Discretion and Bias in Performance Evaluation: The Impact of Diversity and Subjectivity

By Frank Moers. 2001

330 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Accounting, Management Information Systems

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/55ecb06e91340d9f334e25dc8effe92d08b1f843

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Accounting

In Management Information Systems

Citations in the corpus

Signaling in Secret: Pay-for-Performance and the Incentive and Sorting Effects of Pay Secrecy (2014, background): “…Murphy & Cleveland, 1995) suggests that when performance appraisal is based on such objective (as opposed to subjective) performance criteria, pay is perceived as less disposed to effort–performance weakening rater biases such as leniency and centrality (Moers, 2005; Rynes, Gerhart, & Parks, 2005).”
Performance appraisals and job satisfaction (2017, unknown): “Rating distortions, which are very prominent in organizations (Kane et al., 1995; Moers, 2005), lead to less acceptance among employees and decrease the economic incentives to provide effort (Prendergast & Topel, 1996).”
The Choice of Different Types of Subjectivity in CEO Annual Bonus Contracts (2011, unknown): “Some of the problems relate to the mere use of subjectivity such as reneging, favoritism, and bias (e.g., Baker et al. 1994; Prendergast and Topel 1996; Moers 2005).”
Performance measurement, modes of evaluation and the development of compromising accounts (2013, background): “…effects on individual and organizational performance (see, for example, research on subjectivity (Gibbs, Merchant, Van der Stede & Vargus, 2004; Moers, 2005), comprehensiveness (Hall, 2008) and financial/non-financial measures (e.g. Perera, Harrison & Poole, 1997; Baines & Langfield-Smith,…”
Strategy, Choice of Performance Measures, and Performance (2006, background): “…measures contributes to recent work in accounting that has begun to focus on the use of subjectivity in performance measurement, evaluation, and incentives (e.g., Bushman et al. 1996; Gibbs et al. 2004; Ittner, Larcker, and Meyer 2003; MacLeod and Parent 1999; Moers 2005; Murphy and Oyer 2004).”
Political constraints, organization design and performance measurement in China's state-owned enterprises (2006, background): “5 The accounting literature identifies several economic attributes of performance measures (informativeness, sensitivity, noise, and objectivity: Moers, 2005).”
The Effects of Leadership Styles and Use of Performance Measures on Managerial Work-Related Attitudes (2010, unknown): “, 2003 ; Moers, 2005 ; Lau and Tan, 2006 ; Lau and Moser, 2008 ).”
The Determinants and Performance Effects of Managers’ Performance Evaluation Biases (2011, background): “To control for differences in contract design that can cause different effort allocations, I include the number of performance measures that the rating comprises (NR_PM) and the total weight placed on these measures (WEIGHT) (see Moers 2005).”
Contemporary Performance Measurement Systems: A Review of Their Consequences and a Framework for Research (2012, background): “, 2004); or they may tend to use lenient and more compressed performance ratings (Moers, 2005).”
How Formal Performance Evaluation Affects Trust between Superior and Subordinate Managers (2009, background): “This is not only consistent with the studies by Hopwood (1972), Lau and Buckland (2001) and Lau and Shohilin (2005), but also with other recent evidence on the behavioral effects of implicit and subjective performance measures (e.g., Hartmann, 2007; Moers, 2005).”