Contact points and flash points: Conceptualizing the use of justice mechanisms in the performance appraisal interview

Human Resource Management Review

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2002, Pages 101-123

  Holbrook Jr , Robert L ^a  

^a OHIO UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Justice; Perfomance appraisal interviews

Indexed keywords

EID: 10644283016     PISSN: 10534822     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1053-4822(01)00053-5     Document Type: Article

References (95)

1. Abramson, L. Y., Seligman, M. P., & Teasdale, J. D. (1978). Learned helplessness in humans: critique and reformulation. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 87, 49-74.
2. Adams, J. S. (1963). Toward an understanding of inequity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 422-436.
3. Alexander, S., & Ruderman, M. (1987). The role of procedural and distributive justice in organizational behavior. Social Justice Research, 1, 177-198.
4. Alloy, L. B., Peterson, C., Abramson, L. Y., & Seligman, M. R (1984). Attributional style and the generality of Learned helplessness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 681-687.
5. Ambrose, ML, Harland, L. K., & Kulik, C. T. (1991). Influence of social comparisons on perceptions of organizational fairness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 239-246.
6. Baron, R. A. (1986). Self-presentation m job interviews: when there can be "too much of a good thing". Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 16, 16-28.
7. Bassi, L. J., & Van Buren, M. E. (1997, June). Sustaining high performance in bad times. Training and Development, 51, 32-41.
8. Beck, A. T. (1972). Depression: causes and treatment. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.
9. Bensimon, H. F. (1997, September). What to do about anger in the workplace. Training and Development, 51, 28-32.
10. Bies, R. J. (1987). The predicament of injustice: the management of moral outrage, In: L. L. Cummings, & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (pp. 289-319). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
11. Bies, R. J., & Moag, J. S. (1986). Interactional justice: communication criteria of fairness, In: R. J. Lewicki, B. H. Sheppard, & M. H. Bazerman (Eds.), Research on negotiation in organizations (pp. 43-55). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
12. Bies, R. J., & Shapiro, D. L. (1987). Interactional fairness judgments: the influence of causal accounts. Social Justice Research, 1, 199-218.
13. Bies, R. J., & Shapiro, D. L. (1988). Voice and justification: their influence on procedural fairness judgments. Academy of Management Journal, 31, 676-685.
14. Bies, R. J., Shapiro, D. L., & Cummings, L. L. (1988). Causal accounts and managing organizational conflict. Communication Research, 15, 381-399.
15. Bobko, P., & Colella, A (1994). Employee reactions to performance standards: a review and research propositions. Personnel Psychology, 47, 1-29.
16. Bretz, R. D., Milkovich, G. T., & Read, W. (1992). The current state of performance appraisal research and practice: concerns, directions, and implications. Journal of Management, 18, 321-352.
17. Brockner, J., DeWitt, R. L., Grover, S., & Reed, T. (1990). When it is especially important to explain why: factors affecting the relationship between managers' explanations of a layoff and survivors' reactions to the layoff. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 26, 389-407.
18. Brockner, J., & Wiesenfeld, B. M. (1996). An integrative framework for explaining reactions to decisions: interactive effects of outcomes and procedures. Psychological Bulletin, 120, 189-208.
19. Brockner, J., Wiesenfeld, B. M., & Martin, C. L. (1995). Decision frame, procedural justice, and survivor's reactions to job layoffs. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 63, 59-68.
20. Budman, M., & Rice, B. (1994). The rating game. Across the Board, 31, 34-38.
21. Cameron, K., Freeman, S. J., & Mishra, A. (1991). Best practices in white-collar downsizmgs: managing contradictions. Academy of Management Executive, 5, 57-73.
22. Chiu, C. K., & Alliger, G. M. (1990). A proposed method to combine ranking and graphic rating in performance appraisal: the quantitative ranking scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 50, 493-504.
23. Conlon, D. E. (1993). Some tests of the self-interest and group-value models of procedural justice: evidence from an organizational appeal procedure. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 1109-1124.
24. Conlon, D. E., & Fasolo, P. M. (1990). Influence of speed of third-party intervention and outcome on negotiator and constituent fairness judgments. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 833-846.
