MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009777847 · doi:10.1108/00251741111126495

Globalization of performance appraisals: theory and applications

2011· article· en· W2009777847 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Decision · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicQuality and Supply Management
Canadian institutionsCanadian Society of NephrologyCégep de Saint-LaurentConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultinational corporationPerformance appraisalVariety (cybernetics)Order (exchange)GlobalizationBest practiceProcess (computing)MarketingBusinessHuman resource managementKnowledge managementPublic relationsProcess managementComputer scienceManagementEconomicsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this article is to provide a more complete perspective regarding the “best practices” for performance appraisals of “distant” employees in global organizations. Design/methodology/approach A range of published works (1998‐2009) on multinational corporations and performance appraisals was reviewed. The literature was used to determine human resource challenges associated with globalization as well as the types of performance appraisals, common pitfalls and elements for improvement of appraisal systems. Concepts were then combined to determine the “best practices” for performance appraisal in a global setting. Finally, a small questionnaire consisting of six questions was constructed and sent to managers in two companies in the health care industry meeting the criteria of having “distant” employees. The questions were open‐ended in order to allow for a variety of responses enabling the researchers to view trends and make comparisons with the literature. Findings Adequate training must be provided to both the appraiser and the appraisee in order to avoid the many rating errors that are common in performance appraisal. Training should include cultural, legal and customer differences by country providing managers with the tools to improve on the process. Managers must also be given the opportunity to build the required relationship with these employees. Research limitations/implications A questionnaire was sent to several key managers in two complex pharmaceutical firms meeting the criteria with responses received. Further empirical research on the best practices of performance appraisal for distant employees in global organizations should be pursued. Practical implications This article provides a source of information on what practices are followed in order to support the performance appraisal of “distant” employees in different parts of the world. Originality/value There is limited literature dealing with “distant” employee performance appraisal in global organizations and this article attempts to fill this gap.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.932
Threshold uncertainty score0.507

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it