Motivating raters through work design: Applying the job characteristics model to the performance appraisal context

References

• Antonioni, D. (1994). The effects of feedback accountability on upward appraisal ratings. Personnel Psychology, 47, 349–356. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1994.tb01728.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Antonioni, D., & Park, H. (2001). The relationship between rater affect and three sources of 360-degree feedback ratings. Journal of Management, 27, 479–495. doi:10.1177/014920630102700405
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arvey, R. D., & Murphy, K. R. (1998). Performance evaluation in work settings. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 141–168. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.49.1.141
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernardin, H. J., & Buckley, M. R. (1981). Strategies in rater training. Academy of Management Review, 6, 205–212. doi:10.5465/AMR.1981.4287782
   Google Scholar
• Blume, B. D., Baldwin, T. T., & Rubin, R. S. (2009). Reactions to different types of forced distribution performance evaluation systems. Journal of Business and Psychology, 24, 77–91. doi:10.1007/s10869-009-9093-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bommer, W. H., Johnson, J. L., Rich, G. A., Podsakoff, P. M., & Mackenzie, S. B. (1995). On the interchangeability of objective and subjective measures of employee performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 48, 587–605. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1995.tb01772.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breaux, D. M., Munyon, T. P., Hochwarter, W. A., & Ferris, G. R. (2009). Politics as a moderator of the accountability–job satisfaction relationship: Evidence across three studies. Journal of Management, 35, 307–326. doi:10.1177/0149206308318621
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bretz, R. D., Milkovich, G. T., & Read, W. (1992). The current state of performance appraisal research and practice: Concerns, directions, and implications. Journal of Management, 18, 321–352.10.1177/014920639201800206
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, M., & Benson, J. (2005). Managing to overload?: Work overload and performance appraisal processes. Group & Organization Management, 30, 99–124. doi:10.1177/1059601104269117
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buller, P. F., & McEvoy, G. M. (2012). Strategy, human resource management and performance: Sharpening line of sight. Human Resource Management Review, 22, 43–56. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2011.11.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campbell, D. J., Campbell, K. M., & Chia, H. (1998). Merit pay, performance appraisal, and individual motivation: An analysis and alternative. Human Resource Management, 37, 131–146. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-050X(199822)37:2<131::AID-HRM4>3.0.CO;2-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cleveland, J. N., Murphy, K. R., & Williams, R. E. (1989). Multiple uses of performance appraisal: Prevalence and correlates. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 130–135. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.74.1.130
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coens, T., & Jenkins, M. (2000). Abolishing performance appraisals: Why they backfire and what to do instead. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Conway, J. M., & Huffcutt, A. I. (1997). Psychometric properties of multisource performance ratings: A meta-Analysis of subordinate, supervisor, peer, and self-ratings. Human Performance, 10, 331–360. doi:10.1207/s15327043hup1004_2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Decotiis, T., & Petit, A. (1978). The performance appraisal process: A model and some testable propositions. Academy of Management Review, 3, 635–646. doi:10.5465/AMR.1978.4305904
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• DeNisi, A. S. (1996). A cognitive approach to performance appraissal: A program of research. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• DeNisi, A. S., & Kluger, A. N. (2000). Feedback effectiveness: Can 360-degree appraisals be improved? Academy of Management Perspectives, 14, 129–139. doi:10.5465/AME.2000.2909845
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeNisi, A. S., & Peters, L. H. (1996). Organization of information in memory and the performance appraisal process: Evidence from the field. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 717–737. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.81.6.717
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeNisi, A. S., & Pritchard, R. D. (2006). Performance appraisal, performance management and improving individual performance: A motivational framework. Management and Organization Review, 2, 253–277. doi:10.1111/j.1740-8784.2006.00042.x
   Google Scholar
• DeNisi, A., & Smith, C. E. (2014). Performance appraisal, performance management, and firm-level performance: A review, a proposed model, and new directions for future research. The Academy of Management Annals, 8, 127–179. doi:10.1080/19416520.2014.873178
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dorfman, P. W., Stephan, W. G., & Loveland, J. (1986). Performance appraisal behaviors: Supervisor perceptions and subordinate reactions. Personnel Psychology, 39, 579–597. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1986.tb00954.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Facteau, J. D., & Craig, S. B. (2001). Are performance appraisal ratings from different rating sources comparable? Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 215–227. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.2.215
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferris, G. R., Judge, T. A., Rowland, K. M., & Fitzgibbons, D. E. (1994). Subordinate influence and the performance evaluation process: Test of a model. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 58, 101–135. doi:10.1006/obhd.1994.1030
