Improvements in performance management through the use of 360 feedback

Industrial and Organizational Psychology

Volumn 8, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 85-93

  Campion, Michael C ^a   Campion, Emily D ^b   Campion, Michael A ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO   (United States)

^c PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84994589525     PISSN: 17549426     EISSN: 17549434     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/iop.2015.3     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Antonioni, D. (1994). The effects of feedback accountability on upward appraisal ratings. Personnel Psychology, 47, 349-356. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1994.tb01728.x
2. Antonioni, D. (1996). Designing an effective 360-degree appraisal feedback process. Organizational Dynamics, 25(2), 24-38. doi:10.1016/S0090-2616(96)90023-6
3. Bernardin, J. H. (1986). Subordinate appraisal:Avaluable source of information aboutmanagers. Human Resource Management, 25, 421-439. doi:10.1002/hrm.3930250307
4. Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. M. (1993). Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual performance. In N. Schmitt & W. C. Borman (Eds.), Personnel selection in organizations (pp. 71-98). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
5. Campion, M. C., Campion, E. D., & Campion, M. A. (2014). Practice feedback: Using best practices to develop a model for using 360-feedback for performance management. Unpublished manuscript.
6. Church, A. H., & Bracken, D.W. (1997). Advancing the state of the art of 360-degree feedback. Group & Organization Management, 22, 149-161. doi:10.1177/1059601197222002
7. Conway, J., & Huffcutt, A. (1997). Psychometric properties ofmultisource performance ratings: A meta-analysis of subordinate, supervisor, peer, and self-ratings. Human Performance, 10, 331-360. doi:10.1207/s15327043hup1004_2
8. DeNisi, A. S., & Kluger, A. N. (2000). Feedback effectiveness: Can 360-degree appraisals be improved? Academy of Management Executive, 14(1), 129-139.
9. Flint, D. H. (1999). The role of organizational justice inmulti-source performance appraisal: Theory-based applications and directions for research. Human Resource Management Review, 9, 1-20. doi:10.1016/S1053-4822(99)00009-1
10. 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.
11. Greguras, G. J., Ford, J. M., & Brutus, S. (2003).Manager attention tomultisource feedback. Journal of Management Development, 22, 345-361. doi:10.1108/02621710310467631
12. Greguras, G. J., & Robie, C. (1998). A new look at within-source interrater reliability of 360-degree feedback ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 960-968. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.83.6.960
13. Greguras, G. J., Robie, C., Schleicher, D. J., & Goff, M., III. (2003). A field study of the effects of rating purpose on the quality ofmultisource ratings. Personnel Psychology, 56, 1-21. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2003.tb00141.x
14. Griffin, M. A., Neal, A., & Parker, S. K. (2007). A new model of work role performance: Positive behavior in uncertain and interdependent contexts. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 327-347. doi:10.5465/AMJ.2007.24634438
15. Hannum, K. M. (2007). Measurement equivalence of 360-degree assessment data: Are different raters rating the same constructs? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 15, 293-301. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2389.2007.00389.x
16. Harris, M. M., & Schaubroeck, J. (1988). A meta-analysis of self-supervisor, self-peer, and peer-supervisor ratings. Personnel Psychology, 41, 43-62. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1988.tb00631.x
17. Hazucha, J. F., Hezlett, S. A., & Schneider, R. J. (1993). The impact of 360-degree feedback on management skills development. Human ResourceManagement, 32, 325-351. doi:10.1002/hrm.3930320210
18. He, Z.-L., & Wong, P. K. (2004). Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organization Science, 15, 481-494. doi:10.1287/orsc.1040.0078
19. Hollander, E. P. (1954). Buddy ratings: Military research and industrial implications. Personnel Psychology, 7, 385-393. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1954.tb01607.x
20. Kane, J. S., & Lawler, E. E., III. (1978). Methods of peer assessment. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 555-586. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.85.3.555
21. LeBreton, J. M., Burgess, J. R., Kaiser, R. B., Atchley, K. E., & James, L. R. (2003). The restriction of variance hypothesis and interrater reliability and agreement: Are ratings from multiple sources really dissimilar? Organizational Research Methods, 6, 80-128. doi:10.1177/1094428102239427
