performance-management.pdf

E F F E C T I V E P R A C T I C E G U I D E L I N E S
Performance
Management
A roadmap for developing,
implementing and evaluating
performance management systems
Elaine D. Pulakos

This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information regarding the subject matter covered.
Neither the publisher nor the author is engaged in rendering legal or other professional service. If legal advice or other
expert assistance is required, the services of a competent, licensed professional should be sought. Any federal and state
laws discussed in this book are subject to frequent revision and interpretation by amendments or judicial revisions that
may significantly affect employer or employee rights and obligations. Readers are encouraged to seek legal counsel
regarding specific policies and practices in their organizations.
This book is published by the SHRM Foundation, an affiliate of the Society for Human Resource Management
(SHRM©). The interpretations, conclusions and recommendations in this book are those of the author and do not
necessarily represent those of the SHRM Foundation.
©2004 SHRM Foundation. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America.
This publication may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in whole or in part, in any form
or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission
of the SHRM Foundation, 1800 Duke Street, Alexandria, VA 22314.
The SHRM Foundation is the 501(c)(3) nonprofit affiliate of the Society for Human Resource Management
(SHRM). The SHRM Foundation advances the human resource management profession and increases the
effectiveness of HR professionals through research, innovation and research-based knowledge. The Foundation is
governed by a volunteer board of directors, comprised of distinguished HR academic and practice leaders.
Contributions to the SHRM Foundation are tax-deductible.
For more information, please contact the SHRM Foundation at 703-535-6020. Online at www.shrm.org/foundation.

Forward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v
Acknowledgments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii
About the Author . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix
Effective Practice Guidelines for Performance Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Methodology for Developing Practice Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Overview of the Performance Management Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Performance Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Ongoing Feedback. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Employee Input . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Performance Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Performance Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Ensure Alignment with Other HR Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Get Organizational Members on Board . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Communicate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Automate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Pilot Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Train Employees and Managers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Evaluate and Improve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Legal Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Summary and Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Sources and Suggested Readings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
iii
Table of Contents

The SHRM Foundation Board of Directors appreciates how difficult it is for HR
practitioners to access current research findings and incorporate them into their own
human resource practices.
Human resource professionals juggle multiple responsibilities and do not have time to
read long research reports, no matter how beneficial. Realistically, most HR practition-
ers will seek guidance from research findings only if they are presented in a clear, con-
cise and usable format.
To make research more accessible, the SHRM Foundation has created a new series
entitled Effective Practice Guidelines. The Foundation will publish new reports on dif-
ferent HR topics each year. You are now reading the first report in the series:
Performance Management.
Here is the series concept: A subject matter expert with both research and practitioner
experience is selected to prepare the guidelines and the author distills the research find-
ings and expert opinion into specific advice on how to conduct effective HR practice.
We believe this new product presents relevant research-based knowledge in an easy-to-
use format. We look forward to your feedback to let us know if we’ve achieved that goal.
The author of Performance Management is Dr. Elaine Pulakos, executive vice president
and director of the Personnel Decisions Research Institutes (PDRI) Washington, D.C.
office. Dr. Pulakos is one of the country’s leading experts in performance management,
both as a researcher and a consultant, and she has provided the very best guidance
available on this topic.
The Foundation board recently created a new vision for the organization: “The
SHRM Foundation maximizes the impact of the HR profession on organizational
decision-making and performance, by promoting innovation, research and the use of
research-based knowledge.”
We are confident that this new series of Effective Practice Guidelines takes us one step
closer to making that vision a reality.
Herbert G. Heneman III, Ph.D.
Director of Research, SHRM Foundation Board
Professor, School of Business, University of Wisconsin-Madison
v
Forward

The SHRM Foundation wishes to thank the following individuals for reviewing this
report, providing feedback and helping to shape the finished product:
Wayne F. Cascio, Ph.D., Professor of Management
Graduate School of Business Administration
University of Colorado at Denver
Debra Cohen, Ph.D., SPHR
Chief Knowledge Development Officer
Society for Human Resource Management
Hank Hennessey Jr., Ph.D., SPHR, Professor of Management
College of Business and Economics
University of Hawaii at Hilo
Mark A. Huselid, Ph.D., Associate Professor
School of Management and Labor Relations
Rutgers University
Kathleen McComber, SPHR
Sr. Director of Human Resources and Org. Development
University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences
James W. Smither, Ph.D., Professor of Management
School of Business Administration
LaSalle University
Patrick M. Wright, Ph.D., Director
Center for Advanced Human Resource Studies (CAHRS)
Cornell University
This work could not have been completed without the generous support of the
Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) and the Human Resource
Certification Institute (HRCI).
vii
Acknowledgments

Elaine Pulakos is executive vice president and director of the
Washington, D.C. office of Personnel Decisions Research Institute
(PDRI). PDRI is a premier consulting firm in the field of indus-
trial and organizational psychology. A recognized expert and
researcher in the areas of selection and performance appraisal, Dr.
Pulakos has over 15 years experience conducting large-scale job
analysis, selection, performance appraisal and career development
projects.
A Fellow of the American Psychological Association (APA) and the Society for
Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP), Dr. Pulakos is a successful author
and has written on the topics of staffing and performance management. She is a past
president of SIOP. In addition to authoring numerous publications, Dr. Pulakos
recently co-edited two books: The Changing Nature of Performance: Implications for
Staffing, Motivation, and Development with Daniel Ilgen, and Implementing
Organizational Interventions: Steps, Processes, and Best Practices with Jerry Hedge.
Dr. Pulakos has spent her career conducting applied research in public and private sec-
tor organizations, where she has designed, developed, and successfully implemented
numerous HR systems including staffing, performance management, and career devel-
opment and training systems. Dr. Pulakos has also been extensively involved in provid-
ing expert advice on EEO-related legal matters, serving as an expert witness and
advisor to the Department of Justice, among others. Elaine received her Ph.D. in
industrial and organizational psychology from Michigan State University.
ix
About the Author
Elaine D. Pulakos, Ph.D.

Performance management systems, which typically include performance appraisal and
employee development, are the “Achilles’ heel” of human resources management. They
suffer flaws in many organizations, with employees and managers regularly bemoaning
their ineffectiveness. A recent survey by Watson Wyatt showed that only three out of
10 workers agree that their company’s performance management system helps improve
performance. Less than 40 percent of employees said their systems established clear
performance goals, generated honest feedback or used technology to streamline the
process. While these results suggest that there may be poorly designed performance
management systems in many organizations, it is typically not poorly developed tools
and processes that cause difficulties with performance management. Rather, difficulties
arise because, at its core, performance management is a highly personal and often
threatening process for both managers and employees.
Managers are reluctant to provide candid feedback and have honest discussions with
employees for fear of reprisal or damaging relationships with the very individuals they
count on to get work done. Employees feel that their managers are unskilled at dis-
cussing their performance and ineffective at coaching them on how to develop their
skills. Many complain that performance management systems are cumbersome,
bureaucratic and too time consuming for the value added. This leads both managers
and employees to treat performance management as a necessary evil of work life that
should be minimized rather than an important process that achieves key individual
and organizational outcomes.
In spite of the difficulties, performance management is an essential tool for high per-
forming organizations, and it is one of a manager’s most important responsibilities,
1
Effective Practice Guidelines for
Performance Management
Possible Outcomes from Effective Performance Management
Q Clarifying job responsibilities and expectations.
Q Enhancing individual and group productivity.
Q Developing employee capabilities to their fullest extent through effective feedback
and coaching.
Q Driving behavior to align with the organization’s core values, goals and strategy.
Q Providing a basis for making operational human capital decisions (e.g., pay).
Q Improving communication between employees and managers.

if not the most important responsibility. Furthermore, done correctly, performance
management can result in numerous important outcomes for an organization, its
managers and employees. The goal of this booklet is to provide human resource
(HR) professionals with useful guidelines for developing and implementing effective
performance management systems.
Methodology for Developing Practice Guidelines
The guidelines presented here draw upon the best of the academic research literature
on performance management, the writings of leading performance management
experts and the experience of highly seasoned practitioners who have successfully led
the development and implementation of state-of-art performance management systems
in their organizations. A total of 15 professionals from public and private sector organ-
izations were interviewed to learn about the characteristics of the performance manage-
ment systems they implemented, what factors were most important for success and
what difficulties were encountered. Information from the research literature, best prac-
tice publications and the interviews was melded together to provide a roadmap for
developing, implementing and evaluating performance management systems that
reflect demonstrably effective and proven practices.
Throughout the paper, many of the guidelines are discussed as being based on either
research or practice. Research-based guidelines are those that can be supported by rig-
orous and systematic research studies that have been published in peer-reviewed aca-
demic journals. Practice-based guidelines are those that reflect a consensus of opinion
based on benchmarking, best practices and the guidance of leading professionals who
have had extensive experience in the field of performance management. The selection
of the references on which this booklet is based was a collaborative effort between the
author and members of the SHRM editorial board who guided and reviewed this
paper. The citations are not included in the text, but rather appear in the section on
“Sources and Suggested Readings” at the end of the paper.
Overview of the Performance Management Process
While research and experienced practitioners have identified several characteristics that
are prerequisites for effective performance management systems, there are also many
decisions that need to be made to design a system ideally suited for a given organiza-
tion’s needs. One such decision is what purpose(s) the system will serve. For instance,
performance management systems can support pay decisions, promotion decisions,
employee development and reductions in force. A performance management system
that attempts to achieve too many objectives is likely to die of its own lack of focus
and weight. There is no one type of system or set of objectives that is best suited for all
2 Q Performance Management

organizations. The purposes for a given performance management system should be
determined by considering business needs, organizational culture and the system’s inte-
gration with other human resource management systems.
One important caveat to consider is that while performance management for purposes
of decision-making and employee development are certainly related, these two objec-
tives are rarely supported equally well by a single system. When a performance man-
agement system is used for decision-making, the appraisal information is used as a
basis for pay increases, promotions, transfers, assignments, reductions in force or other
administrative HR actions. When a performance management system is used for
development, the appraisal information is used to guide the training, job experiences,
mentoring and other developmental activities that employees will engage in to develop
their capabilities. Although it is theoretically possible to have a performance manage-
ment system that serves both decision-making and development purposes well, this
can be difficult to achieve in practice. In addition, research has shown that the purpose
of the rating (decision-making versus development) affects the ratings that are
observed.1
Ratings used for decision-making tend to be lenient, with most employees
receiving ratings on the high end of the scale. Ratings for developmental purposes tend
to be more variable, reflecting both employee strengths and development needs.
An example will illustrate why it can be difficult to emphasize equally decision-making
and development within the same system. Managers in this organization evaluate their
employees and then meet to calibrate their ratings and make reward decisions.
Managers then conduct review sessions with every employee to discuss the employee’s
performance, pay increase and stock option grant. Developmental feedback is sup-
posed to be included in the meeting. However, the range of percentage increases and
stock options is large, thereby allowing managers to link performance with rewards
effectively. With so much at stake, the majority of the meeting typically focuses on jus-
tification by both parties, rather than on how the employee can develop. The climate
of the meeting is not conducive to giving and receiving feedback, and employees are
reticent to discuss their development needs for fear this will negatively impact their
rewards. Even in the strong performance-based culture of this organization, the deci-
sion-making aspect of performance is, by default, given more emphasis.
Effective performance management systems have a well-articulated process for
accomplishing evaluation activities, with defined roles and timelines for both man-
agers and employees. Especially in organizations that use performance management
as a basis for pay and other HR decisions, it is important to ensure that all employ-
Performance Management Q 3
1
Greguras, G. J., Robie, C., Schleicher, D. J., & Goff, M. (2003). A field study of the effects of rating purpose on the quality of multi-
source ratings. Personnel Psychology, 56, 1-21.

