidence for the effectiveness of an alternative multisource performance rating methodology. Pers. Psychol. 65:531–63 [Google Scholar]
  59. Hoffman BJ, Lance CE, Bynum B, Gentry WA. 2010. Rater source effects are alive and well after all. Pers. Psychol. 63:119–51 [Google Scholar]
  60. Hoffman BJ, Woehr DJ. 2009. Disentangling the meaning of multisource performance rating source and dimension factors. Pers. Psychol. 62:735–65 [Google Scholar]
  61. Hoffman RR, Militello LG. 2009. Perspectives on Cognitive Task Analysis New York: Psychol. Press, Taylor & Francis
  62. Hofmann DA, Jacobs R, Gerras SJ. 1992. Mapping individual performance over time. J. Appl. Psychol. 77:185–95 [Google Scholar]
  63. Hogan J, Hogan R, Kaiser RB. 2011. Management derailment. See Zedeck 2011, pp. 555–76 [Google Scholar]
  64. Howard A. 1983. Work samples and simulations in competency evaluation. Prof. Psychol. Res. Pract. 14:780–96 [Google Scholar]
  65. Hunt ST. 2011. Technology is transforming the nature of performance management. Ind. Organ. Psychol. 4:18889 [Google Scholar]
  66. Hunter JE. 1983. A causal analysis of cognitive ability, job knowledge, job performance, and supervisor ratings. Performance Measurement and Theory Landy FJ, Zedeck S, Cleveland JN. 257–66 Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum [Google Scholar]
  67. Kargupta H, Sarkar K, Gilligan M. 2010. MineFleet: an overview of a widely adopted distributed vehicle performance data mining system. Proc. ACM SIGKDD Int. Conf. Knowl. Discov. Data Min., 16th, Washington, DC, July 2529, pp. 37–46. New York: ACM
  68. Katzell RA, Guzzo RA. 1983. Psychological approaches to productivity improvement. Am. Psychol. 38:468–72 [Google Scholar]
  69. Kim Y, Ployhart RE. 2014. The effects of staffing and training on firm productivity and profit growth before, during, and after the Great Recession. J. Appl. Psychol. 99:361–89 [Google Scholar]
  70. Klehe U-C, Anderson N. 2007. Working hard and working smart: motivation and ability during typical and maximum performance. J. Appl. Psychol. 92:978–92 [Google Scholar]
  71. Kluger AN, DeNisi A. 1996. The effects of feedback interventions on performance: a historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychol. Bull. 119:254–84 [Google Scholar]
  72. Koopmans L, Bernaards CM, Hildebrandt VH, Schaufeli WB, de Vet Henrica CW, van der Beek AJ. 2011. Conceptual frameworks of individual work performance: a systematic review. J. Occup. Environ. Med. 53:856–66 [Google Scholar]
  73. Kozlowski SWJ. 2012. The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Psychology Vol. 1 New York: Oxford Univ. Press
  74. Kozlowski SWJ, Chao GT, Morrison RF. 1998. Games raters play: politics, strategies, and impression management in performance appraisal. Performance Appraisal: State of the Art in Practice Smither JW. 163–205 San Francisco: Jossey-Bass [Google Scholar]
  75. Kunkler K. 2006. The role of medical simulation: an overview. Int. J. Med. Robotics Comput. Assist. Surg. 2:203–10 [Google Scholar]
  76. Lance CE, Hoffman BJ, Gentry WA, Baranik LE. 2008. Rater source factors represent important subcomponents of the criterion construct space, not rater bias. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 18:223–32 [Google Scholar]
  77. Lance CE, Teachout MS, Donnelly TM. 1992. Specification of the criterion construct space: an application of hierarchical confirmatory factor analysis. J. Appl. Psychol. 77:437–52 [Google Scholar]
  78. Levy PE, Williams JR. 2004. The social context of performance appraisal: a review and framework for the future. J. Manag. 30:881–905 [Google Scholar]
  79. Lievens F, Patterson F. 2011. The validity and incremental validity of knowledge tests, low-fidelity simulations, and high-fidelity simulations for predicting job performance in advanced-level high-stakes selection. J. Appl. Psychol. 96:927–40 [Google Scholar]
  80. Locke EA, Latham GP. 2002. Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: a 35-year odyssey. Am. Psychol. 57:705–17 [Google Scholar]
  81. Lohr S. 2013. Big data, trying to build better workers. New York Times, Apr. 21, p. BU4
  82. Lord RG, Diefendorff JM, Schmidt AM, Hall RJ. 2010. Self-regulation at work. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 61:543–68 [Google Scholar]
