Search

Purpose Being grounded in interdependence theory, this study aims to address the following research question: Do managers’ negotiation styles (collaborative versus competitive) make employees’ relational justice-emotional experiences links sporadic? Design/methodology/approach Data elicited from N = 139 Pakistani undergraduate students participating in an online scenario-based experiment were used to employ repeated measures analysis and partial least square structural equation modeling techniques. Findings Results suggest that employees’ relational justice is likely to be higher when managers use a collaborative negotiation style than when they use competitive style in performance review meetings. Moreover, per managers’ different negotiation styles, employees’ relational justice perceptions may predict their positive emotions differently. That is, when managers use collaborative negotiation style, employees’ relational justice perceptions may positively predict their hope but not optimism, whereas when managers use competitive negotiation style, employees’ relational justice perceptions may positively predict their optimism but not hope. Furthermore, the positive relationship between employees’ relational justice and their optimism is stronger when their trust in manager is low than when it is high. Originality/value The study is of value for performance management theorists who aim to address the issue of ineffectiveness of the practice through relational means. The study includes the recently explicated concept of relational justice and examines its links with employee emotional reactions to performance reviews. Moreover, the study unveils how managers’ negotiation styles in performance review meetings cause variations in the links between employees’ perceptions of relational justice and their emotional experiences.

The paper aims to investigate the role of the rater, a key player in the performance appraisal system (PAS), in determining the ratee’s self-efficacy. In this regard, the current study highlights the role of rater’s knowledge and experience in conducting just appraisals by making the performance appraisal processes and distribution of resources fairer. The study investigated different components of the PAS under the lens of systems theory and the upper echelon theory. The study used survey methods to collect data with the help of self-administered questionnaires from raters and ratees (252 in total) working in different organizations operating in various sectors of the economy. The collected data were analyzed using SmartPLS-4. The results revealed that the rater’s knowledge about the PAS do not predict the ratee’s self-efficacy. Nevertheless, the rater’s knowledge significantly predicted the ratee’s self-efficacy through procedural and distributive justice. Also, the rater’s experience in conducting the performance appraisal conditionally predicted the indirect relationship between the rater’s knowledge and self-efficacy through procedural and distributive justice. The study provides invaluable insights for the users of performance appraisals and policymakers by highlighting the importance of the rater’s knowledge alongside the rater’s experience in shaping positive ratee reactions.

PurposeRecent performance appraisal (PA) literature suggests that alongside cognitive biases, rating distortions may stem from rater disposition and PA context. The study investigated the role of social value orientation (rater disposition), PA purposes and rater accountability (PA context) toward rating distortions at both performance levels, i.e. good and poor.Design/methodology/approachThe authors designed an experimental study and elicited data from N = 110 undergraduate students about two video-taped performances of good and poor performers. In these videos, two managers conducted assessment interviews of two different employees for the job of a sales representative at an information technology organization. To ensure the validity of performance ratings, the authors invited 10 senior managers to provide benchmark ratings of the video-taped performances. While being placed in two separate groups, the study participants gave performance ratings on both the video-taped performances. The authors used repeated-measures analysis to analyze data.FindingsThe results revealed that rating distortions took place not because of rater social value orientation, but the PA context. Different rating distortion patterns emerged for different levels of ratees' performance.Originality/valueThis study’s findings furnish new insights for assessing rating distortions for poor as well as good performers. Moreover, the results support previous findings that for good performers, accountable raters are tempted toward accurate ratings and refrained from deflation. Similarly, for poor performers, accountable raters do not inflate ratings. The findings will open research avenues to examine the role of PA purposes in rating distortions for different performance levels.

Building on recent research in organizational justice, this study examined the impact of four factors of justice on perceived overall fairness of performance appraisal (PA) systems. The study used a survey questionnaire to collect data from 259 public servants in Pakistan. Based on fundamental ethical principles that employees desire public managers to be unbiased, we developed the hypotheses that were, subsequently, tested using variance-based structural equation modeling in SmartPLS 3.0. The results of the study revealed evidence that, in the context of PA systems, high interpersonal justice is indeed associated with decreased perceptions of overall fairness. The findings of the study provide guidance to public managers that distributive justice, procedural justice, and informational justice perceptions are more conducive for overall fairness perceptions in the PA system than interpersonal justice. Although the negative effect of interpersonal justice seems plausible, surprisingly, empirical research hitherto has not directly investigated this possibility.

PurposeRatees' reactions to performance appraisal (PA) system suggest how effective the system is. However, there is less clarity about those different reactions that good versus poor performing ratees show vis-à-vis their performance appraisals. This paper seeks to examine the possible PA responses (PA fairness and PA satisfaction) of the ratees for the cases where they receive equitable versus equal performance-based rewards and punishments.Design/methodology/approachTwo studies were designed. Study 1 was a scenario-based experiment in Pakistan (N = 100 students) and Study 2 was based on surveys in Japan (N = 123 employed students) and Pakistan (N = 111 full-time working professionals). Data were analyzed using one-way repeated measures (Study 1) and structural equation modeling (Study 2).FindingsOverall, good performers considered PA fairer and more satisfying under equity than under equality. However, poor performers considered PA fairer under equity than under equality.Originality/valueThe study has value for PA theorists and managers, as it offers: (a) an understanding on the differential effect of equity versus equality, on employees' perceptions of fairness and satisfaction in a PA setting; (b) clarity about the likely disparity between good and poor performers' reactions toward perceived fairness and satisfaction; and, (c) ratee reactions from both organizational and social perspectives contributing to the philosophical debate questioning whether both distributive fairness and retributive fairness should operate under similar or different normative principles.