ees are treated in a fair and equitable manner. Based on examination of performance
management processes in several organizations, most contain some variation of the
process shown below:
The following sections describe each phase of this process in more detail.
Performance Planning
At the beginning of the performance management cycle, it is important to review with
employees their performance expectations, including both the behaviors employees are
expected to exhibit and the results they are expected to achieve during the upcoming
rating cycle. Behaviors are important because they reflect how an employee goes about
getting the job done—how the individual supports the team, communicates, mentors
others and so forth. We are all familiar with employees who may achieve exceptional
results but are extremely difficult to work with, unhelpful or exhibit maladaptive
behaviors at work. Because such behaviors can be extremely disruptive, behavior is
important to consider in most work situations. On the other hand, an employee can
be extremely helpful, considerate and interpersonally effective, yet never achieve any
important results.
Performance
Review
Employee
Input
Performance
Planning
Determination of
Organization Strategy
and Goals
Performance
Evaluation
Ongoing
Feedback
Figure 1 Typical Performance Management Process

Behavioral and results expectations should be tied to the organization’s strategic direc-
tion and corporate objectives.2
In fact, if developed and implemented properly, per-
formance management systems drive employees to engage in behaviors and achieve
results that facilitate meeting organizational objectives. For example, if improving cus-
tomer service is determined to be critical to an organization’s future success, including
customer service related expectations and rewards in the performance management sys-
tem will not only communicate its importance but also promote increases in behaviors
and results related to this area. Similarly, if effective teaming with strategic partners is a
key organizational value, the performance management system should hold employees
accountable for effective collaboration.
Behavioral Expectations
As we will discuss below, effective performance management systems provide behav-
ioral standards (see page 10 for an example) that describe what is expected of employ-
ees in key competency areas. During the performance planning process, managers
should review and discuss these behavioral standards with employees. It is important
for managers to make sure employees understand how the behavioral standards relate
to their specific jobs.
Results Expectations
The results or goals to be achieved by employees should be tied to the organization’s
strategy and goals. The employee’s development needs should also be taken into
account in the goal setting process. Development goals can be targeted either to
improving current job performance or preparing for career advancement. Example
goals for an employee might be:
Q Complete project “X” by time “Y.”
Q Increase sales by 10 percent.
Q Successfully mentor employee “X” to develop skill “Y.”
In some situations, it is difficult to see direct relationships between high-level and
sometimes lofty organizational goals and what a particular individual can achieve in
his or her job. To remedy this, organizational goals need to be translated and cascad-
ed into more refined goals and expectations at the unit, team and individual levels.
This typically requires a series of meetings where, for example, the highest-level exec-
utives first develop division goals that align with the organizational goals. Then, the
mid-level managers develop unit goals that align with the division goals, followed by
managers developing group goals that align with unit goals and so on until the orga-
nizational goals are cascaded down to individuals. This exercise can be a somewhat
2
Hillgren, J. S., & Cheatham, D. W. (2000). Understanding performance measures: An approach to linking rewards to the achieve-
ment of organizational objectives. Scottsdale, AZ: WorldatWork.

time-consuming and difficult process. Depending on the nature of the organization’s
goals, it may be difficult to cascade them down clearly to some jobs, for example,
general maintenance and support jobs. Nonetheless, to the extent possible, the most
effective practice is to establish a hierarchy of goals where each level supports goals
directly relevant to the next level, ultimately working toward the organization’s
strategic direction and critical priorities. The value of developing and linking goals at
different levels has been extensively written about in the Management by Objectives
(MBO) literature.3
While goals and expected results can be established for the entire rating cycle, many
employees are in jobs that are characterized by continual change. Under these circum-
stances, it may be necessary to set nearer-term goals in order to ensure that they are
sufficiently specific and achievable to have positive motivating effects. In addition,
feedback should be given and appraisals can be performed as employees reach key
milestones or achieve goals during the rating period.
Shown below is a list of guidelines that the research literature has shown to be impor-
tant for establishing effective goals.4
It is interesting to note that very difficult (but
attainable) goals lead to more effective performance outcomes than moderately diffi-
cult goals. Research has also shown that employee commitment to goals is critically
important for goal attainment and that employees must feel that they are able to
achieve their goals. It is thus important to ensure that employees participate in the
goalsetting process, accept their goals and are motivated to work towards those goals. It
is also important for managers to communicate their willingness to assist employees in
achieving their goals by providing guidance and resources, and removing obstacles to
goal attainment.
Guidelines for Establishing Effective Performance Goals
Q Goals must clearly define the end results to be accomplished.
Q To the extent possible, goals should have a direct and obvious link to organizational
success factors or goals.
Q Goals should be difficult, but achievable, to motivate performance.
Q Goals should be set in no more than three areas—attempting to achieve too many
different goals at once will impede success.
3
Rodgers, R., & Hunter, J. E. (1991). Impact of management by objectives on organizational productivity. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 76, 322-336.
4
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P
. (1990). A theory of goal setting and task performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Ongoing Feedback
During the performance planning process, both behavioral and results expectations
should have been set. Performance in both of these areas should be discussed and feed-
back provided on an ongoing basis throughout the rating period. In addition to pro-
viding feedback whenever exceptional or ineffective performance is observed, providing
periodic feedback about day-to-day accomplishments and contributions is also very
valuable. Unfortunately, this does not happen to the extent that it should in organiza-
tions because many managers are not skilled in providing feedback. In fact, managers
frequently avoid providing feedback because they do not know how to deliver it pro-
ductively in ways that will minimize employee defensiveness.
For the feedback process to work well, experienced practitioners have advocated that it
must be a two-way communication process and a joint responsibility of managers and
employees, not just the managers.5,6
This requires training both managers and employ-
ees about their roles and responsibilities in the performance feedback process.
Managers’ responsibilities include providing feedback in a constructive, candid and
timely manner. Employees’ responsibilities include seeking feedback to ensure they
understand how they are performing and reacting well to the feedback they receive.
Having effective, ongoing performance conversations between managers and employ-
ees is probably the single most important determinant of whether or not a perform-
ance management system will achieve its maximum benefits from a coaching and
development perspective.
Research has shown that for feedback to have the most value, it needs to be given in
close proximity to the event.7
It does not help employees to receive feedback nine
5
Wexley, K. N. (1986). Appraisal interview. In R. A. Berk (Ed.), Performance assessment (pp. 167-185). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins
University Press.
6
Cederblom, D. (1982). The performance appraisal interview: A review, implications, and suggestions. Academy of Management
Review, 7, 219-227.
7
University Press.
Guidelines for Providing Feedback Effectively
Q Provide immediate positive and developmental feedback in a private location.
Q Ask for the employee’s view about what could have been done differently.
Q Be specific about what behaviors were effective or ineffective.
Q Focus on what the person did or did not do, not personal characteristics.
Q Collaboratively plan steps to address development needs.
Q Offer help in addressing development needs and providing resources.

months after something has happened. And, their performance will likely not
improve on its own while the supervisor is waiting for the end-of-year review session
to occur. Ongoing feedback can be informal and should occur as part of the daily
work routine. In fact, research has shown that in organizations where employees
report higher levels of ongoing, informal feedback, performance levels are higher.
The table on page 7 presents guidelines that research has found to be important for
providing feedback effectively.8,9,10
Employee Input
Employee input has been used effectively in many organizations. It sometimes takes
the form of asking employees to provide self-ratings on performance standards,
which are then compared with the manager’s ratings and discussed. However, experi-
enced practitioners have found that this type of process and discussion can lead to
increased defensiveness, disagreements and bad feelings between employees and
managers, if managers ultimately rate employees less effectively than they have rated
themselves. An alternative way of collecting employee input is to ask employees to
prepare statements of their key results or most meritorious accomplishments at the
end of the rating period.
Employee input has a number of positive results. First, it involves employees in the
process, enhancing ownership and acceptance. Second, it reminds managers about the
results employees have delivered and how they were achieved. Third, employee-gener-
ated accomplishments can be included in the formal appraisal, decreasing managers’
writing requirements. Fourth, employee input increases communication and under-
standing. Managers and employees usually review and discuss the accomplishments
before they become part of the appraisal, resulting in fewer disconnects between the
manager’s and the employee’s views of the employee’s contributions. Finally, employee
accomplishments can be retained and used as input for pay or promotion decisions.
8
University Press.
9
Cederblom, D. (1982). The performance appraisal interview: A review, implications, and suggestions. Academy of Management
Review, 7, 219-227.
10
Cawley, B. D., Keeping, L. M., & Levy, P
. E. (1998). Participation in the performance appraisal process and employee reactions: A
meta-analytic review of field investigations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 615-633.
Guidelines for Writing Employee Accomplishments
Q Include the situation or circumstances faced by the employee.
Q Describe what specific actions the employee took to achieve results.
Q Describe the impact of the accomplishment on the work unit or organization.