  83. Lord RG, Dinh JE. 2014. What have we learned that is critical in understanding leadership perceptions and leader-performance relations?. Ind. Organ. Psychol. 7:158–77 [Google Scholar]
  84. Mangos PM, Arnold RD. 2008. Enhancing military training through the application of maximum and typical performance measurement principles. Perform. Improv. 47:29–35 [Google Scholar]
  85. Mangos PM, Steele-Johnson D, LaHuis D, White ED. 2007. A multiple-task measurement framework for assessing maximum-typical performance. Hum. Perform. 20:241–58 [Google Scholar]
  86. Marcus B, Schuler H, Quell P, Hümpfner G. 2002. Measuring counterproductivity: development and initial validation of a German self-report questionnaire. Int. J. Sel. Assess. 10:18–35 [Google Scholar]
  87. Markon KE, Krueger RF, Watson D. 2005. Delineating the structure of normal and abnormal personality: an integrative hierarchical approach. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 88:139–57 [Google Scholar]
  88. McAfee A, Brynjolfsson E. 2012. Big data: the management revolution. Harv. Bus. Rev. 90:60–68 [Google Scholar]
  89. Miles DE, Borman WE, Spector PE, Fox S. 2002. Building an integrative model of extra role work behaviors: a comparison of counterproductive work behavior with organizational citizenship behavior. Int. J. Sel. Assess. 10:1/251–57 [Google Scholar]
  90. Miller JS. 2003. High tech and high performance: managing appraisal in the information age. J. Labor Res. 24:409–24 [Google Scholar]
  91. Motowidlo SJ. 2000. Some basic issues related to contextual performance and organizational citizenship behavior in human resource management. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 10:115–26 [Google Scholar]
  92. Motowidlo SJ, Borman WC, Schmit MJ. 1997. A theory of individual differences in task and contextual performance. Hum. Perform. 10:71–83 [Google Scholar]
  93. Mueller L. 2011. How I-O can contribute to the teacher evaluation debate: a response to Lefkowitz. TIP 49:17 [Google Scholar]
  94. Murphy KR. 1989a. Dimensions of job performance. Testing: Theoretical and Applied Perspectives Dillon RF, Pellegrino JW. 218–47 New York: Praeger [Google Scholar]
  95. Murphy KR. 1989b. Is the relationship between cognitive ability and job performance stable over time?. Hum. Perform. 2:183–200 [Google Scholar]
  96. Murphy KR. 2008. Explaining the weak relationship between job performance and ratings of job performance. Ind. Organ. Psychol. 1:148–60 [Google Scholar]
  97. Murphy KR, Cleveland JN. 1995. Understanding Performance Appraisal: Social, Organizational, and Goal-Based Perspectives Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
  98. Murphy KR, Dechert PJ. 2013. 2013 performance appraisal See Geisinger et al. 2013, pp. 611–27 [Google Scholar]
  99. Murphy KR, DeShon R. 2000. Interrater correlations do not estimate the reliability of job performance ratings. Pers. Psychol. 53:873–900 [Google Scholar]
  100. Noonan LE, Sulsky LM. 2001. Impact of frame-of-reference and behavioral observation training on alternative training effectiveness criteria in a Canadian military sample. Hum. Perform. 14:3–26 [Google Scholar]
  101. 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]
  102. O’Neil HF, Allred K, Dennis RA. 1997. Validation of computer simulation for assessment of interpersonal skills. Workforce Readiness: Competencies and Assessments O’Neil HF. 229–54 Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum [Google Scholar]
  103. Ones DS, Dilchert S. 2012. Employee green behaviors. Managing Human Resources for Environmental Sustainability Jackson SE, Ones DS, Dilchert S. 85–116 San Francisco:: Jossey-Bass/Wiley [Google Scholar]
  104. Ones DS, Dilchert S. 2013. Counterproductive work behaviors: concepts, measurement, and nomological network. See Geisinger et al. 2013, pp. 643–59 [Google Scholar]
  105. Ones DS, Viswesvaran C, Schmidt FL. 2008. No new terrain: reliability and construct validity of job performance ratings. Ind. Organ. Psychol. 1:174–79 [Google Scholar]
  106. Organ DW. 1988. Organizational Citizenship Behavior: The Good Soldier Syndrome Lexington, MA: Lexington Books
  107. Organ DW, Podsakoff PM, Podsakoff NP. 2011. Expanding the criterion domain to include organizational citizenship behavior: implications for employee selection. See Zedeck 2011:281–323 [Google Scholar]
