績效責任與參考架構訓練對績效考核正確度之影響

以作者查詢圖書館館藏

、以作者查詢臺灣博碩士

、以作者查詢全國書目

、勘誤回報

、線上人數：23

、訪客IP：3.139.82.23

姓名

鄭淑翎(Shu-Ling Cheng) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

人力資源管理研究所

論文名稱

績效責任與參考架構訓練對績效考核正確度之影響
(Accountability and frame of ference training's effect on performance appraisal accuracy.)

相關論文

★ 組織精簡與員工態度探討 - 以A公司人力重整計劃為例。	★ 訓練成效評估及影響訓練移轉之因素探討----一項時間管理訓練之研究
★ 主管領導風格、業務員工作習慣及專業證照對組織承諾與工作績效之相關研究	★ 研發專業人員職能需求之研究-以某研究機構為例
★ 人力資本、創新資本與組織財務績效關聯性之研究	★ 企業人力資源跨部門服務HR人員之角色、工作任務及所需職能之研究
★ 新進保全人員訓練成效之評估	★ 人力資源專業人員職能之研究－一項追蹤性的研究
★ 影響企業實施接班人計劃的成功因素	★ 主管管理能力、工作動機與工作績效之關聯性探討─以A公司為例
★ 影響安全氣候因子之探討-以汽車製造業為例	★ 台電公司不同世代員工工作價值觀差異及對激勵措施偏好之研究
★ 不同的激勵措施對員工工作滿足及工作投入之影響性分析	★ 工作價值觀、工作滿足對組織承諾之影響(以A通訊公司研發人員為例)
★ 薪資公平知覺與組織承諾關係之探討－以內外控人格特質為干擾變項	★ 改善活動訓練成效評量之研究

檔案

[Endnote RIS 格式]

[Bibtex 格式]

[相關文章]

[文章引用]

[完整記錄]

[館藏目錄]

[檢視]

[下載]

本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
已達開放權限電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的，進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定，切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送，以免觸法。

摘要(中)

績效責任使我們了解考核者的行為，當賦與考核者績效責任時，使考核者了解他需要對評核結果負責，於績效考核過程當中，考核者相對的會較留意被考核者的行為並做適當的記錄，並對考核結果做適當的解釋，以降低考核者主觀意識。過去研究亦指出參考架構訓練(frame of reference)相較於其它訓練的方式更能提昇考核者的能力，能使他們能打出更正確的考核結果，對考核者施以適當的訓練，使之了解考核過程的理論基礎，並且知道各種衡量錯誤的來源，皆有助於考核結果的正確性及績效回饋。
　　本研究採2(有無績效責任)X2(有無接受參考架構訓練)的二因子實驗設計，主要透過四組實驗操弄情境來了解考核者必須負擔績效責任及接受參考架構訓練，對參與者進行績效考核正確度的影響，實驗對象為大學有修習組織行為125位大學生，對績效考核內容已有相關了解，最後透過變異數分析探討績效責任與參考架構訓練是否能有效降低月暈效應偏誤及提高考核正確性。
　　研究結果顯示(1)績效責任存在有主效果並且績效責任與訓練間亦有交互作用效果，當賦與績效責任後，若同時又給與參考架構訓練時，月暈效應呈現下降趨勢。(2) 績效責任與參考架構訓練對於考核正確度得提升(與專家分數的差距)有主效果存在，同時兩者的交互作用效果也達顯著水準，未賦與績效責任情境下，無論有無訓練其距離正確性並無顯著差異，但對於績效責任組而言，若未提供訓練，其距離正確度為最低一旦給予訓練後，兩者之交互作用會顯著提高考核正確性。

摘要(英)

We understand the behaviors of the rater by taking accountability. When the raters are endowed with accountability and realize that they must be responsible to the rating result, the raters will regard the behaviors of the rates more serious, make proper records and make proper explanation to the rating result to reduce the objective awareness of the raters. The previous research also points out that the frame of reference training may further increase the ability of the raters in contrast with the other training method.By taking frame of reference training, the raters may make the rater to make more correct rating result, to give proper training to the ratee, to understand the fundamental theory of the process of rating, and to know the source of all kinds of the measuring error. All of this may increase the validity of the rating result and the performance feedback.
In study, we investigated the effects of accountability and frame of reference training on halo, and accuracy of performance ratings.Undergraduate students (N = 125) from university who took organizational behavior class to participate in the present study and understand the context of performance appraisal. We used three videotapes as context and target stimulus performances, one of performances was of poor quality and second was good.
Results indicated that taking accountability and training at the same time would reduce the halo bias and increase the accuracy of performance appraisal. Besides, taking FORtraining seminar would increase the rating accuracy,too.