Research has shown that employee accomplishments are effective predictors of how
successfully employees will perform at higher job levels, and they thus provide useful
input for promotion decisions.11
Performance Evaluation
Evaluating Behaviors
Today, many organizations are using competency models as a basis for their perform-
ance management systems.12
Competency models articulate the knowledge, skills, abili-
ties and other characteristics that are deemed to be most instrumental for achieving
positive organizational outcomes. Job analysis techniques, such as job observations,
interviews, focus groups and surveys, are used to identify key competencies and associ-
ated critical work behaviors. An effective process for identifying and defining compe-
tencies is discussed in Jeffery Schippmann’s (1999) book on strategic job modeling.13
11
Hough, L. M., Keyes, M. A., & Dunnette, M. D. (1983). An evaluation of three “alternative” selection procedures. Personnel
Psychology, 36, 261-276.
12
Spencer, L., & Spencer, S. (1994). Competence at work. New York, NY: John Wiley.
13
Schippmann, J. S. (1999). Strategic job modeling: Working at the core of integrated human resource systems. Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Personal
Effectiveness
Teamwork
Achieving
Business
Results
Conceptual and
Critical Thinking
HRM
Technical
Knowledge
Leadership
Communication
Organizational
Know-how
COAC
H
I
N
G
ASSESSING
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
I
N
G
Figure 2 Sample Competency Model for Human Resource Manager

An advantage of competency models is that they typically include the full array of
factors associated with success—technical, leadership and interpersonal. Competency
models are especially useful because they not only communicate what is important
to an organization but also provide a common foundation for developing integrated
human resource systems, such as staffing, training, promotion, succession planning
and performance management.
Organizations usually identify between five and 10 key competencies that are linked to
their strategic objectives and critical success factors. An important practical question is
how many competencies need to be separately evaluated? Novice developers of per-
formance management systems are sometimes tempted to include numerous compe-
tencies, which can take quite a long time to rate and may not be palatable to busy
managers who need to complete a large number of appraisals. A reasonable number of
Sample Performance Standards for Communication Competency
Experienced Employee Performance Standards
Below Expectations Meets Expectations Role Model
Fails to prepare timely, clear, organized and
concise communications on complex topics;
communications require moderate to extensive
revisions.
Fails to effectively adapt communication style
and materials to communicate complex infor-
mation.
Effectively prepares timely, clear, organized and
concise communications on complex topics;
communications require some revisions.
Effectively adapts communication style and
materials to communicate complex informa-
tion.
Effectively prepares timely, clear, organized and
concise communications on highly complex,
sensitive or controversial topics; communica-
tions require minimal revisions.
Effectively tailors communication style and
customizes materials to communicate highly
complex, sensitive or controversial information.
First-Level Manager Performance Standards
Fails to prepare communications that are
clear, organized and concise on complex, sen-
sitive or controversial topics; products require
moderate to extensive revisions.
Fails to tailor highly complex communications
for internal and external audiences that are
effectively targeted.
Prepares high-visibility communications that
are clear, organized and concise on complex,
sensitive or controversial topics; products
require few revisions.
Skillfully tailors highly complex communica-
tions for internal and external audiences that
are effectively targeted, even in sensitive or
highly visible situations.
Prepares high-visibility communications that
are clear, organized and concise on the most
complex, sensitive or controversial topics;
products require no revisions.
Expertly tailors the most complex communica-
tions for internal and external audiences that
are optimally targeted; is called upon to han-
dle the most sensitive and visible situations.
Entry-Level Employee Performance Standards
Even with guidance, fails to prepare straightfor-
ward communications, including forms, paper-
work and records, in a timely and accurate
manner; products require moderate to exten-
sive revisions.
Even with guidance, fails to adapt style and
materials to communicate straightforward infor-
mation.
With guidance, prepares straightforward com-
munications, including forms, paperwork and
records, in a timely and accurate manner; prod-
ucts require minimal corrections.
With guidance, adapts style and materials to
communicate straightforward information.
Independently prepares communications, such
as forms, paperwork and records, in a timely,
clear and accurate manner; products require
few, if any, corrections.
Independently adapts style and materials to
communicate information.

competencies should be selected to capture the most important aspects of perform-
ance. Related competencies can be combined into larger competency factors.
For performance management purposes, experienced practitioners agree that compe-
tencies should be defined in terms of important job behaviors and expectations that
are associated with them. Defining competencies behaviorally provides a solid basis for
differentiating between employees who are performing more or less effectively than
others. The competencies should also be defined to reflect different levels of responsi-
bility, complexity and difficulty that characterize employees’ jobs at different levels in
an organization. Employees at different job levels are certainly paid differently, based
on their experience, responsibility and contributions. For performance evaluation pur-
poses, it is important to articulate clearly how expectations change at different job lev-
els (for example, entry-level employee, experienced employee and manager) as well as
what reflects more or less effective job performance at each level. The primary advan-
tages of defining competencies in terms of behavioral performance standards are (1) to
help employees understand what is expected of them and (2) to provide uniform stan-
dards that managers can apply in evaluating employees, thereby increasing consistency,
transparency and fairness. Research has shown that it is important for employees to
perceive that the performance management system is fair. Further, perceived fairness
can mitigate negative outcomes, such as unfavorable ratings.14
Some competency models and performance standards are developed at the organiza-
tional level to apply to all jobs. The unique technical aspects of different jobs can be
represented in a more generally defined technical competency, where the behavioral
standards may reflect keeping current in technical field, applying technical knowl-
edge and skill effectively, and so forth. Alternatively, some competency models con-
tain a set of core competencies that apply to all organizational members and
additional specialized competencies that are customized to reflect the specific techni-
cal or managerial responsibilities that apply to particular jobs. Several examples are
listed below.
Q In one large organization, a common competency model was developed at the orga-
nizational level but three sets of performance standards were developed reflecting
these competencies: one for professional jobs, one for administrative jobs and one
for managerial jobs.
Q In another large organization, 26 job families were identified, such as Information
Technology, Acquisitions, Finance, Human Resources, Analysts and Management.
Customized competencies and performance standards were then developed for each
job family and level.
14
Gilliland, S. W., & Langdon, J. C. (1998). Creating performance management systems that promote perceptions of fairness. In James
W. Smither (Ed.), Performance appraisal: State of the art in practice. Jossey-Bass: San Francisco.

Q In yet another organization, a common set of performance standards was used to
define a set of core competencies (interpersonal effectiveness, teamwork, communi-
cation) that were used across all jobs. In addition, specialized technical competencies
were also defined for each individual job group.
Decisions need to be made about how many sets of competencies and performance
standards should be developed and how customized they should be. There is no one
best approach, as there are advantages and disadvantages to different options. Use of a
common set of performance standards across jobs means that the standards will be writ-
ten at a more general level and that managers will need to translate them into more spe-
cific expectations and goals that are relevant to a given employee’s job, particularly in
competency areas that relate to technical aspects of the job. However, practical advan-
tages to using common standards across jobs or job groups are that (1) the development
time and developmental resources are significantly less than developing separate stan-
dards for each job and (2) there is more consistency in the expectations communicated
to organizational members. To the extent that an organization wishes to drive particular
behaviors, a consistent message regarding expectations can facilitate this.
Experienced practitioners advocate the use of performance standards because without
them it is difficult to calibrate evaluations from different managers. If a scale is used,
for example, that measures whether an employee “meets expectations” without articu-
lating exactly what those expectations are, some managers will inevitably expect more
than others. The result is that employees holding the same job at the same level may
be held to different standards, which is unfair. Similarly, a scale that asks managers to
rate employees from “ineffective” to “highly effective” suffers the same problem. Thus,
the inclusion of performance standards to guide ratings is considered best practice in
developing an effective performance management system.15
Evaluating Results
Although more and more organizations are using competency models and accompany-
ing behavioral standards as a basis for performance management, there is also increas-
Advantages of Performance Standards
Q Communicate key performance factors and expectations.
Q Show distinctions in effectiveness levels that help supervisors explain why an
employee was evaluated in a particular way.
Q Provide a job-relevant basis for evaluating employees, increasing fairness.
15
Borman, W. C. (1991). Job behavior, performance, and effectiveness. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial
and organizational psychology (vol. 2, p.271-326). Pal Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

ing focus on and importance of evaluating employees’ results as part of the perform-
ance management process. Key results to be achieved will vary for different employees,
depending on the nature of the individual’s job and assignments. For example, some
employees may have production or sales results, others may be responsible for success-
fully developing and implementing new programs or systems, others may have specific
levels of customer satisfaction outcomes they are expected to reach, and yet others may
have employee development or team leadership results.
A critical issue faced by organizations is how to measure and evaluate results. Some
results can be evaluated by tracking various objective indicators of performance, such as
dollar volume of sales, profitability and amount of product produced. While objective
indicators of performance can be useful, there are two potential problems with them.16
The first is that such measures can be affected by differences in opportunities that are
available to different employees. For example, one employee may have more modern
equipment than another and thus be able to produce a higher volume of product, irre-
spective of how hard either individual works. A similar example is that one employee
may have sales territory in Wyoming and another in New York City. Certainly, based on
the volume and proximity of potential customers, the individual in New York will have
more opportunities to make sales than the one in Wyoming. Another issue with objective
measures of performance is ensuring the accuracy of the metrics collected and putting
systems in place to track those of interest for performance evaluation. Developing and
collecting meaningful metrics in organizations can have significant resource implications
and thus the number and type of metrics to be collected must be carefully considered.
Due to the inherent difficulties in collecting good objective performance measures,
many organizations have moved the evaluation of results to collecting information on
employees’ most meritorious accomplishments and the impact of these contributions.
Discussed above was a component of the performance management process where
employees are asked to articulate their major accomplishments or results for the rating
period. The use of employee accomplishments to measure results does not have the
same limitations as using objective performance measures and also allows for results to
be considered that may not have objective performance measures associated with them,
such as team leadership skills.
What Type of Evaluation Will Be Made?
If performance information is to be used for decision-making, a numerical rating on
which employees can be rank-ordered or identified as top, middle and bottom per-
formers is often required. A five- to seven-point scale is typically used because it pro-
16
Borman, W. C. (1991). Job behavior, performance, and effectiveness. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial
and organizational psychology (vol. 2, p.271-326). Pal Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

vides a sufficient number of rating points to help differentiate between employees. If a
rating scale is to be used, the rating points should be defined sufficiently so that raters
can apply them in a uniform and fair manner. Ratings made with numerical scales can
easily be averaged or summed across rating categories to derive a summary score for
decision-making.
Below is an example five-point scale that could be used with the competency-based
communication performance standards shown previously. These performance standards
contain expectations for three different job levels (entry-level employee, experienced
employee, and first-level manager). Within each job level, performance standards are
provided describing three different effectiveness levels (“Below Expectations,” “Meets
Expectations” and “Role Model”). The following scale would be used to evaluate an
employee against the performance standards for his or her specific job level (e.g., entry-
level employee).
Managers and employees frequently jump to the conclusion that competencies should
be weighted in deriving an overall evaluation. This is not the case since it would rarely
be possible to develop an easy-to-use weighting algorithm that would apply across
multiple positions. In addition, contrary to what managers typically think, weighted
and unweighted ratings tend to result in the same rank order of employees. Weighting
competencies adds significant administrative burden with no obvious changes in over-
all results of the appraisal process.
If a system is developmentally focused and not used for decision-making, there may be
less need for a numerical rating scale and, in fact, the use of one may detract from
development. This is because employees will tend to be more concerned about their
“score” than understanding and planning to improve their development needs. Rather
than provide numerical ratings, some performance management systems involve sim-
ply identifying which competencies should be the focus of developmental effort and
Example: Five-Point Scale With Defined Rating Points
5 = Almost always performs as described by the “Role Model” standards.
4 = Sometimes performs as described by the “Role Model” standards and sometimes performs as described by
the “Meets Expectations” standards.
3 = Almost always performs as described by the “Meets Expectations” standards.
2 = Sometimes performs as described by the “Meets Expectations” standards and sometimes performs as
described by the “Below Expectations” standards.
1 = Almost always performs as described by the “Below Expectations” standards.