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferris, G. R., Munyon, T. P., Basik, K., & Buckley, M. R. (2008). The performance evaluation context: Social, emotional, cognitive, political, and relationship components. Human Resource Management Review, 18, 146–163. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2008.07.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fletcher, C. (2001). Performance appraisal and management: The developing research agenda. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74, 473–487. doi:10.1348/096317901167488
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fried, Y., & Ferris, G. R. (1987). The validity of the job characteristics model: A review and meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 40, 287–322. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1987.tb00605.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frink, D. D., & Klimoski, R. J. (1998). Toward a theory of accountability in organizations and human resource management. In G. R. Ferris (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 16, pp. 1–51). Stamford, CT: JAI Press.
   Google Scholar
• Frink, D. D., & Klimoski, R. J. (2004). Advancing accountability theory and practice: Introduction to the human resource management review special edition. Human Resource Management Review, 14, 1–17. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2004.02.001
   Google Scholar
• George, J. M. (2009). The illusion of will in organizational behavior research: Nonconscious processes and job design. Journal of Management, 35, 1318–1339. doi:10.1177/0149206309346337
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graen, G. B., Scandura, T. A., & Graen, M. R. (1986). A field experimental test of the moderating effects of growth need strength on productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 484–491. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.71.3.484
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gruman, J. A., & Saks, A. M. (2011). Performance management and employee engagement. Human Resource Management Review, 21, 123–136. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2010.09.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guralnik, O., Rozmarin, E., & So, A. (2004). Forced distribution: Is it right for you? Human Resource Development Quarterly, 15, 339–345. doi:10.1002/hrdq.1107
   Google Scholar
• Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16, 250–279. doi:10.1016/0030-5073(76)90016-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1980). Work redesign. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Harris, M. (1994). Rater motivation in the performance appraisal context: A theoretical framework. Journal of Management, 20, 737–756. doi:10.1016/0149-2063(94)90028-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harris, M. M., & Schaubroeck, J. (1988). A meta-analysis of self-supervisor, self-peer, and peer-supervisor ratings. Personnel Psychology, 41, 43–62. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1988.tb00631.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hochwarter, W. A., Ferris, G. R., Gavin, M. B., Perrewé, P. L., Hall, A. T., & Frink, D. D. (2007). Political skill as neutralizer of felt accountability—job tension effects on job performance ratings: A longitudinal investigation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 102, 226–239. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.09.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Humphrey, S. E., Nahrgang, J. D., & Morgeson, F. P. (2007). Integrating motivational, social, and contextual work design features: A meta-analytic summary and theoretical extension of the work design literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1332–1356. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.5.1332
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ilgen, D. R., Mitchell, T. R., & Fredrickson, J. W. (1981). Poor performers: Supervisors’ and subordinates’ responses. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 27, 386–410. doi:10.1016/0030-5073(81)90030-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johns, G., Xie, J. L., & Fang, Y. (1992). Mediating and moderating effects in job design. Journal of Management, 18, 657–676.10.1177/014920639201800404
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Korsgaard, M. A., & Roberson, L. (1995). Procedural justice in performance evaluation: The role of instrumental and non-instrumental voice in performance appraisal discussions. Journal of Management, 21, 657–669. doi:10.1177/014920639502100404
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lahuis, D. M., & Avis, J. M. (2007). Using multilevel random coefficient modeling to investigate rater effects in performance ratings. Organizational Research Methods, 10, 97–107. doi:10.1177/1094428106289394
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Landy, F. J., & Farr, J. L. (1980). Performance rating. Psychological Bulletin, 87, 72–107.10.1037/0033-2909.87.1.72
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Latham, G. P., & Wexley, K. N. (1982). Increasing productivity through performance appraisal. Reading, MA: Addision-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Levy, P. E., & Williams, J. R. (2004). The social context of performance appraisal: A review and framework for the future. Journal of Management, 30, 881–905. doi:10.1016/j.jm.2004.06.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• London, M., Mone, E. M., & Scott, J. C. (2004). Performance management and assessment: Methods for improved rater accuracy and employee goal setting. Human Resource Management, 43, 319–336. doi:10.1002/hrm.20027
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Longenecker, C. O., Sims, Jr., H. P., & Gioia, D. A. (1987). Behind the mask: The politics of employee appraisal. The Academy of Management Executive (1987–1989), 1, 183–193.
