Dynamic Performance and the Performance-Performance Rating Relation

In this commentary we discuss the appropriateness and usefulness of taking into account the dynamic nature of performance when considering the relation between job performance and ratings of job performance. Like the vast majority of research in this area, Murphy (this issue) does not critically exa...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: REB, Jochen, GREGURAS, Gary J.
Format: text
Language:English
Published: Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University 2008
Subjects:
Online Access:https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/lkcsb_research/1001
https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/lkcsb_research/article/2000/viewcontent/CommentaryToMurphy_RebGreguras.pdf
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Singapore Management University
Language: English
id sg-smu-ink.lkcsb_research-2000
record_format dspace
spelling sg-smu-ink.lkcsb_research-20002017-12-12T05:44:26Z Dynamic Performance and the Performance-Performance Rating Relation REB, Jochen GREGURAS, Gary J. In this commentary we discuss the appropriateness and usefulness of taking into account the dynamic nature of performance when considering the relation between job performance and ratings of job performance. Like the vast majority of research in this area, Murphy (this issue) does not critically examine whether or how changes in ratee performance over time influence job performance ratings. As noted by Murphy and Cleveland (1995), a limitation of performance appraisal research is that it has ignored that employee performance “…is embedded in a context or pattern of employee performance over time” (p. 73). In this commentary, we argue that a consideration of dynamic performance is essential to our understanding of the relation between performance and performance ratings because the dynamic nature of performance (a) affects what raters observe, their utilized integration rules, and ultimately their performance ratings, (b) likely interacts with elements in multi-factor and mediated models (e.g., Murphy, this issue) to influence ratings, and (c) provides useful information about ratee effectiveness. Based on this discussion, we suggest that the dynamic nature of performance should be explicitly addressed in performance measurement systems to strengthen the relation between performance and ratings of performance, and thus increase ratings’ usefulness. 2008-06-01T07:00:00Z text application/pdf https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/lkcsb_research/1001 info:doi/10.1111/j.1754-9434.2008.00038.x https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/lkcsb_research/article/2000/viewcontent/CommentaryToMurphy_RebGreguras.pdf http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Research Collection Lee Kong Chian School Of Business eng Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University Human Resources Management Organizational Behavior and Theory
institution Singapore Management University
building SMU Libraries
continent Asia
country Singapore
Singapore
content_provider SMU Libraries
collection InK@SMU
language English
topic Human Resources Management
Organizational Behavior and Theory
spellingShingle Human Resources Management
Organizational Behavior and Theory
REB, Jochen
GREGURAS, Gary J.
Dynamic Performance and the Performance-Performance Rating Relation
description In this commentary we discuss the appropriateness and usefulness of taking into account the dynamic nature of performance when considering the relation between job performance and ratings of job performance. Like the vast majority of research in this area, Murphy (this issue) does not critically examine whether or how changes in ratee performance over time influence job performance ratings. As noted by Murphy and Cleveland (1995), a limitation of performance appraisal research is that it has ignored that employee performance “…is embedded in a context or pattern of employee performance over time” (p. 73). In this commentary, we argue that a consideration of dynamic performance is essential to our understanding of the relation between performance and performance ratings because the dynamic nature of performance (a) affects what raters observe, their utilized integration rules, and ultimately their performance ratings, (b) likely interacts with elements in multi-factor and mediated models (e.g., Murphy, this issue) to influence ratings, and (c) provides useful information about ratee effectiveness. Based on this discussion, we suggest that the dynamic nature of performance should be explicitly addressed in performance measurement systems to strengthen the relation between performance and ratings of performance, and thus increase ratings’ usefulness.
format text
author REB, Jochen
GREGURAS, Gary J.
author_facet REB, Jochen
GREGURAS, Gary J.
author_sort REB, Jochen
title Dynamic Performance and the Performance-Performance Rating Relation
title_short Dynamic Performance and the Performance-Performance Rating Relation
title_full Dynamic Performance and the Performance-Performance Rating Relation
title_fullStr Dynamic Performance and the Performance-Performance Rating Relation
title_full_unstemmed Dynamic Performance and the Performance-Performance Rating Relation
title_sort dynamic performance and the performance-performance rating relation
publisher Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University
publishDate 2008
url https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/lkcsb_research/1001
https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/lkcsb_research/article/2000/viewcontent/CommentaryToMurphy_RebGreguras.pdf
_version_ 1770569762003222528