goal setting for the upcoming rating period. A simple judgment of “is a development
area” or “is not a development area” can be made for each competency and develop-
mental goals can be set accordingly.
From an employee development perspective, rating narratives tend to provide more
useful information than numerical ratings. Even when performance is rated against
behavioral rating standards, the ratings themselves typically do not convey what the
employee did or did not do in sufficient detail to be meaningful. Rating narratives,
on the other hand, can be extremely rich, customized and useful sources of feedback
because they tend to provide specific behavioral examples that can aid employees in
understanding why they were evaluated in a particular way. Behavioral examples
used in narrative descriptions also help managers calibrate their ratings by allowing
them to discuss and compare more specific examples of performance that relate to
the standards.
Irrespective of what type of information is collected, experienced practitioners general-
ly advocate that narrative documentation be provided to substantiate ratings if they
will be used for decision-making. This is especially important in cases where an
employee may have received particularly high or low ratings. Narrative descriptions,
however, should not be used alone as a basis for linking performance to rewards.
Without accompanying performance standards and ratings, narrative descriptions tend
to be unstructured, not standardized, and can reflect the motivation and writing skills
of the manager more than the performance of the individual being rated.
A sample performance rating form is shown on the following pages. This form is a
generic example of what an appraisal form might look like, but it contains the various
sections that would likely be included on most appraisal forms: key work responsibili-
ties, results/goals to be achieved, behavioral assessment, results assessment, narrative,
areas to be developed and development actions, and signature blocks for managers and
employees. On an actual rating form, more space may need to be devoted to some
areas, such as the accomplishments to be evaluated, narrative section or the areas to be
developed and development actions.
Who Will Provide Evaluations?
Performance evaluation information can be obtained from managers, peers, direct
reports or customers. This type of rating process is often referred to as 360-degree feed-
back. Important questions that need to be considered are which rating sources should
provide input and how that input will be collected, managed and controlled. If per-
formance information is to be used primarily for development, control over informa-
tion sources is less unimportant than if the system is used for decision-making. If
feedback from different rating sources is collected, the ratings of at least three raters

Sample Performance Rating Form
Employee’s Name ________________________________________ Level: Entry-Level Employee
Manager’s Name ________________________________________
Key Work Responsibilities Results/Goals to be Achieved
1. ____________________________________________________ 1. ____________________________________________________
2. ____________________________________________________ 2. ____________________________________________________
3. ____________________________________________________ 3. ____________________________________________________
4. ____________________________________________________ 4. ____________________________________________________
Behavioral Assessment of Competencies
Communication
1 3 5
Below Expectations
Even with guidance, fails to prepare straight-
forward communications, including forms,
paperwork and records, in a timely and accu-
rate manner; products require minimal cor-
rections.
Even with guidance, fails to adapt style and
materials to communicate straightforward
information.
Meets Expectations
With guidance, prepares straightforward com-
munications, including forms, paperwork and
records, in a timely and accurate manner;
products require minimal corrections.
With guidance, adapts style and materials to
communicate straightforward information.
Role Model
Independently prepares communications, such
as forms, paperwork and records, in a timely,
clear and accurate manner; products require
few, if any, corrections.
Independently adapts style and materials to
communicate information.
2 4
1 3 5
Below Expectations
<performance standards appear here>
Meets Expectations
Role Model
2 4
Organizational Know-How
1 3 5
Below Expectations
Meets Expectations
Role Model
2 4
Personal Effectiveness
1 3 5
Below Expectations
Meets Expectations
Role Model
2 4
Teamwork
1 3 5
Below Expectations
< performance standards appear here>
Meets Expectations
Role Model
2 4
Achieving Business Results

Results Assessment
Accomplishment 1: ________________________________________________________________________________________________
1 3 5
Low Impact
The efficiency or effectiveness of operations
remained the same or improved only mini-
mally.
The quality of products remained the same
or improved only minimally.
Moderate Impact
improved quite a lot.
The quality of products improved quite a lot.
High Impact
improved tremendously.
The quality of products improved tremendously.
2 4
Accomplishment 2: ________________________________________________________________________________________________
1 3 5
Low Impact
remained the same or improved only mini-
mally.
The quality of products remained the same
or improved only minimally.
Moderate Impact
improved quite a lot.
The quality of products improved quite a lot.
High Impact
improved tremendously.
The quality of products improved tremendously.
2 4
Narrative
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
Areas to be Developed Actions Completion Date
Manager’s Signature: ______________________________________________________________________ Date: ________________
Employee’s Signature: ______________________________________________________________________ Date: ________________
The above employee signature indicates receipt of, but not necessarily concurrence with, the evaluation herein.

from each rating source should be averaged and reported to the employee. This helps
ensure more accurate feedback and also protects the anonymity of individual raters,
which research has found to be important for obtaining accurate evaluations in multi-
source rating programs.17,18
An advantage of using different rating sources is that they often have different views of
an employee’s performance and thus provide a more complete picture of effectiveness.
For example, peers and customers typically would not have information to evaluate
how effectively an employee develops or leads her subordinates, whereas direct reports
would be an excellent source for this type of information. Beyond gaining a more
comprehensive assessment of performance, experienced practitioners have found that
multi-source assessments can be more convincing and tend to be viewed as more credi-
ble for communicating development needs. With multiple raters, the manager is taken
out of the role of “sole judge and evaluator” and can assume a greater role as a per-
formance coach and helper.
Although there are several advantages to collecting performance information from
multiple sources, doing so adds complexity and administrative burden. Automated
processes for collecting ratings from multiple sources are highly desirable to make
multi-rater processes more manageable. In addition, research has shown that to obtain
the maximum benefit and highest degree of performance improvement from multi-
source rating processes, they must be coupled with targeted development programs
that specifically address identified development needs.
If performance information is to be used for decision-making, managers are typically the
best source of performance information. While managers should be encouraged to col-
lect performance information from other credible sources, they should serve as gatekeep-
ers for integrating this information, judging its credibility and quality, and balancing it
against other available information. The reason why control and proper integration of
information is especially important when decisions are made is because direct reports,
peers and customers often do not have the qualifications, experience, complete perspec-
tive or motivation to make accurate and effective evaluative ratings. In fact, research has
shown decrements in the quality in multi-source ratings when they are used for deci-
sion-making versus development purposes.19
Supporting this research finding, evalua-
tions of multi-source rating programs in organizations have shown that the accuracy of
ratings from different sources can be compromised when they are intended for decision-
17
Ghorpade, J. (2000). Managing the five paradoxes of 360-degree feedback. Academy of Management Executive, 14(1), 140-150.
18
Waldman, D., & Atwater, L. E. (1998). The power of 360-degree feedback: How to leverage performance evaluations for top produc-
tivity. Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing.
19
Greguras, G. J., Robie, C., Schleicher, D. J., & Goff, M. (2003). A field study of the effects of rating purpose on the quality of multi-
source ratings. Personnel Psychology, 56, 1-21.

making. Specifically, employees are more likely to “cut deals” (exchange one good
appraisal for another) with peers when the purpose of appraisal is decision-making.
Performance Evaluation in Special Situations
The focus of the preceding discussion has been on evaluating individual performance in
typical situations where managers have regular opportunities to observe performance on
the job. Increasingly, organizations are faced with specialized situations that require vari-
ations to the standard performance management model. For example, increasing num-
bers of employees are working in remote locations, virtually or telecommuting. The
challenge here is ensuring that accurate performance information is collected when
supervisors may have limited access to employees’ day-to-day activities. Addressing this
situation may involve a combination of fine-tuning what is evaluated, such as (1) focus-
ing on performance areas where observations can be made or performance information
is available; (2) focusing more on results than on less visible behaviors; or (3) collecting
information from others who have opportunities to observe performance.
Other special situations may include the evaluation of team or unit-level performance
in addition to, or instead of, individual performance. Evaluating performance at differ-
ent levels requires the same process of defining performance standards, expectations
and goals. A thorough treatment of performance evaluation at the team or unit level is
outside the scope of what can be covered here, but it is important to be aware that it is
often desirable to evaluate performance at the team or unit levels.
Performance Review
Assuming that feedback has been provided on an ongoing basis, the formal perform-
ance review session should simply be a recap of what has occurred throughout the rat-
ing period. In other words, there should be no surprises in the performance review.
During this meeting, managers should discuss with employees their ratings, narratives
and rationale for the evaluation given.20
The performance review session is also a good time to plan developmental activities
with employees. Experienced practitioners have found that competency models and
performance standards like those described above help managers and employees
identify and address development needs. Obviously, any performance standards that
are not currently being met should be identified as development areas. If all current
job standards are being met, employees and managers can look to the next level’s
performance standards to identify requirements and developmental areas to pursue in
preparation for advancement.
20
University Press.

