Rapid Evidence Assessment of Performance Development and Review (PDR) systems

This Rapid Evidence Assessment (REA) synthesizes evidence concerning effective performance and development review (PDR) systems.

The review included 21 primary research studies and eight reviews. It focussed on 3 questions: what are the purposes and intended outcomes of PDR systems?; what works in terms of ensuring PDR systems are implemented effectively and achieve their intended outcomes?; and what has been found to reduce the effectiveness of the PDR in achieving the intended outcomes?

Key implications derived from the findings included: employees tend to have a more positive view of systems to the extent that they are designed to explicitly support professional development, rather than to inform decisions about pay and promotion; employees also dislike elaborate PDR processes because they are perceived as time-consuming, rigid and bureaucratic; fairness of PDR systems is an important contributor to their acceptance by employees, and employees are more likely to perceive them as fair when assessments are based on observations from several colleagues rather than a single line manager.

Evidence

Study Author(s) Country Year Study Method Source
A literature review of multi-source feedback systems within and without health services, leading to 10 tips for their successful design. Medical Teacher, 28(7), 185-91. Wood, L., Hassell, A., Whitehouse, A., Bullock, A., & Wall, D. Various 2006 Literature Review Link
Action inquiry and performance appraisals: Tools for organizational learning and development. The Learning Organization, 12(1), 26 - 41. Walsh, K., & Fisher, D. Various 2005 Literature Review Link
Advances in the science of performance appraisal: Implications for practice. International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 21, 295-338. Latham, G. P., & Mann, S. Various 2006 Literature Review Link
Authentic performance appraisal: when home is the workplace. International Journal of Palliative Nursing, 13(12), 606-9. O'Connor, M., & Lee, S. NS 2007 NS Link
Conversing About Performance: Discursive Resources for the Appraisal Interview. Management Communication Quarterly, 22(3), 473-501. Gordon, M. E., & Stewart, L. P. Various 2009 Literature Review Link
Different relationships between perceptions of developmental performance appraisal and work performance. Personnel Review, 36(3), 378 - 397. Kuvaas, B. Norway 2007 Survey Link
Dimensions of performance appraisal systems in Jordanian private and public organizations. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18(1), 75-84. Abu-Doleh, J., & Weir, D. Jordan 2007 Survey Link
Effects of a Performance Management Intervention on Frequency of Behavioral Supervision at a Specialized School for Students with Developmental Disabilities. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 20(1), 53-61. Luiselli, J. NS 2008 Longitudinal Link
Effects on organizational context (culture and climate) from implementing a 360-degree feedback system: The case of Arcelik. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 17(4), 426-449. Mamatoglu, N. Turkey 2008 Longitudinal Link
Employee fairness perceptions of performance appraisal: a Saint Lucian case study. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19(6), 1152-1169. Narcisse, S., & Harcourt, M. St Lucia 2008 Qualitative, mixed Link
Evaluating and rewarding OCBs: Potential consequences of formally incorporating organisational citizenship behaviour in performance appraisal and reward systems. Employee Relations, 30(5), 494 - 514. Becton, J. B., Giles, W. F., & Schraeder, M. Various 2008 Literature Review Link
Evaluation of 2+2 Alternative Teacher Performance Appraisal Program in Shanxi, People's Republic of China. Teaching and Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies, 23(7), 1012-1023. Wang, W. China 2007 Intervention Link
Explaining the Weak Relationship Between Job Performance and Ratings of Job Performance. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1(2), 148-160. Murphy, K. R. Various 2008 Literature Review Link
Identifying acceptable performance appraisal criteria: An international perspective. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 47(1), 102-125. Taormina, R. J., & Gao, J. H. China 2009 Survey Link
Lessons from management-union partnership in teacher performance appraisal in the New South Wales public education system. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18(7), 1214-1227. Johnson, L., & Shields, J. Australia 2007 Qualitative interviews Link
Perceived purposes of performance appraisal: Correlates of individual- and position-focused purposes on attitudinal outcomes. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 18(3), 315-343. Youngcourt, S. S., Leiva, P. I., & Jones, R. G. US 2007 Survey Link
Performance appraisal and the compensation of academic staff in the University of Tartu. Baltic Journal of Management, 3(1), 40 - 54. Turk, K. Estonia 2008 Survey Link
Performance Appraisal of Behavior-Based Competencies: a realiable and valid procedure. Personnel Psychology, 60(1), 201-230. Catano, V. M., Darr, W., & Campbell, C. A. Canada 2007 Mixed methods Link
Performance Appraisal Research: A Critical Review of Work on" the Social Context and Politics of Appraisal". ESSEC. Jenkins, A. Various 2005 Literature Review Link
Playing tick-box games: Interrelating defences in professional appraisal. Human Relations, 60(9), 1361-1385. McGivern, G., & Ferlie, E. UK 2007 Qualitative Link
Police officer performance appraisal and overall satisfaction. Journal of Criminal Justice, 35(2), 137-150. Lilley, D., & Hinduja, S. US 2007 Survey Link
Procedural Justice and Supervisors' Personal Power Bases: Effects on Employees' Perceptions of Performance Appraisal Sessions, Commitment, and Motivation. Journal of Collective Negotiations, 31(2), 101-118. Steensma, H., & Visser, E. Netherlands 2007 Survey Link
Registered Nurse Participation in Performance Appraisal Interviews. Journal of Professional Nursing, 23(1), 55-59. Spence, D. G., & Wood, E. E. New Zealand 2007 Qualitative interviews Link
Teacher appraisal and its outcomes in Singapore primary schools. Journal of Educational Administration, 46(1), 39 - 54. Kelly, K. O., Ang, S. Y. A., Chong, W. L., & Hu, W. S. Singapore 2008 Survey Link
Teachers’perceptions of and attitudes towards performance appraisal in Zimbabwean schools. Africa Education Review, 5(1), 144-164. Pretorius, S. G. Zimbabwe 2008 Survey Link
The Development of a 360-Degree Performance Appraisal System: A University Case Study. International Journal of Management, 25(1), 16. Sanwong, K. Thailand 2008 Longitudinal Search
The Influence of Perceptions of Fairness on Performance Appraisal Reactions. Journal of Labor Research, 28(4), 735-754. Jawahar, I. US 2007 Survey Link
The Social Context of Performance Appraisal: A Review and Framework for the Future. Journal of Management, 30(6), 881-905. Levy, P. E., & Williams, J. R. Various 2004 Systematic Review Link
Understanding performance appraisal fairness. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 45(2), 132-150. Kavanagh, P., Benson, J., & Brown, M. Australia 2007 Survey Link

