Comparing performance management across contexts

Abstract

Comparing performance management across contexts 169 the public sector context. As performance management has been expanding in these new directions, what does this mean for its linkage with other aspects of the HRM system? PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT AND HRMPerformance management is often seen as a microcosm of HRM, transferring the broader debate around the added value of human resource management to the performance management arena (Bach, 2000;Dewettinck, 2008). Special attention in both areas (HRM and performance management) is paid to alignment with the overall business strategy (strategic fit), alignment of practices towards a high-performance work system (horizontal or internal fit), line management involvement in the enactment of the practices, soft versus hard approaches (stressing the employee developmental side versus the individual performance side), and special attention to the search for interventions to increase firm performance. An ideal performance management system of practices is actually a sort of mini high-performance work system focused on goal setting, monitoring, appraising, developing, and rewarding employees in order to increase employee performance and to achieve organizational goals.However, this performance management system can take on many guises. Several authors emphasize the relevance of different contextual factors that affect the ideal system for an organization (Dewettinck, 2008;Haines III & St-Onge, 2012;van Dooren et al., 2015). These contextual factors may include industry characteristics, firm size, degree of unionization, the history of the organization, and private versus public sector organization factors. Most importantly here, they may also include potential country and national institutional and cultural differences affecting performance management in an organization in a specific geographical location.Claus and Briscoe ( 2008) present an overview of 64 articles published between 1985 and 2005 on employee performance management from an international perspective. The authors conclude that the academic literature on cross-border performance management is relatively atheoretical and exploratory in nature. They also conclude that the design and the substance of the empirical studies are weak. The majority of the empirical articles identified are focused upon or based upon performance management in multinational companies (e.g., Lam et al., 2002). Overall, Claus and summarize the following major themes and findings from their literature review:

Green human resource management practices and employee innovative behaviour: reflection from Ghana

“…Performance management is a company's method of evaluating, coaching, and developing personnel on a regular basis with the ultimate objective of improving organisational performance (in this case, creative behaviour) (Gorman, Meriac, Roch, Ray, & Gamble, 2017). Conducting evaluation interviews between line managers and subordinates is the most prevalent type of performance management (Boselie, Farndale, & Paauwe, 2018). Specific performance management needs develop as a result of the objective of promoting creative behaviour.…”

Home and host distal context and performance appraisal in multinational enterprises: A 22 country study

“…In a review of research specifically on PA and merit pay, the U.S. National Research Council suggested that the economic environment could play an important role in determining the way organizations link PA and decisions about pay, by limiting or making available financial resources to support effective merit pay plans (Milkovich & Wigdor, 1991). In a recent comparison of performance management across contexts, Boselie, Farndale, and Paauwe (2018) highlight a decrease in some performance management related activities which they suggest may be reflective of the recent global financial crisis, a trend which for them highlights “the impact of external economic factors on the shaping of performance management in organizations” (p. 180).…”

Performance appraisal and MNEs: The impact of different capitalist archetypes

“…They call for further cross-national research into performance management. Boselie, Farndale, and Paauwe (2018) provide empirical data on performance management from the Cranet survey and their Global HRM Research Alliance study of 16 MNEs. Overall, they found that appraisal systems prevailed, particularly for clerical and manual workers.…”

“…LMEs are based on competition between and within firms, the assumption that government should play only a limited role, and a focus on short-term results for business owners. This context is likely to be more suited to individual targets and performance-based rewards (Boselie, Farndale, & Paauwe, 2018;Marsden, 2007). In CMEs, firms collaborate more -with each other and with government, and firms are more supported and/or restricted by legislation, and are required to focus on survival and the long-term interests of a wider group of stakeholders (Wood et al, 2014;Jackson & Deeg, 2019).…”