   Google Scholar
• McConkie, M. L. (1979). A clarification of the goal setting and appraisal processes in MBO. Academy of Management Review, 4, 29–40. doi:10.5465/AMR.1979.4289175
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Meisler, A. (2003). Dead man’s curve. Workforce, 82, 44–49.
   Google Scholar
• Mero, N. P., Guidice, R. M., & Brownlee, A. L. (2007). Accountability in a performance appraisal context: The effect of audience and form of accounting on rater response and behavior. Journal of Management, 33, 223–252. doi:10.1177/0149206306297633
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mero, N. P., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1995). Effects of rater accountability on the accuracy and the favorability of performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 517–524. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.80.4.517
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mero, N. P., Motowidlo, S. J., & Anna, A. L. (2003). Effects of accountability on rating behavior and rater accuracy. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33, 2493–2514. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2003.tb02777.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyer, H. H. (1975). The pay-for-performance dilemma. Organizational Dynamics, 3, 39–50. doi:10.1016/0090-2616(75)90029-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mintzberg, H. (1975). The manager’s job: Folklore and fact. Harvard Business Review, 53, 49–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitchell, T. R., Green, S. G., & Wood, R. E. (1981). An attributional model of leadership and the poor performing subordinate: Development and validation. Research in Organizational Behavior, 3, 197–234
   Google Scholar
• Mount, M. K. (1984). Psychometric properties of subordinate ratings of managerial performance. Personnel Psychology, 37, 687–702. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1984.tb00533.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murphy, K. R., & Balzer, W. K. (1986). Systematic distortions in memory-based behavior ratings and performance evaluations: Consequences for rating accuracy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 39–44. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.71.1.39
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murphy, K. R., & Cleveland, J. N. (1991). Performance appraisal: An organizational perspective. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• Murphy, K. R., & Cleveland, J. N. (1995). Understanding performance appraisal: Social, organizational, and goal-based perspectives. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Murphy, K. R., Cleveland, J. N., Skattebo, A. L., & Kinney, T. B. (2004). Raters who pursue different goals give different ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 158–164. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.89.1.158
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’brien, G. E. (1982). Evaluation of the job characteristics theory of work attitudes and performance. Australian Journal of Psychology, 34, 383–401. doi:10.1080/00049538208254733
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oldham, G. R., & Hackman, J. R. (2010). Not what it was and not what it will be: The future of job design research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31, 463–479. doi:10.1002/job.678
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park, S. (2014). Motivation of public managers as raters in performance appraisal. Public Personnel Management, 43, 387–414. doi:10.1177/0091026014530675
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parker, S. K., Wall, T. D., & Cordery, J. L. (2001). Future work design research and practice: Towards an elaborated model of work design. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74, 413–440. doi:10.1348/096317901167460
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pfeffer, J., & Sutton, R. I. (2000). The knowing-doing gap: How smart companies turn knowledge into action. Watertown, MA: Harvard Business Press.