  108. Pearlman K, Sanchez JI. 2010. Work analysis. See Farr & Tippins 2010:73–98 [Google Scholar]
  109. Peretz H, Fried Y. 2012. National cultures, performance appraisal practices, and organizational absenteeism and turnover: a study across 21 countries. J. Appl. Psychol. 97:448–59 [Google Scholar]
  110. Ployhart RE, Bliese PD. 2006. Individual adaptability (I-ADAPT) theory: conceptualizing the antecedents, consequences, and measurement of individual differences in adaptability. See Salas 2006:3–39 [Google Scholar]
  111. Ployhart RE, Hale D. 2014. The fascinating psychological microfoundations of strategy and competitive advantage. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav. 1:145–72 [Google Scholar]
  112. Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Paine JB, Bachrach DG. 2000. Organizational citizenship behaviors: a critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. J. Manag. 26:513–63 [Google Scholar]
  113. Pulakos ED, Arad S, Donovan MA, Plamondon KE. 2000. Adaptability in the workplace: development of a taxonomy of adaptive performance. J. Appl. Psychol. 85:612–24 [Google Scholar]
  114. Pulakos ED, Dorsey DW, White SS. 2006. Adaptability in the workplace: selecting an adaptive workforce. See Salas 2006, pp. 41–71 [Google Scholar]
  115. Pulakos ED, O’Leary RS. 2010. Defining and measuring results of workplace behavior. See Farr & Tippins 2010, pp. 513–29 [Google Scholar]
  116. Pulakos ED, O’Leary RS. 2011. Why is performance management broken?. Ind. Organ. Psychol. 4:146–64 [Google Scholar]
  117. Pulakos ED, Schmitt N, Dorsey DW, Arad S, Borman WC, Hedge JW. 2002. Predicting adaptive performance: further tests of a model of adaptability. Hum. Perform. 15:299–323 [Google Scholar]
  118. Putka DJ, Hoffman BJ. 2014. “The” reliability of job performance ratings equals 0.52. More Statistical and Methodological Myths and Urban Legends Lance CE, Vandenberg RJ. 247–75 New York: Taylor & Francis [Google Scholar]
  119. Riggio RE, Mayes BT, Schleicher DJ. 2003. Using assessment center methods for measuring undergraduate business student outcomes. J. Manag. Inq. 12:68–78 [Google Scholar]
  120. Rotundo M, Xie JL. 2013. Understanding the domain of counterproductive work behaviour in China. Human Resource Management “With Chinese Characteristics”: Facing the Challenges of Globalization Warner M. 86–107 New York: Routledge [Google Scholar]
  121. Rumsey MG. 2013. The Oxford Handbook of Leadership New York: Oxford Univ. Press
  122. Rupp DE, Gibbons AM, Baldwin AM, Snyder LA, Spain SM et al. 2006. An initial validation of developmental assessment centers as accurate assessments and effective training interventions. Psychol. Manag. J. 9:171–200 [Google Scholar]
  123. Sackett PR. 2007. Revisiting the origins of the typical-maximum performance distinction. Hum. Perform. 20:179–85 [Google Scholar]
  124. Salas E. 2006. Advances in Human Performance and Cognitive Engineering Research Vol. 6 Bingley, UK: Emerald
  125. Sanchez JI, Levine EL. 2009. What is (or should be) the difference between competency modeling and traditional job analysis?. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 19:53–63 [Google Scholar]
  126. Sauer DA. 1997. Information content of prior period mutual fund performance rankings. J. Econ. Bus 49:549–67 [Google Scholar]
  127. Schleicher DJ, Day DV, Mayes BT, Riggio RE. 2002. A new frame for frame-of-reference training: enhancing the construct validity of assessment centers. J. Appl. Psychol. 87:735–46 [Google Scholar]
  128. Schmidt FL, Viswesvaran C, Ones DS. 2000. Reliability is not validity and validity is not reliability. Pers. Psychol. 53:901–12 [Google Scholar]
  129. Schmitt N, Borman WC. 1993. Personnel Selection in Organizations San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
  130. Shippmann JS. 2010. Competencies, job analysis, and the next generation of modeling. Handbook of Workplace Assessment Scott JC, Reynolds DH. 197–232 San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Wiley [Google Scholar]
  131. Shippmann JS, Ash RA, Batjtsta M, Carr L, Eyde LD et al. 2000. The practice of competency modeling. Pers. Psychol. 53:703–40 [Google Scholar]
