Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T14:22:49.806Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Managing Performance Through the Manager–Employee Relationship

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 January 2015

Ryan S. O’Leary  and
Elaine D. Pulakos
Ryan S. O’Leary*
Affiliation:
PDRI, an SHL Company
Elaine D. Pulakos
Affiliation:
PDRI, an SHL Company
*
E-mail: elaine.pulakos@pdri.com, Address: PDRI, an SHL Company, 1300 North 17th Street, Suite 100, Arlington, VA 22209
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In our recent focal article, we proposed that a fundamental change is needed in how performance management is implemented and viewed. Rather than attempting to improve the effectiveness of performance management by changing features of the formal system (e.g., steps, tools, and processes), we recommended increased focus on improving manager–employee communication and aspects of the manager–employee relationship that are foundational for effective performance management. Our article generated a number of thoughtful and engaging commentaries. In this commentary, we respond to several themes raised in the commentaries and relate them to the recommendations we made for improving performance management processes in organizations.

Type
Response
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 4 , Issue 2 , June 2011 , pp. 208 - 214
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2011 

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

Bhave, D. P., & Brutus, S. (2011). A macro perspective to micro issues. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 4, 165–168.Google Scholar
Brumback, G. (2011). Performance management fundamentals. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 4, 182–183.Google Scholar
Cascio, W. F. (2011). The puzzle of performance management in the multinational enterprise. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 4, 190–193.Google Scholar
Dahling, J. J., & O’Malley, A. L. (2011). Supportive feedback environments can mend broken performance management systems. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 4, 201–203.Google Scholar
Frear, K. A., & Paustain-Underdahl, S. C. (2011). From elusive to obvious: Improving performance management through specificity. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 4, 198–200.Google Scholar
Hantula, D. A. (2011). What performance management needs is a good theory: A behavioral perspective. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 4, 194–197.Google Scholar
Hauenstein, N. M. A. (2011). Improving performance management: Take my golf game, please! Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 4, 176–178.Google Scholar
Hunt, S. T. (2011). Technology is transforming the nature of performance management. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 4, 188–189.Google Scholar
Jones, R. G., & Culbertson, S. C. (2011). Why performance management will remain broken: Authoritarian communication. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 4, 179–181.Google Scholar
Lewis, R. E. (2011). Accountability is key to effective performance appraisal systems. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 4, 173–175.Google Scholar
Marrelli, A. F. (2011). Problems and remedies in performance management: A federal-sector perspective. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 4, 169–172.Google Scholar
Marrelli, A., & Tsugawa, J. (2010). A call to action: Improving first-line supervision of federal employees. Washington, DC: Merit Systems Protection Board. Google Scholar
Mone, E., Price, B., & Eisinger, C. (2011). Performance management: Process perfection or process utility. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 4, 184–187.Google Scholar
Pulakos, E. D. (2009). Performance management: A new approach for driving business results. Boston: Blackwell. Google Scholar
Pulakos, E. D., Mueller-Hanson, R. A., & O’Leary, R. S. (2008). Performance management in the United States. In Varma, A., Budhwar, P. S., & DeNisi, A. (Eds.), Performance management systems: A global perspective (pp. 97–114). London: Routledge. Google Scholar
Pulakos, E. D., & O’Leary, R. S. (2011). Why is performance management broken? Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 4, 194–197.Google Scholar
Saks, A. M., & Gruman, J. A. (2011). Manage employee engagement to manage performance. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 4, 204–207.Google Scholar
Thornton, G. C., Hollenbeck, G. P., & Johnson, S. K. (2010). Selecting leaders: Executives and high potentials. In Farr, J. L., & Tippins, N. (Eds.), The handbook of employee selection (pp. 823–846). New York: Psychology Press. Google Scholar
Varma, A., Budhwar, P. S., & DeNisi, A. (2008). Performance management systems: A global perspective. London: Routledge. Google Scholar