This Article Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (28) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Levy, P. E. Articles by Williams, J. R. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The Social Context of Performance Appraisal: A Review and Framework for the Future

Department of Psychology, The University of Akron, 290 East Buchtel Avenue, Akron, OH44325-4301, USApelevy{at}uakron.edu

Jane R. Williams

Psychology Department, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, 402 N. Blackford St., Indianapolis, IN 46142, USAjrwillim{at}iupui.edu

Performance appraisal research over the last 10 years has begun to examine the effects of the social context on the appraisal process. Drawing from previous theoretical work, we developed a model of this process and conducted a systematic review of the relevant research. This review of over 300 articles suggests that as a field we have become much more cognizant of the importance of the social context within which the performance appraisal process operates. First, research has broadened the traditional conceptualization of performance appraisal effectiveness to include and emphasize ratee reactions. Second, the influence that the feedback environment or feedback culture has on performance appraisal outcomes is an especially recent focus that seems to have both theoretical and applied implications. Finally, there appears to be a reasonably large set of distal variables such as technology, HR strategies, and economic conditions that are potentially important for understanding the appraisal process, but which have received very little research attention. We believe that the focus of recent performance appraisal research has widespread implications ranging from theory development and enhancement to practical application.

Journal of Management, Vol. 30, No. 6, 881-905 (2004)
DOI: 10.1016/j.jm.2004.06.005


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. J. Schleicher, R. A. Bull, and S. G. Green Rater Reactions to Forced Distribution Rating Systems Journal of Management, August 1, 2009; 35(4): 899 - 927. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. E. Gordon and L. P. Stewart Conversing About Performance: Discursive Resources for the Appraisal Interview Management Communication Quarterly, February 1, 2009; 22(3): 473 - 501. [Abstract] [PDF]

				B. G. Whitaker, J. J. Dahling, and P. Levy The Development of a Feedback Environment and Role Clarity Model of Job Performance Journal of Management, August 1, 2007; 33(4): 570 - 591. [Abstract] [PDF]

				N. P. Mero, R. M. Guidice, and A. L. Brownlee Accountability in a Performance Appraisal Context: The Effect of Audience and Form of Accounting on Rater Response and Behavior Journal of Management, April 1, 2007; 33(2): 223 - 252. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. D. Elicker, P. E. Levy, and R. J. Hall The Role of Leader-Member Exchange in the Performance Appraisal Process Journal of Management, August 1, 2006; 32(4): 531 - 551. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Taggar and T. C. Brown Interpersonal Affect and Peer Rating Bias in Teams Small Group Research, February 1, 2006; 37(1): 86 - 111. [Abstract] [PDF]