Editing Performance appraisal (section)

===Resistance from managers===

Managers who have had unsatisfactory experiences with inadequate or poorly designed appraisal programs may be skeptical about their usefulness. Academic literature has also been unable to appropriately define exclusive measure of PA effectiveness.<ref name="Barbieri et al 2023 Performance of Performance Appraisal Systems">{{cite journal |last1=Barbieri |first1=Marta |last2=Micacchi |first2=Lorenza |last3=Vidè |first3=Francesco |last4=Valotti |first4=Giovanni |title=The Performance of Performance Appraisal Systems: A Theoretical Framework for Public Organizations |journal=Review of Public Personnel Administration |date=March 2023 |volume=43 |issue=1 |pages=104–129 |doi=10.1177/0734371X211043560 }}</ref> The skepticism is also reflected in the decline in the use of traditional PA processes in the U.S. corporate sector.<ref name="Cappelli Tavis 2016 The performance management revolution"/> It is estimate of a third of the U.S. private companies have now switched to a more informal and frequent engagement between managers and employees to enhance performance.<ref name="Cappelli Tavis 2016 The performance management revolution"/> The shift is attributed to a greater focus on talent development, business agility, and a preference for teamwork over individual responsibility.<ref name="Cappelli Tavis 2016 The performance management revolution"/>

The government and public sector organizations continue to use PA worldwide.<ref name="Belle et al 2017 Cognitive Biases in Performance"/> In the 2005 Merit Performance Survey (MPS) conducted by the United States (U.S.) [[United States Merit Systems Protection Board|Merit Systems Protection Board]] (MSPB), 16.41% of federal supervisors reported that they had rated their employees' PAs either higher or lower than the employees should have received.<ref name="Lin Kellough 2019 Performance Appraisal Problems">{{cite journal |last1=Lin |first1=Yu-Chun |last2=Kellough |first2=J. Edward |title=Performance Appraisal Problems in the Public Sector: Examining Supervisors' Perceptions |journal=Public Personnel Management |date=June 2019 |volume=48 |issue=2 |pages=179–202 |doi=10.1177/0091026018801045 }}</ref> Among nine potential problems identified in the 2005 MPS on structure and operation of the U.S. federal government appraisal system; inflated ratings, flawed standards, and lack of support were ranked as the top three problems, respectively.<ref name="Lin Kellough 2019 Performance Appraisal Problems"/>

==== Inflated Ratings ====
Occurs when employees receive higher-than-expected performance ratings due to systematic bias by raters when conducting PA.<ref name="Lin Kellough 2019 Performance Appraisal Problems"/> This consequently affect the effectiveness of PA evaluations due to the impact of [[halo effect]] and [[anchoring effect]] on PA rating.<ref name="Belle et al 2017 Cognitive Biases in Performance"/> Research shows that managers tend to give better ratings to subordinates they favor, influenced by both direct bias and indirect bias.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Davis |first1=Paul J. |title=Seven biggest problems with performance appraisals: and seven development approaches to rectify them |journal=Development and Learning in Organizations|date=30 December 2011 |volume=26 |issue=1 |pages=11–14 |doi=10.1108/14777281211189119 }}</ref> Inflated ratings are more common when PAs are conducted for judgmental and administrative purposes, such as promotions, pay increases, or job retention, rather than for developmental reasons.<ref name="Lin Kellough 2019 Performance Appraisal Problems"/>

Research studies have identified various factors contributing to inflated ratings. First, raters may be lenient to avoid administrative burdens, such as compiling documentation to justify low ratings.<ref name="Lin Kellough 2019 Performance Appraisal Problems"/> This could be because managers view PAs as time-consuming and routine tasks.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Schleicher |first1=Deidra J. |last2=Baumann |first2=Heidi M. |last3=Sullivan |first3=David W. |last4=Yim |first4=Junhyok |title=Evaluating the effectiveness of performance management: A 30-year integrative conceptual review |journal=Journal of Applied Psychology |date=July 2019 |volume=104 |issue=7 |pages=851–887 |doi=10.1037/apl0000368 |pmid=30676036 }}</ref> Second, raters may hesitate to give harsh ratings to avoid damaging work relationships and creating an unproductive environment.<ref name="Lin Kellough 2019 Performance Appraisal Problems"/>

Recent HRM studies also suggest raters’ experiences cognitive bias influenced by contextual factors, such as institutional, political, and cultural influences,<ref name="Wang et al 2019 Contextualizing performance">{{cite journal |last1=Wang |first1=Meng |last2=Zhu |first2=Cherrie Jiuhua |last3=Mayson |first3=Susan |last4=Chen |first4=Weizhen |title=Contextualizing performance appraisal practices in Chinese public sector organizations: the importance of context and areas for future study |journal=The International Journal of Human Resource Management |date=9 March 2019 |volume=30 |issue=5 |pages=902–919 |doi=10.1080/09585192.2017.1292537 }}</ref> as well as environmental factors.<ref name="Sanner et al 2022 Do Desperate Times">{{cite journal |last1=Sanner |first1=Bret |last2=Evans |first2=Karoline |last3=Fernandez |first3=Delia |title=Do Desperate Times Call for Desperate Measures? The Effect of Crises on Performance Appraisals |journal=Human Performance |date=8 August 2022 |volume=35 |issue=3–4 |pages=218–240 |doi=10.1080/08959285.2022.2108034 }}</ref> For instance, an environmental, such as, a national crisis can impair raters to rely on heuristic thinking rather than making an objective and cognitive evaluation of subordinates PA, as described by [[Dual process theory|dual-process theory]].<ref name="Sanner et al 2022 Do Desperate Times"/>

