Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-sh8wx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-20T11:09:54.509Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Analytics and Information: A Case for Performance Ratings

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 March 2017

Sylvia G. Roch
Sylvia G. Roch*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University at Albany, State University of New York
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Sylvia G. Roch, Department of Psychology, University at Albany, State University of New York, 1400 Washington Avenue, Albany, NY 12222. E-mail: sroch@albany.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Schiemann and Ulrich's (2017) discussion of opportunities for industrial–organizational (I-O) psychology speaks directly to the growing movement of companies eliminating their performance ratings. One of the main issues that the focal article highlights is the need for strong analytics and measurement. A core domain of industrial psychology historically has been employee performance measurement. However, by some accounts, as of September 2015, at least 51 large companies were in the process of eliminating their performance ratings (Rock & Jones, 2015). Whether eliminating performance ratings is a good idea is a subject of debate in the I-O psychology community. In addition to a focal article in the summer of 2016 edition of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (Adler, Campion, et al., 2016), several sessions addressed this topic at the 2016 Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology convention (e.g., Adler, Colquitt, et al., 2016; Hettal, Garza, Levy, & Cleveland, 2016; Hunt et al., 2016; Roch & Gorman, 2016). The I-O psychology community appears to be divided on the value of performance ratings. In my opinion, the recent drive to abandon rigorous performance measurement appears to be a step backward rather than a step forward.

Type
Commentaries
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 10 , Issue 1 , March 2017 , pp. 39 - 42
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

I would like to thank my colleague, Michael Ford, for his willingness to read drafts of this commentary.

References

Adler, S., Campion, M., Colquitt, A., Grubb, A., Murphy, K., Ollander-Krane, R., & Pulakos, E. (2016). Getting rid of performance ratings: Genius or folly? A debate. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 9, 219–252. doi:10.1017/iop.2015.106 Google Scholar
Adler, S., Colquitt, A. L., Kamin, A. M., Huth, M. L., Walzer, A. S., & Merges, J. (2016, April). Performance management is broken, so how do we fix it? Panel discussion at the 31st Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Anaheim, CA.Google Scholar
Cleveland, J. N, Murphy, K. R., & Williams, R. E. (1989). Multiple uses of performance appraisal: Prevalence and correlates. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74 (10), 130–135.Google Scholar
Hettal, K. A., Garza, M., Levy, P. E., & Cleveland, J. N. (2016, April). Where have all the ratings gone? Interactive discussion at the 31st Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Anaheim, CA.Google Scholar
Hunt, S. T. (2016). Rating performance may be difficult, but it is also necessary. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 9, 296–304. doi:10.1017/iop.2016.14 Google Scholar
Hunt, S. T., Mansfield, L. R., Burlacu, G. I., Karavis, P., Kim, M., & Levy, P. E. (2016, April). What does good performance management look like? An appreciative inquiry. Discussion at the 31st Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Anaheim, CA.Google Scholar
Kleinmuntz, B. (1990). Why we still use our heads instead of formulas: Toward an integrative approach. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 296–310. doi:10.1037//0033-2909.107.3.296 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Murphy, K. R. (2008). Explaining the weak relationship between job performance and ratings of job performance. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, 148–160.Google Scholar
Murphy, K. R., & Cleveland, J. N. (1995). Understanding performance appraisal: Social, organizational, and goal-based perspectives. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Pulakos, E. D., & O'Leary, R. S. (2011). Why is performance management broken? Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 4, 146–164.Google Scholar
Roch, S. G., & Gorman, C. A. (2016, April). The demise of the performance review: Is rating research irrelevant? Roundtable discussion at the annual meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Anaheim, CA.Google Scholar
Rock, D., & Jones, B. (2015, September). Why more and more companies are ditching performance ratings. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2015/09/why-more-and-more-companies-are-ditching-performance-ratings Google Scholar
Schiemann, W. A., & Ulrich, D. (2017). Rise of HR—New mandates for I-O. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 10 (1), 3–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tziner, A., & Roch, S. G. (2016). Disappointing interventions and weak criteria: Carving out a solution is still possible. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 9 (2), 350–356. doi:10.1017/iop.2016.24 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woehr, D. J. (2008). On the relationship between job performance and ratings of job performance: What do we really know. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, 161–166.Google Scholar