Organizational citizenship behavior[edit]

Main article: Organizational citizenship behavior

Also referred to as contextual behavior, prosocial behavior, and extra-role behavior,
organizational citizenship behavior (OC! consists of e"plo#ee behavior that
contributes to the $elfare of the organization but is be#ond the scope of the
e"plo#ee%s &ob duties'[(] )hese extra-role behaviors "a# help or hinder the
attain"ent of organizational goals' *esearch supports +ve di"ensions of OC:
altruis", conscientiousness, courtes#, sports"anship, and civic virtue'[,-]
*esearchers have found that the OC di"ensions of altruis" and civic virtue can
have &ust as "uch of an i"pact on "anager%s sub&ective evaluations of e"plo#ees%
perfor"ances as e"plo#ees% ob&ective productivit# levels'[,.] )he degree to $hich
OC can in/uence &udg"ents of &ob perfor"ance is relativel# high' Controvers#
exists as to $hether OC should be for"all# considered as a part of perfor"ance
appraisal (0A!'
1ntervie$s[edit]
)he perfor"ance appraisal (0A! intervie$ is t#picall# the +nal step of the appraisal
process'[2] )he intervie$ is held bet$een the subordinate and supervisor' )he 0A
intervie$ can be considered of great signi+cance to an organization%s 0A s#ste"'[-]
1t is "ost advantageous $hen both the superior and subordinate participate in the
intervie$ discussion and establish goals together'[2] )hree factors consistentl#
contribute to e3ective 0A intervie$s: the supervisor%s 4no$ledge of the
subordinate%s &ob and perfor"ance in it, the supervisor%s support of the subordinate,
and a $elco"ing of the subordinate%s participation'[-]
5"plo#ee reactions[edit]
6u"erous researchers have reported that "an# e"plo#ees are not satis+ed $ith
their perfor"ance appraisal (0A! s#ste"s'[2,] 7tudies have sho$n that sub&ectivit#
as $ell as appraiser bias is often a proble" perceived b# as "an# as half of
e"plo#ees'[2,] Appraiser bias, ho$ever, appears to be perceived as "ore of a
proble" in govern"ent and public sector organizations'[2,] Also, according to so"e
studies, e"plo#ees $ished to see changes in the 0A s#ste" b# "a4ing 8the s#ste"
"ore ob&ective, i"proving the feedbac4 process, and increasing the fre9uenc# of
revie$':[2,] 1n light of traditional 0A operation defects, 8organizations are no$
increasingl# incorporating practices that "a# i"prove the s#ste"' )hese changes
are particularl# concerned $ith areas such as eli"ination of sub&ectivit# and bias,
training of appraisers, i"prove"ent of the feedbac4 process and the perfor"ance
revie$ discussion':[2,]
According to a "eta-anal#sis of ;< +eld studies, general e"plo#ee participation in
his=her o$n appraisal process $as positivel# correlated $ith e"plo#ee reactions to
the 0A s#ste"'[;>] More speci+call#, e"plo#ee participation in the appraisal
process $as "ost strongl# related to e"plo#ee satisfaction $ith the 0A s#ste"'[;>]
Concerning the reliabilit# of e"plo#ee reaction "easures, researchers have found
e"plo#ee reaction scales to be sound $ith fe$ concerns through using a
con+r"ator# factor anal#sis that is representative of e"plo#ee reaction scales'[?@]
*esearchers suggest that the stud# of e"plo#ees% reactions to 0A is i"portant
because of t$o "ain reasons: e"plo#ee reactions s#"bolizes a criterion of interest
to practitioners of 0As and e"plo#ee reactions have been associated through theor#
to deter"inants of appraisal acceptance and success'[?@] *esearchers translate
these reasons into the context of the scientist-practitioner gap or the 8lac4 of
align"ent bet$een research and practice':[?@]
[2] 7chultz A 7chultz notes that opposition to perfor"ance appraisals generall#
donBt receive positive ratings fro" an#one involved' C7o e"plo#ees that $ill be
directl# a3ected b# the 0erfor"ance Appraisals are less than enthusiastic about
participating in the"C' [;] Dhen an e"plo#ee 4no$s that their $or4 perfor"ance
has been less than perfect it%s nerve rac4ing to be evaluated' Most $or4ers &ust
don%t appreciate constructive criticis" or an# criticis"' 5"plo#ees tend to be
hostile 4no$ing the# could be given bad ne$s on their perfor"ance' 7chultz, Euane
0' 7chultz, 7#dne# 5llen (;@@.!' 0s#cholog# and $or4 toda# (2@th ed', 1nternational
ed' ed'!' Fpper 7addle *iver, 6'G': 0earson 5ducation' pp' 2@-H2@.' 176
.<-@;@?<@?-<@' More than one of IauthorJ and IlastJ speci+ed 7chultz, Euane 0'
7chultz, 7#dne# 5llen (;@@.!' 0s#cholog# and $or4 toda# (2@th ed', 1nternational ed'
ed'!' Fpper 7addle *iver, 6'G': 0earson 5ducation' p' 2@.' 176 .<-@;@?<@?-<@'
