Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMerchant, Kenneth A.en_NZ
dc.contributor.authorStringer, Carolynen_NZ
dc.contributor.authorTheivananthampillai, Paulen_NZ
dc.date.available2011-04-07T03:01:56Z
dc.date.copyright2010en_NZ
dc.identifier.citationMerchant, K. A., Stringer, C., & Theivananthampillai, P. (2010). Relationships between Objective and Subjective Performance Ratings (pp. 1–37). Accountancy Working Paper Series presented at the AFAANZ Conference.en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10523/706
dc.description.abstractThis study explored relationships between objective and subjective performance measures in a company setting where both were weighted equally in importance for allocating bonuses to high- and mid-level managers and professionals. We found that the correlation between the objective and subjective performance ratings was positive but small, which suggests no performance evaluation halo effect. Contrary to most prior studies, we found no evidence of the a subjective rating centrality bias; the subjective performance ratings were more highly differentiated than were the objective ratings. We found no evidence of a leniency bias in the subjective performance ratings, apparently because the company’s mandated maximum average subjective performance rating was rigorously enforced. However, we did find evidence of leniency in the objective measure portion of the system, and that leniency was particularly high in a time of economic stress. Finally, we found that the objective performance ratings were higher both for managers, as compared to professionals, and for employees at higher ranks, but they were lower for employees working at corporate level rather than in one of the SBUs. We discuss the possible causes and implications of these findings.en_NZ
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.relation.ispartofseriesAccountancy Working Paper Seriesen_NZ
dc.subjectperformance measurementen_NZ
dc.subjectperformance evaluationsen_NZ
dc.subjectobjective measuresen_NZ
dc.subjectsubjective measuresen_NZ
dc.subjecthalo effecten_NZ
dc.subjectcentrality biasen_NZ
dc.subjectleniency biasen_NZ
dc.subjectincentive compensationen_NZ
dc.subject.lcshHF Commerceen_NZ
dc.subject.lcshHF5601 Accountingen_NZ
dc.subject.lcshHF5601 Accountingen_NZ
dc.titleRelationships between Objective and Subjective Performance Ratingsen_NZ
dc.typeConference or Workshop Item (Paper)en_NZ
dc.description.versionUnpublisheden_NZ
otago.date.accession2010-07-20 21:37:14en_NZ
otago.relation.pages1-37en_NZ
otago.openaccessOpen
dc.identifier.eprints920en_NZ
dc.description.refereedPeer Revieweden_NZ
otago.school.eprintsAccountancy & Business Lawen_NZ
dc.description.referencesAhn,T.S., Hwang, I. and Kim, M-I. (2008). Discriminability of subjective performance measures and its impact on ratee incentives. Unpublished working paper, Seoul National University. Baiman, S. and Rajan, M. (1995). The informational advantages of discretionary bonus schemes. The Accounting Review 70, pp. 557-579. Baker, G.P., Jensen, M.C., and Murphy, K.J. (1988). Compensation and incentives: practice vs. theory. The Journal of Finance, 43(3), 593-616. Balzer, W. and Sulsky, L. (1992). Halo and performance appraisal research: A critical reexamination. Journal of Applied Psychology 77, pp. 975-985. Bol, J.C. (2009), The determinants and performance effects of supervisor bias. Unpublished working paper, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. Bol, J.C. (2008). Subjectivity in compensation contracting. Journal of Accounting Literature 27, pp. 1-32. Bol, J.C. and Smith, S.D. (2009). Spillover effects in subjective performance evaluation: Bias, fairness and controllability. Unpublished working paper, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. Bolton, G.E. and Ockenfels, A. (2000). A theory of equity, reciprocity and competition. American Economic Review 100, pp. 166-193. Bommer, W.H., Johnson, J.L., Rich, G.A., Podsakoff, P.M. and MacKenzie, S.B. (1995). On the interchangeability of objective and subjective measures of employee performance: a meta-analysis, Personnel Psychology, 48 (3), 587-605. Bretz, R.D., Milkovich, G.T. and Read, W. (1992). The current state of performance appraisal research and practice: Concerns, directions, and implications. Journal of Management 18, pp. 312-352. Fox, S., Bizman, A, and Herrmann, E. (1983). The halo effect: Is it a unitary concept? Journal of Occupational Psychology 56(4), pp. 289-296. Gibbs, M., Merchant, K.A. and Van der Stede, W., and Vargas, M.E. (2004). Determinants and Effects of Subjectivity in Incentives. The Accounting Review, 79 (2), 409-436. Greenberg, J. (1991). Motivaton to inflate performance ratings: