Performance appraisal interviews: Preference organization in assessment sequences

Journal of Business Communication

Volumn 45, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 408-429

  Asmuß, Birte ^a,b  

^a AARHUS UNIVERSITY   (Denmark)

^b AARHUS SCHOOL OF BUSINESS   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Assessments; Conversation analysis; Internal communication; Performance appraisal interviews; Preference

Indexed keywords

EID: 51049088189     PISSN: 00219436     EISSN: 15524582     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0021943608319382     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Allen, K.L. (2000, April). Reappraising performance appraisal. Across the Board, p. 62.
2. American Psychological Association. (2005). Publication manual (5 th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
3. Arminen, I. (2000). On the context sensitivity of institutional interaction. Discourse & Society, 11 (4). 435-458.
4. Asmuß, B., & Steensig, J. (Eds.) (2003). Samtalen p arbejde-Konversationsanalyse og kompetenceudvikling. [Conversation at the workplace-Conversation analysis and competence development.]. Copenhagen, Denmark: Samfundslitteratur.
5. Asmuß, B., & Steensig, J. (2005). Notes on disaligning 'yes but' initiated utterances in German and Danish conversations. Two construction types for dispreferred responses. In A. Hakulinen & M. Selting (Eds.), Syntax and lexis in conversation (pp. 349-373). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
6. Atkinson, M., & Heritage, J. (1984). Preference organization. In M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action (pp. 53-56). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
7. Baker, C., Emmison, M., & Firth, A. (Eds.) (2005). Calling for help: Language and social interaction in telephone helplines (Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 143). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
8. Boden, D. (1994). The business of talk. Organizations in action. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
9. Clifton, J. (2006). A conversation analytical approach to business communication: The case of leadership. Journal of Business Communication, 43 (3). 202-219.
10. Drew, P., & Heritage, J. (Eds.) (1992). Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
11. Fellinger,. (2005). Svære medarbejdersamtaler. Bliv en bedre chef [Difficult employee performance appraisals. Become a better boss]. Copenhagen, Denmark: Jyllands-Postens Forlag.
12. Firth, A. (Ed.). (1995). The discourse of negotiation: Studies of language in the workplace. Oxford, UK: Pergamon.
13. Fletcher, C. (2001). Performance appraisal and management: The developing research agenda. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74, 473-487.
14. Frimann, S. (2004). I sauna med chefen? (u)muligheder i medarbejderudviklingssamtalen [In the sauna with the boss? (Im)possibilities in employee performance appraisals]. In H. Alrø & M. Kristiansen (Eds.), Dialog og magt i organisationer [Dialogue and power in organizations] (pp. 129-167). Aalborg, Denmark: Aalborg Universitetsforlag.
15. Gabris, G., & Ihrke, D. (2001). Does performance appraisal contribute to heightened levels of employee burnout? The results of one study. Public Personnel Management, 30 (2). 157-172.
16. Golser-Wamser, C. (2005). Internal communication across Europe 2005. A research report by Feiea in cooperation with Trident Communciations. Retrieved from http://www.feiea.com/menu,1875,page,1875.html.
17. Grote, D. (2000, May). The secrets of performance appraisal. Best practices from the masters. Across the Board, pp. 14-20.
18. Heritage, J. (1984). Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
19. Heritage, J., & Stivers, T. (1999). Online commentary in acute medical visits: A method of shaping patient expectations. Social Science and Medicine, 49 (11). 1501-1517.
20. Housley, W. (2000). Category work and knowledgeability within multidisciplinary team meetings. Text, 20, 83-107.
21. Houtkoop-Steenstra, H. (2000). Interaction and the standardized interview. The living questionnaire. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
22. Kotthoff, H. (1993). Disagreement and concession in disputes: On the context sensitivity of preference structures. Language in Society, 22, 193-216.
