Performance Appraisal Reactions: Measurement, Modeling, and Method Bias*1

,
Lisa M. Keeping and Paul E. Levy

Abstract

In this study, the authors attempted to comprehensively examine the measurement of

performance appraisal reactions. They first investigated how well the reaction scales,
representative of those used in the field, measured their substantive constructs. A
confirmatory factor analysis indicated that these scales did a favorable job of measuring
appraisal reactions, with a few concerns. The authors also found that the data fit a higher
order appraisal reactions model. In contrast, a nested model where the reaction constructs
were operationalized as one general factor did not adequately fit the data. Finally, the
authors tested the notion that self-report data are affectively driven for the specific case of
appraisal reactions, using the techniques delineated by L. J. Williams, M. B. Gavin, and
M. L. Williams (1996). Results indicated that neither positive nor negative affect
presented method biases in the reaction measures, at either the measurement or construct
levels.

*1 A version of this article was presented at the thirteenth annual meeting of the Society
for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Dallas, April 1998. We thank both Rosalie
Hall and Andee Snell for their assistance regarding data-analytic techniques and
strategies.

Employee Reactions to Contextual and Session Components of Performance Appraisal

,a
William F. Giles and Kevin W. Mossholdera
a
Department of Management, Auburn University, USA

Abstract

A neglected area of performance appraisal research concerns the context within which the
appraisal process occurs. For a sample of exempt employees, measures were developed
that assessed system components of the appraisal context. The contribution of these
variables (complexity, implementation, and follow-up) to the prediction of 2 measures of
employee reactions to performance appraisal (review session satisfaction and appraisal
system satisfaction) was compared with the contribution of a more frequently studied set
of variables—supervisory behaviors in the review session. The relationship of a salary
linkage variable to the 2 outcome criteria also was assessed. The supervisory session
variables were related to session satisfaction, and the system contextual variables were
primarily related to system satisfaction. Salary linkage was associated with system
satisfaction.
Performance appraisal: Dilemmas and possibilities

Michael Beer

Abstract

This article attempts to summarize what is known about the underlying causes of
problems experienced with performance appraisal and to suggest some means for
overcoming these. The central thrust has been to find means for dealing with the main
barrier to effective appraisals—that is, avoidance by the supervisor and defensiveness
from the subordinate. We have suggested a number of ways in which supervisors and
subordinates might negotiate the difficult dilemma of discussing an evaluation of
performance in a nonevaluative manner.

PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL BEHAVIORS: SUPERVISOR PERCEPTIONS

AND SUBORDINATE REACTIONS

This study examined supervisor perceptions and subordinate reactions to formal

performance-appraisal reviews. The performance-appraisal behaviors of supervisors and
the reactions of their subordinates were studied in a sample of university employees. A
factor analysis revealed that there were three dimensions of formal performance
appraisals: two developmental dimensions (being supportive; emphasizing performance
improvement) and one administrative dimension (discussing pay and advancement).
Regression analyses suggested that supervisors supported highly rated individuals and
stressed improvement efforts for poor performers. After controlling for the level of
previous performance ratings, results indicated that support in the appraisal review was
associated with higher levels of employee motivation, while discussing pay and
advancement was associated with higher levels of employee satisfaction. Unfortunately,
improvement efforts by the supervisors did not influence job performance one year later.

Implicit Personality and Performance Appraisal: The Influence of Trait Inferences on

Evaluations of Behavior
,a
Frank Krzystofiak , Robert Cardy1, a and Jerry Newmana
a
State University of New York at Buffalo, USA

Abstract

Performance appraisal research has recently focused on the role of the rater and on the
cognitive processing underlying the appraisal judgment task. Although recent appraisal
models basically propose that the human information processing involved is schematic in
nature, much of the support for this approach comes from social psychological findings
concerning person judgments. The present study is an attempt to investigate the operation
of schematic processes in the form of implicit personality theories related to performance
judgments. Performance and trait ratings made by 200 management students of college
professor vignettes were found to be influenced by the behaviors depicted in the
vignettes, but the pattern of results also supported the operation of implicit personality
theory in performance appraisal, even when ratee descriptions were artificially limited to
contain information that was solely behavioral in nature.

Merit pay, performance appraisal, and individual motivation: An analysis and

alternative

Abstract

Theories of motivation and common expectation argue that people who contribute more
to an undertaking should receive more from it. This expectation has significantly
influenced the design of compensation systems. Merit pay reflects this influence.
Nonetheless, in spite of intuitive appeal and apparent theoretical support, merit pay rarely
achieves its objectives. This article reviews five common implementation issues. It also
argues that merit plans underemphasize important attribution biases that affect
performance judgments. These biases suggest that such plans would still have limited
effectiveness, even if implementation problems were overcome. The article presents an
alternative focused on group accomplishment. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

REACTION OF EMPLOYEES TO PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL INTERVIEWS

AS A FUNCTION OF THEIR PARTICIPATION IN RATING SCALE
DEVELOPMENT

Abstract

A substantial amount of research has been conducted on the performance appraisal

feedback interview. The purpose of the present field study was to see whether employee
involvement in the development of rating scales used in the feedback interview affected
ratees' perceptions of the interview. Behaviorally anchored rating scales (BARS) were
developed for five job families in a midwestem hospital. A participation group consisted
of employees from each of the job families who were involved in all phases of BARS
construction. A nonparticipation group involved an equal number of employees from
each of the job families who were not involved in the BARS development. The results
showed that participation in BARS construction led to favorable perceptions regarding
the performance appraisal interview process as well as positive outcomes.

