Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Discretion and bias in performance evaluation: the impact of diversity and subjectivity

Contents:

Author Info

  • Moers, Frank

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6VCK-4BFXPBV-1/2/1dab45600fdc76f6bace39201ee385d4
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Accounting, Organizations and Society.

Volume (Year): 30 (2005)
Issue (Month): 1 (January)
Pages: 67-80

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:eee:aosoci:v:30:y:2005:i:1:p:67-80

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/aos

Related research

Keywords:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. George Baker & Robert Gibbons & Kevin J. Murphy, 1993. "Subjective Performance Measures in Optimal Incentive Contracts," NBER Working Papers 4480, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  2. Canice Prendergast & Robert H. Topel, 1993. "Favoritism in Organizations," NBER Working Papers 4427, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  3. Govindarajan, V. & Gupta, Anil K., 1985. "Linking control systems to business unit strategy: impact on performance," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 51-66, January.
  4. Prendergast, Canice & Topel, Robert, 1993. "Discretion and bias in performance evaluation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 37(2-3), pages 355-365, April.
  5. Wallace, James S., 1997. "Adopting residual income-based compensation plans: Do you get what you pay for?," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 275-300, December.
  6. Ittner, Christopher D. & Larcker, David F. & Randall, Taylor, 2003. "Performance implications of strategic performance measurement in financial services firms," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(7-8), pages 715-741.
  7. Govindarajan, V., 1984. "Appropriateness of accounting data in performance evaluation: An empirical examination of environmental uncertainty as an intervening variable," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 125-135, June.
  8. Davidson, Russell & MacKinnon, James G., 1993. "Estimation and Inference in Econometrics," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, Oxford University Press, number 9780195060119, October.
  9. Rachel M. Hayes & Scott Schaefer, 2000. "Implicit Contracts and the Explanatory Power of Top Executive Compensation for Future Performance," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(2), pages 273-293, Summer.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as in new window

Cited by:
  1. Golman, Russell & Bhatia, Sudeep, 2012. "Performance evaluation inflation and compression," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 534-543.
  2. Rosaz, Julie & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2012. "Lies and biased evaluation: A real-effort experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 537-549.
  3. Wong-On-Wing, Bernard & Guo, Lan & Li, Wei & Yang, Dan, 2007. "Reducing conflict in balanced scorecard evaluations," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 32(4-5), pages 363-377.
  4. van Veen-Dirks, Paula, 2010. "Different uses of performance measures: The evaluation versus reward of production managers," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 141-164, February.
  5. Jurjen J.A. Kamphorst & Otto H. Swank, 2012. "The Role of Performance Appraisals in Motivating Employees," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 12-034/1, Tinbergen Institute.
  6. Breuer, Kathrin & Nieken, Petra & Sliwka, Dirk, 2010. "Social Ties and Subjective Performance Evaluations: An Empirical Investigation," IZA Discussion Papers 4913, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  7. Gill, David & Prowse, Victoria & Vlassopoulos, Michael, 2013. "Cheating in the workplace: An experimental study of the impact of bonuses and productivity," MPRA Paper 50166, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  8. Uwe Jirjahn & Erik Poutsma, 2011. "The Use of Performance Appraisal Systems: Evidence from Dutch Establishment Data," Research Papers in Economics 2011-02, University of Trier, Department of Economics.
  9. Lucia Marchegiani & Tommaso Reggiani & Matteo Rizzolli, 2013. "Severity vs. Leniency Bias in Performance Appraisal: Experimental evidence," BEMPS - Bozen Economics & Management Paper Series, School of Economics and Management at the Free University of Bozen BEMPS01, School of Economics and Management at the Free University of Bozen.
  10. Noeverman, J., 2010. "Not Just Because it is Fair - The Role of Feedback Quality and Voice in Performance Evaluation," ERIM Report Series Research in Management, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasm ERS-2010-048-ORG, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
  11. Chenhall, Robert H., 2008. "Accounting for the horizontal organization: A review essay," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 33(4-5), pages 517-550.
  12. Noeverman, J., 2010. "Within- and Between-group Agreement in Supervisor’s Evaluative Behaviours: Do evaluative ‘styles’ exist?," ERIM Report Series Research in Management, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasm ERS-2010-002-F&A, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
  13. O'Connor, Neale G. & Deng, Johnny & Luo, Yadong, 2006. "Political constraints, organization design and performance measurement in China's state-owned enterprises," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 157-177, February.
  14. Jurjen J.A. Kamphorst & Otto H. Swank, 2012. "The Role of Performance Appraisals in Motivating Employees," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 12-034/1, Tinbergen Institute.
  15. Burney, Laurie L. & Henle, Christine A. & Widener, Sally K., 0. "A path model examining the relations among strategic performance measurement system characteristics, organizational justice, and extra- and in-role performance," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(3-4), pages 305-321, April.
  16. Hartmann, Frank & Slapnicar, Sergeja, 2009. "How formal performance evaluation affects trust between superior and subordinate managers," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(6-7), pages 722-737, August.
  17. Victor Maas & Raquel Torres-González, 2011. "Subjective Performance Evaluation and Gender Discrimination," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, Springer, vol. 101(4), pages 667-681, July.
  18. Patrick Kampkötter, 2014. "Performance Appraisals and Job Satisfaction," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 672, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:aosoci:v:30:y:2005:i:1:p:67-80. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.