More than one of IauthorJ and IlastJ speci+ed
Kegal i"plications[edit]
)here are federal la$s addressing fair e"plo#"ent practices, and this also concerns
perfor"ance appraisal (0A!' Eiscri"ination can occur $ithin predictions of
perfor"ance and evaluations of &ob behaviors'[2] )he revision of "an# court cases
has revealed the involve"ent of alleged discri"ination $hich $as often lin4ed to
the assess"ent of the e"plo#ee%s &ob perfor"ance'[?2] 7o"e of the la$s $hich
protect individuals against discri"ination are 8the )itle L11 of the Civil *ights Act of
2.(,, the Civil *ights Act of 2..2, the Age Eiscri"ination in 5"plo#"ent Act
(AE5A!, and the A"ericans $ith Eisabilities Act (AEA!':[2] Ka$suits "a# also results
fro" charges of an e"plo#er%s negligence, defa"ation, and=or "isrepresentation'
[2] A fe$ appraisal criteria to 4eep in "ind for a legall# sound 0A is to 4eep the
content of the appraisal ob&ective, &ob-related, behavior-based, $ithin the control of
the ratee, and related to speci+c functions rather than a global assess"ent'[?2]
7o"e appraisal procedure suggestions for a legall# sound 0A is to standardize
operations, co""unicate for"all# $ith e"plo#ees, provide infor"ation of
perfor"ance de+cits and give opportunities to e"plo#ees to correct those de+cits,
give e"plo#ees access to appraisal results, provide $ritten instructions for the
training of raters, and use "ultiple, diverse and unbiased raters'[?2] )hese are
valuable but not exhaustive lists of reco""endations for 0As' )he 5"plo#"ent
Opportunit# Co""ission (55OC! guidelines appl# to an# selection procedure that is
used for "a4ing e"plo#"ent decisions, not onl# for hiring, but also for pro"otion,
de"otion, transfer, la#o3, discharge, or earl# retire"ent' )herefore, e"plo#"ent
appraisal procedures "ust be validated li4e tests or an# other selection device'
5"plo#ers $ho base their personnel decisions on the results of a $ell-designed
perfor"ance revie$ progra" that includes for"al appraisal intervie$s are "uch
"ore li4el# to be successful in defending the"selves against clai"s of
discri"ination'[?;]
Cross-cultural i"plications[edit]
0erfor"ance appraisal (0A! s#ste"s, and the pre"ises of $hich the# $ere based,
that have been for"ed and regarded as e3ective in the Fnited 7tates "a# not have
the transferabilit# for e3ectual utilization in other countries or cultures, and vice
versa'[2?] 0erfor"ance 8appraisal is thought to be deepl# rooted in the nor"s,
values, and beliefs of a societ#:'[?>] 8Appraisal re/ects attitudes to$ards
"otivation and perfor"ance (self! and relationships (e'g' peers, subordinates,
supervisors, organization!, all of $hich var# fro" one countr# to the next:'[?,]
)herefore, appraisal should be in con&unction $ith cultural nor"s, values, and
beliefs in order to be operative'[??] )he deep-seated nor"s, values and beliefs in
di3erent cultures a3ect e"plo#ee "otivation and perception of organizational
e9uit# and &ustice' 1n e3ect, a 0A s#ste" created and considered e3ectual in one
countr# "a# not be an appropriate assess"ent in another cultural region'[?,]
Mor exa"ple, so"e countries and cultures value the trait of assertiveness and
personal acco"plish"ent $hile others instead place "ore "erit on cooperation and
interpersonal connection' Countries scoring high on assertiveness consider 0A to be
a $a# of assuring e9uit# a"ong e"plo#ees so that higher perfor"ing e"plo#ees
receive greater re$ards or higher salaries'[?,] Countries scoring lo$ on
assertiveness but higher in interpersonal relations "a# not li4e the social separation
and pa# ine9uit# of higher=lo$er perfor"ing e"plo#eesN e"plo#ees fro" this "ore
cooperative rather than individualistic culture place "ore concern on interpersonal
relationships $ith other e"plo#ees rather than on individual interests'[?,] Oigh
assertive countries value perfor"ance feedbac4 for self-"anage"ent and
e3ectiveness purposes $hile countries lo$ in assertiveness vie$ perfor"ance
feedbac4 as 8threatening and obtrusive:'[?,][?(] 1n this case, the 0A of the high
assertive countries $ould li4el# not be bene+cial for countries scoring lo$er in
assertiveness to e"plo#' Oo$ever, countries scoring lo$er in assertiveness could
e"plo# 0A for purposes of i"proving long-ter" co""unication develop"ent $ithin
the organization such as clarif#ing &ob ob&ectives, guide training and develop"ent
plans, and lessen the gap bet$een &ob perfor"ance and organizational
expectations'[?<]