Research and practice in performance appraisal: evaluating employee performance

in America's largest companies.

by Steven L. Thomas , Robert D. Bretz Jr.

Introduction
Many academics and practicing managers regard performance appraisal as one of the
most valuable human resource tools. It is a vital component in recruiting and hiring
employees, where it is used to validate selection tests, and in staffing, where transfer,
layoff, termination, or promotion decisions are made on the basis of appraisal results. In
compensation administration, performance appraisal forms the basis for the
administration of merit pay systems. Most important, performance appraisal can be used
as a motivational tool for communicating performance expectations to employees and
providing them with feedback. Finally, performance appraisal is indispensable in training
and development activities to assess potential and identify training needs.

Supervisor and subordinate reactions to performance appraisal sessions*1

Daniel R. Ilgen , Richard B. Peterson, Beth Ann Martin and Daniel A. Boeschen

Abstract

Sixty supervisor-subordinate pairs were sampled before and after annual performance
appraisal interviews used to discuss the subordinates' goal accomplishments over the past
12 months. The pairs were randomly selected from exempt employees of an industry
headquartered in the Northwest. The data showed little agreement between superiors and
their subordinates on preappraisal conditions of interest but moderate agreement on the
affective orientation of the interview, objective qualities of it, and the nature of
subordinate performance. However, in spite of the agreement across pairs on the pattern
of performance discussions (reflected by supervisor-subordinate correlations), they did
not agree on the level of performance; mean differences between the groups still existed
after the sessions.

An Analysis of Managers' Reactions to Their Own Performance Appraisal Feedback

James S. Russella, and Dorothy L. Goodeb

Abstract

Individuals' reactions to their performance appraisal interviews were examined in two

analyses of managers who appraised their subordinates. We hypothesized that managers'
reactions toward their own appraisal interview would be influenced by both supervisor
satisfaction and favorability of the feedback they received. We also hypothesized that
managers' reactions would be affected by system satisfaction (i.e., their attitudes toward
the system's ability to document the performance of their subordinates). Questionnaires
were administered to managers in eight colleges and universities in one state system.
Results indicated that managers distinguished between satisfaction with their own
appraisal and its value in improving performance. Appraisal satisfaction was predicted by
supervisor satisfaction and the recollection of their rating, but not system satisfaction. In
a follow-up analysis, results were confirmed with managers in the original sample. The
appraisal's improvement value was associated with supervisor satisfaction, and inversely
related with performance rating.

Correlates of performance appraisal satisfaction among supervisory and

nonsupervisory employees

Abdullah Pooyan

Bruce J. Eberhardt

Abstract

The predictors of performance appraisal satisfaction among supervisory and

nonsupervisory employees were examined. The data were collected from 665 nonfaculty
supervisory and nonsupervisory employees in a midwestern state university. A
questionnaire was used to measure subjects' perceptions regarding appraisal determinants,
appraisal interview characteristics, supervisory behavior, and satisfaction with
performance appraisal. Results of a multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA)
followed by univariate analyses of variance (ANOVA) indicated that supervisors were
significantly more satisfied with performance appraisals and described their appraisals in
more favorable terms as compared to nonsupervisors. Stepwise regression analyses
indicated that four appraisal determinant items, the supervisor's goal setting behavior, and
his or her relations with subordinates accounted for 53% of the variance in appraisal
satisfaction for the supervisory sample. In the nonsupervisory sample, three appraisal
determinants, two appraisal interview items, the supervisor's relations with subordinates,
and his or her problem-solving behavior combined to account for 57% of the variance.
The limitations of the study and the implications of the findings for research and practice
in performance appraisal are discussed.

Untangling the performance appraisal dilemma: The influence of perceived

organizational context on evaluative processes

Ronald J. Greya and David Kipnis

a
Hay Assoc, Philadelphia, PA

Available online 6 May 2007.

Previous laboratory studies found that the presence of a noncompliant worker, who
deliberately refused to obey orders, resulted in an increased number of rewards and
higher performance evaluations assigned by managers to compliant workers. The present
study investigated whether these laboratory based findings could be detected in an
ongoing work situation. 50 supervisors of clerical workers indicated that number of
noncompliant workers in their work unit and evaluated the performance of their
remaining compliant workers. Information on pay raises given these compliant workers
was also obtained. The greater the proportion of noncompliant workers in a unit, the more
favorable the supervisor's judgments of his or her compliant workers. Recommendations
for promotion, pay raises, and actual pay raises given to compliant workers were also
predicted as a function of the proportion of noncompliant workers, with correlations
ranging from .25 to .48. Implications for understanding supervisory judgments are
discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved)