Performance Appraisal: Two Steps Forward, One Step Back?

This article reports the findings of a recent study of performance appraisal systems in Australian industry, updating earlier research data in view of contemporary organizational and industrial relations changes. Research results suggest that, while substantial forward steps have been made, organiza...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Asia Pacific journal of human resources 1997, Vol.35 (2), p.80-92
Hauptverfasser: Nankervis, Alan R., Leece, Priscilla
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 92
container_issue 2
container_start_page 80
container_title Asia Pacific journal of human resources
container_volume 35
creator Nankervis, Alan R.
Leece, Priscilla
description This article reports the findings of a recent study of performance appraisal systems in Australian industry, updating earlier research data in view of contemporary organizational and industrial relations changes. Research results suggest that, while substantial forward steps have been made, organizations still have some way to go in their pursuit of ‘best practice’ appraisal schemes. Performance appraisal (PA) is still a popular HRM tool, with increased employee coverage and an emphasis on Management by Objectives. There is some evidence that organizations are more closely customizing their PA systems, sometimes in conjunction with quality programs, to meet their specific HR objectives. Conversely, the objectives of many PA systems remain short‐term rather than strategic, and there appears to be a decline in the use of formal PA feedback mechanisms. Overall, this survey suggests a focus on performance evaluation rather than training and development, and increasingly a ‘hard’ HRM perspective capitalizing on current industrial relations changes.
doi_str_mv 10.1177/103841119703500208
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>istex_wiley</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_wiley_primary_10_1177_103841119703500208_APHR271</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><informt_id>10.3316/ielapa.980100657</informt_id><sourcerecordid>ark_67375_WNG_W7R23TRB_0</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3091-5917e27ba2a5de1430e0dfbc01e05146483b07971d78de63d10734ca79dfcb933</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkMFOwkAQhhujiYi-gKc-gNWZ7rbTejFABEyIEMRw3Gy7W10ptNltgry9rRgvXjzNZOb__sw_nneNcItIdIfAEo6IKQGLAEJITrweEucBpRxP274VBJ3i3Ltw7qOTMGI9L1loW1R2K3e59gd1baVxsrz3V_vKf2l07fxxZffSqht_vtPfI38o883DpXdWyNLpq5_a917Hj6vRNJjNJ0-jwSzIGaQYRCmSDimToYyURs5AgyqyHFBDhDzmCcuAUkJFidIxUwjEeC4pVUWepYz1vfDom9vKOasLUVuzlfYgEESXXfzN3kJ0hPam1Id_EGKwmC5DwpYcH0m7NY2QtSwa8d40tRNKNlKYXfesdlPZN6Eq01kyhrEwumzFIk0AAeKIWqPgaGRcoz9_T5B2I2JiFIn180SsaRmy1XIogH0BYmmBEQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Performance Appraisal: Two Steps Forward, One Step Back?</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><source>SAGE Complete A-Z List</source><creator>Nankervis, Alan R. ; Leece, Priscilla</creator><creatorcontrib>Nankervis, Alan R. ; Leece, Priscilla</creatorcontrib><description>This article reports the findings of a recent study of performance appraisal systems in Australian industry, updating earlier research data in view of contemporary organizational and industrial relations changes. Research results suggest that, while substantial forward steps have been made, organizations still have some way to go in their pursuit of ‘best practice’ appraisal schemes. Performance appraisal (PA) is still a popular HRM tool, with increased employee coverage and an emphasis on Management by Objectives. There is some evidence that organizations are more closely customizing their PA systems, sometimes in conjunction with quality programs, to meet their specific HR objectives. Conversely, the objectives of many PA systems remain short‐term rather than strategic, and there appears to be a decline in the use of formal PA feedback mechanisms. Overall, this survey suggests a focus on performance evaluation rather than training and development, and increasingly a ‘hard’ HRM perspective capitalizing on current industrial relations changes.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1038-4111</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1744-7941</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/103841119703500208</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Enterprise bargaining ; Evaluation ; Human resource management ; Job competencies ; Management by objectives ; Performance appraisal schemes ; Surveys ; Total quality management</subject><ispartof>Asia Pacific journal of human resources, 1997, Vol.35 (2), p.80-92</ispartof><rights>1997 Australian Human Resources Institute (AHRI)</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3091-5917e27ba2a5de1430e0dfbc01e05146483b07971d78de63d10734ca79dfcb933</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1177%2F103841119703500208$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1177%2F103841119703500208$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,1412,4010,27904,27905,27906,45555,45556</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Nankervis, Alan R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leece, Priscilla</creatorcontrib><title>Performance Appraisal: Two Steps Forward, One Step Back?