Sample Excerpt from Developmental Handbook for the
Teamwork Competency
Teamwork: Collaborates with others to facilitate the achievement of goals and promotes com-
mitment to a team approach to work.
What does it involve?
Q Facilitating cooperation, pride, trust and team spirit.
Q Promoting open exchange of ideas and information among team members.
Q Creating commitment to team goals.
Q Collaboratively defining boundaries and outcomes of work responsibilities.
Q Recognizing and rewarding team accomplishments.
Key Questions: To strengthen your teamwork skills, ask yourself the following questions
every day:
Q Can we reach a consensus on this issue?
Q Which of my team’s norms impede teamwork?
Q What organizational processes or structures hinder teamwork?
Q Do I let team members know that I appreciate and recognize their contributions?
Q Do team members have the authority they need to accomplish their goals?
Q Do I provide positive feedback to individuals who behave in the best interest of the team?
Self-Study to Enhance Teamwork Skills
Recommended Readings
Q Empowered Teams. Wellins, Richard S., Byham, William C., & Wilson, Jeanne M. (1991). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Q Team-Based Organizations. Shonk, James H. (1992). Homewood, IL: Business One Irwin.
Q Team Players and Teamwork: The New Competitive Business Strategy. Parker, Glenn M. (1990) San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Q The Wisdom of Teams. Katzenbach, J. R., & Smith D. K. (1993). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Training Programs
Q Advanced Team Building. NTL Institute. 1240 North Pitt Street, Suite 100, Alexandria, VA 22314.
(800) 777-5227.
Q Becoming a Team Player. Management Concepts, Inc. 8230 Leesburg Pike, Vienna, VA 22182.
(703) 790-9595.
Q Building Effective Work Teams. TASC, Organization Performance Skills Training. U.S. Department of
Transportation. TASC/SVC-131, Room P2-0339, 400 7th Street, SW, Washington, D.C. 20590.
(202) 366-4378.
On-the-Job Learning Activities
Q Observe professional facilitators. Take note of their techniques, styles and interactions with group members.
Q Interview members of successful teams and identify effective processes used and lessons learned.
Q Co-lead a team meeting. Take steps to ensure that all team members’ opinions are listened to, considered
and respected. Ask a peer or the team leader for feedback on your effectiveness in this role.
Q Identify another employee to recognize with the Peer Accomplishment Award.
Q Take steps to communicate with other teams about work activities and accomplishments (e.g., make a pres-
entation to another team).

While identifying developmental needs can be easy with the right performance man-
agement tools, knowing exactly what to do to address these needs effectively is not
always so obvious. Many managers are quick to suggest formal classroom training or
distance learning to enhance employees’ skills, without realizing that the vast majority
of learning occurs on the job. Even if formal training is the best option for addressing
a development need, how does a manager know which training to prescribe for an
employee’s particular needs? To address these questions and help managers and
employees more easily identify effective learning options, “Developmental Handbooks”
can be included in performance management systems. Developmental handbooks
contain on-the-job learning experiences, formal training and other developmental
resources (e.g., books, Web sites) targeted to each competency. These handbooks
provide a roadmap for helping address development areas. See the sample excerpt on
the previous page.
In some organizations, pay, promotion decisions and other administrative actions are
also discussed during the performance review session. In others, separate meetings are
held to discuss administrative actions. The rationale for not discussing rewards or other
outcomes during this session is to enable a more open discussion about employee
development needs. As a practical matter, however, it can be difficult to schedule mul-
tiple performance management meetings between managers and employees to discuss
different aspects of the process (e.g., evaluations, development, rewards).
Implementation
Attention has thus far been directed to performance management tools and processes.
However, experienced practitioners uniformly agree that having effective tools and
processes is a necessary but certainly not sufficient condition for having an effective
performance system. This is because what really matters in any performance manage-
ment system is how effectively it is used and how seriously managers and employees
take it. This is why both the most challenging and the most important part of devel-
oping an effective performance management system is successful implementation.
There are several aspects to implementation, but at its core is providing a user-friendly,
value-added system that both managers and employees can and will use effectively. The
following sections discuss best practices based on the change management literature
and the views of experienced practitioners about successful implementation of per-
formance management systems.
Cornerstones of Successful Implementation
Q Ensure alignment with other HR systems. Q Pilot test.
Q Get organizational members on board. Q Train employees and managers.
Q Communicate. Q Evaluate and improve.
Q Automate.

Ensure Alignment with Other HR Systems
In developing a performance management system, it is important to ensure that it is
aligned with other HR systems in the organization. For example, competencies used as
the basis for performance management should be the same as those used for recruit-
ment, staffing and training. This not only ensures that employees are being hired,
trained and appraised on a consistent set of critical job requirements, but it also sends
a strong message, internally and externally, about what is valued by the organization.
Get Organizational Members on Board
In order for any performance management system to be effective, organizational mem-
bers must be motivated to use it properly. The literature on many different types of
management programs shows that effective program implementation depends on the
level of top management commitment—the stronger the commitment, the greater the
potential for program success.21
In the case of performance management, an organiza-
tion with a committed CEO, who models effective performance management with the
executive team and establishes clear expectations around performance management for
all staff, will have a much higher probability of success than one that does not have
high-level support. Without management support the system will fail. Management
support means that the highest level managers follow all parameters of the system
themselves and establish expectations for their direct reports to do so as well by includ-
ing performance management as a critical aspect of their evaluations.
Starting at the top and getting the commitment of upper management to make per-
formance management a priority is a prerequisite for success. Some organizations
already have a strong performance management culture. In others, it may be necessary
to educate the executive team about the critical role that performance management can
play in an organization’s effectiveness and convince them about the criticality of their
role in leading the effort. Piloting a new system with the executive or higher level man-
agement teams can be a useful strategy for gaining the support of these critical individ-
uals. In situations where there is not a strong performance culture to begin with, it can
be established over time with management support.
Because a performance management system’s success relies so much on the effective-
ness with which managers and employees use the system, it is also essential to get orga-
nizational members committed to the new system. A strategy for accomplishing this is
to involve key individuals in the design and implementation process.22
The design
21
Rodgers, R., Hunter, J. E., & Rogers, D. L. (1993). Influence of top management commitment on management program success.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 51-155.
22
Engelmann, C. H., & Roesch, R. C. (2001). Managing individual performance: An approach to designing and effective performance
management system. Scottsdale, AZ: WorldatWork.

team should consist of individuals who represent key constituencies in the organiza-
tion, major business lines or functions and different geographic locations. The design
team is typically led by HR representatives, or possibly consultants, who are experi-
enced in performance management and can thus guide the organization in developing
and implementing the system successfully. Design team participants should be team
players, effective communicators, good problem solvers and sufficiently knowledgeable
about organizational functioning to offer practical advice about what will work and be
well received. The design team performs four major duties:
Q Provide input that represents their constituency. The design team leader works
through various performance management options with the design team. Design
team members may need to meet with managers and employees in their areas to
assess unique local requirements or preferences. The design team members provide
input and make recommendations or decisions about the features and structure of
the system based on their specific needs.
Q Disseminate information about the system. Another role of design team members
is to ensure that their constituents are kept informed about progress in the devel-
opment process. As decisions are made, team members need to engage in an itera-
tive process of disseminating information to and gathering feedback from
constituents. This iterative process is important to ensure that the final system is
sensitive to business needs and supports the culture in the organization and its
different units.
Q Serve as a champion to get others on board. Employees will be concerned about
changes to the performance management system and how these changes will affect
them. Thus, champions are needed to communicate the value of the system to
others, its benefits, and how obstacles and concerns are being addressed. This
essentially involves marketing the system to constituents and may involve recruit-
ing other opinion leaders to assist with the process.
Q Involve others in contributing to and trying-out the system. A final role of design
team members is to serve as a liaison between the performance management team
and their units in the development process. Typically, performance management
system design involves various focus groups, review groups and pilot testing prior
to organization-wide implementation. It is useful to involve other employees in
these various activities to communicate further about the system, ensure that it
meets organizational needs and encourage others to take their fair share of respon-
sibility in implementing the process properly.
Communicate
Communication should begin at the launch of the design process. Design team mem-
bers should inform their constituents that revisions to the performance management
system are planned, and gather input and feedback on desired system features. If imple-
mentation of a new system involves major changes that are potentially threatening to

employees, a change-management strategy will be required.23
For example, if there was
never an obvious link between performance and pay, and the new system will explicitly
link these, employees may feel threatened and resist or sabotage the process. The com-
munications and change-management process must clearly and simply explain to
employees the advantages and rationale for the new system. Organizational members
should also be provided with ample opportunities to comment on the new system, and
their comments should be responded to, if not actually addressed. Some organizations
have been known to undertake full-blown advertising campaigns, with slogans, mar-
keting materials and massive communication campaigns, to “sell” a new performance
management system to employees. While outlining a comprehensive change-manage-
ment strategy to support performance management is beyond what can reasonably be
covered in this paper, it is important to understand that extensive change-management
work may be required to implement performance management successfully.
Automate
Performance management systems involve a considerable amount of paperwork, writ-
ing and exchange of documents. When the administrative demands are great, both
employees and managers end up spending their performance management time push-
ing paper rather than discussing performance issues and development.
Automation can greatly facilitate the performance management workflow and substan-
tially reduce the paperwork associated with this process. In fact, evaluations of auto-
mated performance management systems show that they are viewed positively by
managers and employees, decrease workload, ensure widespread access to performance
management tools and provide a standardized, structured approach to collecting and
storing performance data.
In making decisions about the extent of performance management system automation,
it is important to balance time, resource, development and maintenance costs. For
example, database development and maintenance can represent extensive costs beyond
applications development. Additionally, features such as information security, archiving
and records management represent additional areas for consideration.
Basic, automated performance management applications typically contain:
Q The functionality to conduct and capture performance ratings, including user inter-
faces for displaying relevant competency, performance standard and rating process
information.
Q Supporting Web pages that contain help and information files.
23
Mohrman, A. M., Jr., Resnick-West, S. M., & Lawler, E. E. III. (1989). Designing performance appraisal systems: Aligning appraisals
and organizational realities. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

More advanced automated features might include:
Q Capturing employee input and documentation of accomplishments online.
Q Managing workflow to include prompting managers and employees about critical
performance management events, routing documents between managers and
employees, and providing access to forms and documents as the appraisal process is
completed.
Q Providing real-time training and feedback to help managers mitigate rating inflation
and other rating errors. For example, if managers seem consistently to be rating
employees at the highest rating levels, they can be reminded to make sure their rat-
ings reflect both strengths and development needs.
Q Producing automated reports that evaluate ratings for protected demographic
groups (e.g., employees over 40, minority groups) versus nonprotected groups and
analyze relationships between performance appraisal information and outcomes
such as pay and promotion.
Q Providing managers with sample behavioral statements to use when developing nar-
ratives, where the manager is able to select statements that match the employee’s
behavior and then customize them to describe the employee’s behavior more accu-
rately. While a concern with this feature might be that managers will produce
“cookie cutter” reviews, evaluations at two large organizations showed that managers
did customize the statements.
Q Providing automated development suggestions for identified development needs,
such as on-the-job experiences, training, books, Web sites, etc. Some software allows
employees to request formal training, register in programs, and track their develop-
mental activities and progress.
Q Facilitating HR decision-making. A government agency that was implementing a
pay for performance process developed software to facilitate pay decisions. Once
managers agreed on employees’ ratings, they were automatically plotted on a graph
that showed where each employee stood within their pay band. Taking into account
the employee’s performance ratings, this tool helped managers diagnose which
employees might be under- or overpaid for their level of contribution. The software
also allowed managers to input alternative compensation amounts for different
employees while tracking the overall impact on payroll. Other types of software are
available that will import performance evaluations and use these along with other
information to facilitate succession planning, staffing and other HR functions.
There are many ways that automation can facilitate performance management, saving
valuable time and considerable administrative burden. However, as mentioned, these
applications can be very costly to implement and maintain, so a careful analysis must be
made of technology requirements and associated costs in making decisions regarding
automation. In addition, one caution with respect to automation is that while it has
many efficiency-related benefits, a potential downside is that automation can make

