Removing performance appraisal and merit pay in the name of quality: an empirical study of employees' reactions

Waite, Melissa L.; Stites-Doe, Susan

doi:10.1016/s1084-8568(01)00020-7

Cited by 11 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…"[I]t continues to be a major source of frustration for managers" (McDonald and Smith, 1995, p. 59). Some authors have suggested doing away with performance appraisal systems because of the evident problems (Pfeffer, 2009;Waite and Stites-Doe, 2000) centered on its fulcrum of superordinate-subordinate dyadic relations, its implications for perceptions of organizational fairness, as well as its role in the establishment of the organization's meritocratic order.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why does performance management not perform?

Cunha

Vieira

Rego

et al. 2018

IJPPM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to ask why poor performance management practices persist in Portugal, in the middle of claims to increase productivity. Design/methodology/approach An inductive micro-practice analysis is used to understand barriers to management practice that do not require massive institutional changes. Findings The practice of performance management in Portugal typically displays three weaknesses: (1) insufficient planning (2) process and integrity issues, and (3) a non-meritocratic logic. Research limitations/implications The paper discusses the important topic of persistence of bad practices, showing how institutionalized patterns might be difficult to eradicate even they are suboptimal. Practical implications The authors identity key issues in the functioning of performance management, therefore helping managers in developing remedies to improve the quality of their practice. Originality/value The paper explains the persistence of bad management practice whose continuity hinders not only organizations’ effectiveness but also that of their members.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why does performance management not perform?

Cunha

Vieira

Rego

et al. 2018

IJPPM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus it is the system, not the individual, that has the biggest impact on performance variance, making fair evaluations of employee performance 'inherently impossible'. 44 In further criticisms of appraisal problems which are fundamental to the allocation of PRP schemes, Gilman, in a review of such schemes, argued that attempts to determine performance ratings 'were more about identifying the ''very best'' or the ''very worst'' performers and not about rewarding performance per se.' 41 In a commentary about pay and reward, Pfeffer reports how William A Mercer, a major American consultancy firm, had concluded that 'most individual merit or performance pay plans share two attributes: they absorb vast amounts of management time and resources, and they make everybody unhappy.'…”

Section: Does Prp Work In Public Sector Health Organizations?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance Pay Remuneration for Consultants in the NHS: is the Current System Fair and Fit for Purpose?

Abel

Esmail

2006

J R Soc Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite reforms to the performance pay review system for NHS consultants, little has changed since the original Distinction Awards Scheme was conceived in 1948. Inherent weaknesses and biases in the scheme persist and result in discrimination against women and ethnic minority consultants in the allocation of awards. The literature on performance-related pay suggests that such schemes can be inappropriate in a public sector health service. The continued focus on rewarding individuals in performancerelated pay schemes can seem out of place in the modern era where there is an increasing focus on the performance of teams.

show abstract

“…Some claim that the system, and not the individual is responsible for a large part of performance variance, making fair and accurate evaluations of employee performance inherently impossible (Waite and Stites-Doe, 2000). The opposition of the unions to incorporate pay into PA may be clarified by exploring the difficulties that can arise from the design and implementation of PRP.…”

Section: Prp Problemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Right on the money

Hanley

Nguyễn²

2005

Employee Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose -The diffusion of performance related pay has attracted considerable academic attention over the past decade. While much contemporary debate has focussed on the excesses of executive remuneration at the "big end of town", what is not so prominent are the views of unions representing employees at the other end of the remuneration spectrum: this is the purpose of this paper. Design/methodology/approach -Evidence was gathered at two levels using two sets of research instruments: in-depth interviews with senior union officials, and primary documentation analysis with specific reference to performance appraisal and performance-related pay clauses in union Enterprise Bargaining Agreements. Findings -Document analysis reveals that performance appraisal and performance-related pay clauses range from mere stipulation of existence to detailed processes and principles of design and implementation. Specific clauses in the white-collar unions' agreements suggest that they are not totally opposed. However, the lack of performance appraisal and performance-related pay clauses in the blue-collar unions' agreements illustrate their propensity to restrict pay increases to a job classification structure. Although there were clauses that aimed to ensure a performance-oriented culture, their agreements seem to be mere sentiments. Overall, only one union supports the notion of performance related pay; the others find performance appraisals difficult to embrace. Negative experiences and consequent problems lead them to argue that the process is complicated and usually puts workers at a disadvantage. Originality/value -Strands of different explanations account for union opposition, but the principal issue is that performance appraisal has only an evaluative function, that is to link performance to pay. To minimise problems in shaping PRP schemes, the unions advocated the integration of a social dimension; transparency and equality.

show abstract

Removing performance appraisal and merit pay in the name of quality: an empirical study of employees' reactions

Cited by 11 publications

References 35 publications

Why does performance management not perform?

Why does performance management not perform?

Performance Pay Remuneration for Consultants in the NHS: is the Current System Fair and Fit for Purpose?

Right on the money

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About