The role of organizational justice in multi-source performance appraisal: Theory-based applications and directions for research

Human Resource Management Review

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 1999, Pages 1-20

  Flint, Douglas H ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0043229554     PISSN: 10534822     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1053-4822(99)00009-1     Document Type: Article

References (76)

1. Antonioni D. The effects of feedback accountability on upward appraisal ratings. Personnel Psychology. 47:1994;349-356.
2. Balcazar F., Hopkins B.L., Suarez Y. A critical, objective review of performance feedback. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management. 7:1985;65-89.
3. Ball G.A., Trevino L.K., Sims H.P. Just and unjust punishment: Influences on subordinate performance and citizenship. Academy of Management Journal. 37:1994;299-322.
4. Barclay J.H., Harland L.K. Peer performance appraisals: The impact of rater competence, rater location and rating correctability on fairness perceptions. Group and Organizational Management. 20(1):1995;39-60.
5. Bassett G.A., Meyer H.H. Performance appraisal based on self-review. Personnel Psychology. 21:1968;421-430.
6. Brockner J. Managing the effects of layoffs on survivors. California Management Review. 1992;9-28. Winter.
7. Brockner J., Wiesenfield B.M. An integrative framework for explaining reactions to decisions: Integrative effects of outcomes and procedures. Psychological Bulletin. 120:1996;189-208.
8. Campbell D.J., Lee C. Self-appraisal in performance evaluation: Development versus evaluation. Academy of Management Review. 13:1988;302-314.
9. Cederblom D., Lounsbury J.W. An investigation of user acceptance of peer evaluations. Personnel Psychology. 33:1980;567-579.
10. DeNisi A.S., Mitchell J.L. An analysis of peer ratings as predictors and criterion measures and a proposed new application. Academy of Management Review. 3:1978;369-374.
11. Dipboye R.L., dePontbriand R. Correlates of employee reactions to performance appraisals and appraisal systems. Journal of Applied Psychology. 66(2):1981;248-251.
12. Downey R.G., Medland F.F., Yates L.G. Evaluation of a peer rating system for predicting subsequent promotion of senior military officers. Journal of Applied Psychology. 61:1976;206-209.
13. Dunnette M.D. My hammer or your hammer? Human Resource Management. 32:1993;373-384.
14. Earley P.C., Lind A.E. Procedural justice and participation in task selection: The role of control in mediating justice judgements. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 52:1987;1148-1160.
15. Farh J.L., Dobbins G.H. Effects of self-esteem on leniency bias in self-reports of performance: A structural equation model. Personnel Psychology. 42:1989;835-850.
16. Farh J.L., Dobbins G.H., Cheng B.S. Cultural relativity in action: A comparison of self-ratings made by Chinese and U.S. workers. Personnel Psychology. 44:1991;129-147.
17. Feldman J.M. Beyond attribution theory: Cognitive processes in performance appraisal. Journal of Applied Psychology. 66:1981;127-148.
18. Folger R. Distributive and procedural justice: Combined impact of "voice" and improvement on experienced inequity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 35:1977;108-119.
19. Folger R., Cropanzano R. Organizational justice and human resource management. 1998;Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
20. French J.R.P., Kay E., Meyer H.H. Participation and the appraisal system. Human Relations. 19:1966;3-20.
21. Fried R.S., Ferris G.R. The validity of the job characteristics model: A review and meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology. 40:1987;287-322.
22. Gilliland S.W. Effects of procedural and distributive justice on reactions to a selection system. Journal of Applied Psychology. 79:1994;691-701.
23. Greenberg J. Organizational performance appraisal procedures: What makes them fair? Lewicki R.J., Sheppard B.H., Bazerman M.H. Research on Negotiations in Organizations. 1:1986;JAI Press, London.
24. Greenberg J. Determinants of perceived fairness of performance evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology. 71:1986;340-342.
