MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283746512 · doi:10.1108/pr-07-2021-0492

Reframing the performance management system: a conversations perspective

2022· article· en· W4283746512 on OpenAlexaffabout
Paula O’Kane, Martin McCracken, Travor C. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenuePersonnel Review · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHuman Resource Development and Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFormalityKnowledge managementActive listeningFunction (biology)OriginalityCognitive reframingSet (abstract data type)BespokeProcess managementSociologyBusinessPsychologyComputer scienceQualitative researchPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose To explore human resource (HR) practitioner perspectives of the effectiveness, challenges, and aspirations of the performance management (PM) system to inform future directions for PM design and success. Design/methodology/approach Interviews with 53 HR practitioners from a cross-section of organisations operating in the United Kingdom, Canada and New Zealand. Findings Practitioner's discussed the criticality of effective conversations across all elements of the PM system. Using an interpretive approach, and through a lens of social exchange theory (SET), we used their voice to develop a conversations-based PM model. This model centres on effective performance conversations through the design and implementation of the PM system. It includes four enablers and five environmental elements. The enablers (aligned goals, frequent feedback, skills development, and formality) depend on skilled interactions and conversations, and the organisational environmental elements (design, development function, buy-in, culture, and linkage to other systems) are enhanced when effective conversations take place. Practical implications Practitioners can use the conversations model to help shape the way they design and implement PM systems, that place emphasis on upskilling participants to engage in both formal and informal honest conversations to build competency in the enablers and assess organisational readiness in terms of the environmental elements. Originality/value By listening to the under-utilised voice of the HR practitioner, and through a lens of SET, we developed a PM model which emphasises reciprocity and relationship building as key tenets of the PM system. While past research recognises the importance of effective conversations for PM implementation, it has largely silent been about the role of conversations in system design. Our model centres these conversations, presenting enablers and environmental elements to facilitate their core position within effective PM.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.042
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.134

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.042
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0120.028
Scholarly communication0.0220.026
Open science0.0030.017
Research integrity0.0040.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePersonnel ReviewSame topicHuman Resource Development and Performance EvaluationFrench-language works237,207