performance management a more perfunctory activity. For example, if managers are
able to choose from a menu of prepared statements to provide feedback to an employee,
they may not customize their feedback based on the employee’s actual performance,
thereby decreasing its meaningfulness.
Pilot Test
Another important factor in ensuring a successful implementation is to pilot test the
new process in a couple of units prior to large-scale implementation. Pilot testing
will show if the system functions smoothly and efficiently. It will also show if man-
agers and employees understand and support the process, or if further change-man-
agement efforts are needed. Importantly, a pilot test provides an opportunity to
gauge reactions to the system and make adjustments that will facilitate organization-
wide implementation.
Train Employees and Managers
Employees and managers need to be able and motivated to use the performance man-
agement system effectively. Training helps accomplish both of these objectives. There
are a number of training formats that can be used for performance management.
Classroom training, job aides or Web-based training can be used, each of which has
advantages and disadvantages. The training format that should be used depends on
how experienced raters are in conducting performance management and what
resources the organization is willing to devote to training.
When employees and managers are required to attend a structured performance
management briefing or classroom training session, this sends a message that per-
formance management is important. Classroom training is preferable when the
training content requires hands-on practice or interactive discussions that are not
easily achieved with other training formats. Experienced practitioners have found
that one very good use of the classroom format is to train managers and employees
on how to provide and receive feedback effectively, because it allows managers and
employees to understand, practice and grow comfortable with their roles in the feed-
back and development process. Because classroom training is costly and requires
attendance at scheduled times, it should only be used when the value added is great,
such as for feedback training.
Performance management aides can be used to support training. The advantage of
such aids is that they can be reviewed at an employee’s own pace. For example, an
aide might be developed that lists a manager’s key responsibilities in the performance
management process and when these activities must be completed. Performance
management aids tend to be useful for managers who are experienced in conducting
performance management, but tend to be less effective for new managers, who may

need hands-on practice and more information than is typically provided in a suc-
cinct aide.
Many organizations provide a performance management “hotline,” where managers
and employees can call in to ask questions about the performance management
process. These are very useful, particularly around the time period when evaluations
occur. However, the organization needs to be willing to staff the hotline so that
employees can have their questions readily addressed.
A final option is to develop Web-based training. An advantage of this training is that it
allows participants to complete programs at their own pace. Advanced forms of Web-
based training can also provide practice exercises. The biggest disadvantage of Web-
based training is that it can be easily ignored by both managers and employees, and
significant policing is often required to ensure participation.
Evaluate and Improve
Performance management systems need to be evaluated and continually improved over
time. There are several metrics that should be tracked to assess how effectively the sys-
tem is operating.
Q Track completion of training. This involves verifying that all users of the perform-
ance management system have been trained prior to implementation.
Q Track completion of performance management activities. In most organizations,
copies of completed performance management forms are submitted to Human
Performance Management Training Topics
Q Philosophy and uses of the system.
Q Description of the rating process.
Q Roles and responsibilities of employees and managers.
Q How to plan performance, set expectations and set goals.
Q How to provide accurate evaluations, minimizing rating errors and rating inflation.
Q The importance of ongoing, constructive, specific behavioral feedback.
Q How to seek feedback effectively from others.
Q How to react to and act on feedback in a constructive manner.
Q How to give feedback in a manner that minimizes defensiveness and maintains self-
esteem.
Q How to identify and address development needs.
Q How to use the automated system and related software.

Resources following formal performance evaluations. If the system is automated,
the forms can be signed electronically and automatically stored, alleviating the
need to generate and retain paper copies. Either of these strategies enables the
organization to ensure that performance management activities are being conduct-
ed for each employee.
Q Management review. Management review helps ensure that narrative descriptions
match ratings, that ratings are not positively or negatively biased, that especially
high or low ratings have been properly justified, that evaluation criteria are being
applied systematically across supervisors and employees, and that proper distinc-
tions are made between employees. Often, supervisors in a given unit will meet
with their manager to discuss the ratings for all employees and decide on final
rank-orderings or groupings of employees for decision-making. A distinct advan-
tage of this type of process is that it tends to ensure distinctions between excep-
tional, fully successful and less effective performers, and it also tends to result in
more systematic, consistent and fair decisions. Factors that would make this
process less viable include geographical dispersion and work situations where
supervisors and managers may not be familiar with the work of a majority of the
employees.
Guidelines for Addressing Legal Requirements
Q Employees must be evaluated on factors that are relevant to their jobs.
Q Employees must be informed about what is expected of them and the standards
against which they will be evaluated at the beginning of the rating cycle.
Q There must be a standard, well-documented procedure for how the performance
management process will be conducted, with defined roles and responsibilities for
employees and managers.
Q Managers and employees should be trained on the performance management
process and relevant skills required to implement the process effectively (e.g., train-
ing for managers on how to provide feedback to employees).
Q Managers should keep records to document examples of effective and, especially,
ineffective employee performance to substantiate their evaluations.
Q Managers should be held accountable for discussing performance issues with
employees and providing them with feedback in a timely manner during the rating
cycle.
Q Performance evaluations should be reviewed by a higher-level manager or panel.
Q The organization should provide a process whereby employees can formally com-
ment on and appeal their performance evaluations.
Q If performance evaluations are used for decision-making, the evaluation should
be consistent with the decision. For example, individuals who receive higher pay
raises/bonuses should have higher performance ratings than those who receive
lower raises/bonuses.

Q Track alignment with other HR decisions. If a performance management system
links evaluation to rewards, the system should monitor the internal consistency of
the evaluations and rewards. People who received good evaluations should be
receiving higher levels of compensation, more frequent promotions and other
desirable outcomes more readily than those who perform less effectively on the
job. Tracking alignment of evaluation information and decisions is made easier by
having automated processes in place.
Q Gather feedback from users. Survey or focus group information should be collect-
ed periodically to assess user reactions to the performance management process
and to modify the system in ways that will be more acceptable to users. One
effective strategy that not only gathers useful information but also promotes feed-
back is to survey managers and employees on the extent to which they are seek-
ing, giving and receiving quality feedback. Experienced practitioners have found
that reporting these results back to individual managers and employees can
increase the frequency and quality of the performance feedback over time.
Legal Considerations
It is important to be knowledgeable about professional and legal guidelines, includ-
ing relevant case law in any given country, pertinent to the design and implementa-
tion of performance management systems, as following these guidelines will enhance
the defensibility of a system in the face of a legal challenge.24,25,26,27
Although an in-
depth discussion of legal issues and requirements is beyond the scope of what will be
covered here, the general legal requirements relevant to performance management
systems based on U. S. case law are presented in the table on page 28.
24
Kahn, S. C., Brown, B. B., & Lanzarone, M. (1996). Legal guide to human resources. Boston: Warren, Gorham & Lamont, 6-2 to 6-58.
25
Martin, D. C., Bartol, K. M., & Kehoe, P
. E. (2000). The legal ramifications of performance appraisal: The growing significance. Public
Personnel Management, 29(3), 379-406.
26
Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. (2003). Principles for the validation and use of personnel selection proce-
dures: Fourth edition. Bowling Green, OH: Author.
27
Uniform guidelines on employee selection procedures. (1978). Federal register, 43, 38295-38315.

Summary and Conclusions
Many factors will impact the effectiveness of an organization’s performance manage-
ment system, but three are most important. First, the system needs to be aligned with
and support the organization’s direction and critical success factors. Second, well-devel-
oped, efficiently administered tools and processes are needed to make the system user-
friendly and well received by organizational members. Third, and most important, is
that both managers and employees must use the system in a manner that brings visi-
ble, value-added benefits in the areas of performance planning, performance develop-
ment, feedback and achieving results.
Practical Tips for Legal Considerations
Make Sure the System…
Q Aligns with the culture and business needs of the organization.
Q Matches the level of support for performance management that exists in the
organization.
Q Is considered an important tool for achieving business results by managers and
employees.
Q Is as user-friendly, straightforward and easy to use as possible.

Q Arvey, R. D., & Murphy, K. R. (1998). Performance evaluation in work settings.
Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 141-168.
This annual review chapter covers the historical treatment and context of per-
formance evaluation, the definition of job performance and measurement of job
performance. The authors conclude that contemporary research in performance
evaluation is characterized by several themes. These include that (1) general mod-
els of job performance are being developed; (2) the job performance domain is
being expanded; (3) research continues to explore the statistical characteristics of
performance ratings; (4) research is developing on potential bias in ratings; (5)
rater training continues to be examined; and (6) research continues in terms of
efforts to attach utility values to rated performance. Researchers are recognizing
that job performance is more than just the execution of specific tasks and involves
a wider array of important organizational activities. There is also increased opti-
mism regarding the use of supervisory ratings and recognition that such “subjec-
tive” appraisal instruments do not automatically translate into rater error or bias.
Q Beatty, R. W., Baird, L. S., Schneier, E. C., & Shaw, D. G. (Eds.). (1995).
Performance, Measurement, Management, and Appraisal Sourcebook. Amherst, MA:
Human Resource Development Press.
This sourcebook provides complete, up-to-date coverage of all aspects of perform-
ance management—communication, coaching, measuring, rating, reviewing and
developing. It is a valuable resource for those who are designing, managing and
evaluating performance management systems. Also included are ready-to-use fully
reproducible handouts for use in presentations and training.
Q Borman, W. C. (1991). Job behavior, performance, and effectiveness. In M. D.
Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychol-
ogy (vol. 2) (pp. 271-326). Pal Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
This chapter reviews research and methods related to measuring individual job
performance in organizations. It provides a comprehensive review of methodolog-
ical advances, research results and personnel research applications relevant to per-
formance ratings, including the evaluation of different rating forms, results of
training directed toward reducing rating errors and research results related to rat-
ing accuracy. Also discussed are the development and use of objective perform-
ance measures such as turnover, sales volume, error rates and work samples.
31
Sources and Suggested Readings

Q Campbell, D. J., & Lee, C. (1988). Self-appraisal in performance evaluation:
Development versus evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 13, 302-314.
This article suggests that self-appraisal may be used to help employees improve
their job performance, in addition to its use in the performance evaluation
process. A conceptual model of the self-appraisal process is presented. Although
there can be a lack of convergence between self and supervisor ratings, this article
argues that self-appraisal may be useful in identifying areas of performance that
need improvement and in uncovering areas of disagreement between employees
and supervisors. Future-oriented self-evaluation is also discussed in terms of man-
agement-by-objective and goal-setting approaches to evaluation.
Q Cardy, R. L. (2003). Performance management: Concepts, skills, and exercises.
Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe, Inc.
This book examines the entire process of performance management, providing
both theoretical concepts and practical how-to skills. It is organized around a
straightforward model of performance management that includes defining per-
formance, diagnosis, evaluation, feedback and improving performance. The
author also addresses important issues in performance management that are often
overlooked, such as incorporating strategy and values into performance criteria
and dealing with emotions that can accompany performance feedback. Each
chapter begins with a discussion of a specific concept, followed by a variety of
skill-building exercises that provide a rich resource for HR professionals, students,
faculty, workshop instructors and trainers.
Q Cawley, B. D., Keeping, L. M., & Levy, P. E. (1998). Participation in the perform-
ance appraisal process and employee reactions: A meta-analytic review of field inves-
tigations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 615-633.
The relationship between participation in the performance appraisal process and
various employee reactions was explored through examining 27 research studies.
There was a strong relationship between participation in performance appraisal
and employee reactions. Various ways of conceptualizing participation and
employee reactions were discussed and analyzed. Overall, appraisal participation
was most strongly related to satisfaction. Value-expressive participation (i.e., par-
ticipation for the sake of having one’s “voice” heard) had a stronger relationship
with most of the reaction measures than did instrumental participation (i.e., par-
ticipation for the purpose of influencing the end result). The results are discussed
as they relate to organizational justice issues.

