| Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools. |
DOI: 10.1177/002194369503200304 A Review, an Integration, and a Critique of Cross-Disciplinary Research on Performance Appraisals, Evaluations, and Feedback: 1980-1990University of Houston - Downtown, Texas One-hundred-thirteen empirical studies on performance appraisals, published between 1980 and 1990 in business, communication, and psychology journals, were reviewed and integrated. Results of this synthesis include the following: Organizations use collaborative and traditional instruments to evaluate employ ees, training of raters is essential, multiple raters are more effective than single raters, interrater agreement is strong between peer and supervisory ratings, and performance feedback is positively correlated with ratee job satisfaction. By imposing Bolman and Deal's four-part organizational framework on perfor mance-appraisal literature, it is possible to make recommendations for future research that are human-resource and political-symbolic oriented. Recommen dations call for more studies that investigate counterrational dimensions in performance appraisal, interaction effects between rater and ratee characteris tics, preferences of raters and ratees toward components in performance appraisal, and communication transactions within the framework of the perfor mance appraisal.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
|
 |
|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