關鍵字(中)

★ 參考架構訓練
★ 績效責任
★ 績效考核

關鍵字(英)

★ performance appraisal
★ frame of ference training
★ accountability

論文目次

摘要 v
Abstract vi
目錄 vii
表目錄 viii
圖目錄 viii
第一章緒論 1
第一節研究背景 1
第二節研究動機 1
第三節研究目的 3
第二章文獻探討 4
第一節績效責任對考核結果的影響 4
第二節參考架構訓練對考核結果的影響 6
第三節績效責任與參考架構訓練交互作用對考核正確性影響 8
第三章研究方法 10
第一節銷售人員職能簡介 10
第二節實驗參與者 11
第三節實驗設計與程序 11
第四節變數與衡量 16
第五節實驗操弄檢測 21
第六節研究假設 22
第七節統計分析方法 23
第四章研究結果 24
第一節樣本描述性統計結果 24
第二節績效責任與參考架構訓練之二因子變異數分析 30
第五章結論與建議 33
第一節研究結論與討論 33
第三節管理意涵 35
第三節研究限制及建議 35
參考文獻 36
附錄 42
附錄一績效評估工作之職位工作說明與績效指標說明手冊 42
附錄二　績效評估內容說明手冊評量卷 57
附錄三銷售人員之銷售技巧考核之錄音內容 60
附錄四訓練組受試對象之訓練用教材 70
附錄五英語課程銷售人員之績效評估表格 80
附錄六專家對英語課程銷售人員之績效考核評分結果 82
附錄七績效考核績效責任之書面操弄說明 83
附錄八考核者訓練 84
附錄九本實驗之操弄檢測表格 85
附錄十英語課銷售人員行為績效評估表 87

