Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T15:27:17.739Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Efficiency Ratings and Performance Appraisals in the United States Federal Government

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 July 2016

Thomas A. Stetz  and
Todd L. Chmielewski
Thomas A. Stetz*
Affiliation:
Department of Public Service, Hawaii Pacific University
Todd L. Chmielewski
Affiliation:
School of Leadership, St. Thomas University
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Thomas A. Stetz, Department of Public Service, Hawaii Pacific University, Suite 500, 1164 Bishop Street, Honolulu, HI 96813. E-mail: tstetz@hpu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

As industrial–organizational (I-O) psychologists and longtime employees, we have developed and implemented appraisal systems and have been subjected to and have subjected others to appraisals. We have thus viewed performance appraisals from all angles, seeing the good, the bad, and the downright ugly. We believe that all of the points discussed by Adler et al. (2016) about retaining or eliminating performance ratings have merit and address the realities of the current state of affairs in performance appraisal practice and research. However, as Wiese and Buckley (1998) point out, organizations survived quite well for centuries without formal appraisal systems, which raises the question, “Why do formal performance appraisal systems exist?” One inescapable yet surprisingly undiscussed reason is that it is a legal and/or regulatory mandate for 4,185,000 U.S. federal government employees (Office of Personnel Management, 2015a). Eliminating performance ratings for these workers would literally require an act of Congress.

Type
Commentaries
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 9 , Issue 2 , June 2016 , pp. 270 - 275
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adler, S., Campion, M., Colquitt, A., Grubb, A., Murphy, K., Ollander-Krane, R., & Pulakos, E. D. (2016). Getting rid of performance ratings: Genius or folly? A debate. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 9 (2), 219–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DaCruz, A. (1970). Performance ratings—Who needs them??? American University Law Review, 19, 509–520.Google Scholar
Edwards, C. (2015). Federal government pay exceeds most industries. Retrieved from http://www.cato.org/blog/federal-government-pay-exceeds-most-industriesGoogle Scholar
Graves, W. B. (1947). Efficiency rating systems: Their history, organization, and functioning. Washington, DC: Library of Congress, Legislative Reference Service, State Law Section.Google Scholar
Klores, M. (1966). Rater bias in forced-distribution performance ratings. Personnel Psychology, 19, 411–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, G. B. (2001). Public service motivation and job performance: Evidence from the federal sector. The American Review of Public Administration, 31, 363–380.Google Scholar
Mercer. (2015). 2014/2015 U.S. compensation planning executive summary: Survey report. Retrieved from http://www.mercer.com/content/dam/mercer/attachments/global/Talent/Compensation_Planning_Survey_ExecSumm14.pdfGoogle Scholar
Merit System Protection Board. (2015). What is due process in federal civil service employment? Washington, DC: U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board.Google Scholar
Milkovich, G. T., & Wigdor, A. K. (1991). Pay for performance: Evaluating performance appraisal and merit pay. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
Office of Personnel Management. (2015a). Data, analysis, & documentation: Total government employment since 1962. Retrieved from https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/data-analysis-documentation/federal-employment-reports/historical-tables/total-government-employment-since-1962Google Scholar
Office of Personnel Management. (2015b). Performance management: Historical chronology. Retrieved from https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/performance-management/overview-history/#url=Historical-ChronologyGoogle Scholar
Partnership for Public Service. (2015). The best places to work in the federal government: The big picture government wide analysis. Retrieved from http://bestplacestowork.org/BPTW/rankings/governmentwideGoogle Scholar
Perry, J. L. (1996). Measuring public service motivation: An assessment of construct reliability and validity. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 6, 5–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perry, J. L., & Wise, L. R. (1990). The motivational bases of public service. Public Administrative Review, 50, 367–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, F. W. (1911). The principles of scientific management. Retrieved from http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/6435Google Scholar
Wiese, W. S., & Buckley, W. R. (1998). The evolution of the performance appraisal process. Journal of Management History, 4, 233–249.Google Scholar