Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pjpqr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-26T10:58:16.127Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Performance Management: Process Perfection or Process Utility?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 January 2015

Edward M. Mone ,
Bennett Price  and
Christina Eisinger
Edward M. Mone*
Affiliation:
CA Technologies
Bennett Price
Affiliation:
CA Technologies
Christina Eisinger
Affiliation:
CA Technologies
*
E-mail: emone@optonline.net, Address: 6 Sands Court, Port Washington, NY 11050
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Commentaries
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 4 , Issue 2 , June 2011 , pp. 184 - 187
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2011 

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.)

References

Cascio, W. F. (1982). Applied psychology in personnel management. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Professional. Google Scholar
Mone, E. M., Acritani, K., & Eisinger, C. (2009). Take it to the roundtable. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 2, 425–429. Google Scholar
Mone, E. M., & London, M. (2002). Fundamentals of performance management. London: Spiro Press. Google Scholar
Mone, E. M., & London, M. (2010). Employee engagement through effective performance management: A practical guide for managers. New York: Routledge. Google Scholar
Pulakos, E. D., & O’Leary, R. S. (2011). Why is performance management broken? Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 4, 146–164.Google Scholar