This study investigates the relationship between self-monitoring and multidimensional performance ratings of global assignees. It was hypothesized that supervisors’ performance ratings of expatriate subordinates would depend on three factors: (a) individual differences in self-monitoring, (b) supervisor-subordinate national similarity, and (c) the dimension of performance being rated (technical, contextual, or expatriate-specific). Analysis of variance results from 78 supervisor/subordinate dyads indicated significant interactions among these three factors. The significant interaction for the contextual performance dimension suggests that high self-monitors were rated more favorably by supervisors of the same nationality. Low self-monitors’ ratings were somewhat less affected by rater-ratee national similarity. Self-monitoring also had a significant main effect on ratings of assignment-specific performance. These results suggest self-monitoring personality has differential effects across performance dimensions and rater context. Future research implications are provided for examining the relationship between personality and job performance dimensions. Practical recommendations for the performance management of global assignees are provided.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Arvey, R. D.
, & Murphy, K. R. (1998). Performance evaluation in work settings. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 141-168.
2.
Austin, J. T.
, & Villanova, P. (1992). The criterion problem: 1917-1992. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 836-874.
3.
Barrick, M. R.
, & Mount, M. K. (1991). The big five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1-26.
4.
Bernardin, H. J.
, & Buckley, M. R. (1981). Strategies in rater training. Academy of Management Review, 6, 205-212.
5.
Black, J. S.
, Gregersen, H. B., & Mendenhall, M. E. (1992). Global assignments: Successfully expatriating and repatriating international managers. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
6.
Black, J. S.
, & Mendenhall, M. (1990). Cross-cultural training effectiveness: A review and theoretical framework for future research. Academy of Management Review, 15, 113-136.
7.
Borman, W. C.
, & Brush, D. H. (1993). More progress toward a taxonomy of managerial performance requirements. Human Performance, 6, 1-22.
8.
Borman, W. C.
, & Motowidlo, S. J. (1993). Expanding the criteria domain to include elements of contextual performance. In N. Schmitt, W. C. Borman, & Associates (Eds.), Personnel selection in organizations (pp. 71-98). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
9.
Caldwell, D. F.
, & O’Reilly, C. A., III. (1982). Boundary spanning and individual performance: The impact of self-monitoring. Journal of Applied Psychology, 27, 124-127.
10.
Caligiuri, P.
(1997). Assessing expatriate success: Beyond just being there. In Z. Aycan (Ed.), Expatriate management: Theory and practice (Vol. 4, pp. 117-140). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
11.
Campbell, J. P.
, McCloy, R. A., Oppler, S. H., & Sager, C. E. (1993). A theory of performance. In N. Schmitt, W. C. Borman Associates (Eds.), Personnel selection in organizations (pp. 35-70). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
12.
Cleveland, J. N.
, & Murphy, K. R. (1992). Analyzing performance appraisal as goal-directed behavior. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 10, 121-185.
13.
Cui, G.
, & van den Berg, S. (1991). Testing the construct validity of intercultural effectiveness. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 15, 227-241.
14.
Day, D. V.
, Schleicher, D. J., & Unckless, A. L. (1996, April). Self-monitoring and work-related outcomes: A meta-analysis. Paper presented at the Eleventh Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, San Diego, CA.
15.
Day, D. V.
, & Silverman, S. B. (1989). Personality and job performance: Evidence of incremental validity. Personnel Psychology, 42, 25-36.
16.
Day, D. V.
, & Sulsky, L. M. (1995). Effects of frame-of-reference training and information configuration on memory organization and rating accuracy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 158-167.
17.
Detweiler, R. A.
(1975). On inferring the intentions of a person from another culture. Journal of Personality, 43, 591-611.
18.
Dunnette, M.
(1963). A note on the criterion. Journal of Applied Psychology, 47, 251-254.
19.
Finney, M.
, & Von Glinow, M. A. (1988). Integrating academic and organizational approaches to developing the international manager. Journal of Management Development, 7, 16-27.
20.
Gangestad, S.
, & Snyder, M. (1985). To carve nature at its joints: On the existence of discrete classes in personality. Psychological Review, 92, 317-349.
21.
Gorsuch, R. L.
(1983). Factor analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
22.
Hogan, R.
(1998). Reinventing personality. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 17, 1-10.
23.
Hough, L. M.
(1992). The Big Five personality variables-construct confusion: Description versus prediction. Human Performance, 5, 139-155.
24.
Judge, T. A.
, & Ferris, G. R. (1993). Social context of performance evaluation decisions. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 80-105.
25.
Katz, D.
, & Kahn, R. L. (1978). The social psychology of organizations (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.
26.
Kilduff, M.
, & Day, D. V. (1994). Do chameleons get ahead? The effects of self-monitoring on managerial careers. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 1047-1060.
27.
Kobrin, S. J.
(1988). Expatriate reduction and strategic control in American multinational corporations. Human Resource Management, 27, 63-75.
28.
Landy, F. J.
, & Farr, J. L. (1983). The measurement of work performance: Methods, theory, and applications. New York: Academic Press.
29.
McCloy, R. A.
, Campbell, J. P., & Cudeck, R. (1994). A confirmatory test of a model of performance determinants. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 493-505.
30.
Motowidlo, S. J.
, & Van Scotter, J. R. (1994). Evidence that task performance should be distinguished from contextual performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 475-480.
31.
Murphy, K. R.
, & Cleveland, J. N. (1995). Understanding performance appraisal: Social, organizational, and goal-based perspectives. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
32.
Ronan, W. W.
, & Prien, E. P. (1971). Perspectives on the measurement of human performance. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
33.
Schrader, B. W.
, & Steiner, D. D. (1996). Common comparison standards: An approach to improving agreement between self and supervisory performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 813-820.
34.
Snyder, M.
(1974). The self-monitoring of expressive behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30, 526-537.
35.
Snyder, M.
(1979). Self-monitoring processes. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 12, 85-128.
36.
Snyder, M.
(1987). Public appearances/private realities: The psychology of self-monitoring. New York: Freeman.
37.
Snyder, M.
, & Gangestad, S. (1986). On the nature of self-monitoring: Matters of assessment, matters of validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 125-139.
38.
Tett, R. P.
, Jackson, D. N., & Rothstein, M. (1991). Personality measures as predictors of job performance: A meta-analytic review. Personnel Psychology, 44, 703-742.
39.
Tsui, A. S.
, & O’Reilly, C. A., III. (1989). Beyond simple demographic effects: The importance of relational demography in superior-subordinate dyads. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 402-423.
40.
Tung, R. L.
(1981). Selection and training of personnel for overseas assignments. Columbia Journal of World Business, 16, 21-25.
41.
Wagner, R. K.
(1987). Tacit knowledge in everyday intelligent behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 1236-1247.
42.
Wayne, S. J.
, & Liden, R. C. (1995). Effects of impression management on performance ratings: A longitudinal study. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 232-260.
43.
Woehr, D. J.
, & Roch, S. G. (1996). Context effects in performance evaluation: The impact of ratee sex and performance level on performance ratings and behavioral recall. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 66, 31-41.