PurposeThis study seeks to examine the links between employee agreeableness, group performance, and peers' perceptions of threat of retaliation, through relationship conflict.Design/methodology/approachIn a laboratory setting, 42 groups of undergraduate students (N = 182) from a Pakistani university were assigned to group projects to be completed within four months. Data collected from three different questionnaires at four different times and actual scores awarded by the course instructor to each group were used for the analyses. Based on rWG(J)and ICC(1), level 1 (182 students') data were aggregated to level 2 (groups), and then analysed using regression analysis followed by Preacher and Hayes' bootstrapping procedure.FindingsResults suggest that high agreeableness predicts group performance positively and peers' perceptions of threat of retaliation negatively. Moreover, relationship conflict among group members significantly mediates the agreeableness-group performance relationship. The above relationships may be sensitive to national culture.Research limitations/implicationsIn this study, groups were formed for a few months, whereas in real organizational life, workgroups are formed for different durations. Therefore, the range of situations to which these findings generalize remains an open question.Practical implicationsAgreeableness of group members can be constructive for performance of the group. Managers may utilize this insight while forming groups, and rating performance.Originality/valueThere is dearth of research illuminating how employee's personality traits affect group performance and appraisal ratings. The study tests the effects of employee agreeableness on: (1) group performance, as rated by supervisors; (2) the threat of retaliation, as perceived by peer raters; and (3) the mediating effect of relationship conflict.

This study offers insights into the underlying mechanism behind the relationship of role clarity and organizational commitment in an integrated model of multiple serial mediation effects of job inv...

PurposeThis study examines the relationship between employees' perceptions of informational fairness and project performance. Furthermore, it examines if this relationship is sequentially mediated by (1) knowledge sharing and role clarity and (2) communication openness and role clarity.Design/methodology/approachData are collected from 302 full-time employees of seven project-based construction organizations in Pakistan. Data are analyzed through variance-based structural equation modeling technique and the Preacher and Hayes' bootstrapping procedure.FindingsResults indicate that project employees' perceptions of informational fairness positively predict project performance. Moreover, this relationship is sequentially mediated by (1) communication openness and role clarity and (2) knowledge sharing and role clarity.Originality/valueThis study provides further insights on the informational fairness and project performance relationship by examining their underlying mechanisms. It draws on the much ignored context of Pakistan, and offers some implications for managers and researchers with regard to how behavioral factors may further enhance project performance.

This paper seeks to understand the association between ratees’ relational justice perceptions and their feedback acceptance, both directly and through leader–member exchange (LMX). The paper also examines the moderated mediation effect of supervisory trust. The paper presents the findings of two studies. Study 1 utilized two data sets collected through an online survey from 280 part-time students working full-time (Sample 1) and 292 working professionals (Sample 2) in Pakistan. Study 2 utilized data collected from N = 167 students recruited for a scenario-based experiment that manipulated whether a manager was fair or unfair. Results revealed that relational justice positively predicted feedback acceptance in Studies 1 and 2. LMX positively mediated the above-mentioned relationship in both studies. As expected, supervisory trust negatively moderated the relational justice–feedback acceptance relationship in Study 2. The present study contributes to performance management theory and practice by illuminating that raters can stimulate performance partnership by employing a relational justice approach that increases the likelihood that employees accept performance feedback.

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to develop a conceptual framework for the effectiveness of performance appraisal (PA) systems by using a competing values approach. Design/methodology/approach – The review employs a three-step approach: first, the paper discusses the existing criteria to determine the effectiveness of PA systems, and presents criticisms of these criteria. Second, the paper reviews the literature on the competing values model of organizational effectiveness. Third, the paper integrates the PA system in the competing values model to develop a comprehensive framework for the effectiveness of PA systems. Findings – A practical model is developed, taking into account the processes and procedures involved in PA systems. Originality/value – The paper is designed to provide a guideline for managers to consider the effectiveness of a PA system. The paper suggests that assessing the effectiveness of a PA system on any single criterion ignores various important aspects of the system. Moreover, the effectiveness of a PA system should be based on the values and preferences of all major stakeholders of the system, i.e., appraisers, appraisees and the organization.

Performance Appraisal System (PAS) in the civil service of Pakistan has been established to fulfill variouspurposes. Previously, this aspect of PAS in the civil service has not been investigated. In this study we examineperceptions of the civil servants regarding various purposes of the PAS. Data was collected from the civilservants working in the two departments of far flung district Dera Ismail Khan, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Theresults show that appraisees have mixed responses regarding purposes of PAS. It implies that appraisees are notfully aware to all the purposes of PAS, with exception of a sole purpose i.e. support to promotion decisions. Inthe article we discuss the factors affecting appraisees’ perceptions about purposes of the appraisal system.Subsequently, we proffer few recommendations for making the appraisal system purposeful in minds ofappraisees. Finally, we give directions for future research in the PAS of civil service.