   Google Scholar
• Renn, R. W., & Vandenberg, R. J. (1995). the critical psychological states: An underrepresented component in job characteristics model research. Journal of Management, 21, 279–303. doi:10.1177/014920639502100206
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts, G. E. (1998). Perspectives on enduring and emerging issues in performance appraisal. Public Personnel Management, 27, 301–320. doi:10.1177/009102609802700302
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts, G. E. (2003). Employee performance appraisal system participation: A technique that works. Public Personnel Management, 32, 89–98. doi:10.1177/009102600303200105
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roch, S. G. (2005). An investigation of motivational factors influencing performance ratings. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 20, 695–711. doi:10.1108/02683940510631453
   Google Scholar
• Roch, S. G., Woehr, D. J., Mishra, V., & Kieszczynska, U. (2012). Rater training revisited: An updated meta-analytic review of frame-of-reference training. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 85, 370–395. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8325.2011.02045.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosso, B. D., Dekas, K. H., & Wrzesniewski, A. (2010). On the meaning of work: A theoretical integration and review. Research in Organizational Behavior, 30, 91–127. doi:10.1016/j.riob.2010.09.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schleicher, D. J., Bull, R. A., & Green, S. G. (2009). Rater reactions to forced distribution rating systems. Journal of Management, 35, 899–927. doi:10.1177/0149206307312514
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scullen, S. E., Bergey, P. K., & Aiman-Smith, L. (2005). Forced distribution rating systems and the improvement of workforce potential: A baseline simulation. Personnel Psychology, 58, 1–32. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00361.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spence, J. R., & Keeping, L. (2011). Conscious rating distortion in performance appraisal: A review, commentary, and proposed framework for research. Human Resource Management Review, 21, 85–95. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2010.09.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Storey, J., & Sisson, K. (1993). Managing human resources and industrial relations. Buckingham: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tetlock, P. E. (1985). Accountability: The neglected social context of judgment and choice. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tetlock, P. E. (1992). The impact of accountability on judgment and choice: Toward a social contingency model. New York, NY: Academic Press. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60287-7
   Google Scholar
• Thurston, Jr., P. W., & McNall, L. (2010). Justice perceptions of performance appraisal practices. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 25, 201–228. doi:10.1108/02683941011023712
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tiegs, R. B., Tetrick, L. E., & Yitzhak, F. (1992). Growth need strength and context satisfactions as moderators of the relations of the job characteristics model. Journal of Management, 18, 575–593. doi:10.1177/014920639201800308
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tziner, A., Murphy, K. R., Cleveland, J. N., Beaudin, G., & Marchand, S. (1998). Impact of rater beliefs regarding performance appraisal and its organizational context on appraisal quality. Journal of Business and Psychology, 12, 457–467. doi:10.1023/A:1025003106150
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van der Heijden, B. I. J. M., & Nijhof, A. H. J. (2004). The value of subjectivity: Problems and prospects for 360-degree appraisal systems. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 15, 493–511. doi:10.1080/0958519042000181223
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Villanova, P., Bernardin, H. J., Dahmus, S. A., & Sims, R. L. (1993). Rater leniency and performance appraisal discomfort. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 789–799. doi:10.1177/0013164493053003023
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Wang, X. M., Wong, K. F., & Kwong, J. Y. (2010). The roles of rater goals and ratee performance levels in the distortion of performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 546–561. doi:10.1037/a0018866
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wayne, S. J., & Kacmar, K. M. (1991). The effects of impression management on the performance appraisal process. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 48, 70–88. doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90006-F.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Welch, J. F. (2001). Jack: Straight from the gut. New York, NY: Warner Books.
   Google Scholar
• Williams, J. R., & Levy, P. E. (2000). Investigating some neglected criteria: The influence of organizational level and perceived system knowledge on appraisal reactions. Journal of Business and Psychology, 14, 501–513. doi:10.1023/A:1022988402319
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woehr, D. J., & Huffcutt, A. I. (1994). Rater training for performance appraisal: A quantitative review. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 67, 189–205. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8325.1994.tb00562.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar