Public managers wrestle with how to influence organizational performance. Results-based management approaches point to the goal alignment’s importance in performance management programs for meeting organizational goals. This research examines the extent to which federal agency organizational factors allow for performance appraisal goal alignment. Goal alignment is operationalized in two ways: embedding of strategic plan goals into employee performance plans and employee knowledge of how their work relates to the agency’s goals and priorities. Using data from U.S. Office of Personnel Management’s evaluation of federal agency appraisal programs, results indicate leadership support of the program is a determining factor of plan alignment. Communication of the organization’s goals, the climate fit for achieving results, and whether the strategic plan was written for the agency program level tend to predict employee alignment. Strategic plan level is particularly important for strategic management literature, which has limited empirical evidence for the effectiveness of program-level strategic plans.
AlexanderL. D. (1985). Successfully implementing strategic decisions. Long Range Planning, 18(3), 91-97.
2.
AndrewsR.BoyneG. A.MeierK. J.O’TooleL. J.WalkerR. M. (2012). Vertical strategic alignment and public service performance. Public Administration, 90, 77-98.
3.
BarrettR. S. (1967). Performance rating. Chicago, IL: Science Research Associates.
4.
BeehrT. A.GlazerS.FischerR.LintonL. L.HansenC. P. (2009). Antecedents for achievement of alignment in organizations. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 82, 1-20.
5.
BehnR. (2002). The psychological barriers to performance management: Or why isn’t everyone jumping on the performance-management bandwagon?Public Performance & Management Review, 26(1), 5-25.
6.
BernardinH. J.BuckleyM. R. (1981). Strategies in rater training. Academy of Management Review, 6, 205-212.
7.
BernardinH. J.PenceE. C. (1980). Rater training: Creating new response sets and decreasing accuracy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 60-66.
8.
BerryF. S. (1994). Innovation in public management: The adoption of strategic planning. Public Administration Review, 54, 322-330.
9.
BerryF. S.WechslerB. (1995). State agencies’ experience with strategic planning: Findings for a national survey. Public Administration Review, 55, 159-168.
10.
BretzR. D.MilkovichG. T.ReadW. (1992). The current state of performance appraisal research and practice: Concerns, directions, and implications. Journal of Management, 18, 321-352.
11.
BrysonJ. M. (2003). Strategic planning for public and nonprofit organizations. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
12.
BrysonJ. M.BerryF. S.YangK. (2010). The state of public strategic management research: A selective literature review and set of future directions. American Review of Public Administration, 20, 495-521.
13.
BrysonJ. M.FreemanR. E.RoeringW. D. (1986). Strategic planning in the public sector: Approaches and directions. In CheckowayB. (Ed.), Strategic perspectives on planning practices (pp. 65-85). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
14.
CawleyB. D.KeepingL. M.LevyP. E. (1998). Participation in the performance appraisal process and employee reactions: A meta-analytic review of the field investigations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 615-633.
15.
ChunY. H.RaineyH. G. (2005). Goal ambiguity and organizational performance in U.S. Federal Agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15, 529-557.
16.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
DaleyD. M. (2005). Designing effective performance appraisal systems. In CondreyS. E. (Ed.), Handbook of human resource management in government (pp. 499-527). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
19.
DamanpourF. (1991). Organizational innovation: A meta-analysis of effects of determinants and moderators. The Academy of Management Journal, 34, 555-590.
20.
deLeonL.EwenA. J. (1997). Multi-source performance appraisals: Employee perceptions of fairness. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 17(1), 22-38.
21.
DeNisiA. S.SoneshS. (2010). The appraisals and management of performance at work. In ZedeckS. (Ed.), APA handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 255-279). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
22.
DuarteN. T.GoodsonJ. R.KlichN. R. (1994). Effects of dyadic quality and duration on performance appraisal. The Academy of Management Journal, 37, 499-521.
23.
EnriquezV.McBrideJ.PaxtonL. (2001). Improving knowledge of strategic goals and the impact on organizational commitment. Health Marketing Quarterly, 18(3-4), 119-132.
24.
FernandezS.RaineyH. G. (2006). Managing successful organizational change in the public sector. Public Administration Review, 66, 168-177.
