Erratum

European Accounting Review, Vol. 13, No. 4, 659–687, 2004

Performance Management and Management Control: Evaluted Managers' Point of View

ANNICK BOURGUIGNON

It has been brought to the publisher's attention that Table 1 (p. 665) in this paper was incorrect. Please find the table reproduced here in its correct form. The publisher wishes to apologise for any inconvenience this may have caused.

Table 1. Two variants of the evaluation process

Instrumentation	MCS	HRMS
General meaning of performace		Action (results+means)
Dimensions of performance	Aligned with the entity's objectives	According to the person's organisational objectives
Attributes	Results of organizational action	Results of personal action, personal  behaviour, qualities or abilities
Form of the PEC used	Quantitative	Qualitative
Referents
Space	Internal or external (benchmarking)	Internal or external (ranking)
Time	Past or future (budgets, plans)	General missions of the job  or objectives
Control
Measurement	Offers a basis for judgement	Formalizes the judgement
Value judgement	Second	First
Associated practices	Budgetary control, balanced scorecard, tableau de bord, performance meetings	Annual appraisal form and interview
Consequences
For management	Corrective actions	HRM decisions
For the person (rewards)
Extrinsic	Direct and indirect	Direct
Intrinsic	Direct	Direct