Perceptual bias or response bias? Behavioral Science 15(1), pp. 81-97. Grund, C. and Przemeck, J. (2008) Subjective performance evaluation and inequality aversion. Unpublished working paper, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA), Bonn. Harris, M.M. (1994). Rater motivation in the performance appraisal context: A theoretical framework. Journal of Management 20(4), pp. 737-756. Hayes, R.M. and Schaefer, S. (2000). Implicit contracts and the explanatory power of top executive compensation for future performance. RAND Journal of Economics, pp. 279-293. Heneman, R.L., (1986). The Relationship between supervisory ratings and results-oriented measures of performance: A Meta-Analysis, Personnel Psychology. 39, pp. 811-826. Indjejikian, R.J. (1999). Performance evaluation and compenation research: An agency perspective. Accounting Horizons 13, pp. 147-157. Indjejikian, R.J., Matĕjka, M., Merchant, K.A. and Van der Stede, W.A. (2009). Performance targets in annual bonus plans during a recession: Survey evidence on the discontinuity in earings distributions. Unpublished working paper. University of Michigan. Ittner, C. D., Larcker, D. F. and Meyer, M.W. (2003). Subjectivity and the weighting of performance measures: Evidence from a balanced scorecard, The Accounting Review, 78 (3), 725-759. Jawahar, I.M. and Williams, C.R. (1997). Where all the children are above average: The performance appraisal purpose effect. Personnel Psychology 50(4), pp. 905-926. Jennings, T., Palmer, J.K. and Thomas, A. (2004). Effects of performance context on processing speed and performance ratings. Journal of Business and Psychology 18(4), pp. 453-463. Landy, F. J., & Farr, J. L. (1980). Performance ratings. Psychological Bulletin 87, pp. 72–107. Levy, P.E. and Williams, J.R. (2004). The social context of performance appraisal: A review and framework for the future. Journal of Management 30, pp. 881-905. Matĕjka, M., Merchant, K.A. and Van der Stede, W.A. (2009). “Employment Horizon and the Choice of Performance Measures: Empirical Evidence from Annual Bonus Plans of Loss-Making Entities.” Management Science, 55(6), pp. 890-905. Merchant, K.A. (1989) Rewarding Results: Motivating Profit Center Managers. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Merchant, K.A. and Manzoni J. (1989). The achievability of budget targets in profit centers: A field study, The Accounting Review, LXIV (3), pp. 539-558. Moers, F. (2005). Discretion and bias in performance evaluation: the impact of diversity and subjectivity, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 30, 67-80. Murphy, K.J. (1992). Performance measurement and appraisal: Motivating managers to identify and reward performance. In Bruns, W.J. Jr. (ed.), Performance Measurement, Evaluation and Incentives. Boston: Harvard Business School Press, pp. 37-62 Murphy, K.R. and Cleveland, J.N. (1991). Performance Appraisal: An Organizational Perspective. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Nisar, T.M. (2007). Evaluation of subjectivity in incentive pay. Journal of Financial Services Research 31, pp. 53-73. Petty, M.M., Singleton, B. and Connell, D.W. (1992). An experimental evaluation of an organizattional incentive plan in the electric utility industry. Journal of Applied Psychology. 77(4): 427-436. Prendergast, C. (1999). The provision of incentives in firms. Journal of Economic Literature 37, pp. 7-63. Rajan, M.V. and S. Reichelstein (2009). Objective versus subjective indicators of managerial performance. The Accounting Review 84(1): 209-237. Rajan, M.V. and Reichelstein, S. (2006). Subjective performance indicators and discretionary bonus pools. Journal of Accounting Research, 44 (3), pp. 585-618. Rynes, Sara L., Barry Gerhart, & Laura Parks. (2005). Performance Evaluation and Pay for Performance. Annual Review of Psychology. 56: 571-600. Viswesvaran, C. OInes, D.S. and Schmidt, F.L. (1996). Comparative analysis of the reliability of job performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology 81: 557-574. Van der Stede, W.A., Chow, C.W. and Lin, T.W. (2006). Strategy, choice of performance measures, and performance. Behavioral Research in Accounting 18, pp. 185-205. Varma, A., DeNisi, A.S. and Peters, L.H. (1996). Interpersonal affect and performance appraisal: A field study, Personnel Psychology 49, pp. 341-360. Zhao, X. and Yu, Z. (2007) Value of subjective performance evaluation: A theoretical perspective. Journal of Modern Accounting and Auditing 3(4), pp. 46-52.en_NZ
otago.event.dates4 - 6 July 2010en_NZ
otago.event.placeChristchurchen_NZ
otago.event.typeconferenceen_NZ
otago.event.titleAFAANZ Conferenceen_NZ
 Find in your library

Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record