Subjective performance appraisal and inequality aversion

Applied Economics

Volumn 44, Issue 17, 2012, Pages 2149-2155

  Grund, Christian ^a   Przemeck, Judith ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WÜRZBURG   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BONN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Appraisals; Centrality bias; Inequality aversion; Leniency bias; Performance evaluation

Indexed keywords

EMPLOYMENT; LABOR; NUMERICAL MODEL; PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT; THEORETICAL STUDY;

EID: 80051748623     PISSN: 00036846     EISSN: 14664283     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00036846.2011.560109     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Agell, J. and Lundborg, P. (1995) Theories of pay and unemployment: survey evidence from Swedish manufacturing firms, Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 97, 295-307.
2. Bernardin, J. H. and Buckley, R. M. (1981) Strategies in rater training, The Academy of Management Review, 6, 205-12.
3. Bol, J. C. (2005) Subjective performance evaluation, AAA Management Accounting Section (MAS) 2006 Meeting Paper No. SSRN-id771565.
4. Bol, J. C. (2008) The determinants and performance effects of supervisor bias, SSRN Discussion Paper No. SSRN-id1089077.
5. Bretz, R. D., Milkovich, G. T. and Read, W. (1992) The current state of performance appraisal research and practice: concerns, directions, and implications, Journal of Management, 18, 312-52.
6. Breuer, K., Nieken, P. and Sliwka, D. (2008) Social ties and subjective performance evaluations-an empirical investigation, Working Paper, University of Cologne.
7. Cleveland, J. N., Murphy, K. R. and Williams, R. E. (1989) Multiple uses of performance appraisal: prevalence and correlates, Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 130-5.
8. Englmaier, F. (2005) A survey on moral hazard, contracts, and social preferences, in Psychology, Rationality and Economic Behaviour: Challenging Standard Assumptions (Eds) B. Agarwal and A. Vercelli, Macmillan, New York, pp. 125-39.
9. Fehr, E. and Schmidt, K. M. (1999) A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114, 817-68.
10. Fehr, E. and Schmidt, K. M. (2003) Theories of fairness and reciprocity-evidence and economic applications, in Advances in Economics and Econometrics, Theory and Applications (Eds) M. Dewatripont, L. Hansen and S. Turnovsky, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 208-57.
11. Ferris, G. R. and Judge, T. A. (1991) Personnel/human resources management: a political influence perspective, Journal of Management, 17, 447-88.
12. Fox, S., Bizman, A. and Herrman, E. (1983) The halo effect: is it a unitary concept?, Journal of Occupational Psychology, 56, 289-96.
13. Giebe, T. and Gürtler, O. (2009) Optimal contracts for lenient supervisors, GEABA Discussion Paper No. 08-08.
14. Grund, C. and Przemeck, J. (2008) Subjective performance evaluation and inequality aversion, IZA Discussion Paper No. 3382.
15. Holmstrom, B. and Milgrom, P. (1987) Aggregation and linearity in the provision of intertemporal incentives, Econometrica, 55, 303-28.
16. Holmstrom, B. and Milgrom, P. R. (1991) Multitask principal-agent analyses: incentive contracts, asset ownership, and job design, Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 7, 24-52.
17. Ittner, C. D., Larcker, D. F. and Meyer, M. W. (2003) Subjectivity and the weighting of performance measures: evidence from a balanced scorecard, The Accounting Review, 78, 725-58.
18. Jawahar, I. M. and Williams, C. R. (1997) Where all the children are above average: the performance appraisal purpose effect, Personnel Psychology, 50, 905-26.
19. Levy, P. E. and Williams, J. R. (2004) The social context of performance appraisal: a review and framework for the future, Journal of Management, 30, 881-905.
20. Meyer, H. (1975) The pay for performance dilemma, Organizational Dynamics, 3, 39-50.
21. Milgrom, P. R. and Roberts, J. (1988) An economic approach to influence activities in organizations, American Journal of Sociology, 94, S-154-79.
22. Murphy, K. J. (1992) Performance measurement and appraisal: motivating managers to identify and reward performance, in Performance Measurement, Evaluation, and Incentives (Ed.) W. J. Bruns, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, pp. 37-62.
23. Murphy, K. R. and Cleveland, J. N. (1991) Performance Appraisal: An Organizational Perspective, Allyn and Bacon, Bosten.
24. Murphy, K. R. and Cleveland, J. N. (1995) Understanding Performance Appraisal, Sage, Thousand Oaks.
25. Prendergast, C. (2002) Uncertainty and incentives, Journal of Labor Economics, 20, S115-37.
26. Prendergast, C. and Topel, R. (1996) Favoritism in organizations, Journal of Political Economy, 104, 958-78.
27. Reichelstein, S. (1997) Investment decisions and managerial performance evaluation, Review of Accounting Studies, 2, 157-80.
28. Sliwka, D. (2007) Loss aversion and bias in subjective performance evaluations, mimeo, University of Cologne.
29. Sliwka, D. (2009) Accuracy, social preferences and bias in subjective performance evaluation, mimeo, University of Cologne.
30. Varma, A., Denisi, A. S. and Peters, L. H. (1996) Interpersonal affect and performance appraisals: a field study, Personnel Psychology, 49, 341-60.