Accuracy and effectiveness in appraisal outcomes: the influence of self‐efficacy, personal factors and organisational variables

“Their deteriorating self-efficacy as appraisers may lead them to more “political” appraisals (Bernardin & Villanova, 2005; Tziner, 2002; Wood & Marshall, 2008).”

“Wood and Marshall (2008) found that the individuallevel self-efficacy of the assessor, and rater training and experience influence the accuracy of assessment.”

“…Hope-Hailey, & Kelliher, 2011) Resources ● Charismatic leadership (Tuytens & Devos, 2012a) ● Leadership support (Ayers, 2013) ● Senior management concern for PM (Wood & Marshall, 2008) ● Organizational investment in PM (Yang & Klaas, 2011) Strategy and PM purpose ● Strategic integration…”

“Some research conducted at the individual level of analysis suggests that the perceived importance of appraisals may be a relevant variable relating to the context of performance management (Wood and Marshall 2008 ).”

“Therefore, a political culture in which the appraisal process operates may also aggravate in-group and out-group situations, resulting in favourable and unfavourable ratings, respectively (Wood and Marshall 2008).”

“1995 ; Findley, Giles and Mosslander 2000 ; Wood and Marshall 2008 ; Selvarajan and Cloninger 2009 ).”

“…(Bandura, 1977), and it has also been shown to be predicted by performance feedback and causal attributions (Tolli & Schmidt, 2008), training (Wood & Marshall, 2008), framing of training (Tai, 2006), personality (Phillips & Gully, 1997), and organizational support programs (Varekamp et al.,…”

“…and Kyle, 2004; Chiang and Birtch, 2010; CIPD, 2009; Hedge and Teachout, 2000; Ilgen et al., 1993; Iqbal et al., 2015; Jacobs et al., 1980; Kudisch et al., 2006; Levy and Williams, 2004; Linna et al., 2012; Keeping and Levy, 2000; Pichler, 2012; Roch, 2006; Wood and Marshall, 2008, among others).”

“Others argue that there are aspects of ‘employee initiatives’, where, certain behaviours can lead to increased performance (e.g. Wood and Marshall 2008).”

“A huge body of literature has also utilised self-efficacy as a potential moderator and mediator in explaining these organisational outcomes (Fitzgerald & Schutte, 2010; Ballout, 2009; Wood & Marshall, 2008).”

“This factor suggests that employee performance can be evaluated through multiple sources such as supervisors, managers, self, peers and even customers (Wood and Marshall, 2008).”

“The perceived accuracy of appraisals by employees is one of the main criteria used to assess the effectiveness of the appraisal system [18] and is linked to various appraisal outcomes such as the employee’s satisfaction with the appraisal system and their motivation to improve performance [19, 20].”

“Belief in one’s ability can be changed by things like reviews of their work, loyalty to the workplace, personal plans, and school programs (Wood & Marshall, 2008).”

“The scale for measuring performance appraiser self-efficacy was adapted from Wood and Marshall (2008).”

“Self-efficacy significantly impacts work effectiveness, motivating employees to set and achieve ambitious goals (Wood and Marshall, 2008; Attiq et al ., 2017).”

“…that appraisers with high accountability and public self-consciousness experience higher task anxiety when they are held accountable, which can lead to proactive improvement in the quality of appraisal by the appraisee and increase the effectiveness of organizational performance appraisal [33].”

“Accountability entails the social pressure a rater feels to fulfill expected evaluation obligations and justify his or her ratings to others (Wood & Marshall, 2008; Schlenker, Britt, Pennington, Murphy, & Doherty, 1994).”