25. Conlon, D. E., Lind, E. A., & Lissak, R. I. (1989). Nonlinear and nonmonotonic effects of outcome on procedural and distributive fairness judgments. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 19, 1085-1099.
26. Cropanzano, R. S., Kacmar, K. M., & Bozeman, D. P. (1995). The social setting of work organizations: politics, justice and support. In: R. S. Cropanzano, & K. M Kacmar (Eds.), Organizational politics, justice, and support: managing the social climate of the workplace (pp. 1-20). Westport, CT: Greenwood.
27. Daly, J. P. (1995). Explaining changes to employees: the influence of justifications and change outcomes on employees' fairness judgments. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 31, 415-428.
28. DeNisi, A. S., & Williams, K. J. (1988). Cognitive approaches to performance appraisal. In: G. R. Ferns (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resources management (vol. 6, pp. 109-155). Greenwich., CT: JAI Press.
29. Dickmson, T. L. (1993). Attitudes about performance appraisal. In: H. Schuler, J. L. Farr, & M. Smith (Eds.), Personnel selection and assessment: industrial and organizational perspectives (pp. 141-161). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
30. Dulebohn, J. H. (1997). Social influence injustice evaluations of human resources systems. In: G. R. Ferris (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resources management (vol. 15, pp. 241-291). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
31. Dulebohn, J.H, & Ferns, G. R. (1999). The role of influence tactics in perceptions of performance evaluations' fairness. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 288-303.
32. Earley, P. C. (1984), Informational mechanisms of participation influencing goal acceptance, satisfaction and performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
33. Earley, P. C., & Lind, E. A. (1987), Procedural justice and participation in task selection: the role of control in mediating justice judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 1148-1160.
34. Eden, D. (1990). Pygmalion in management: productivity as a self-fulfilling prophecy. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
35. Elsbach, K. D. (1994). Managing organizational legitimacy in the California cattle industry: the construction and effectiveness of verbal accounts. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39, 57-88.
36. Ferris, G. R., Judge, T. A., Rowland, K. M, & Fitzgibbons, D. E. (1994). Subordinate influence and the performance evaluation process: test of a model. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 58, 101-135.
37. Ferris, G. R., Mitchell, T. R., Canavan, P. J., Frink, D. D., & Hopper, H. (1995). Accountability in human resources systems. In: G. R. Ferris, S. D. Rosen, & D. T. Barnum (Eds.), Handbook of human resource management (pp. 175-196). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
38. Fisher, C. D. (1979). The transmission of positive and negative feedback to subordinates: a laboratory investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 533-540.
39. Folger, R. (1977). Distributive and procedural justice: combined impact of "voice" and improvement on experienced inequity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 108-119.
40. Folger, R. (1993). Reactions to mistreatment at work. In: J. K. Murnighan (Ed.), Social psychology in organizations: advances in theory and research (pp. 161-183). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
41. Folger, R., & Cropanzano, R. (1998). Organizational justice and human resource management. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
42. Folger, R., Konovsky, M. A., & Cropanzano, R. (1992). A due process metaphor for performance appraisal. In: B. M. Staw, & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (vol. 14, pp. 129-177). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
43. Folger, R., & Lewis, D. (1993). Self-appraisal and fairness in evaluations. In: R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Justice in the workplace: approaching fairness in human resource management (pp. 107-131). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
44. Frink, D. D., & Ferris, G. R. (1998). Accountability, impression management, and goal setting in the performance evaluation process. Human Relations, 51, 1259-1283.
45. Frink, D. D., & Klimoski, R. J. (1993). Toward a theory of accountability in organizations and human resources management. In: G. R. Ferns (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resources management (vol. 16, pp. 1-50). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
