IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jomega/v23y1995i6p667-676.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The linear programming alternative to policy capturing for eliciting criteria weights in the performance appraisal process

Author

Listed:
  • Horowitz, I.
  • Zappe, C.

Abstract

An important aspect of management is the periodic performance appraisal (PA) of subordinates. This paper focuses on inferring the criteria employed and weights attached to them by an assessor in any PA process. Linear programming (LP) is proposed as an alternative to policy capturing (PC) as the inference mechanism. The LP approach is illustrated and contrasted with regression-based PC approaches. We show that, at a minimum, LP provides facilitating inputs to complement PC.

Suggested Citation

  • Horowitz, I. & Zappe, C., 1995. "The linear programming alternative to policy capturing for eliciting criteria weights in the performance appraisal process," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 667-676, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:23:y:1995:i:6:p:667-676
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0305-0483(95)00039-9
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bernardo, John J & Blin, Jean-Marie, 1977. "A Programming Model of Consumer Choice among Multi-Attributed Brands," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 4(2), pages 111-118, Se.
    2. Dov Pekelman & Subrata K. Sen, 1974. "Mathematical Programming Models for the Determination of Attribute Weights," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(8), pages 1217-1229, April.
    3. V. Srinivasan & Allan Shocker, 1973. "Linear programming techniques for multidimensional analysis of preferences," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 38(3), pages 337-369, September.
    4. Ilgen, Daniel R. & Barnes-Farrell, Janet L. & McKellin, David B., 1993. "Performance Appraisal Process Research in the 1980s: What Has It Contributed to Appraisals in Use?," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 54(3), pages 321-368, April.
    5. N/A, 1974. "Appraisal," National Institute Economic Review, National Institute of Economic and Social Research, vol. 67(1), pages 3-7, February.
    6. Christopher Zappe & William Webster & Ira Horowitz, 1993. "Using Linear Programming to Determine Post-Facto Consistency in Performance Evaluations of Major League Baseball Players," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 23(6), pages 107-113, December.
    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


    Cited by:

    1. Shirland, Larry E. & Jesse, Richard R. & Thompson, Ronald L. & Iacovou, Charalambos L., 2003. "Determining attribute weights using mathematical programming," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 423-437, December.
    2. Kornbluth, J. S. H., 1997. "Identifying feasible orderings for performance appraisal," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 329-334, June.
    3. Chao Fu & Dong-Ling Xu, 2016. "Determining attribute weights to improve solution reliability and its application to selecting leading industries," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 245(1), pages 401-426, October.
    4. Liginlal, Divakaran & Ow, Terence T., 2005. "On policy capturing with fuzzy measures," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 167(2), pages 461-474, December.
    5. Yang, Guo-liang & Yang, Jian-Bo & Xu, Dong-Ling & Khoveyni, Mohammad, 2017. "A three-stage hybrid approach for weight assignment in MADM," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 93-105.
    6. Jung, Ho-Won, 2001. "A linear programming model dealing with ordinal ratings in policy capturing of performance appraisal," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 134(3), pages 493-497, November.
    7. Ira Horowitz, 2017. "An Efficiency Evaluation of Men’s College Basketball Coaches," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 62(1), pages 77-98, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jung, Ho-Won, 2001. "A linear programming model dealing with ordinal ratings in policy capturing of performance appraisal," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 134(3), pages 493-497, November.
    2. Zopounidis, Constantin & Doumpos, Michael, 2002. "Multicriteria classification and sorting methods: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 138(2), pages 229-246, April.
    3. Oral, Muhittin & Kettani, Ossama & Cinar, Unver, 2001. "Project evaluation and selection in a network of collaboration: A consensual disaggregation multi-criterion approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 130(2), pages 332-346, April.
    4. Kim, Soung Hie & Ahn, Byeong Seok, 1999. "Interactive group decision making procedure under incomplete information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 116(3), pages 498-507, August.
    5. Ma, Jian & Fan, Zhi-Ping & Huang, Li-Hua, 1999. "A subjective and objective integrated approach to determine attribute weights," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(2), pages 397-404, January.
    6. Jessica Rubiano-Moreno & Samuel Nucamendi-Guillén & Alvaro Cordero-Franco & Alejandro Rodríguez-Magaña, 2022. "An improved LINMAP for multicriteria decision: designing customized incentive portfolios in an organization," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 3489-3520, September.
    7. Kadziński, MiŁosz & Greco, Salvatore & SŁowiński, Roman, 2012. "Extreme ranking analysis in robust ordinal regression," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 488-501.
    8. Sunil Kanwar, 2006. "Innovation and Intellectual Property Rights," Working papers 142, Centre for Development Economics, Delhi School of Economics.
    9. Xunjie Gou & Zeshui Xu & Huchang Liao, 2019. "Hesitant Fuzzy Linguistic Possibility Degree-Based Linear Assignment Method for Multiple Criteria Decision-Making," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(01), pages 35-63, January.
    10. Zanakis, Stelios H. & Mandakovic, Tomislav & Gupta, Sushil K. & Sahay, Sundeep & Hong, Sungwan, 1995. "A review of program evaluation and fund allocation methods within the service and government sectors," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 59-79, March.
    11. Kadziński, Miłosz & Wójcik, Michał & Ciomek, Krzysztof, 2022. "Review and experimental comparison of ranking and choice procedures for constructing a univocal recommendation in a preference disaggregation setting," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    12. Mark Davison, 1976. "Fitting and testing carroll's weighted unfolding model for preferences," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 41(2), pages 233-247, June.
    13. Theodoros Evgeniou & Constantinos Boussios & Giorgos Zacharia, 2005. "Generalized Robust Conjoint Estimation," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 415-429, May.
    14. Grigoroudis, Evangelos & Noel, Laurent & Galariotis, Emilios & Zopounidis, Constantin, 2021. "An ordinal regression approach for analyzing consumer preferences in the art market," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 290(2), pages 718-733.
    15. Hauser, John R. & Urban, Glen L., 1982. "Prelaunch forecasting of new consumer durables : ideas on a consumer value - priority model," Working papers 1270-82., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    16. Mark Davison, 1988. "A reformulation of the general Euclidean model for the external analysis of preference data," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 53(3), pages 305-320, September.
    17. Olivier Toubia & Duncan I. Simester & John R. Hauser & Ely Dahan, 2003. "Fast Polyhedral Adaptive Conjoint Estimation," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(3), pages 273-303.
    18. Dan Horsky & Paul Nelson, 2006. "Testing the Statistical Significance of Linear Programming Estimators," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(1), pages 128-135, January.
    19. Adriane Hartmann & Henrik Sattler, 2004. "Wie robust sind Methoden zur Präferenzmessung?," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 56(1), pages 3-22, February.
    20. Schleicher, Deidra J. & Day, David V., 1998. "A Cognitive Evaluation of Frame-of-Reference Rater Training: Content and Process Issues, ," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 76-101, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:23:y:1995:i:6:p:667-676. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/375/description#description .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.