25. Greenberg J. Organizational justice: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Journal of Management. 16(2):1990;399-432.
26. Greenberg J. Using socially fair treatment to promote acceptance of a work site smoking ban. Journal of Applied Psychology. 79(2):1994;288-297.
27. Greller M.M. Subordinate participation and reactions to the appraisal review. Journal of Applied Psychology. 60:1975;544-549.
28. Greller M.M. The nature of subordinate participation in appraisal review. Academy of Management Journal. 21:1978;646-658.
29. Greller M.M., Jackson J.H. A subordinate's experience and prior feedback as determinants of participation in performance appraisal reviews. Psychological Reports. 80:1997;547-561.
30. Halperin K., Snyder C.R., Shenkel R.J., Houston B.K. Effect of source status and message favorability on acceptance of personality feedback. Journal of Applied Psychology. 61:1976;85-88.
31. Harris M.J., Rosenthal R. Mediation of interpersonal expectancies effects: 31 meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin. 97:1985;363-386.
32. Harris M.M., Schaubroeck J. A meta-analysis of self-supervisor, self-peer and peer-supervisor ratings. Personnel Psychology. 41:1988;43-62.
33. Houlden P., LaTour S., Walker L., Thibault J. Preferences for modes of dispute resolution as a function of process and decision control. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 14:1978;13-30.
34. Ilgen D.R. Satisfaction with performance as a function of the initial level of expected performance and the deviation from expectations. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. 6:1971;349-371.
35. Ilgen D.R., Barnes-Farrell J.L. Performance planning and evaluation. 1984;SRA, Chicago.
36. Ilgen D.R., Hamstra B.W. Performance satisfaction as a function of the difference between expected and reported performance at five levels of reported performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. 7:1972;359-370.
37. Ilgen D.R., Fisher C.D., Taylor M.S. Consequences of individual feedback on behavior in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology. 64:1979;349-371.
38. Jacobs M., Jacobs A., Feldman G., Cavior N. Feedback II - The "credibility gap": Delivery of positive and negative and emotional and behavioral feedback in groups. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 41:1973;215-223.
39. Kay E., Meyer H.H., French J.R.P. Effects of threat in a performance appraisal interview. Journal of Applied Psychology. 49:1965;311-317.
40. Kluger A.N., DeNisi A. The effects of feedback on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin. 119:1996;254-284.
41. Konovsky M.A., Cropanzano R. Perceived fairness of employee drug testing as a predictor of employee attitudes and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology. 76(5):1991;698-707.
42. Korsgaard M.A., Schweiger D.M., Sapienza H.J. Building commitment, attachment, and trust in strategic decision-making teams: The role of procedural justice. Academy of Management Journal. 38(1):1995;60-84.
43. Kremer J.F. Construct validity of multiple measures in teaching, research, and service and reliability of peer ratings. Journal of Educational Psychology. 82:1990;213-218.
44. Landy F.J., Farr J.L. Performance rating. Psychological Bulletin. 87(1):1980;72-107.
45. Landy F.J., Guion R.M. Performance rating. Psychological Bulletin. 87:1980;72-107.
46. Landy F.J., Barnes J.L., Murphy K.R. Correlates of perceived fairness and accuracy of performance evaluation. Journal of Applied Psychology. 63:1978;751-754.
47. Landy F.J., Barnes-Farrell J., Cleveland J.N. Perceived fairness and accuracy of performance evaluation: A follow-up. Journal of Applied Psychology. 65:1980;355-356.
48. Latham G.P., Wexley K.N. Increasing productivity through performance appraisal. 2nd edn. 1994;Addison-Wesley, New York.
49. Lawler E.E. The multi-trait multi-rater approach to measuring managerial job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology. 51(5):1967;369-381.
50. Levine M.J. Comparative labor relations law. 1975;General Learning Press, Morristown, NJ.