Third, the perceived importance of accurate PA ratings may be positively influenced by motivational factors, such as felt accountability, incentive structures, and public service motivation.<ref name="Park 2014 Motivation of Public Managers">{{cite journal |last1=Park |first1=Seejeen |title=Motivation of Public Managers as Raters in Performance Appraisal: Developing a Model of Rater Motivation |journal=Public Personnel Management |date=December 2014 |volume=43 |issue=4 |pages=387–414 |doi=10.1177/0091026014530675 }}</ref> Finally, close relationships between raters and subordinates can also lead to inflated ratings. For example, a line manager who regularly engages with subordinates may develop strong interpersonal relationships, which can impair objective evaluation.

'''Flawed performance standards or measures''' are attributed to the use of subjective criteria or ambiguous measures by raters during PAs. One cause of this issue is the difficulty in defining objective performance standards due to the complexity of job tasks or outcomes.<ref name="Lin Kellough 2019 Performance Appraisal Problems"/> This challenge may be influenced by how organizations structure their employees' duties. Factors such as job autonomy, teamwork, and job rotation affect the setting of performance standards, and in some cases, subjective criteria may be necessary due to the nature of the job.<ref name="Bayo-Moriones et al 2020 Performance appraisal">{{cite journal |last1=Bayo-Moriones |first1=Alberto |last2=Galdon-Sanchez |first2=Jose E. |last3=Martinez-de-Morentin |first3=Sara |title=Performance appraisal: dimensions and determinants |journal=The International Journal of Human Resource Management |date=21 August 2020 |volume=31 |issue=15 |pages=1984–2015 |doi=10.1080/09585192.2018.1500387 |url=http://www2.unavarra.es/gesadj/depEconomia/repec/DocumentosTrab/DT1207.PDF }}</ref> For example, empirical findings suggest that subordinates with a high degree of job autonomy may have a positive relationship with the inclusion of subjective measures in their PA, due to the variation of day-to-day job tasks need to meet performance targets and provided there is frequent level monitoring by their line managers.<ref name="Bayo-Moriones et al 2020 Performance appraisal"/>

Clear performance standards are shaped by well-defined organizational goals.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Rubin |first1=Ellen V. |last2=Edwards |first2=Amani |title=The performance of performance appraisal systems: understanding the linkage between appraisal structure and appraisal discrimination complaints |journal=The International Journal of Human Resource Management |date=21 August 2020 |volume=31 |issue=15 |pages=1938–1957 |doi=10.1080/09585192.2018.1424015 }}</ref> The absence of clear goals and targets can disrupt goal alignment, which affects the effectiveness of PAs in monitoring and managing how employees' work contributes to organizational priorities.<ref name="Ayers 2015 Aligning Individual">{{cite journal |last1=Ayers |first1=Rebecca S. |title=Aligning Individual and Organizational Performance: Goal Alignment in Federal Government Agency Performance Appraisal Programs |journal=Public Personnel Management |date=June 2015 |volume=44 |issue=2 |pages=169–191 |doi=10.1177/0091026015575178 }}</ref> Organizational goals provide employees with a clear line of sight, helping them understand how their duties contribute to organizational performance.<ref name="Ayers 2015 Aligning Individual"/> A study suggests that PAs help moderate the relationship between employee alignment and organizational performance.<ref name="Ayers 2015 Aligning Individual"/> Government departments and public service organizations often face challenges in developing clear organizational goals, which makes it further challenging for managers evaluate the performance of subordinates based on individual performance goals that are not clearly aligned to organizational goals.<ref name="Barbieri et al 2023 Performance of Performance Appraisal Systems"/>

'''Lack of support from higher management''' can undermine raters' confidence and their ability to conduct employee PA effectively, which can compromise the independence and integrity of PA decision-making.<ref name="Lin Kellough 2019 Performance Appraisal Problems"/> Employees often rely on higher management to validate the organization's decisions.<ref name="Lin Kellough 2019 Performance Appraisal Problems"/> When higher management emphasizes the importance of PAs by providing endorsements, resources, training, and time for participation, it can motivate raters to be more accountable and thorough in conducting accurate appraisals.<ref name="Park 2014 Motivation of Public Managers"/> However, political and institutional factors, such as, political ideologies, norms, and organizational culture can influence the effective implementation of PA outcomes.<ref name="Wang et al 2019 Contextualizing performance"/>