</title><title>Asia Pacific journal of human resources</title><description>This article reports the findings of a recent study of performance appraisal systems in Australian industry, updating earlier research data in view of contemporary organizational and industrial relations changes. Research results suggest that, while substantial forward steps have been made, organizations still have some way to go in their pursuit of ‘best practice’ appraisal schemes. Performance appraisal (PA) is still a popular HRM tool, with increased employee coverage and an emphasis on Management by Objectives. There is some evidence that organizations are more closely customizing their PA systems, sometimes in conjunction with quality programs, to meet their specific HR objectives. Conversely, the objectives of many PA systems remain short‐term rather than strategic, and there appears to be a decline in the use of formal PA feedback mechanisms. Overall, this survey suggests a focus on performance evaluation rather than training and development, and increasingly a ‘hard’ HRM perspective capitalizing on current industrial relations changes.</description><subject>Enterprise bargaining</subject><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>Human resource management</subject><subject>Job competencies</subject><subject>Management by objectives</subject><subject>Performance appraisal schemes</subject><subject>Surveys</subject><subject>Total quality management</subject><issn>1038-4111</issn><issn>1744-7941</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1997</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNkMFOwkAQhhujiYi-gKc-gNWZ7rbTejFABEyIEMRw3Gy7W10ptNltgry9rRgvXjzNZOb__sw_nneNcItIdIfAEo6IKQGLAEJITrweEucBpRxP274VBJ3i3Ltw7qOTMGI9L1loW1R2K3e59gd1baVxsrz3V_vKf2l07fxxZffSqht_vtPfI38o883DpXdWyNLpq5_a917Hj6vRNJjNJ0-jwSzIGaQYRCmSDimToYyURs5AgyqyHFBDhDzmCcuAUkJFidIxUwjEeC4pVUWepYz1vfDom9vKOasLUVuzlfYgEESXXfzN3kJ0hPam1Id_EGKwmC5DwpYcH0m7NY2QtSwa8d40tRNKNlKYXfesdlPZN6Eq01kyhrEwumzFIk0AAeKIWqPgaGRcoz9_T5B2I2JiFIn180SsaRmy1XIogH0BYmmBEQ</recordid><startdate>1997</startdate><enddate>1997</enddate><creator>Nankervis, Alan R.</creator><creator>Leece, Priscilla</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>1997</creationdate><title>Performance Appraisal: Two Steps Forward, One Step Back?</title><author>Nankervis, Alan R. ; Leece, Priscilla</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3091-5917e27ba2a5de1430e0dfbc01e05146483b07971d78de63d10734ca79dfcb933</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1997</creationdate><topic>Enterprise bargaining</topic><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>Human resource management</topic><topic>Job competencies</topic><topic>Management by objectives</topic><topic>Performance appraisal schemes</topic><topic>Surveys</topic><topic>Total quality management</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Nankervis, Alan R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leece, Priscilla</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Asia Pacific journal of human resources</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Nankervis, Alan R.</au><au>Leece, Priscilla</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Performance Appraisal: Two Steps Forward, One Step Back?</atitle><jtitle>Asia Pacific journal of human resources</jtitle><date>1997</date><risdate>1997</risdate><volume>35</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>80</spage><epage>92</epage><pages>80-92</pages><issn>1038-4111</issn><eissn>1744-7941</eissn><abstract>This article reports the findings of a recent study of performance appraisal systems in Australian industry, updating earlier research data in view of contemporary organizational and industrial relations changes. Research results suggest that, while substantial forward steps have been made, organizations still have some way to go in their pursuit of ‘best practice’ appraisal schemes. Performance appraisal (PA) is still a popular HRM tool, with increased employee coverage and an emphasis on Management by Objectives. There is some evidence that organizations are more closely customizing their PA systems, sometimes in conjunction with quality programs, to meet their specific HR objectives. Conversely, the objectives of many PA systems remain short‐term rather than strategic, and there appears to be a decline in the use of formal PA feedback mechanisms. Overall, this survey suggests a focus on performance evaluation rather than training and development, and increasingly a ‘hard’ HRM perspective capitalizing on current industrial relations changes.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1177/103841119703500208</doi><tpages>13</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1038-4111
ispartof Asia Pacific journal of human resources, 1997, Vol.35 (2), p.80-92
issn 1038-4111
1744-7941
language eng
recordid cdi_wiley_primary_10_1177_103841119703500208_APHR271
source Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete; SAGE Complete A-Z List
subjects Enterprise bargaining
Evaluation
Human resource management
Job competencies
Management by objectives
Performance appraisal schemes
Surveys
Total quality management
title Performance Appraisal: Two Steps Forward, One Step Back?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-20T13%3A03%3A46IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-istex_wiley&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Performance%20Appraisal:%20Two%20Steps%20Forward,%20One%20Step%20Back?&rft.jtitle=Asia%20Pacific%20journal%20of%20human%20resources&rft.au=Nankervis,%20Alan%20R.&rft.date=1997&rft.volume=35&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=80&rft.epage=92&rft.pages=80-92&rft.issn=1038-4111&rft.eissn=1744-7941&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/103841119703500208&rft_dat=%3Cistex_wiley%3Eark_67375_WNG_W7R23TRB_0%3C/istex_wiley%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_informt_id=10.3316/ielapa.980100657&rfr_iscdi=true