Q Cederblom, D. (1982). The performance appraisal interview: A review, implica-
tions, and suggestions. Academy of Management Review, 7, 219-227.
Research on the performance appraisal interview was reviewed. Three factors were
shown to be consistently useful for producing effective interviews: supervisor’s
knowledge of the subordinate’s job performance, supervisor’s support of the sub-
ordinate and welcoming the subordinate’s participation. The effects of the func-
tioning, frequency and format of the interview, as well as the presence of goal
setting and subordinate participation, were shown to depend on the characteris-
tics of the employee and job.
Q DeNisi, A. S., & Kluger, A. N. (2000). Feedback effectiveness: Can 360-degree
appraisals be improved? Academy of Management Executive, 14(1), 129-139.
This article discusses performance feedback, an important part of many organiza-
tional interventions. The authors note that managers typically assume that pro-
viding employees with feedback about their performance makes it more likely
that performance on the job will be improved. Despite the prevalence of feedback
mechanisms in management interventions, however, feedback is not always as
effective as typically assumed. In this article, specific conditions under which
feedback might be less effective, or even harmful, are presented. The implications
of the results and model for designing of interventions aimed at improving per-
formance are discussed.
Q Engelmann, C. H., & Roesch, R. C. (2001). Managing individual performance: An
approach to designing and effective performance management system. Scottsdale, AZ:
WorldatWork.
This paper discusses five key steps involved in developing effective performance
systems in organizations. These include (1) creating and working with a design
team; (2) linking the system to key organizational objectives, characteristics and
strategy; (3) determining the performance management cycle; (4) linking per-
formance management and pay delivery; and (5) implementing the system. The
paper presents best practice-based, easy to understand, nuts-and-bolts
approaches for developing and implementing performance management sys-
tems in organizations.
Q Fisher, S. G. (1997). The manager’s pocket guide to performance management.
Amherst, MA: HRD Press.
This book serves as a useful tool for any manager who wishes to improve per-
formance throughout an organization. It presents a systems approach to perform-
ance enhancement and includes tools for determining current performance levels
and establishing desired performance levels. Specific guidance is provided on (1)
analyzing the performance of individual employees; (2) pinpointing gaps in per-

formance and determining the cause of those gaps; (3) developing practical strate-
gies for maximizing performance; (4) getting the most from training dollars and
ensuring that training is successful; (5) recognizing employee’s achievements; and
(6) evaluating whether or not employees are using what they’ve learned.
Q Fitzwater, T. L. (1998). The manager’s pocket guide to documenting employee perform-
ance. Amherst, MA: HRD Press.
This step-by-step guide provides guidance on documenting and changing
unwanted work behaviors before they become issues leading to termination. It
presents information on the legal framework surrounding discipline and specific
measures for accurate performance documentation that will help protect against
discharge litigation. The book includes a four-step progressive discipline process
and how to apply it, including how to (1) clarify gaps in execution vs. gaps in
knowledge; (2) promote self-discipline through PEPs (Performance Enhancement
Plans); (3) clarify position expectations to meet expected deliverables; (4) employ
behavior modification through corrective rather than punitive action; (5) develop
a coaching leadership style; (6) isolate factors for improvement; and (7) docu-
ment performance issues.
Q Ghorpade, J. (2000). Managing the five paradoxes of 360-degree feedback. Academy
of Management Executive, 14(1), 140-150.
The performance feedback method known as 360-degree feedback has gained
wide popularity in the corporate world and is widely used in Fortune 500 com-
panies. A 360-degree feedback program enables organizational members to
receive feedback on their performance, usually anonymously, from the different
constituencies they serve. Unlike traditional approaches to performance counsel-
ing, the 360-degree feedback concept enlists supervisors, peers, subordinates, sup-
pliers and customers in providing individuals feedback on aspects of their
performance. Although 360-degree feedback is widely used, its application is
filled with paradoxes. While it delivers valuable feedback, the concept has prob-
lems relating to privacy, validity and effectiveness. This article identifies five issues
associated with 360-degree feedback programs and offers suggestions for manag-
ing them.
Q Ghorpade, J., & Chen, M. M. (1995). Creating quality-driven performance
appraisal systems. Academy of Management Executive, 9(1), 32-39.
Managers in quality-driven firms face the challenge of creating a performance
appraisal system that is congruent with quality precepts. This article discussed the
following several prescriptions for achieving this: (1) within a quality environ-
ment, the primary purpose of performance appraisal should be to help the
employees improve their performance; (2) modification of the existing perform-

ance appraisal system should be brought about with the active involvement of all
of those who are affected by the activity; (3) evaluation of the existing perform-
ance appraisal system should be approached like any other quality improvement
effort; (4) within a quality-driven environment, the focus of appraisal should be
on behavior, with output and input used for diagnostic and developmental pur-
poses; (5) for each dimension of performance considered, employees should be
asked to provide examples of task performance and quality improvement; and (6)
workers should be judged by absolute rather than relative standards of perform-
ance. An executive commentary is included.
Q Gilliland, S. W., & Langdon, J. C. (1998). Creating performance management sys-
tems that promote perceptions of fairness. In James W. Smither (Ed.), Performance
Appraisal: State of the Art in Practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
The authors of this chapter describe three aspects of fairness: procedural fairness
(the fairness of procedures used to arrive at outcomes), interpersonal fairness (the
fairness of interpersonal treatment and communication) and outcome fairness
(the fairness of the decision and of outcomes such as pay associated with the deci-
sion). They review research showing that employees’ perceptions of appraisal fair-
ness are related to acceptance of evaluations, satisfaction with the process,
(modest) changes in performance, trust in the supervisor, organizational commit-
ment and intentions to stay with the organization. They provide specific recom-
mendations and organizational examples that illustrate how to increase fairness in
each of three aspects of the performance appraisal process: system development
(creating appraisal instruments, communicating objectives), appraisal (observing
and evaluating performance, making reward decisions) and providing feedback
(communicating ratings and rewards).
Q Greguras, G. J., Robie, C., Schleicher, D. J., Goff, M. (2003). A field study of the
effects of rating purpose on the quality of multisource ratings. Personnel Psychology,
56, 1-21.
Using a field sample of peers and subordinates, this study examined developmental
and administrative ratings. A large sample of managers (454) in a large telecom-
munications company participated as ratees in this study. Ratings given by peers
and subordinates were analyzed. The results showed that subordinate ratings are of
significantly better quality when made for developmental than for administrative
purposes, but no differences in peer ratings were observed as a function of rating
purpose.

Q Grote, D. (1996). The complete guide to performance appraisal. New York: American
Management Association.
This book supplies readers with quick, sure and up-to-date methods for devel-
oping and implementing effective performance management systems. The book
covers how to (1) set objectives that measure important aspects of performance;
(2) prepare managers for the rigor of performance appraisal review sessions,
with scripts and interview techniques; (3) create forms and procedures that sat-
isfy different appraisal and organizational needs; (4) gain support for the system
throughout the organization; (5) set up training programs for both managers
and employees; (6) increase employees’ skills and capabilities through effective
development; (7) explore the relationships between performance and compen-
sation; and (8) understand new and emerging trends such as 360-degree feed-
back, team appraisals and computer-generated appraisals. The book includes
dozens of ready-to-use worksheets, scripts and checklists.
Q Hillgren, J. S., & Cheatham, D. W. (2000). Understanding performance measures: An
approach to linking rewards to the achievement of organizational objectives. Scottsdale,
AZ: WorldatWork.
This paper discusses seven key steps involved in effectively linking rewards to the
achievement of organizational objectives. These include (1) deciding on the pur-
pose of measurement; (2) deciding on types of measures—quantitative versus
qualitative; (3) linking measurement to objectives; (4) linking measurement to
feedback; (5) linking measurement to rewards; (6) a checklist for getting started;
and (7) aiming for organizational achievement. The paper presents straightfor-
ward, best practices guidance for linking rewards to organizational achievement.
Q Hough, L. M., Keyes, M. A., & Dunnette, M. D. (1983). An evaluation of three
“alternative” selection procedures. Personnel Psychology, 36, 261-276.
Three alternative selection inventories were designed to reflect the content
domain of positions held by attorneys employed within a large federal agency.
The usefulness of these inventories for predicting performance at higher job levels
was evaluated. The three inventories included two traditional selection measures
(a background inventory, and an interest and opinion inventory) and one alterna-
tive inventory (an accomplishment record inventory). Both the traditional and
the alternative inventories were found to be statistically and practically useful in
predicting performance. The special features and advantages of the accomplish-
ment record inventory as an alternative selection procedure are discussed.

