On the validity of subjective measures of company performance

By Toby D. Wall, J. Michie, Malcolm Patterson, Stephen Wood, M. Sheehan, C. Clegg, M. West. 2004

1,182 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management Information Systems, Management Science and Operations Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/de8720dfdb14ee7c891ee20f6758e77c1d9668f8

How researchers see this paper

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

In Management Information Systems

1. David P. Lepak
2. Arun Rai
3. A. Som
4. Riki Takeuchi
5. Xinlin Tang
6. Pankaj C. Patel
7. D. Guest
8. L. O'toole

In Management Science and Operations Research

1. H. Rainey
2. Sung Min Park
3. Moses Acquaah
4. K. Meier
5. L. O'toole
6. Anne S. Tsui
7. Jacob Guinot
8. B. S. Anderson

Citations in the corpus

• Leadership and Public Service Motivation in U.S. Federal Agencies (2008, background): “Countering concerns about subjective measures are reports of appreciable correlations between subjective and objective performance measures (e.g., see Brewer 2006, 36–37; Walker and Boyne 2006; Wall et al. 2004).”
• How the Use of Big Data Analytics Affects Value Creation in Supply Chain Management (2015, positive): “In order to enhance the quality of the key informants, we screened the responses and eliminated informants whose titles were not directly related to a supply chain function [83].”
• Does Family Involvement in Management Reduce the Risk of Business Failure? The Moderating Role of Entrepreneurial Orientation (2016, methodology): “Subjective measures of performance have been widely used in research and have been shown to have strong convergent, discriminant, and construct validities (Wall et al., 2004).”
• Comparing perspectives on high involvement management and organizational performance across the British economy (2008, result): “Moreover, Wall et al. (2004) have shown that in three UK studies using the kind of self-reported performance data on which we and others, who work at the workplace level, have had to rely may be consistent with the assumed more ‘objective’ audited accounting data, which offers some support for the…”
• Organizational innovation as an enabler of technological innovation capabilities and firm performance (2014, background): “However, some studies in the literature on social psychology (e.g., Wall et al., 2004) report correlations of around 0.8 for good measures of subjective and objective performance; therefore, only weak convergent validity of the measures exists.”
• The influence of family responsibilities, career fields and gender on career success (2008, background): “Despite a sometimes fierce discussion about the use of objective and subjective success measures in organizational research (for firm performance see, for example, Wall et al. , 2004”
• From flexibility human resource management to employee engagement and perceived job performance across the lifespan: A multisample study (2015, background): “First, objective and subjective measures of performance are positively correlated and are similarly predicted by independent variables (Bommer, Johnson, Rich, Podsakoff, & MacKenzie, 1995; Wall et al., 2004).”
• The Relationship between Competitive Strategy and Firm Performance in Micro and Small Businesses in Ghana: The Moderating Role of Managerial and Marketing Capabilities (2015, background): “There is enough evidence in the literature to show that subjective measures are valid since they are highly correlated with subjective measures (Wall et al., 2004).”
• The impact of HR practices, HR effectiveness and a ‘strong HR system’ on organisational outcomes: a stakeholder perspective (2011, background): “( 2004 ) argued that they have moderate-to-high validity, partly, as Delaney and Huselid also argue, because they are rating potentially objective and verifiable information.”