參考文獻

一、中文部分
丁志達（2003），績效管理，台北:揚智文化。
邱晧政，2008，量化研究與統計分析-SPSS中文視窗版貟料分析範例解析，五南出版社。
劉益民（2001），績效評估制度應用之研究-以電子業為例，台灣科技大學管理研究所在職專班碩士論文。
二、英文部分
Athey, T. R., and McIntyre, R. M. (1987). “Effects of rater training on rater accuracy: levels -of-processing theory and social facilitation theory perspectives.” Journal of Applied psychology, 72：567-572.
Bernardin, H. J., Buckley, M. R. , Tyler, C. I. and Wiese,D. S. (2001) “ A reconsideration of strategies for rater training.” In Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management. 221-274.
Beckner. D., and Highhouse, S., Hazer. J. T. (1998). “Effects of upward accountability andrating purpose on peer-rater inflation anddelay: a field experiment. ”Journal of Organizational Behavior. 19：209-214.
Bernardin H. J., & Beatty R. W., (1984), Performance Appraisal: Assessing Human Behavior at Work, Boston: Kent.
Bernardin, H. J., & Buckley, M. R. (1981). Strategies in rater training. Academy of Management Review, 6: 205–212.
Bernardin, H. J., & Pence, E. C. (1980). Effects of rater training: Creating new response sets and decreasing accuracy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 6: 60–66.
Borman, W. C. (1979). Format and training effects on rating accuracy and rater errors Journal of Applied Psychology, 64: 410-421.
Curtis. A. B., Harvey R. D., Ravden. D. (2005). “Source of political distortions in performance appraisals :appraisal purpose andrater accountability.” Group and Organization Management, 30：42-60.
Cardy, R. L., & Keefe, T. J. (1994). Observational purpose and evaluative articulation in frame-of-reference training: The effects of alternative processing models on rating accuracy. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 57: 338–357.
Cronbach, L J. (1955) Processes affecting scores on "understanding of others" and "assumed similarity." Psychological Bulletin, 52:177-193.
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.
Dorfman P. W., & Stephan W. G.,(1986), Performance appraisal Behaviors: Supervisors Perceptions and Subordinates, Personnel Psychology, 39:579-597.
Feldman (1994) “On the synergy between theory andapplication social cognition and performance appraisal “. In R. S. Wyer andT. K. Srull(Eds).Handbook of social cognition 2nd ed. 2 (pp.339-397). Hillsdale NJ. Erlbaum.
Feldman, J., & Lynch, J. (1988). Self-generated validity and other influences of measurement on belief, attitude, intention, and behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73:421–435.
Fisher, C.D. (1979). "Transmission of positive and negative feedback to subordinates: a laboratory investigation", Journal of Applied Psychology, 64：533-40.
Gorman, C. A.,and Rentsch, J. R.(2009). “ Evaluating Frame-of-Reference Rater Training Effectiveness Using Performance Schema Accuracy” Journal of Applied Psychology, 94: 1336-1344.
Goodstone, M. S., & Lopez, F. E. (2001). The frame of reference approach as a solution to an assessment center dilemma. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 53:96–107.
Gordon, R. A., Rozelle, R. M.and Baxter, J. C. (1998). “The effect applicant age, job level andaccountability on the evaluation of job applicants. “ Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 41：20-33.
Grover, V. (1993). “An empirically derived model for the adoption of customer-based
interorganizational systems”, In Decision Sciences , 24：603-639.
Hodgetts, R. M., Luthans, F., and Doh., J.,(1997), “International Management: Culture, Strategy and Behavior”, 6th edition, McGraw-Hill/Irwin publishers.
Hauenstein, N. M. A., & Foti, R. J. (1989). From laboratory to practice: Neglected issues in implementing frame-of-reference rater training. Personnel Psychology, 42: 359–379.
Ilgen, D. R., and Knowlton, W. A. (1980). “Performance attribution effects on feedback from supervisors. “, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 25：441-456.
Jawahar, I. M., and Williams, C. R. (1997). “Where all the children are above average: The performance appraisal purpose effect.” Personnel Psychology, 50：905-925.
Klimoski, R., and Inks, L. (1990). “Accountability forces in performance appraisal. “,Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 45：194-208.
Kunda, Z.,(1990). “The Case for Motivated Reasoning”, Psychological Bulletin, 108:480-498.
Lievens, F. (2001). Assessor training strategies and their effects on accuracy, interrater reliability, and discriminant validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86:255–264.
Lerner, J. S., & Tetlock, P. E. (1999). Accounting for the effects of accountability. Psychological Bulletin, 12:255–275.
Latham G. P., & Wexley K. N.,(1981), Increasing Productivity Through Performance Appraisal Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Lawer, III, E., E.( 1973), Motivation in Work Organizations. Belmont, California, Brookes-Cole.
Murphy K., & Constans J. N.,(1995), Understanding Performance Appraisal, Organizational, and Goal-Oriented Perspective, Newbury PARK, CA: Sage.
McIntyre, R. M., Smith, D. E., & Hassett, C. E. (1984). Accuracy of performance ratings as affected by rater training and purpose of rating. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69:147–156.
Maier, N.R.F. (1955). Psychology in industry. Boston, MA: Houghton - Mifflin.
Noonan, L. E., & Sulsky, L. M. (2001). Impact of frame-of-reference and behavioral observation training on alternative training effectiveness criteria in a Canadian military sample. Human Performance, 14:3–26.
Nunnally, J. (1978) Psychometric theory (2nd ed.) New York: McGraw-Hill.
Palmer, J.K., and Feldman, J. K. (2005). “Accountability and need for cognition effects on contrast, halo, and accuracy in performance ratings.”, The Journal of Psychology , 3：127-139 .
Pulakos, E. D. (1986) “The development of training programs to increase accuracy with different rating tasks.” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process. 38：79-91.
Pulakos, E. D. (1984) “A comparison of rater trainign programs. error training andaccuracy training.”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 69：581-588.
Roberts, N. (2002). “Keeping public officials accountable through dialogue: resolving the accountability paradox. “Public Administration Review, 62：658-669.
Schleicher, D. J., Day, D. V., Mayes, B. T., & Riggio, R. E. (2002). A new frame for frame-of-reference training: Enhancing the construct validity of assessment centers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87: 735–746.
Schleicher, D. J., & Day, D. V. (1998). A cognitive evaluation of frameof- reference training: Content and process issues. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 73:76–101.
Sulsky, L. M., & Day, D. V. (1994). Effect of frame-of-reference training on rater accuracy under alternative time delays. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79:535–543.
Stamoulis, D.T., and Hauenstein, N. M. A. (1993). “rater training andrating accuracy: training for dimensional accuracy versus training for ratee differentiation “. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78：994-1003.
Simonson. I., and Nye. P. (1992). ” Deescalation strategies: A comparison of techniques for reducing commitment to losing courses of action.”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 77：419-426.
Sulsky, L. M., and Day, D. V. (1992). “Frame training andcognitive categorization: An empirical investigation of rater memory Issues”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 77:501–510.
Smith, D.E. (1986). “Training programs for performance appraisal” A Review of Management, 28-40.
Tetlock, P. E., Skitka, L., andBoettger, R. (1989) “Social andcognitive strategies for coping with accountability: conformity, complexity, andbolstering “, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57：632-640.
Tetlock, P.E., and Boettger, R. (1989). “Accountability: social magnifier of the dilution effect.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57：388-398.
Tetlock, P.E. and Kim, J. I. (1987) “Accountability andjudgment processes in a personality prediction task”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52：700-9.
Tetlock, P.E. (1985). “Accountability: The neglected social context of judgment andchoice: toward a social contingency model”, In M. P. Zanna(ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 25：331-377.
Tetlock, P. E., (1983a). “Accountability andcomplexity of thought”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45：74-83.
Tetlock, P. E., (1983b). “Accountability andthe perseverance of first impressions.” Social Psychology Quarterly, 46：285-292.
Uggerslev, K. L, and Sulsky, L. M.(2008) “ Using frame-of-reference training to understandthe implications of rater idiosyncrasy for rating accuracy”　Journal of Applied Psycholog, 93： 711 -734
Woehr, D. J., and Huff, A. I. (1994) “Rater training for performance appraisal: A quantitative review.” Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 67：189-205.

指導教授

林文政

審核日期

2010-1-20

推文