51. Lewin K., Dembo T., Festinger L., Sears P.S. Level of aspiration. Hunt J.M. Personality and behavior disorders. 1944;333-377 Ronald Press, New York.
52. Lind E.A., Tyler T.R. The social psychology of procedural justice. 1988;Plenum, New York.
53. Lind E.A., Kulik C.T., Ambrose M., de Vera Park M.V. Individual and corporate dispute resolution: Using procedural fairness as a decision heuristic. Administrative Science Quarterly. 38:1993;224-251.
54. Locke E.A. Motivational effects of knowledge of results: Knowledge or goal settings? Journal of Applied Psychology. 51:1967;324-329.
55. Locke E.A., Bryan J.F. Knowledge of scores and goal level as determinants of work rate. Journal of Applied Psychology. 53:1969;59-65.
56. London M., Smither J.W. Can multi-source feedback change perceptions of goal accomplishment, self-evaluations, and performance-related outcomes? Theory-based applications and directions for research. Personnel Psychology. 48:1995;803-839.
57. Love K.G. Comparison of peer assessment methods: Reliability, validity, friendship bias and user reaction. Journal of Applied Psychology. 66(4):1981;451-457.
58. Maier N.R.F. Psychology in industry. 1946;Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA.
59. McCall M.W., Lombardo M.M. Off the track: Why and how successful executives get derailed. 1983;Centre for Creative Leadership, Greesboro, NC.
60. McCauley C., Lombardo M. Benchmarks: An instrument for diagnosing managerial strengths and weaknesses. Clark K.E., Clark M.B. Measures of leadership. 1990;535-545 Leadership Library of America, West Orange, NJ.
61. McEnvoy G.M., Buller P.F. User acceptance of peer appraisals in an industrial setting. Personnel Psychology. 40:1987;785-797.
62. Meyer H.H., Kay E., French J.R.P. Split roles in performance appraisal. Harvard Business Review. 43:1965;123-129.
63. Motowidlo S.J. Relationship between self-rated performance and pay satisfaction among sales representatives. Journal of Applied Psychology. 67(2):1982;209-213.
64. Mount M.K. Psychometric properties of subordinate ratings of managerial performance. Personnel Psychology. 37:1984;687-702.
65. Olson-Buchanan J.B. Voicing discontent: What happens to the grievance filer after the grievance? Journal of Applied Psychology. 81(1):1996;52-63.
66. Schaubroeck J., May D.R., Brown F.W. Procedural justice explanations and employee reactions to economic hardship: A field experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology. 79(3):1994;455-460.
67. Silverman S.B., Wexley K.N. Reaction of employees to performance appraisal interviews as a function of their participation in rating scale development. Personnel Psychology. 37:1984;703-710.
68. Skarlicki D.P., Folger R. Retaliation in the workplace: The roles of distributive, procedural, and interactional justice. Journal of Applied Psychology. 82:1997;434-443.
69. Taylor M.S., Tracy K.B., Renard M.K., Harrison J.K., Caroll S.J. Due process in performance appraisal: A quasi-experiment in procedural justice. Administrative Science Quarterly. 40:1995;495-523.
70. Thibaut J., Walker L. Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. 1975;Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
71. Tornow W.W. Perceptions or reality: Is multi-perspective measurement a means or an end? Human Resource Management. 32:1993;221-230.
72. Tyler T. The psychology of procedural justice: A test of the group-value model. Journal of Personnel and Social Psychology. 57:1989;830-838.
73. Tyler T. Psychological models of justice motive: Antecedents of distributive and procedural justice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 67(5):1994;850-863.
74. van den Bos K., Vermunt R., Wilke H.A.M. Procedural and distributive justice: What is fair depends more on what comes first than what comes next. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 72:1997;95-104.
75. Wellbourne T.M., Balkin D.B., Gomez-Mejia L.R. Gainsharing and mutual monitoring: A combined agency-organizational justice interpretation. Academy of Management Journal. 38(3):1995;881-899.
76. Yammarino F.J., Atwater L.E. Understanding self-perception accuracy: Implications for human resource management. Human Resource Management. 32:1993;231-247.