Effects of Subordinate Likeability and Balanced Scorecard Format on Performance-Related Judgments

Advances in Accounting

Volumn 23, Issue , 2007, Pages 85-111

  Kaplan, Steven E ^a   Petersen, Michael J ^a   Samuels, Janet A ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34648816393     PISSN: 08826110     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1016/S0882-6110(07)23004-4     Document Type: Review

References (44)

1. Alexander E.R., and Wilkins R.D. Performance rating validity: The relationship between objective and subjective measures of performance. Group and Organization Studies 7 4 (1982) 485-496
2. Anderson N.H. Likableness ratings of 555 personality-trait words. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 9 3 (1968) 272-279
3. Antonioni D., and Park H. The relationship between rater affect and three sources of 360-degree feedback ratings. Journal of Management 27 4 (2001) 479-495
4. Baddeley A. The magical number seven: Still magic after all these years?. Psychological Review 101 2 (1994) 353-356
5. Baltes B.B., and Parker C.P. Reducing the effects of performance expectations on behavioral ratings. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 82 2 (2000) 237-267
6. Balzer W.K. Biases in the recording of performance-related information: The effects of initial impression and centrality of the appraisal task. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 37 3 (1986) 329-347
7. Banker R.D., Chang H., and Pizzini M.J. The balanced scorecard: Judgmental effects of performance measures linked to strategy. The Accounting Review 79 1 (2004) 1-23
8. Baron R.M., and Kenny D.A. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51 6 (1986) 1173-1182
9. Bates R. Liking and similarity as predictors of multi-source ratings. Personnel Review 31 5/6 (2002) 540-552
10. Bonner S. A model of the effects of audit task complexity. Accounting, Organizations and Society 19 3 (1994) 213-234
11. Cardy R.L., and Dobbins G.H. Affect and appraisal accuracy. Liking as an integral dimension in evaluating performance. Journal of Applied Psychology 71 4 (1986) 672-678
12. Cardy R.L., and Dobbins G.H. Performance appraisal: The influence of liking on cognition. Advances in Managerial Cognition and Organizational Information Processing 5 (1994) 115-140
13. DeNisi A.S., Robbins T.L., and Summers T.P. Organization, processing, and use of performance information: A cognitive role for performance instruments. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 27 21 (1997) 1884-1905
14. Dilla W.N., and Steinbart P.J. Relative weighting of common and unique balanced scorecard measures by knowledgeable decision makers. Behavioral Research in Accounting 17 (2005) 43-53
15. Dipboye R.L. Some neglected variables in research on discrimination in appraisal. Academy of Management Review 10 1 (1985) 116-127
16. Dobbins G.H., and Russell J.M. The biasing effects of subordinate likeableness on leaders' responses to poor performance: A laboratory and a field study. Personnel Psychology 39 4 (1986) 759-777
17. Ittner C.D., Larcker D.F., and Meyer M.W. Subjectivity and the weighting of performance measures: Evidence from a balanced scorecard. The Accounting Review 78 3 (2003) 725-758
18. Kadous K. Improving jurors' evaluations of auditors in negligence cases. Contemporary Accounting Research 18 3 (2001) 425-444
19. Kaplan R., and Norton D. The balanced scorecard - measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review 70 1 (1992) 71-79
20. Kaplan R., and Norton D. The balanced scorecard (1996), Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA
21. Kaplan R., and Norton D. Using the balanced scorecard as a strategic management system. Harvard Business Review 74 1 (1996) 75-85
22. Kida T.E., Moreno K.K., and Smith J.F. The influence of affect on managers' capital-budgeting decisions. Contemporary Accounting Research 18 3 (2001) 477-494
23. Kida T.E., and Smith J.F. The encoding and retrieval of numerical data for decision making in accounting contexts: Model development. Accounting, Organizations, and Society 20 7/8 (1995) 585-610
24. Kunda Z. The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin 108 3 (1990) 480-498
25. Lefkowitz J. The role of interpersonal affective regard in supervisory performance ratings: A literature review and proposed causal model. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 73 1 (2000) 67-85
26. Libby T., Salterio S.E., and Webb A. The balanced scorecard: The effects of assurance and process accountability on managerial judgment. The Accounting Review 79 4 (2004) 1075-1094
27. Lipe M.G., and Salterio S. The balanced scorecard: Judgmental effects of common and unique performance measures. The Accounting Review 75 3 (2000) 283-298
28. Lipe M.G., and Salterio S. A note on the judgmental effects of the balanced scorecard's information organization. Accounting, Organization and Society 27 6 (2002) 531-540
29. Miller G.A. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review 63 (1956) 81-97
30. Moreno K., Kida T., and Smith J.F. The impact of affective reactions on risky decision making in accounting contexts. Journal of Accounting Research 40 5 (2002) 1331-1349
31. Murphy K.R., and Cleveland J.N. Performance appraisal: An organizational perspective (1991), Allyn and Bacon, Boston, MA
32. Murphy K.R., Gannett B.A., Herr B.M., and Chen J.A. Effects of subsequent performance on evaluations of previous performance. Journal of Applied Psychology 71 3 (1986) 427-431
33. Park O.S., Sims H.P., and Motowildo S.J. Affect in organizations. In: Sims H.P., and Gioia D.A. (Eds). The thinking organization (1987), Josey-Bass, San Francisco 215-237
34. Robbins T.L., and DeNisi A.S. Interpersonal affect and cognitive processing in performance appraisal: Towards closing the gap. Journal of Applied Psychology 79 3 (1994) 341-350
35. Robbins T.L., and DeNisi A.S. Mood vs. interpersonal affect: Identifying process and rating distortions in performance appraisal. Journal of Business and Psychology 12 3 (1998) 313-325
36. Roberts M.L., Albright T.L., and Hibbets A.R. Debiasing balanced scorecard evaluations. Behavioral Research in Accounting 16 (2004) 75-88
37. Shanteau J. Psychological characteristics and strategies of expert decision makers. Acta Psychologica 68 1-3 (1988) 203-215
38. Tsui A.S., and Barry B. Interpersonal affect and rating errors. Academy of Management Journal 29 3 (1986) 586-599
39. Turban D.B., Jones A.P., and Rozelle R.M. Influences of supervisor liking of a subordinate and the reward context on the treatment and evaluation of that subordinate. Motivation and Emotion 14 3 (1990) 215-233
40. Ullrich M.J., and Tuttle B.M. The effects of comprehensive information reporting systems and economic incentives on managers' time-planning decisions. Behavioral Research in Accounting 16 (2004) 89-105
41. Varma A., Denisi A.S., and Peters L.H. Interpersonal affect and performance appraisal. Personnel Psychology 49 2 (1996) 341-360
42. Wong-On-Wing B., Guo L., Li W., and Yang D. Reducing conflict in balanced scorecard evaluations. Accounting, Organizations and Society 32 4-5 (2007) 363-377
43. Wood R.E. Task complexity: Definition of the construct. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 37 1 (1986) 60-82
44. Zajonc R.B. Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist 35 2 (1980) 151-175