Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to examine the attributes of the performance appraisal system used for primary school teachers in Singapore, and how those attributes affect satisfaction with the appraisal system, stress experienced with the appraisal system, attitudes towards performance bonus, job satisfaction and motivation, and perceived cooperativeness amongst teachers. Design/methodology/approach -Data were obtained from surveys of primary school teachers in Singapore (n ¼ 85). The researchers used factor analysis to identify factors of appraisal system attributes and factors of teacher attitudes and perceptions, and then employed step-wise multiple regressions to relate appraisal system attributes to teacher attitudes and perceptions. Findings -The findings indicate that fairness of the performance appraisal system and clarity of appraisal criteria are related to greater satisfaction with the appraisal system, more positive attitudes towards performance bonus, and higher job satisfaction and motivation. Using appraisal criteria that are controllable is associated with greater satisfaction with the appraisal system, less stress experienced with the appraisal system, and higher job satisfaction and motivation. Finally, teachers who report greater trust in their appraiser and more positive assessment of their appraiser's credibility also report more cooperativeness amongst teachers in their school. Originality/value -The paper provides insights on how various attributes of the performance appraisal system in the Singapore educational context are related to important outcomes such as job satisfaction and motivation. The findings may help primary school administrators design and implement more effective performance appraisal systems.

No abstract

Despite the common use of performance goals to motivate employees and the use of ex post goal adjustments to filter out the effects of unforeseen and uncontrollable events, minimal research has examined the consequences of employing them jointly. We predict that the availability of ex post goal adjustments will have a positive effect on performance and that this effect will be stronger when the ex ante goal difficulty level is moderate rather than difficult. Moreover, we predict that these effects will be mediated by perceptions of procedural justice. Results from an experiment completed by 142 undergraduate students support our predictions. The availability of ex post goal adjustments has positive effects on procedural fairness perceptions and performance under the moderate goal, but has no such effects under the difficult goal. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.

We investigate the effects of tangible versus cash rewards in a repeated tournament setting. Firms frequently use tangible rewards to motivate employees, but minimal research has examined their effects relative to cash rewards. We conducted a field experiment at a rug wholesaler that held two consecutive sales tournaments for its retailers. The top three retailers in each tournament received either cash rewards or tangible rewards (gift cards) to be distributed to sales staff. We do not find significant effects of reward type in the first tournament. However, in the second tournament, retailers eligible for tangible rewards significantly outperformed those eligible for cash rewards, and this effect is driven by Tournament One losers. Our results are consistent with the theory that Tournament One losers competing for tangible rewards increased sales effort in the second tournament significantly more than their counterparts competing for cash rewards. Our results have practical and theoretical implications.

There is significant debate about the usefulness of disclosing the CEO-to-median employee pay ratio, as required under Section 953(b) of the Dodd-Frank Act in the United States. Using an experiment, we find that disclosing higher-than-industry CEO pay (versus comparable-to-industry CEO pay) marginally decreases perceived CEO pay fairness and perceived workplace climate, which is counteracted by a significant positive effect on perceived CEO attraction/retention ability, although there are no significant indirect effects through these perceptions on perceived investment potential. However, incrementally disclosing a higher-than-industry pay ratio (versus disclosing only higher-than-industry CEO pay) significantly decreases perceived CEO pay fairness and marginally deceases perceived workplace climate, and we find a significant indirect negative effect on perceived investment potential through perceived CEO pay fairness. If companies are concerned about negative public perceptions, then our results suggest that pay ratio disclosures may be better able than current CEO pay disclosures at shaming companies into restraining CEO pay. Data Availability: Contact the authors.