[Effect of Performance Appraisal and Motivation on Employee's Performance]

By

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACTIII

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTIONIV

BACKGROUND OF STUDYIV

PROBLEM STATEMENTIV

PURPOSE OF STUDYV

SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDYV

RESEARCH METHODOLOGYVI

RESEARCH QUESTIONVII

RESEARCH OBJECTIVESVII

RESEARCH HYPOTHESISVII

RESEARCH APPROACH AND STRATEGIESVII

POPULATION AND SAMPLEVIII

DATA COLLECTION, EDITING AND CODINGIX

CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEWXI

THE ROLE OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISALXIII

PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL SYSTEMSXV

BIAS AND ERRORSXIX

PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL TECHNIQUESXXI

PAST-ORIENTEDXXII

FUTURE-ORIENTEDXXIV

LEGAL INFLUENCESXXVI

REFERENCESXXIX

Abstract

The present study sought to examine the relationship between managers' perceptions of employee motivation and performance appraisal by surveying managers and employees in three distinct cultural regions (North America, Asia, and Latin America) within a single global organization. Three distinct cultural patterns emerged in the theories managers' held about their subordinates. While North American managers perceived their employees as being more extrinsically than intrinsically motivated, perceptions of intrinsic motivation proved to be a more robust predictor of performance appraisal. Asian managers exhibited a holistic tendency in that they perceived their subordinates as equally motivated by intrinsic and extrinsic factors, and their perceptions of both motivations proved to be comparable predictors of performance appraisal. Latin American managers perceived their employees as being more intrinsically than extrinsically motivated, and accordingly, only their perceptions of intrinsic motivation proved to be significantly correlated with performance appraisal. In contrast to the cultural variations exhibited in manager perceptions, employees consistently reported themselves as being more motivated by intrinsic than extrinsic incentives. Explanations for the distinct cultural patterns that emerged and their implications for the study of culture and organizational behavior are discussed.

Chapter I: Introduction

Background of study

In the human side of the company [McGregor, 1960] emphasized the importance of examining the underlying assumptions that the managers keep their subordinates. McGregor uses these assumptions in a broad sense to separate managers into two camps: Theory X and Theory Y manager. McGregor believes the overwhelming majority of managers, the allocation of the theory of X, that they believe that their employees would not like to work to avoid responsibility and the desired security above all. As such, rather than trust in people to motivate themselves, theory X were forced managers to adopt coercive measures, controlling, and sometimes even threatening methods when they try to motivate their staff (Heil, et al., 2000).

In contrast, McGregor complained of a lack of management theory Y, which means that their employees enjoy the work believed, sought to develop their skills and helped a worthy business goals. An acceptance of the Theory X and Theory Y is that the main source of motivation on your own (eg the need self-actualization) or external (eg, monetary incentives and controlling) had to be made to the employees.

Problem Statement

Nevertheless, despite the rhetoric of the performance appraisal and its impact on motivation, commitment and job performance, this relationship is generally assumed, not tested. Thus, quoted in a recent review of the performance analysis study, Levy and Williams (2004) for further field research on the relationship between the reactions of the performance analysis, staff attitudes and behavior. In addition, because studies of individual differences that influence the relationship between performance appraisal and work performance, can establish terms and conditions under which the performance appraisal is ...