22. LePine, J. A., Erez, A., & Johnson, D. E. (2002). The nature and dimensionality of organizational citizenship behavior: A critical review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 52-65. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.87.1.52
23. Lewin, A. Y., & Zwany, A. (1976). Peer nominations: A model, literature critique and a paradigm for research. Personnel Psychology, 29, 423-447. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1976.tb00426.x
24. London, M., & Beatty, R.W. (1993). 360-degree feedback as a competitive advantage. Human Resource Management, 32, 353-372. doi:10.1002/hrm.3930320211
25. London, M., & Wohlers, A. J. (1991). Agreement between subordinate and self-ratings in upward feedback. Personnel Psychology, 44, 375-390. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb00964.x
26. March, J. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2, 71-87. doi:10.1287/orsc.2.1.71
27. Maurer, T. J., Mitchell, D. R. D., & Barbeite, F G. (2002). Predictors of attitudes toward a 360-degree feedback system and involvement in post-feedback management development activity. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75, 87-107. doi:10.1348/096317902167667
28. McDowall, A., & Fletcher, C. (2004). Employee development: An organizational justice perspective. Personnel Review, 33, 8-29. doi:10.1108/00483480410510606
29. McEvoy, G. M., & Buller, P. F. (1987). User acceptance of peer appraisals in an industrial setting. Personnel Psychology, 40, 785-797. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1987.tb00624.x
30. Murphy, K. R., & Cleveland, J. N. (1995). Understanding performance appraisal: Social, organizational, and goal-based perspectives. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
31. Patel, P. C., Messersmith, J. G., & Lepak, D. P. (2013). Walking the tightrope: An assessment of the relationship between high-performance work systems and organizational ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 56, 1420-1442. doi:10.5465/amj.2011.0255
32. Ployhart, R. E., Nyberg, A. J., Reilly, G., & Maltarich, M. A. (2014). Human capital is dead: Long live human capital resources! Journal of Management, 40, 371-398. doi:10.1177/0149206313512152
33. Posthuma, R. A., Campion, M. C., Masimova, M., & Campion, M. A. (2013). A high performance work practices taxonomy: Integrating the literature and directing future research. Journal of Management, 39, 1840-1220. doi:10.1177/0149206313478184
34. Pulakos, E. D., Mueller Hanson, R., Arad, S., & Moye, N. (2015). Performance management can be fixed: An on-the-job experiential learning approach for complex behavior change. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 8, 51-76.
35. Roberson, L., Galvin, B. M., & Charles, A. C. (2007). When group identities matter: Bias in performance appraisal. Academy of Management Annals, 1, 617-650. doi:10.1080/078559818
36. Rothstein, H. R. (1990). Interrater reliability of job performance ratings: Growth to asymptote level with increasing opportunity to observe. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 322-327. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.75.3.322
37. Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 420-428. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.420
38. Smith, C. A., Organ, D.W., & Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 653-663. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.68.4.653
39. Smither, J.W., London, M., & Reilly, R. R. (2005). Does performance improve following multisource feedback? A theoretical model, meta-analysis, and review of empirical findings. Personnel Psychology, 58, 33-66. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.514_1.x
40. Toegel, G., & Conger, J. A. (2003). 360-degree assessment: Time for reinvention. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 2, 297-311. doi:10.5465/AMLE.2003.10932156
41. Viswesvaran, C., Ones, D. S., & Schmidt, F. L. (1996). Comparative analysis of the reliability of job performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 557-574.
42. Viswesvaran, C., Schmidt, F. L., & Ones, D. S. (2002). Moderating influence of job performance dimensions on convergence of supervisory and peer ratings of job performance: Confounding construct-level convergence and rating difficulty. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 345-354. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.87.2.345
43. Waldman, D. A., Atwater, L. E., & Antonioni, D. (1998). Has 360 degree feedback gone amok? Academy of Management Executive, 12(2), 86-94.
44. Waldman, D. A., & Bowen, D. E. (1998). The acceptability of 360 degree appraisals: A customer-supplier relationship perspective. Human Resource Management, 37, 117-129. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-050X(199822)37:2<117::AID-HRM3>3.0.CO;2-Z
45. Wherry, R. J., & Fryer, D. H. (1949). Buddy ratings: Popularity contest or leadership criteria? Personnel Psychology, 2, 147-159. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1949.tb01395.x