Percepção de Controlabilidade e Equidade da Avaliação de Desempenho
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated the effects of environmentaluncertainty, decentralization of decisions rights,and the use of subjective performance measures onmanagers’ perceptions of outcome controllabilityand performance evaluation fairness. Basedon a survey of 339 middle- and upper- levelmanagers, our results suggest that environmentaluncertainty adversely affects perceptions ofoutcome controllability and that this effectis not moderated by the decentralization ofdecision rights. Our results also show a positiveassociation between perceived controllabilityand performance evaluation fairness. Althoughwe found no direct effect of the use of subjectiveperformance measures on perceived performanceevaluation fairness, it appears to moderate thepositive effect of perceived controllability onfairness. We also show that the positive effectof the use of subjective measures may dependon contextual and job-related factors. Theoverall results underscore the need to considerthe organizational context (environmentaluncertainty and decentralization of decisionrights) to investigate how performance measuresaffect perceived controllability and fairness.Because perceived controllability and fairnessaffect individual attitudes and behaviors withinan organization, our results have importantimplications for the design and use of performanceevaluation systems.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.011 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".