FranklinA. L. (2001). Serving the public interest? Federal experiences with participation in strategic planning. American Review of Public Administration, 31, 126-138.
27.
FrazierM. A.SwissJ. E. (2008). Contrasting views of results-based management tools from different organizational levels. International Public Management Journal, 11, 214-234.
28.
GabrisG. T.IhrkeD. M. (2000). Improving employee acceptance towards performance appraisal and merit pay systems: The role of leadership credibility. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 20(1), 41-68.
29.
GhoshalS.BartlettC. A. (1988). Creation, adoption, and diffusion of innovations by subsidiaries of multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 19, 365-388.
30.
GreenhalghT.RobertG.MacfarlaneF.BateP.KyriakidouO. (2004). Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: Systematic review and recommendations. The Milbank Quarterly, 82, 581-629.
31.
IlgenD. R.Barnes-FarrellJ. L.McKellinD. B. (1993). Performance appraisal process research in the 1980s: What has it contributed to appraisals in use?Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 54, 321-368.
32.
JauchL. R.OsbornR. N.TerpeningW. D. (1980). Goal congruence and employee orientations: The substitution effect. The Academy of Management Journal, 23, 544-550.
33.
JenningsE. T.HaistM. P. (2006). Putting performance measurement in context. In IngrahamP. W.LynnL. E. (Eds.), The art of governance (pp. 173-194). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
34.
JoshiM. P.KathuriaR.PorthS. J. (2003). Alignment of strategic priorities and performance: An integration of operations and strategic management perspectives. Journal of Operations Management, 21, 353-369.
35.
KaplanR. S.NortonD. P. (1996). The balanced scorecard: translating strategy into action. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
36.
KelloughJ. E.NigroL. G. (2002). Pay for performance in Georgia: Employee perspectives on Georgia gain after five years. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 22, 59-61.
37.
KimS. E.RubiantyD. (2011). Perceived fairness of performance appraisal in the federal government: Does it matter?Review of Public Personnel Administration, 31, 329-348.
38.
KleinK. J.SorraJ. S. (1996). The challenge of innovation implementation. Academy of Management Review, 21, 1055-1080.
39.
KorosecR. L. (2006). Is department-based strategic planning more effective that organization-wide strategic planning?Public Performance & Management Review, 30, 221-244.
40.
KotterJ. P. (1996). Leading change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
41.
KrippendorffK. (1980). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
42.
Kristof-BrownA. L.StevensC. K. (2001). Goal congruence in project teams: Does the fit between members’ personal mastery and performance goals matter?Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 1083-1095.
43.
LeeC. (1985). Increasing performance appraisal effectiveness: Matching task types, appraisal process, and rater training. The Academy of Management Review, 10, 322-331.
44.
LockeA. L.LathamG. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation. American Psychologist, 57, 705-717.
45.
LongE.FranklinA. L. (2004). The paradox of implementing the government performance and results act: Top-down direction for bottom-up implementation. Public Administration Review, 64, 309-319.
46.
LongeneckerC. O.FinkL. S. (1997). Keys to designing and running an effective performance appraisal system: Lessons learned. Journal of Compensation and Benefits, 13(3), 28-36.
47.
MillerC. C.CardinalL. B. (1994). Strategic planning and firm performance: A synthesis of more than two decades of research. The Academy of Management Journal, 37, 1649-1665.
48.
MoneE. M.LondonM. (2009). Employee engagement through effective performance management: A manager’s guide. New York, NY: Routledge.
49.
MoynihanD. P.PandeyS. K. (2010). The big question for performance management: Why do managers use performance information?Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20, 849-866.
50.
MoynihanD. P.PandeyS. K.WrightB. E. (2011). Setting the table: How transformational leadership fosters performance information use. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22, 143-164.
51.
MurphyK. R.ClevelandJ. N. (1995). Understanding performance appraisal: Social, organizational, and goal-based perspectives. London, England: Sage.
NilakantaS.ScamellR. W. (1990). The effect of information sources and communication channels on the diffusion of innovation in a data vase development environment. Management Science, 36, 24-40.
54.
OhS. S.LewisG. B. (2009). Can performance appraisal systems inspire intrinsically motivated employees?Review of Public Personnel Administration, 29, 158-167.
55.
