Unionised employee's reactions to the introduction of a goal‐based performance appraisal system<sup>1</sup>
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While performance appraisal research has a rich history, we sought to address a long‐noted void in the human resource management (HRM) literature, namely an investigation of employees' reactions to a newly introduced performance appraisal. Specifically, we examined the reaction of 408 unionised employees to a newly introduced performance appraisal system. Reactions examined included appraisal satisfaction, job satisfaction, appraisal fairness, goal setting and the perceived purpose of the system. Satisfaction with the appraisal system was higher when (a) employees perceived it as being fair, (b) it was used primarily for developmental purposes and (c) it allowed them to participate in goal setting. Of additional importance, perception of a developmental focus in the appraisal partially mediated the relationship between appraisal satisfaction, and each of job satisfaction, appraisal fairness and goal setting.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it