Summary Performance Management 2023/2024
Week 1
1) Carpini, J. A., & Parker, S. K. (2018). The bigger picture: How organizational citizenship
behaviors fit within a broader conceptualization of work performance. The Oxford handbook
of organizational citizenship behavior, 19.
2) Cascio, W. F. (2006). The economic impact of employee behaviors on organizational
performance. California Management Review, 48(4), 41-60.
3) Lievens, F., Schapers, P., & Herde, C. N. (2020). Performance management: Quo Vadis?
4) Aguinis, H., & Burgi-Tian, J. (2023). Performance management around the world: solving the
standardization vs adaptation dilemma. IIM Ranchi Journal of Management Studies.
Week 2
Presentation: Tomczak, D. L., Lanzo, L. A., & Aguinis, H. (2017). Evidence-based recommendations for
employee performance monitoring. Business Horizons. Electronic performance monitoring (EPM)
systems
Week 3
5) Kluger, A. N., & Nir, D. (2010). The feedforward interview. Human Resource Management
Review, 20(3), 235-246.
6) Budworth, M. H., Latham, G. P., & Manroop, L. (2015). Looking forward to performance
improvement: a field test of the feedforward interview for performance management.
Human Resource Management, 54(1), 45-54.
7) Moon, S. H., Scullen, S. E., & Latham, G. P. (2016). Precarious curve ahead: The effects of
forced distribution rating systems on job performance. Human Resource Management
Review, 26(2), 166-179.Links to an external site.
8) Speer, A. B. (2018). Quantifying with words: An investigation of the validity of narrative‐
derived performance scores. Personnel Psychology, 71(3), 299-333.
9) Silva, V. V. M., & Ribeiro, J. L. D. (2020). A discussion on using quantitative or qualitative data
for assessment of individual competencies. Personnel Review.
Presentation: Jarrahi, M. H. (2018). Artificial intelligence and the future of work: Human-AI symbiosis
in organizational decision making. Business Horizons, 61(4), 577-586.
Presentation: Jarrahi, M. H., Möhlmann, M., & Lee, M. K. (2023). Algorithmic Management: The Role
of AI in Managing Workforces. MIT Sloan Management Review, 64(3), 1-5.
Week 4
10) Keith, N. (2018). Undesirable effects of goal setting on perceived fairness, commitment, and
unethical behavior. Zeitschrift für Arbeits-und Organisationspsychologie A&O.Links to an
external site.
11) Pritchard, R. D., Harrell, M. M., DiazGranados, D., & Guzman, M. J. (2008). The productivity
measurement and enhancement system: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology,
93(3), 540-567.
12) Salas, E., Tannenbaum, S. I., Kraiger, K., & Smith-Jentsch, K. A. (2012). The science of training
and development in organizations: What matters in practice. Psychological Science in the
Public Interest, 13(2), 74-101.
13) Smith-Jentsch, K. A. (2020). Making smart investments in training: The devil is in the details.
Organizational Dynamics, 49(2), 100726.
1
,Presentation: Cardador, M. T., Northcraft, G. B., & Whicker, J. (2017). A theory of work gamification:
Something old, something new, something borrowed, something cool?. Human Resource
Management Review, 27(2), 353-365.
Week 5
14) Park, S., & Sturman, M. C. (2016). Evaluating form and functionality of pay‐for‐performance
plans: The relative incentive and sorting effects of merit pay, bonuses, and long ‐term
incentives. Human Resource Management, 55(4), 697-719.
15) Englmaier, F., Grimm, S., Schindler, D., & Schudy, S. (2018). The effect of incentives in non-
routine analytical teams tasks-evidence from a field experiment. CESifo working paper series
no. 6903.
16) Kim, J. H., Gerhart, B., & Fang, M. (2022). Do financial incentives help or harm performance in
interesting tasks? Journal of Applied Psychology, 107(1), 153–167.
17) Baeten, X. (2014). Shaping the future research agenda for compensation and benefits
management: Some thoughts based on a stakeholder inquiry. Human Resource Management
Review, 24(1), 31-40.
Presentation: Aguinis, H., & Bradley, K. J. (2015). The secret sauce for organizational success.
Organizational Dynamics, 44(3), 161-168.
Week 6
18) Aguinis, H., Gottfredson, R. K., & Joo, H. (2013). Avoiding a “me” versus “we” dilemma: Using
performance management to turn teams into a source of competitive advantage. Business
Horizons, 56(4), 503-512.
19) Kremer, H., Villamor, I., & Aguinis, H. (2019). Innovation leadership: Best-practice
recommendations for promoting employee creativity, voice, and knowledge sharing. Business
Horizons, 62(1), 65-74.
2
,Week 1 Lecture: Performance and Performance Management
`
input presentations is exam material
Proficient performance: do you have
the abilities and fulfill the tasks that
are in the role.
Adaptive performance: adapt to changing situations. How well you deal with stressful situations, not
just doing what is prescribed but also if you can adapt if the situation changes.
Proactive performance: people develop their own initiatives, be entrepreneurial and make plans for
themselves in stead of being told what to do.
At 3 levels of analysis:
1. Individual task behavior
2. Team-member behaviors
3. Organization member behaviors
Construct recommendations:
- Observable behaviours, rather than cognitive, motivational, affective states. Difficult to
measure.
- Outcomes and indicators are often no behaviour (sales, salary, efficiency).
Performance is an outcome; you can’t measure it with behaviors
Antecedents performance = f(ability x motivation x opportunity). Can, will & show
Performance management: continuous process of identifying, measuring, and developing the
performance of individuals and teams and aligning performance with the strategic goals of the
organization (Aguinis, 2009/2023).
More focus on individuals or teams org. performance is affected so there need to be a match
between strategic goals and individual/team goals.
Cyclical process: PM relates to different organizational levels (organization, unit, group, individual
worker) and refers to a cyclical process with different stages, such as planning, appraisal, and reward.
Dilemma: Most organizations use teamwork. Can individual performance be assessed?
Individual performance
3
, - Interdependence may obscure contribution of individual.
- “Heinrich von Pierer (Former CEO Siemens): “whether a company measures its workforce in
hunders or hundrerd of thousands, its success relies on individual performance” (Bisoux,
2004, p.19).
Quantified self: technological advances to measure performance.
Why manage performance? Do organizations need PM?
Functions: identifying and assessing employee and organizational performance.
Evaluation and compensation management.
Why do organizations need performance management? (Casio)
- Economic impact of employee behaviors can be assessed.
o Examples: turnover, retention, absenteeism, presenteeism, health, attitudes.
- Anticipating these behaviors and the ‘wise management of people’ by means of trainings
and staffing programs can increase productivity and decrease operating expenses.
Opposite of PM → Self-management. It’s less directive. Example: beyond budgeting.
Why not beyond budgeting example/self management?
Summary:
- Performance defined
- Performance management defined
- Reasons for using/not using performance management
- Problems and solutions
4