  132. Şimşek B, Pakdil F, Dengiz B, Testik MC. 2013. Driver performance appraisal using GPS terminal measurements: a conceptual framework. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 26:49–60 [Google Scholar]
  133. Sonnentag S, Frese M. 2012. Dynamic performance. See Kozlowski 2012, pp. 548–78 [Google Scholar]
  134. Spector PE, Bauer JA, Fox S. 2010. Measurement artifacts in the assessment of counterproductive work behavior and organizational citizenship behavior: Do we know what we think we know?. J. Appl. Psychol. 95:781–90 [Google Scholar]
  135. Spector PE, Cha XX. 2014. Re-examining citizenship: how the control of measurement artifacts affects observed relationships of organizational citizenship behavior and organizational variables. Hum. Perform. 27:165–82 [Google Scholar]
  136. Spector PE, Fox S, Penney LM, Bruursema K, Goh A, Kessler S. 2006. The dimensionality of counterproductivity: Are all counterproductive behaviors created equal?. J. Vocat. Behav. 68:446–60 [Google Scholar]
  137. Spence JR, Keeping LM. 2010. The impact of non-performance information on ratings of job performance: a policy-capturing approach. J. Organ. Behav. 31:587–608 [Google Scholar]
  138. Stevens GW. 2013. A critical review of the science and practice of competency modeling. Hum. Resour. Dev. Rev. 12:86–107 [Google Scholar]
  139. Stewart GL, Nandkeolyar AK. 2007. Exploring how constraints created by other people influence intraindividual variation in objective performance measures. J. Appl. Psychol. 92:1149–58 [Google Scholar]
  140. Stokes CK, Schneider TR, Lyons JB. 2010. Adaptive performance: a criterion problem. Team Perform. Manag. 16:3/4212–30 [Google Scholar]
  141. Sturman MC. 2003. Searching for the inverted U-shaped relationship between time and performance: meta-analyses of the experience/performance, tenure/performance, and age/performance relationships. J. Manag. 29:609–40 [Google Scholar]
  142. Taylor S, Todd PA. 1995. Understanding information technology usage: a test of competing models. Inf. Syst. Res. 6:144–76 [Google Scholar]
  143. Tett RP, Guterman HA, Bleier A, Murphy PJ. 2000. Development and content validation of a “hyperdimensional” taxonomy of managerial competence. Hum. Perform. 13:205–51 [Google Scholar]
  144. Thomas JL, Dickson MW, Bliese PD. 2001. Values predicting leader performance in the U.S. Army Reserve Officer Training Corps Assessment Center: evidence for a personality-mediated model. Leadersh. Q. 12:181–96 [Google Scholar]
  145. Vance RJ, MacCallum RC, Coovert MD, Hedge JW. 1988. Construct validity of multiple job performance measures using confirmatory factor analysis. J. Appl. Psychol. 73:74–80 [Google Scholar]
  146. Viswesvaran C, Schmidt FL, Ones DS. 2005. Is there a general factor in job performance ratings? A meta-analytic framework for disentangling substantive and error influences. J. Appl. Psychol. 90:108–31 [Google Scholar]
  147. Walumbwa FO, Wernsing T. 2013. From transactional and transformational leadership to authentic leadership. See Rumsey 2013, pp. 392–400 [Google Scholar]
  148. Wisecarver MM, Carpenter TD, Kilcullen RN. 2007. Capturing interpersonal performance in a latent performance model. Mil. Psychol. 19:83–101 [Google Scholar]
  149. Woehr DJ, Roch S. 2012. Supervisory performance ratings. The Oxford Handbook of Personnel Selection and Assessment Schmitt N. 517–31 New York: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  150. Xu S, Wang Q, Liu C, Li Y, Ouyang K. 2013. Content and construct of counterproductive work behavior in a Chinese context. Soc. Behav. Personal. Int. J. 41:921–32 [Google Scholar]
  151. Yigitbasioglu OM, Velcu O. 2012. A review of dashboards in performance management: implications for design and research. Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst. 13:41–59 [Google Scholar]
  152. Zedeck S. 2011. APAHandbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology Vol. 2: Selecting and Developing Members for the Organization Washington, DC: Am. Psychol. Assoc.
  153. Zyphur MJ, Chaturvedi S, Arvey RD. 2008. Job performance over time is a function of latent trajectories and previous performance. J. Appl. Psychol. 93:217–24 [Google Scholar]
  • 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