The impact of the perceived purpose of electronic performance monitoring on an array of attitudinal variables

Human Resource Development Quarterly

Volumn 18, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 121-138

  Wells, Deborah L ^a   Moorman, Robert H ^a   Werner, Jon M ^b  

^a CREIGHTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN WHITEWATER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34147200291     PISSN: 10448004     EISSN: 15321096     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/hrdq.1194     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1977). Attitude-behavior relations: A theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychological Research, 84, 888-918.
2. Alder, G. S., & Ambrose, M. L. (2000). Feedback's influence on the perceived fairness of computer performance monitoring: An empirical investigation. Paper presented at the National Academy of Management Meetings, Toronto.
3. Alder, G. S., & Ambrose, M. L. (2005a). An examination of the effect of computerized performance monitoring on monitoring fairness, performance, and satisfaction. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 97, 161-177.
4. Alder, G. S., & Ambrose, M. L. (2005b). Towards understanding fairness judgments associated with computer performance monitoring: An integration of the feedback, justice, and monitoring research. Human Resource Management Review, 15, 43-67.
5. Alder, G. S., & Tompkins, P. K. (1997). Electronic performance monitoring: An organizational justice and concertive control perspective. Management Communication Quarterly, 10, 259-288.
6. Alge, B. J. (2001). Effects of computer surveillance on perceptions of privacy and procedural justice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 797-804.
7. Balzer, W. K., & Sulsky, L. M. (1990). Performance appraisal effectiveness. In K. R. Murphy & F. E. Saal (Eds.), Psychology in organizations: Integrating science and practice. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
8. Boswell, W. R., & Boudreau, J. W. (2000). Employee satisfaction with performance appraisals and appraisers: The role of perceived appraisal use. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 11, 283-299.
9. Boswell, W. R., & Boudreau, J. W. (2002). Separating the developmental and evaluative performance appraisal uses. Journal of Business and Psychology, 16, 391-412.
10. 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.
11. Business Wire. (2005, May 18). Electronic monitoring and surveillance survey: Many companies monitoring, recording, videotaping - and firing - employees. Retrieved August 18, 2006, from http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb? index=5&did=841311511&SrchMode=l&sid=26iFmt=3&VInst= PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS=1165523194&clientld= 3852.
12. Cleveland, J. N., Murphy, K. R., & Williams, R. E. (1989). Multiple uses of performance appraisal: Prevalences and correlates. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 130-135.
13. Coomes, A. (2005, June 25). Employers tracking e-mail, Web use. Surveys show more companies are monitoring their workers. Houston Chronicle, 2.
14. Douthitt, E. A., & Aiello, J. R. (2001). The role of participation and control in the effects of computer monitoring on fairness perceptions, task satisfaction, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 867-874.
15. Eisenberger, R., Armeli, S., Rexwinkel, B., Lynch, P. D., & Rhoades, L. (2001). Reciprocation of perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 42-51.
16. Ellickson, M. C. (2002). Determinants of job satisfaction of municipal government employees. Public Personnel Management, 31, 343-358.
17. Gosselin, A., Werner, J. M., & Hallé, N. (1997). Ratee preferences concerning performance management and appraisal. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 8, 315-333.
18. Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1975). Development of the Job Diagnostic Survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 159-170.
19. Holladay, C. L., Knight, J. L., Paige, D. L., & Quinones, M. A. (2003). The influence of framing on attitudes toward diversity training. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 14, 245-263.
20. Ilgen, D. R., & Davis C. A. (2000). Bearing bad news: Reactions to negative performance feedback. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 3, 550-565.
21. Ilgen, D. R., Fisher, C. D., & Taylor, M. S. (1979). Consequences of individual feedback on behavior in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 349-371.
22. Irving, R. H., Higgins, C. A., & Safayeni, F. R. (1986). Computerized performance monitoring systems: Use and abuse. Communications of the ACM, 29, 794-801.
23. Keeping, L. M., & Levy, P. E. (2000). Performance appraisal reactions: Measurement, modeling, and method bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 708-723.
24. Komaki, J. L. (1986). Toward effective supervision: An operant analysis and comparison of managers at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 270-279.
25. Lam, S.S.K., Yik, M.S.M., & Schaubroeck, J. (2002). Responses to formal performance appraisal feedback: The role of negative affectivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 192-201.
26. Landy, F. J., & Farr, J. L. (1980). Performance rating. Psychological Bulletin, 87, 72-107.
27. Landy, F. J., & Farr, J. L. (1983). The measurement of work performance: Methods, theory, and applications. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
28. Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York: Plenum Press.
29. McFarland, C., & Miller, D. T. (1994). The framing of relative performance feedback: Seeing the glass as half empty or half full. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 1061-1073.
30. Meyer, H. H., Kay, E., & French, J.R.P. (1965). Split roles in performance appraisal. Harvard Business Review, 43, 123-129.
31. Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1984). Testing the "side-bet theory" of organizational commitment: Some methodological considerations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 710-720.
32. Moorman, R. H., & Wells, D. L. (2003). Can electronic performance monitoring be fair? Exploring relationships among monitoring characteristics, perceived fairness, and job performance. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 10, 2-16.
33. Nebeker, D. M., & Tatum, C. B. (1993). The effects of computer monitoring, standards, and rewards on work performance, job satisfaction, and stress. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 508-536.
34. Noe, R. A. (2005). Employee training and development (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
35. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
36. Onley, D. S. (2005). Technology gives big brother capability. HR Magazine, 50, 99-102.
37. Ostroff, C. (1993). Rater perceptions, satisfaction and performance ratings. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 66, 345-356.
38. Parenti, C. (2001). Big brother's corporate cousin. Nation, 273(5), 26-31.
39. Pearce, J. L., & Porter, L. W. (1986). Employee responses to formal performance appraisal feedback. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 211-218.
40. Pettijohn, C. E., Pettijohn, L. S., & d'Amico, M. (2001). Characteristics of performance appraisals and their impact on sales force satisfaction. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 12, 127-146.
41. Prince, J. B., & Lawler, E. E., III (1986). Does salary discussion hurt the developmental performance appraisal? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 357-375.
42. Rhoades, L., & Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of the literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 698-714.
43. Stanton, J. M. (2000). Reactions to employee performance monitoring: Framework, review, and research directions. Human Performance, 13, 85-113.
44. Stanton, J. M. (2002). Traditional and electronic monitoring from an organizational justice perspective. Journal of Business and Psychology, 15, 129-147.
45. Swanson, R. A., & Holton, E. F., III (2001). Foundations of human resource development San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
46. Vohra, N., & Singh, M. (2005). Mental traps to avoid while interpreting feedback: Insights from administering feedback to school principals. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 16, 139-147.
47. Werner, J. M., & DeSimone, R. L. (2006). Human resource development (4th ed.). Cincinnati: Thomson/South-Westem.
48. Workman, M. (2003). Results from organizational development interventions in a technology call center. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 14, 215-230.
49. Zweig, D., & Webster, J. (2002). Where is the line between benign and invasive? An examination of psychological barriers to the acceptance of awareness monitoring systems. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 605-633.