Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T19:42:24.706Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Why Performance Appraisal Does Not Lead to Performance Improvement: Excellent Performance as a Function of Uniqueness Instead of Uniformity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 July 2016

Marianne van Woerkom  and
Maaike de Bruijn
Marianne van Woerkom*
Affiliation:
Department of Human Resource Studies, Tilburg University, Tilburg, the Netherlands
Maaike de Bruijn
Affiliation:
Department of Human Resource Studies, Tilburg University, Tilburg, the Netherlands
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Marianne van Woerkom, Department of Human Resource Studies, Tilburg University, P.O. Box 90153, 5000 LE Tilburg, the Netherlands. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Dissatisfaction with performance appraisal is at an all-time high (Adler et al., 2016). In this commentary we argue that one of the reasons why performance appraisal is unable to get the most out of employees is the way in which employees are evaluated against a uniform set of criteria, leading to a focus on deficits and little attention for unique individual qualities and strengths. By comparing the performance of an employee with a set of predetermined criteria, and by expecting the employee to perform well across all these criteria, the performance appraisal tends to focus on those areas where employees perform below the norm, irrespective of how excellently they may perform in other areas. For many employees, this leads to the frustrating experience that there is more attention for their weaknesses than for the areas in which they excel. By focusing on employee strengths and on how to make optimal use of those strengths, and by allowing for diversity in the way that employees execute their jobs, the performance review can be replaced by a dialogue about development that may truly stimulate the motivation for performance improvement.

Type
Commentaries
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 9 , Issue 2 , June 2016 , pp. 275 - 281
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adler, S., Campion, M., Colquitt, A., Grubb, A., Murphy, K., Ollander-Krane, R., & Pulakos, E. D. (2016). Getting rid of performance ratings: Genius or folly? A debate. Industrial and Organiational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 9 (2), 219–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aguinis, H., Joo, H., & Gottfredson, R. K. (2011). Why we hate performance management—and why we should love it. Business Horizons, 54 (6), 503–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berg, J. M., Wrzesniewski, A., & Dutton, J. E. (2010). Perceiving and responding to challenges in job crafting at different ranks: When proactivity requires adaptivity. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31 (2-3), 158–186. doi:10.1002/job.645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, J. S., & Ashford, S. J. (1995). Fitting in or making jobs fit: Factors affecting mode of adjustment for new hires. Human Relations, 48 (4), 421–437. doi:10.1177/001872679504800407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bouskila-Yam, O., & Kluger, A. N. (2011). Strength-based performance appraisal and goal setting. Human Resource Management Review, 21 (2), 137–147. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2010.09.001Google Scholar
Briscoe, J. P., & Hall, D. T. (1999). Grooming and picking leaders using competency frameworks: Do they work? An alternative approach and new guidelines for practice. Organizational Dynamics, 28 (2), 37–52. doi:10.1016/S0090-2616(00)80015-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buckingham, M. (2010). Go put your strengths to work: 6 powerful steps to achieve outstanding performance: New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
Buckingham, M., & Clifton, D. O. (2001). Now, discover your strengths. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
Culbertson, S. S., Henning, J. B., & Payne, S. C. (2013). Performance appraisal satisfaction: The role of feedback and goal orientation. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 12, 189–195.Google Scholar
Govindji, R., & Linley, P. A. (2007). Strengths use, self-concordance and well-being: Implications for strengths coaching and coaching psychologists. International Coaching Psychology Review, 2 (2), 143–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, D. T. (2004). The protean career: A quarter-century journey. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65 (1), 1–13. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2003.10.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hiemstra, D., & Van Yperen, N. W. (2015). The effects of strength-based versus deficit-based self-regulated learning strategies on students’ effort intentions. Motivation and Emotion, 39 (5), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaiser, R. B., & Overfield, D. V. (2011). Strengths, strengths overused, and lopsided leadership. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 63 (2), 89–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kluger, A. N., & Van Dijk, D. (2010). Feedback, the various tasks of the doctor, and the feedforward alternative. Medical Education, 44 (12), 1166–1174.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Linley, P. A., & Harrington, S. (2006). Playing to your strengths. The Psychologist, 19 (2), 86–89.Google Scholar
Meyers, M. C., van Woerkom, M., de Reuver, R., Bakk, Z., & Oberski, D. L. (2015). Enhancing psychological capital and personal growth initiative: Working on strengths or deficiencies? Journal of Counseling Psychology, 62 (1), 50–62. doi:10.1037/cou0000050Google Scholar
Miner, A. S. (1987). Idiosyncratic jobs in formalized organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 32, 327–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miner, A. S. (1991). Organizational evolution and the social ecology of jobs. American Sociological Review, 56, 772–785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rath, T. (2007). Strengthsfinder 2.0. Washington, DC: Gallup Press.Google Scholar
Roberts, L. M., Dutton, J. E., Spreitzer, G. M., Heaphy, E. D., & Quinn, R. E. (2005). Composing the reflected best-self portrait: Building pathways for becoming extraordinary in work organizations. The Academy of Management Review, 30 (4), 712–736. doi:10.5465/AMR.2005.18378874Google Scholar
Rousseau, D. M., Ho, V. T., & Greenberg, J. (2006). I-deals: Idiosyncratic terms in employment relationships. Academy of Management Review, 31 (4), 977–994. doi:10.5465/AMR.2006.22527470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, S. E. (1991). Asymmetrical effects of positive and negative events: The mobilization–minimization hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 110 (1), 67–85. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.110.1.67Google Scholar
Van Woerkom, M., Bakker, A. B., & Nishii, L. N. (2015). Accumulative job demands and support for strength use: Fine-tuning the job demands-resources model using conservation of resources theory. Journal of Applied Psychology. Advance online publication. doi:10.1037/apl0000033Google Scholar
Van Woerkom, M., & Meyers, M. C. (2015). My strengths count! Effects of a strengths-based psychological climate on positive affect and job performance. Human Resource Management, 54 (1), 81–103. doi:10.1002/hrm.21623Google Scholar
Van Woerkom, M., Oerlemans, W. G. A., & Bakker, A. B. (2015). Strengths use and work engagement: A weekly diary study. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 25 (3), 384–397. doi:10.1080/1359432X.2015.1089862CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, A. M., Linley, P. A., Maltby, J., Kashdan, T. B., & Hurling, R. (2011). Using personal and psychological strengths leads to increases in well-being over time: A longitudinal study and the development of the strengths use questionnaire. Personality and Individual Differences, 50 (1), 15–19. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.08.004Google Scholar