46. Greenberg, J. (1986), Determinants of perceived fairness of performance evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 340-342.
47. Greenberg, J. (1987), Reactions to procedural injustice in payment distributions: do the ends justify the means. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 55-61.
48. Greenberg, J. (1991). Using explanations to manage impressions of performance appraisal fairness. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 4, 51-60.
49. Greenberg, J., Eskew, D. E., & Miles, J. A. (1991, August). Adherence to participatory norms as a moderator of the fair process effect: when voice does not enhance procedural justice. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Miami, FL.
50. Henkoff, R. (1997). Are you (more man) ready for a pay raise? Fortune, 136, 233-238.
51. Ilgen, D. R. (1993). Performance-appraisal accuracy: an illusive or sometimes misguided goal? In: H. Schuler, J. L. Farr, & M. Smith (Eds.), Personnel selection and assessment: industrial and organizational perspectives (pp. 235-252). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
52. Ilgen, D. R., Barnes-Farrell, J. L., & McKellin, D. B. (1993). Performance appraisal process research in the 1980s: what has it contributed to appraisals in use? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 54, 321-368.
53. Ilgen, D. R., & Feldman, J. M. (1983), Performance appraisal: a process focus. In: B. M. Staw, & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (pp. 141-197). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
54. Ilgen, D. R., & Knowlton, W. A. (1980). Performance attributional effects on feedback from superiors. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 25, 441-456.
55. Jawahar, I. M., & Williams, C. R. (1997). Where all the children are above average: the performance appraisal purpose effect. Personnel Psychology, 50, 905-925.
56. Judge, T. A., & Ferris, G. R. (1993). Social context of performance evaluation decisions. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 80-105.
57. Kipnis, D., & Schmidt, S. M. (1988). Upward influence styles: relationship with performance evaluations, salary, and stress. Administrative Science Quarterly, 33, 528-542.
58. Khmoski, R., & Inks, L. (1990). Accountability forces in performance appraisal. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 45, 194-208.
59. Korsgaard, M. A., & Roberson, L. (1995). Procedural justice m performance evaluation: the role of instrumental and non-instrumental voice in performance appraisal discussions. Journal of Management, 21, 657-670.
60. Landy, F. J., Barnes, J. L., & Murphy, K. R. (1978). Correlates of perceived fairness and accuracy of performance evaluation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63, 751-754.
61. Landy, F. J., Barnes-Farrell, J., & Cleveland, J. N. (1980). Perceived fairness and accuracy of performance evaluation: a follow-up. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 355-356.
62. Landy, F. J., & Fair, J. L. (1980). Performance rating. Psychological Bulletin, 87, 72-107.
63. Larson, J. R. (1989), The dynamic interplay between employees' feedback-seeking strategies and supervisors' delivery of performance feedback. Academy of Management Review, 14, 408-422.
64. Lawler, E. E., Mohrman, A. M., & Resnick, S. M. (1984, Summer). Performance appraisal revisited. Organizational Dynamics, 20-35.
65. Leventhal, G. S. (1980). What should be done with equity theory? In: K. J. Gergen, M. S. Greenberg, & R. H. Willis (Eds.), Social exchange: advances in theory and research (pp. 27-55). New York: Plenum.
66. Lind, E. A., Kanter, R., & Earley, P. C. (1990). Voice, control, and procedural justice: instrumental and non-instrumental concerns in fairness judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 952-959.
67. Lind, E. A., & Lissak, R. I. (1985), Apparent impropriety and procedural fairness judgments. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 21, 19-29.
68. Lind, E. A., Lissak, R. I., & Conlon, D. E. (1983), Decision control and process control effects on procedural fairness judgments. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 13, 338-350.
69. Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York: Plenum.
70. Maier, N. R. F. (1976). The appraisal interview: three basic approaches. La Jolla, CA: University Associates.
71. Mirowsky, J., & Ross, C. E. (1990). Control or defense? Depression and the sense of control over good and bad outcomes. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 31, 71-86.
72. Murphy, K. R., & Cleveland, J. N. (1991). Performance appraisal: an organizational perspective. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