OlianJ. D.RynesS. L. (1991). Making total quality work: Aligning organizational processes, performance measures, and stakeholders. Human Resources Management, 30, 303-333.
56.
PandeyS. K.WrightB. E. (2006). Connecting the dots in public management: Political environment, organizational goal ambiguity and the public manager’s role ambiguity. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16, 511-532.
57.
PoisterT. H.PittsD. W.EdwardsL. H. (2010). Strategic management research in the public sector: A review, synthesis, and future directions. American Review of Public Administration, 40, 522-547.
58.
PulakosE. D.O’LearyR. S. (2011). Why is performance management broken?Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 4, 146-164.
59.
ReinkeS. J. (2003). Does the form really matter? Leadership, trust, and the acceptance of the performance appraisal process. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 23, 23-37.
60.
RobertsG. E. (1992). Linkages between performance appraisal system effectiveness and rater and ratee acceptance. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 12(3), 19-41.
61.
RobertsG. E. (1996). A case study in performance appraisal system development: Lessons from a municipal police department. American Review of Public Administration, 26, 361-385.
62.
RobertsG. E. (2002). Employee performance appraisal system participation: A technique that works. Public Personnel Management, 31, 333-342.
63.
RobertsG. E.PavlakT. (1996). Municipal government personnel professionals and performance appraisal. Public Personnel Management, 25, 379-408.
64.
RobertsG. E.ReedT. (1996). Performance appraisal participation, goal setting, and feedback: The influence of supervisory style. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 16(4), 29-60.
65.
RodgersR.HunterJ. E.RogersD. L. (1993). Influence of top management commitment on management program success. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 151-155.
66.
RogersE. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. London, England: Free Press of Glencoe.
67.
RosenthalR.RosnowR. L. (1991). Essentials of behavioral research: Methods and data analysis (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
68.
RubinE. V. (2011, June). Appraising performance appraisal systems in the federal government: A literature review, preliminary findings, and prospects for future research. Paper presented at the Public Management Research Conference, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY.
69.
SchiemannW. A. (2009). Aligning performance management with organizational strategy, values and goals. In SmitherJ. W.LondonM. (Eds.), Performance management: Putting research into action (pp. 45-88). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
70.
ShraderC. B.TaylorL.DaltonD. R. (1984). Strategic planning and organizational performance: A critical appraisal. Journal of Management, 10, 149-171.
71.
SHRM Foundation. (2012). Building a high-performance culture: A fresh look at performance management. Alexandria, VA: Author.
72.
SmithP. C.KendallL. M. (1963). Retranslation of expectations: An approach to construction of unambiguous anchors for rating scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 47, 149-155.
73.
StrangD.SouleS. A. (1998). Diffusion in organizations and social movements: From hybrid corn to poison pills. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 265-290.
74.
TaylorP. J.PierceJ. L. (1999). Effects of introducing a performance management system on employees’ subsequent attitudes and effort. Public Personnel Management, 28, 423-452.
75.
U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2007). Financial regulators: Agencies have implemented key performance management practices, but opportunities for improvement exist (GAO Publication No. GAO-07-678). Washington, DC: Author.
76.
U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2008). Lessons learned for the next administration on using performance information to improve results (GAO Publication No. GAO-08–1026T). Washington, DC: Author.
77.
U.S. Office of Personnel Management. (2001). A handbook for measuring employee performance: Aligning employee performance plans with organizational goals. Washington, DC: Author.
78.
U.S. Office of Personnel Management. (2008). Performance appraisal assessment tool. Washington, DC: Author.
79.
VinzantD. H.VinzantJ. C. (1996). Strategy and organizational capacity: Finding a fit. Public Productivity & Management Review, 20, 139-157.
80.
WalkerR. M.BrewerG. A. (2008). An organizational Echelon analysis of the determinants of red tape in public organizations. Public Administration Review, 68, 1112-1127.
81.
WejnertB. (2002). Integrating models of diffusion of innovations: A conceptual framework. Annual Review of Sociology, 28, 297-326.
82.
WrightB. E. (2004). The role of work context in work motivation: A public sector application of goal and social cognitive theories. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 14, 59-78.
83.
YangK.KassekertA. (2009). Linking management reform with employee job satisfaction: Evidence from federal agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20, 413-436.