Q Kahn, S. C., Brown, B. B., & Lanzarone, M. (1996). Legal guide to human resources.
Boston: Warren, Gorham & Lamont.
Written by practicing experts, this guide reports on the continually changing laws
that affect human resources. Broad in scope, this comprehensive volume provides
guidance on current issues, such as sexual harassment, discrimination, employ-
ment-at-will, privacy, employer and union unfair labor practices, collective bar-
gaining, compensation and benefits, retirement and other benefits laws. An
appendix is provided that includes state employment laws and a table of cases.
Q Lee, J., Havigurst, L. C., & Rassel, G. (2004). Factors related to court references
to performance appraisal fairness and validity. Public Personnel Management, 33
(1), 61-78.
In this study, the authors test whether appellate court judges’ concern for per-
formance appraisal validity or fairness depends on their ideology (liberal or con-
servative) and type of charge (gender or age discrimination). They examined 39
cases between 1992 and 2000 and found some impact of both ideology and type
of charge. Appendix A contains a listing of all of the cases, appendix B contains a
glossary of validity terms to classify cases and appendix C contains a glossary of
fairness terms to classify cases. The paper also includes an extensive list of refer-
ences.
Q Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting and task performance.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
This book presents a summary and integration of 25 years of research on a theory
of goal setting and task performance that is both valued and useful. Beginning
with the premise that goals affect action, the authors investigate all avenues of
goal-setting theory and its implications for driving behavior, productivity and
effectiveness in work organizations.
Q Longnecker, C. O., Sims, H. P., Jr., & Gioia, D. A. (1987). Behind the mask: The
politics of employee appraisal. Academy of Management Executive, 1, 183-193.
While management books and manuals claim employee appraisal is an objective,
rational and accurate process, there is extensive evidence to indicate that execu-
tives deliberately distort and manipulate the appraisal process for political pur-
poses. In-depth interviews with 60 upper management executives revealed that
their first concern is not the accuracy of the appraisal, but how to make use of
the review process to reward and motivate their employees. The executives gen-
erally felt that this focus was appropriate. Factors affecting the appraisal process
include the economic health and growth potential of the organization, the exec-
utive’s personal belief system, the degree of communication and trust between
executives and subordinates, and the appraiser’s level in the organizational

hierarchy. Other results include that (1) executives in large corporations are
political actors who try to avoid unnecessary conflict; and (2) executives will try
to make use of the existing bureaucratic procedures for their own benefit.
Q Martin, D. C., Bartol, K.M., & Kehoe, P. E. (2000). The legal ramifications of per-
formance appraisal: The growing significance. Public Personnel Management, 29(3),
379-406.
The article provides information concerning outcomes of performance apprais-
al (e.g., layoffs, promotions, discharges, merit pay) that attract a significant
amount of legal attention. A sample of cases was used to demonstrate prudent,
and not so prudent, use of the results of performance appraisal as they relate to
discrimination issues under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age
Discrimination in Employment Act, the Equal Pay Act and other closely allied
statutes. The authors conclude that evaluations of performance should be based
on the results of performance appraisal processes that incorporate organization-
al justice and fairness.
Q Mohrman, A. M., Jr., Resnick-West, S. M., & Lawler, E. E. III. (1989). Designing
performance appraisal systems: Aligning appraisals and organizational realities. San
This book advocates taking the design of performance appraisal systems out of
the “back room” and treating performance management as a major organizational
change effort in order to correct past problems and insufficiencies. The authors
argue that implementation of effective performance management processes
requires the involvement of all management levels within an organization, from
top to bottom. It also requires a design process that furthers the fundamental
strategic direction of the organization and incorporates the needs of employees. It
is argued that this approach is necessary if appraisal systems are to be relevant,
central to the management of the business and useful to employees. The book
presents a balanced discussion of the technical aspects of appraisal, the contextual
realities affecting appraisal and the process of system design. The book is geared
to internal HR professionals and external consultants who are working to
enhance the strategic value of performance management in organizations.
Q Murphy, K. R., & Cleveland, J. N. (1995). Understanding performance appraisal:
Social, organizational, and goal-based perspectives. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
This book examines the performance appraisal process from a socio-psychologi-
cal perspective, emphasizing the goals pursued by raters, ratees and the various
users of performance appraisal. The authors apply this goal-oriented perspective
to developing, implementing and evaluating performance appraisal systems.
This perspective also emphasizes the context in which appraisal occurs and

shows that the shortcomings of performance appraisal are sensible adaptations
to its various requirements, pressures and demands. Relevant research is sum-
marized, and recommendations are offered for future research and applications.
Q Rodgers, R., & Hunter, J. E. (1991). Impact of management by objectives on orga-
nizational productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 322-336.
Goal-setting, participation in decision-making and objective feedback have
each been shown to increase productivity. As a combination of these three
processes, management by objectives (MBO) also showed increases in pro-
ductivity. A meta-analysis of studies supported this prediction: 68 out of 70
studies showed productivity gains, and only two studies showed losses. The
literature on MBO indicates that various problems have been encountered
with implementing MBO programs. One factor was predicted to be essential
to success: the level of top management’s commitment to MBO. Proper
implementation starts from the top and requires both support and participa-
tion from top management. Results of the meta-analysis showed that when
top management’s commitment was high, the average gain in productivity
was 56 percent. When commitment was low, the average gain in productivity
was only 6 percent.
Q Rodgers, R., Hunter, J. E., & Rogers, D. L. (1993). Influence of top management
commitment on management program success. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78,
51-155.
The literature on many different types of management programs reports that
effective program installations depend on the level of top management’s commit-
ment: the stronger the commitment, the greater the potential for program suc-
cess. A meta-analysis of 18 studies that evaluated the impact of management by
objectives was presented to test this hypothesis. Results showed a significant gain
in job satisfaction when top management had high commitment to program
implementation. Little improvement was found in studies that had moderate or
low commitment from top management.
Q Schippmann, J. S. (1999). Strategic job modeling: Working at the core of integrated
human resource systems. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
This book presents an upgraded approach to job analysis, strategic job model-
ing, that provides a process for understanding the ultimate objectives of an
organization and translating this information into work requirements. Whereas
conventional job analysis procedures frequently provide a past-tense description
of something static, strategic job modeling creates a future-tense description of
something changing. This book will be useful to HR professionals and managers
who want to learn more about how to conduct job and competency modeling

work to maximize the impact of the human capital systems being developed or
implemented in their organizations.
Q Smither, J. W. (Ed.). Performance Appraisal: State of the Art in Practice. San
This edited book is part of the Society for Industrial and Organizational
Psychology’s Practice Series. It contains a series of chapters that bridge the gap
between research on performance appraisal and practice, offering a comprehen-
sive, practitioner-oriented guide to best practices in performance appraisal.
Addressing an issue vital to all organizations, it introduces readers to cutting-
edge thought and theories in the area of performance management. In addi-
tion, it provides nuts-and-bolts guidance to a broad spectrum of issues such as
legality, fairness, team settings and incentive programs.
Q Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. (2003). Principles for the vali-
dation and use of personnel selection procedures: Fourth edition. Bowling Green, OH:
Author.
This document outlines principles adopted by the Society for Industrial and
Organizational Psychology (SIOP) of the American Psychological Association
for the validation and use of personnel selection and assessment procedures,
including performance appraisal. The principles specify SIOP policy on con-
ducting validation research using principles of good practice in the choice,
development and evaluation of personnel selection procedures.
Q Spencer, L., & Spencer, S. (1994). Competence at work. New York: John Wiley.
This book provides analysis of 650 jobs, based on 20 years of research using the
McClelland/McBer job competence assessment (JCA) methodology, a criterion-
referenced approach to competency assessment. The book provides a competen-
cy dictionary, organized around competency clusters that are well-defined and
behaviorally anchored. The reader is provided with a guide that details all of
the steps involved in conducting competency study. The book also includes
generic job models that can be tailored for a given organization or application
for entrepreneurs, technical professionals, salespeople, service workers and cor-
porate managers. Also discussed are various applications that competency study
data may serve.
Q Uniform guidelines on employee selection procedures. (1978). Federal register, 43,
38295-38315.
These guidelines incorporate a single set of principles that are designed to assist
employers, labor organizations, employment agencies, and licensing and certifica-
tion boards to comply with requirements of federal law prohibiting employment

practices that discriminate on grounds of race, color, religion, sex and national
origin. The guidelines are designed to provide a framework for determining the
proper use of tests and other assessment procedures, including performance
appraisal, and to inform employers how the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission would evaluate personnel practices to ensure adherence to federal
law.
Q Waldman, D., & Atwater, L. E. (1998). The power of 360-degree feedback: How to
leverage performance evaluations for top productivity. Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing.
This book, written by two seasoned consultants, describes how to implement
360-degree feedback process effectively in organizations. Filled with case studies
and the authors’ consulting experiences, this book examines the successes and
problems of 360-degree and upward feedback implementation efforts in more
than 15 organizations, including Motorola, AT&T, Federal Express, Raychem,
Colgate-Palmolive and UPS. The book considers such crucial components of
360-degree feedback as organizational culture and performance, pros and cons,
the impact on the individual employee and whether the feedback should be
used for evaluative or developmental purposes. Sample surveys and feedback
reports, including the authors’ own TEAM-Q survey and report set, show what
types of questions to ask and how to present feedback effectively.
Q Weatherly, L. A. (2004, March). Performance management: Getting it right from
the start. SHRM Research Quarterly, 2, 1-10.
This publication recognizes that establishing a performance management sys-
tem in an organization is a significant undertaking. HR practice leaders have
grappled with this issue for decades, and academic and professional journals
contain a plethora of ideas and approaches on this subject too numerous to
count. While no one-size-fits-all solution exists for all organizations and each
must find its own niche in the marketplace, the author argues that there are
certain fundamental criteria in developing performance management systems
that apply equally across organizations. These critical success factors are pre-
sented and discussed.
Q Werner, J. M., & Bolino, M. C. (1997). Explaining U.S. Courts of Appeals deci-
sions involving performance appraisal: Accuracy, fairness, and validation. Personnel
Psychology, 50 (1), 1-24.
This paper examines Circuit Court decisions relevant to performance appraisal
between 1980 and 1995 and shows that these decisions were explained by use
of job analysis, provision of written instructions, employee review of results and
agreement among raters. However, appraisal frequency and type (traits vs.
behaviors or results) were unrelated to judicial decision. Of other factors exam-

ined (e.g., type of discrimination claim, statutory basis, class action status, year
of decision, Circuit Court, type of organization, purpose of appraisal, evaluator
race and sex), only Circuit Court approached having some impact. The authors
concluded that issues relevant to fairness and due process were most salient to
judicial decisions.
Q Wexley, K. N. (1986). Appraisal interview. In R. A. Berk (Ed.), Performance assess-
ment. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. 167-185.
This chapter provides alternative approaches to conducting performance
appraisal interviews, a critical evaluation of the advantages and disadvantages of
each of these approaches, and a discussion of the circumstances under which
different approaches would be appropriate. The chapter also contains several
suggestions for conducting effective feedback interviews with employees, focus-
ing on development rather than the administrative purposes of the performance
feedback session.

performance-management.pdf

More Related Content

Similar to performance-management.pdf (20)

More from ValerieBez1 (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

performance-management.pdf