Getting Rid of Performance Ratings: Genius or Folly? A Debate

Adler, Seymour; Campion, Michael A.; Colquitt, Alan L.; Grubb, Amy; Murphy, Kevin R.; Ollander-Krane, Rob; Pulakos, Elaine D.

doi:10.1017/iop.2015.106

Cited by 159 publications

(206 citation statements)

References 119 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

199

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…At one extreme, some organizations are jumping on the bandwagon to “eliminate” performance ratings based on perceptions that PM is not working (e.g., Deloitte, Accenture, Cigna, GE, Eli Lilly, Adobe, the Gap, Inc.). PM practices, especially associated with performance ratings, have been debated at the annual meetings of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology in 2015 and 2016, along with a focal article in Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice (Adler et al, ), with some experts advocating eliminating performance ratings. However, researchers and practitioners have almost no information about the extent that recommended PM advancements are implemented in organizations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An exploratory study of current performance management practices: Human resource executives’ perspectives

Gorman¹,

Meriac

Roch

et al. 2017

Int J Selection Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A survey of performance management (PM) practices in 101 U.S. organizations explored whether their PM systems, as perceived by human resources (HR) executives, reflect the best practices advocated by researchers to provide a benchmark of current PM practices. Results suggest that many of the PM practices recommended in the research literature are employed across the organizations surveyed, but several gaps between research and practice remain. Results also indicated that the majority of PM systems are viewed by HR executives as effective and fair. Implications for the science and practice of PM are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An exploratory study of current performance management practices: Human resource executives’ perspectives

Gorman¹,

Meriac

Roch

et al. 2017

Int J Selection Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Within the input/outcome terminology of equity theory, employee inputs can theoretically be measurably diverse. But in practice, once performance goes beyond basic uniform measures (e.g., number of widgets produced) it is notoriously difficult to parse meaningful and objective differences (Adler et al, ). Yet institutional pressures, the pressure to conform to industry norms for legitimisation purposes, often influence organisations to evaluate and differentiate individual performance regardless (Adler et al, ).…”

Section: Putting It All Together: Members Receptivity To Egalitarian Paymentioning

confidence: 99%

Making sense of egalitarian pay: Reconceptualising its treatment in organisations

Morand

Merriman

Deckop

2019

Human Res Mgmt Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we offer an intraorganisational sensemaking perspective on how organisational members interpret egalitarian forms of pay. Specific focus is given to managerial (non)communication of diverse rationales for egalitarian pay practices. We integrate a wide range of research and descriptive accounts to organise schema‐relevant concepts into a typology of rationales that inform the sensemaking process, as ultimately observed in employee receptivity and response to egalitarian pay practices. The culmination of our conceptual development is a prescriptive framework on organisational communication of egalitarian pay practices to its members. We offer a future research agenda and propositions to test the validity of this developed framework and conclude with a discussion of limitations and theoretical and practical implications.

show abstract

“…I de seneste år har der rejst sig en diskussion af behovet for nytaenkning eller genopfindelse af organisationers performance management systemer og processer (Adler et al, 2016;Cappelli & Tavis, 2016;Ewenstein, Hancock, & Komm, 2016;Ledford, Benson, & Lawler, 2016;Nisen, 2015b). Den har blandt andet fået naering igennem en lang raekke eksempler fra virksomheder, der i de seneste år radikalt har forandret deres performance management.…”

Section: Behov For Nytaenkningunclassified

“…"Leniency bias" er en anden type støj, der forbindes med rating og ranking. Ved denne type støj giver lederen, sine medarbejdere en mere positiv rating eller ranking, end de egentlig har fortjent, hvilket eksempelvis kan skyldes konfliktskyhed (Adler et al, 2016). Denne problematik mindskes naturligvis, hvis organisationen har valgt at basere rankingen på en tvungen fordelingsskala, da lederen derved tvinges til også at tildele lave rankings.…”

Section: Problematikken Omkring Pålidelighedunclassified

Debatten om den nye performance management – om designproblemer og designløsninger

Hansen

Nechevska

Svendsen

2018

SiS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ResuméEn bølge af eksempler fra en raekke globale og højt profilerede virksomheder, der aendrer deres performance management, har i de senest år skabt megen debat om, hvordan performance management processer og systemer bedst designes. I denne artikel ser vi naermere på feltet performance management, og går på tvaers af virksomhedseksemplerne for at søge svar på spørgsmålene om, hvad det er for problemer, der skaber dette behov for forandring, og hvilke løsninger det er, der udpeges? Svarene på disse spørgsmål er interessante af flere grunde. For det første fordi de søger noget mere principielt ved debatten, og dermed en viden om, hvad performance management er, og hvilke forskellige former det kan tage i organisationer. For det andet fordi svarene er et bidrag til at skabe overblik over de mange forskellige dele af performance management, der i øjeblikket udfordres, og de designvalg, der udses som potentielle løsninger. A. Indledning Behov for nytaenkningI de seneste år har der rejst sig en diskussion af behovet for nytaenkning eller genopfindelse af organisationers performance management systemer og processer (Adler et al., 2016;Cappelli & Tavis, 2016;Ewenstein, Hancock, & Komm, 2016;Ledford, Benson, & Lawler, 2016;Nisen, 2015b). Den har blandt andet fået naering igennem en lang raekke eksempler fra virksomheder, der i de seneste år radikalt har forandret deres performance management. Det gaelder virksomheder som Accenture, Adobe, Cardinal Health, Deloitte, Gap Inc., General Electric, IBM, Microsoft og Sears Holding (Baldassarre & Finken, 2015;Buckingham & Goodall, 2015;Engler & Mason, 2016;George & Holbein, 2016;Morris, 2016;Nisen, 2015a;Ritchie, 2016;Zillman, 2016).Udfordringerne af det konventionelle design og budene på, hvad der så bedre kan svare sig, er mange og forskellige. Ligeledes er forklaringerne på, hvorfor det er nu, der er behov for forandringer, også mange. De knytter sig til kendte tendenser som disruption, digitalisering, de nye generationer på arbejdsmarkedet, samt reviderede motivationsteorier (Buckingham, 2013;Cunningham, 2015a;Margolis, Norris, & McKinnon, 2015;Nisen, 2015c;Rahimi, 2015;Rock, Davis, & Jones, 2014). Det giver sig blandt andet udslag i nytaenkning i designet af performance management i form af hyppigere feedback og større målfleksibilitet, mere fokus på fremadrettet fremfor bagudrettet praestation, udvikling, samt kritik af "rating" og "ranking" af medarbejdernes praestation (Cappelli & Tavis, 2016;Ledford et al., 2016).Formålet med denne artikel er både at identificere de problemer, der i debatten fremsaettes som forklaringer på, at der er et behov for at aendre på performance management designet, men også at skabe et overblik over de designløsninger, der bliver udset til at kunne øge effektiviteten og vaerdiskabelsen i organisationerne. Vi argumenter altså hverken for, at performance management er dødt, eller at det har mistet sin betydning som ledelsespraksis. MetodeDenne artikel har til formål at undersøge debatten om den nye performance management. Vi afgraenser os i ...

show abstract

Getting Rid of Performance Ratings: Genius or Folly? A Debate

Cited by 159 publications

References 119 publications

An exploratory study of current performance management practices: Human resource executives’ perspectives

An exploratory study of current performance management practices: Human resource executives’ perspectives

Making sense of egalitarian pay: Reconceptualising its treatment in organisations

Debatten om den nye performance management – om designproblemer og designløsninger

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About