IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/aosoci/v51y2016icp64-73.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How control system design affects performance evaluation compression: The role of information accuracy and outcome transparency

Author

Listed:
  • Bol, Jasmijn C.
  • Kramer, Stephan
  • Maas, Victor S.

Abstract

Prior research has shown that managers tend to compress ratings when subjectively evaluating employees and that such compression can have negative organizational consequences. We reason that organizations can use the design of their control system to influence the personal costs and benefits associated with managers' rating decisions and thus shape managers’ rating behavior. Based on findings from prior literature, we focus on the effects of two control system design elements: the accuracy of the information on which managers need to base their evaluations and the transparency about performance evaluation outcomes. We hypothesize that increasing information accuracy will increase the extent to which managers differentiate between stronger and weaker employees, but only when there is transparency about evaluation outcomes. Our experimental data support this hypothesis, and we discuss the implications of our findings for management accounting theory and practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Bol, Jasmijn C. & Kramer, Stephan & Maas, Victor S., 2016. "How control system design affects performance evaluation compression: The role of information accuracy and outcome transparency," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 64-73.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:aosoci:v:51:y:2016:i:c:p:64-73
    DOI: 10.1016/j.aos.2016.01.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0361368216300010
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.aos.2016.01.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. R. Lynn Hannan & Kristy L. Towry & Yue (May) Zhang, 2013. "Turning Up the Volume: An Experimental Investigation of the Role of Mutual Monitoring in Tournaments," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(4), pages 1401-1426, December.
    2. Johannes Abeler & Armin Falk & Lorenz Goette & David Huffman, 2011. "Reference Points and Effort Provision," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(2), pages 470-492, April.
    3. Victor S. Maas & Marcel Van Rinsum, 2013. "How Control System Design Influences Performance Misreporting," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(5), pages 1159-1186, December.
    4. Canice Prendergast, 1999. "The Provision of Incentives in Firms," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 37(1), pages 7-63, March.
    5. Larson, James R., 1986. "Supervisors' performance feedback to subordinates: The impact of subordinate performance valence and outcome dependence," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 391-408, June.
    6. HOLMSTROM, Bengt, 1979. "Moral hazard and observability," LIDAM Reprints CORE 379, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    7. Bonner, Sarah E. & Sprinkle, Geoffrey B., 2002. "The effects of monetary incentives on effort and task performance: theories, evidence, and a framework for research," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 27(4-5), pages 303-345.
    8. Dehning, Bruce & Richardson, Vernon, 2002. "Return on investments in information technology: Beyond the productivity paradox," Journal of Financial Transformation, Capco Institute, vol. 6, pages 83-91.
    9. Banker, Rd & Datar, Sm, 1989. "Sensitivity, Precision, And Linear Aggregation Of Signals For Performance Evaluation," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(1), pages 21-39.
    10. Armin Falk & Andrea Ichino, 2006. "Clean Evidence on Peer Effects," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 24(1), pages 39-58, January.
    11. Edward P. Lazear, 2000. "Performance Pay and Productivity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(5), pages 1346-1361, December.
    12. Moers, Frank, 2005. "Discretion and bias in performance evaluation: the impact of diversity and subjectivity," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 67-80, January.
    13. Greiner, Ben & Ockenfels, Axel & Werner, Peter, 2011. "Wage transparency and performance: A real-effort experiment," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 111(3), pages 236-238, June.
    14. Johannes Berger & Christine Harbring & Dirk Sliwka, 2013. "Performance Appraisals and the Impact of Forced Distribution--An Experimental Investigation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(1), pages 54-68, June.
    15. Greenberg, Jerald & Ashton-James, Claire E. & Ashkanasy, Neal M., 2007. "Social comparison processes in organizations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 102(1), pages 22-41, January.
    16. Prendergast, Canice & Topel, Robert, 1993. "Discretion and bias in performance evaluation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 37(2-3), pages 355-365, April.
    17. Bengt Holmstrom, 1979. "Moral Hazard and Observability," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 10(1), pages 74-91, Spring.
    18. Golman, Russell & Bhatia, Sudeep, 2012. "Performance evaluation inflation and compression," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 534-543.
    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. Maas, Victor S. & Yin, Huaxiang, 2022. "Finding partners in crime? How transparency about managers’ behavior affects employee collusion," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    2. Kusterer, David & Sliwka, Dirk, 2022. "Social Preferences and Rating Biases in Subjective Performance Evaluations," IZA Discussion Papers 15496, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    3. Thuy-Van Tran & Sinikka Lepistö & Janne Järvinen, 2021. "The relationship between subjectivity in managerial performance evaluation and the three dimensions of justice perception," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 369-399, September.
    4. Eric W. Chan & Jeremy B. Lill & Victor S. Maas, 2023. "Promote Internally or Hire Externally? The Role of Gift Exchange and Performance Measurement Precision," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(2), pages 493-530, May.
    5. Tim Hermans & Martine Cools & Alexandra Van den Abbeele, 2021. "The role of information accuracy and justification in bonus allocations," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 197-223, June.
    6. Giovannoni, Elena & Quarchioni, Sonia, 2019. "Exploring the generative power of performance measurement systems design," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 211-225.
    7. Jasmijn C. Bol & Cassandra Estep & Frank Moers & Mark E. Peecher, 2018. "The Role of Tacit Knowledge in Auditor Expertise and Human Capital Development," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(4), pages 1205-1252, September.
    8. Narisa Tianjing Dai & Xi (Jason) Kuang & Guliang Tang, 2018. "Differential Weighting of Objective Versus Subjective Measures in Performance Evaluation: Experimental Evidence," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(1), pages 129-148, January.
    9. van Rinsum, M., 2019. "Utilizing Incentives and Accountability: In Control in Control?," ERIM Inaugural Address Series Research in Management EIA 2019-078-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..
    10. Yifei Huang & Matt Shum & Xi Wu & Jason Zezhong Xiao, 2019. "Discovery of Bias and Strategic Behavior in Crowdsourced Performance Assessment," Papers 1908.01718, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2019.
    11. Alexander Brüggen & Victor S. Maas & Alexandra Van den Abbeele, 2021. "Replication in experimental management accounting research - an editorial," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 155-160, June.
    12. Irene Trapp & Rouven Trapp, 2019. "The psychological effects of centrality bias: an experimental analysis," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 89(2), pages 155-189, March.
    13. Victor S. Maas & Niels Verdoorn, 2017. "The effects of performance report layout on managers’ subjective evaluation judgments," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(7), pages 731-751, November.
    14. Christoph Feichter & Isabella Grabner, 2020. "Empirische Forschung zu Management Control – Ein Überblick und neue Trends [Empirical Management Control Reserach—An Overview and Future Directions]," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 72(2), pages 149-181, June.
    15. Kai A. Bauch & Peter Kotzian & Barbara E. Weißenberger, 2021. "Likeability in subjective performance evaluations: does it bias managers’ weighting of performance measures?," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 91(1), pages 35-59, February.
    16. Demartini, Maria Chiara & Otley, David, 2020. "Beyond the system vs. package dualism in Performance Management Systems design: A loose coupling approach," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    17. Lavigne, Eric, 2018. "How structural and procedural features of managers' performance appraisals facilitate their politicization: A study of Canadian university deans’ reappointments," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 638-648.
    18. Eddy Cardinaels & Christoph Feichter, 2021. "Forced Rating Systems from Employee and Supervisor Perspectives," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(5), pages 1573-1607, December.

