The Real Glue in Organizations
Cristina G. Banks
Karen E. May
For several decades, industrial-organizational (I/O) psychologists and human resource (HR) practitioners have wrestled with the problems of accurately assessing performance and designing effective performance development tools. We have focused on a number of variables that held promise for increasing measurement effectiveness: designing the “right” format—one that captured appropriate job content, minimized judgmental and perceptual errors, and was user-friendly; framing performance assessment in the context of goal setting—that is, allowing performance assessment to be a matter of setting an employee's annual goals and then measuring the degree of attainment (for example, management by objectives, or MBO); and obtaining assessments from all levels of the organization (superiors, subordinates, and peers) as well as customers (360-degree feedback).
Different performance measurement systems emerged over the years, some more successful than others. But despite these efforts, effective and well-accepted performance measurement systems still elude many organizations. Why?
Measurement of performance effectiveness is a cornerstone for organizations. Upon it rests an organization's ability to select, train, reward, and motivate the right people in the right ways. Performance measurement is often the only source that employees have to learn about the value of their contributions and the areas in