73. Murphy, K. R., & Cleveland, J. N. (1995). Understanding performance appraisal: social, organizational, and goal-based perspectives. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
74. Nathan, B. R., Mohrman, A. M., & Milliman, J. (1991). Interpersonal relations as a context for the effects of appraisal interviews on performance and satisfaction: a longitudinal study. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 352-369.
75. Pearce, J. L., & Porter, L. W. (1986). Employee responses to formal performance appraisal feedback. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 211-218.
76. Riordan, C. A., Marlin, N. A., & Kellogg, R. T. (1983), The effectiveness of accounts following transgression. Social Psychology Quarterly, 46, 213-219.
77. Roberts, G. E. (1994). Barriers to municipal government performance appraisal systems: evidence from a survey of municipal personnel administrators. Public Personnel Management, 23, 225-236.
78. Schaubroeck, J., May, D. R., & Brown, F. W. (1994). Procedural justice explanations and employee reactions to economic hardship: a field experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 455-460.
79. Shapiro, D. L. (1991). The effects of explanations on negative reactions to deceit. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 614-630.
80. Shapiro, D. L. (1993). Reconciling theoretical differences among procedural justice researchers by reevaluating what it means to have one's views "considered": implications for third-party managers. In: R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Justice in the workplace: approaching fairness in human resource management (pp. 51-78). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
81. Taylor, M. S., Fisher, C. D., & Ilgen, D. R. (1984), Individuals' reactions to performance feedback in organizations: a control theory perspective. In: K. M. Rowland, G. R. Ferris (Eds.) Research in personnel and human resources management (vol. 2, pp. 81-124). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
82. Taylor, M. S., Masterson, K. B., Renard, M. K., & Tracy, K. E. (1998). Managers' reactions to procedurally just performance management systems. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 568-579.
83. Taylor, M. S., Tracy, K. B., Renard, M. K., Harrison, J. K., & Carroll, S. J. (1994). Due process in performance appraisal: a quasi-experiment in procedural justice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 495-523.
84. Tetlock, P. E. (1985), Accountability: the neglected social context of judgment and choice. In: L. L. Cummings, & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (vol. 7, pp. 297-332). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
85. Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: a psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
86. Tyler, T. R. (1987), Conditions leading to value-expressive effects in judgments of procedural justice: a test of four models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 333-344.
87. Tyler, T. R. (1989), The psychology of procedural justice: a test of the group-value model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 830-838.
88. Tyler, T. R. (1990). Using procedures to justify outcomes: managing conflict and allocating resources in work organizations. Working paper No. 50-90, Northwestern University Dispute Resolution Research Center, Evanston, IL.
89. Tyler, T. R., & Bies, R. J. (1990). Beyond formal procedures: the interpersonal context of procedural justice. In: J. S. Carroll (Ed.), Applied social psychology and organizational settings (pp. 77-98). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
90. Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A (1990). Intrinsic versus community-based justice models: when does group membership matter? Journal of Social Issues, 46, 83-94.
91. Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1992). A relational model of authority in groups. In: M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 115-191). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
92. Tyler, T. R., Rasinski, K. A., & Spodick, N. (1985), Influence of voice on satisfaction with leaders: exploring the meaning of process control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 72-81.
93. Villanova, P., Bemardin, H. J., Dahmus, S. A., & Sims, R. L. (1993). Rater leniency and performance appraisal discomfort. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 789-799.
94. Wemer, B. (1985), An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological Review, 92, 548-573.
95. Wexley, K. N., & Klimoski, R. J. (1984), Performance appraisal: an update. In: K. M. Rowland, & G. R. Ferris (Eds.), Research in personnel and human resource management (vol. 2, pp. 35-79). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.