Analysis - 29 studies

If possible, create a .

Age of Study

6-10 years - 5.00 (17.2 %) 3-5 years - 24.00 (82.8 %)

Country of Origin

Jordan - 1.00 (3.4 %) Netherlands - 1.00 (3.4 %) UK - 1.00 (3.4 %) Estonia - 1.00 (3.4 %) Canada - 1.00 (3.4 %) Zimbabwe - 1.00 (3.4 %) New Zealand - 1.00 (3.4 %) Norway - 1.00 (3.4 %) Turkey - 1.00 (3.4 %) Australia - 2.00 (6.9 %) China - 2.00 (6.9 %) Various - 8.00 (27.6 %) US - 3.00 (10.3 %) St Lucia - 1.00 (3.4 %) Thailand - 1.00 (3.4 %) NS - 2.00 (6.9 %) Singapore - 1.00 (3.4 %)

Study Method

Mixed methods - 1.00 (3.4 %) Systematic Review - 1.00 (3.4 %) NS - 1.00 (3.4 %) Intervention - 1.00 (3.4 %) Qualitative - 1.00 (3.4 %) Literature Review - 7.00 (24.1 %) Survey - 11.00 (37.9 %) Longitudinal - 3.00 (10.3 %) Qualitative, mixed - 1.00 (3.4 %) Qualitative interviews - 2.00 (6.9 %)

Top of page  |  Browse all projects...

08 February 2012 17:58 • Matrix Evidence Web Archive v2012.3005