Technical report - CIPD

1 Technical report December 2016. Rapid evidence assessment of the research literature on the effect of performance appraisal on workplace performance The CIPD is the professional body for HR and people development. The not-for-profit organisation champions better work and working lives and has been setting the benchmark for excellence in people and organisation development for more than 100 years. It has more than 140,000 members across the world, provides thought leadership through independent research on the world of work, and offers professional training and accreditation for those working in HR and learning and development. Rapid evidence assessment of the research literature on the effect of performance appraisal on workplace performance Technical report Contents Foreword 2. Introduction 3. 1 Methodology 4. 2 Findings 6. 3 Synthesis 16. Conclusion 18. Limitations 19. Endnotes 20. References 21.

2 Appendix 1 26. Appendix 2 27. Acknowledgements We would like to thank the team behind this research at the Center for Evidence-Based Management (CEBMa). The report was written by Dr Eric Barends, Barbara Janssen and Pietro Marenco, with the support of Professor Rob Briner and Professor Denise Rousseau, all of CEBMa. About CEBMa The Center for Evidence-Based Management is a non-profit member organisation dedicated to promoting evidence-based practice in the field of CEBMa management. It provides support and resources to managers, consultants, center for organisations, teachers, academics and others interested in learning more about Evidence-Based Management evidence-based management. 1 | Rapid evidence assessment of the research literature on the effect of performance appraisal on workplace performance Foreword As a professional body, the In publishing this Technical report , CIPD helps HR professionals and we provide a step-by-step account functions to develop effective of the evidence our REA uncovered strategies and practices in people on what is meant by performance management.

3 We believe that appraisal, how it is assumed to work applied research is a crucial and what influences its effectiveness. step to achieving this. We thus A number of the academic papers see an important part of our referenced are accessible through role as making quality research the EBSCO online journals portal for available, distilling it into accessible CIPD forms and drawing out practical implications. We hope this report provides a useful reference and pointer This Technical report presents the to further reading on this methods and findings of a rapid important aspect of performance evidence assessment (REA), a management. truncated form of systematic review, on the topic of performance Jonny Gifford appraisal. It is accompanied by Adviser, Organisational Behaviour another Technical report of an REA CIPD. on goal setting (Barends et al 2016). The insight and implications of both Technical reports, which are written by the Center for Evidence- Based Management (CEBMa), are discussed in the discussion report , Could do Better: Assessing what works in performance management (Gifford 2016).

4 1. 2 | Rapid evidence assessment of the research literature on the effect of performance appraisal on workplace performance Introduction This Technical report presents the Rationale for this review Main question: What does methods and findings of a rapid the review answer? evidence assessment (REA), a Despite the relevance of truncated form of systematic performance ratings within What is known in the scientific review, on the topic of performance the domain of human resource literature about the impact appraisal. It is accompanied management, both academics of performance appraisal on by another Technical report of and practitioners have always had workplace performance? an REA on goal setting. The a somewhat uneasy relationship insight and implications of both with them. Some academics Supplementary questions Technical reports are discussed in question whether performance Other issues raised, which will form the discussion report , Could do appraisals provide meaningful the basis of our conclusion to the Better: Assessing what works in information, whereas others main question above, are: performance management.

5 Have even suggested that All reports are available at undertaking such reviews should 1 What is meant by performance be discontinued entirely (Hoffman appraisal? (What is it?). et al 2012). Given the widespread 2 What is the assumed causal use of performance appraisals mechanism? (How is it supposed within management practice, the to work?). CIPD approached the Center for 3 What is the effect of Evidence-Based Management performance appraisal on (CEBMa) to undertake a review workplace performance? to understand what is known 4 What is known about possible in the scientific literature about moderators and/or mediators the reliability and validity of that affect the relationship performance appraisal and the between performance appraisal way in which this may impact and workplace performance? workplace performance. This 5 What is known about the review will present an overview of reliability and validity of this evidence.

6 Performance appraisal? 3 | Rapid evidence assessment of the research literature on the effect of performance appraisal on workplace performance 1 Methodology Search strategy: How was the for inclusion. The decision of the Critical appraisal: research evidence sought? third reviewer was final. What is the quality of the studies included? The following four databases were Selection took place in two used to identify studies: ABI/ phases. First, the titles and In almost any situation it is possible INFORM Global, Business Source abstracts of the 250+ studies to find a scientific study to support Premier, PsycINFO and Web of identified were screened for their or refute a theory or a claim, Science. The following generic relevance to this review. In case and sometimes to quite a large search filters were applied to all of doubt or lack of information, degree. It is therefore important databases during the search: the study was included.

7 Duplicate to determine which studies are publications were removed. This trustworthy (that is, valid and 1 scholarly journals, peer-reviewed first phase yielded 41 secondary reliable) and which are not. The 2 published 1980 2016 for meta- studies (meta-analyses) trustworthiness of a scientific analyses, and 2000 16 for and 48 primary studies. study is first determined by its primary studies methodological appropriateness. 3 articles in English. Second, studies were selected based on the full text of For cause-and-effect claims (that A search was conducted using the article according to the is, if we do A, will it result in B?), a combinations of different search following inclusion criteria: study has a high methodological terms, such as performance appropriateness when it fulfils the appraisal', performance review', 1 type of studies: quantitative, three conditions required for causal performance evaluation', empirical studies inference: co-variation, time order annual review' and employee 2 measurement: (a) studies in relationship, and elimination evaluation'.

8 In addition, the which the effect of performance of plausible alternative causes references listed in the studies appraisal on organisational (Shaughnessy and Zechmeister retrieved were screened in order outcomes was measured, 1985). A study that uses a control to identify additional articles for or (b) studies in which the group, random assignment and possible inclusion in the REA. effect of moderators and/ a before-and-after measurement or mediators on performance is therefore regarded as the gold We conducted 17 different search appraisal was measured standard'.3 Non-randomised queries and screened the titles and 3 context: studies related to studies and before after abstracts of more than 250 studies. workplace settings studies come next in terms of An overview of all search terms and 4 level of trustworthiness: appropriateness. Cross-sectional queries is provided in Appendix 1. studies that were graded level studies (surveys) and case studies C or above.

9 Are regarded as having the greatest Selection process: How were the chance of showing bias in the studies selected? In some cases where influential outcome and therefore sit lower studies were referenced that had down in the ranking in terms of Two reviewers worked not been identified in our search appropriateness. Meta-analyses independently to identify which because of the search terms used, in which statistical analysis studies should be included. The we included these additional techniques are used to pool the inter-rater agreement was studies as bycatch'. results of controlled studies are Where the reviewers disagreed on therefore regarded as the most selection, a third reviewer with This second phase yielded 23 appropriate design. no prior knowledge of the initial secondary studies and 37 primary reviewers' assessments assessed studies. An overview of the selection To determine the methodological whether the study was appropriate process is provided in Appendix 2.

10 Appropriateness of the research 4 | Rapid evidence assessment of the research literature on the effect of performance appraisal on workplace performance design of the studies included, the strengths and weaknesses). For applied. According to Cohen, classification system of Shadish instance, was the sample size a small' effect is an effect that et al (2002) and Petticrew and large enough and were reliable is visible only through careful Roberts (2006) was used. The four measurement methods used? To examination. A medium' effect, levels of appropriateness used for determine methodological quality, however, is one that is visible the classification are shown all the studies included were to the naked eye of the careful in Table 1. systematically assessed on explicit observer'. Finally, a large' effect quality criteria. Based on a tally is one that anybody can easily see It should be noted, however, of the number of weaknesses, the because it is substantial.