23. Laird, A., & Clampitt, P. (1985). Effective performance appraisal: Viewpoints from managers. Journal of Business Communication, 22 (3). 49-57.
24. Lerner, G.H. (1996). Finding 'face' in the preference structures of talk-in-interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly, 59 (4). 303-321.
25. Lindstrm, A. (2005). Offers and requests in the Swedish home help service. In A. Hakulinen & M. Selting (Eds.), Syntax and lexis in conversation (pp. 209-230). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
26. Losyk, B. (2002). How to conduct a performance appraisal. Public Management, 84 (3). 8-11.
27. Mani, B.G. (2002). Performance appraisal systems, productivity, and motivation: A case study. Public Personnel Management, 31 (2). 141-159.
28. Maynard, D.W., & Heritage, J. (2005). Conversation analysis, doctor-patient interaction and medical communication. Medical Education, 39, 428-435.
29. Maynard, D. W., Houtkoop-Steenstra, H., Schaeffer N. C., & van der Zouwen, J. (Eds.). (2002). Standardization and tacit knowledge. Interaction and practice in the survey interview. New York: John Wiley.
30. Mikkelsen, A. (2002). Medarbeidersamtaler i det nye arbeidslivet [Employee performance appraisals in the new work life]. Oslo, Norway: Cappelen.
31. Nathan, B.R., Mohrman, A.M., & Millman, J. (1991). Interpersonal relations as a context for the effects of appraisal interviews on performance and satisfaction: A longitudinal study. Academy of Management Journal, 24 (2). 352-369.
32. Neuberger, O. (1998). Das Mitarbeitergesprch. Praktische Grundlagen fr erfolgreiche Fhrungsarbeit [The employee performance appraisal. Practical basis for successful leadership]. Leonberg, Germany: Rosenberger Fachverlag.
33. Perkyl, A. (2002). Agency and authority: Extended responses to diagnostic statements in primary care encounters. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 35, 219-247.
34. Pomerantz, A. (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action. Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 57-101). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
35. Poon, J.M.L. (2004). Effects of performance appraisal politics on job satisfaction and turnover intention. Personnel Review, 33 (3). 322-334.
36. Rasmussen, G., & Wagner, J. (2002). Language choice in international telephone conversations. In K. K. Luke & T. Pavlidou (Eds.), Telephone calls: Unity and diversity in conversational structure across languages and cultures (pp. 111-131). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
37. Roberts, G.E. (2002). Employee performance appraisal system participation: A technique that works. Public Personnel Management, 31 (3). 333-342.
38. Ruusuvuori, J. (2005). 'Empathy' and 'sympathy' in action: Attending to patients' troubles in Finnish homeopathic and general practice consultations. Social Psychology Quarterly, 68 (3). 204-222.
39. Sacks, H. (1987). On the preferences for agreement and contiguity in sequences in conversation. In G. Button & J. R. E. Lee (Eds.), Talk and social organization (pp. 54-69). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
40. Sacks, H. (1992). Lectures on conversation. (G. Jefferson, Ed., Vols. I & II). Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
41. Sacks, H., Schegloff, E., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50 (4). 696-735.
42. Scheuer, J. (2001). Ledelsesmæssige idealer og sproglig virkelighed i medarbejdersamtaler [Management ideals and linguistic reality in employee performance appraisals]. Tidsskrift for Arbejdsliv, 4, 27-48.
43. Scott, S.G., & Einstein, W.O. (2001). Strategic performance appraisal in team-based organizations: One size does not fit all. Academy of Management Executive, 15 (2). 107-116.
44. Soltani, E. (2005). Conflict between theory and practice: TQM and performance appraisal. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 22 (8). 796-818.
45. Stubbe, M., Lane, C., Hilder, J., Vine, E., Vine, B., & Marra, M. (2003). Multiple discourse analyses of workplace interaction. Discourse Studies, 5, 351-388.
46. Weick, K.E. (2004). A bias for conversation: Acting discursively in organizations. In D. Grant, C. Hardy, C. Coswick, & L. Putnam (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational discourse (pp. 405-412). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.