    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. Bouwens, J.F.M.G. & van Lent, L.A.G.M., 2003. "Effort and Selection Effects of Incentive Contracts," Discussion Paper 2003-130, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    2. Irene Trapp & Rouven Trapp, 2019. "The psychological effects of centrality bias: an experimental analysis," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 89(2), pages 155-189, March.
    3. Christoph Feichter & Isabella Grabner, 2020. "Empirische Forschung zu Management Control – Ein Überblick und neue Trends [Empirical Management Control Reserach—An Overview and Future Directions]," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 72(2), pages 149-181, June.
    4. Bouwens, J.F.M.G. & van Lent, L.A.G.M., 2003. "Effort and Selection Effects of Incentive Contracts," Other publications TiSEM 46a62de7-d051-4620-93bb-3, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    5. Golman, Russell & Bhatia, Sudeep, 2012. "Performance evaluation inflation and compression," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 534-543.
    6. Gary E. Bolton & David J. Kusterer & Johannes Mans, 2015. "Inflated reputations: Uncertainty, leniency & moral wiggle room in trader feedback systems," Cologne Graduate School Working Paper Series 06-04, Cologne Graduate School in Management, Economics and Social Sciences, revised 29 Jul 2016.
    7. Marchegiani, Lucia & Reggiani, Tommaso & Rizzolli, Matteo, 2016. "Loss averse agents and lenient supervisors in performance appraisal," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 131(PA), pages 183-197.
    8. Gary E. Bolton & David J. Kusterer & Johannes Mans, 2019. "Inflated Reputations: Uncertainty, Leniency, and Moral Wiggle Room in Trader Feedback Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(11), pages 5371-5391, November.
    9. Kelly K. Wang & Maria Cadiz Dyball & Andy Wang, 2023. "The link between formality and procedural fairness: The influences of precision, sensitivity and role clarity," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 63(S1), pages 1571-1598, April.
    10. Robert Gibbons, 2005. "Incentives Between Firms (and Within)," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(1), pages 2-17, January.
    11. Cardella, Eric & Depew, Briggs, 2018. "Output restriction and the ratchet effect: Evidence from a real-effort work task," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 182-202.
    12. Jurjen J.A. Kamphorst & Otto H. Swank, 2018. "The role of performance appraisals in motivating employees," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(2), pages 251-269, June.
    13. Burney, Laurie L. & Henle, Christine A. & Widener, Sally K., 2009. "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.
    14. Román, Francisco J., 2009. "An analysis of changes to a team-based incentive plan and its effects on productivity, product quality, and absenteeism," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 589-618, July.
    15. Bellavance, François & Landry, Suzanne & Schiehll, Eduardo, 2013. "Procedural justice in managerial performance evaluation: Effects of subjectivity, relationship quality, and voice opportunity," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 149-166.
    16. McCausland, David & Pouliakas, Konstantinos & Theodossiou, Ioannis, 2005. "Some are Punished and Some are Rewarded: A Study of the Impact of Performance Pay on Job Satisfaction," MPRA Paper 14243, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Oyer, Paul & Schaefer, Scott, 2011. "Personnel Economics: Hiring and Incentives," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 20, pages 1769-1823, Elsevier.
    18. Marco Kleine & Sebastian Kube, 2015. "Communication and Trust in Principal-Team Relationships: Experimental Evidence," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2015_06, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    19. Rebitzer, James B. & Taylor, Lowell J., 2011. "Extrinsic Rewards and Intrinsic Motives: Standard and Behavioral Approaches to Agency and Labor Markets," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 8, pages 701-772, Elsevier.
    20. Luis Garicano & Luis Rayo, 2016. "Why Organizations Fail: Models and Cases," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 54(1), pages 137-192, March.

    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:aosoci:v:51:y:2016:i:c:p:64-73. 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/locate/aos .

    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.