Performance Appraisal Reactions: A Review and Research Agenda

  • Shaun PichlerEmail author


Employee reactions to performance appraisals are essential to appraisal effectiveness: They are correlated with subsequent job attitudes, motivation, and performance. Yet, many managers dread giving appraisal reviews and employee reactions are often negative. Although performance appraisal research has traditionally focused on psychometric properties of performance ratings, there is a burgeoning literature on appraisal reactions. In this chapter, this burgeoning literature is reviewed to identify key predictors of appraisal reactions, opportunities for future research, as well as implications for managers and organizations. A conceptual model is developed to guide future research; this model implies that more longitudinal and multilevel studies are needed to better understand the processes whereby predictors are related to appraisal reactions. This review suggests that managers and organizations should pay special attention to leader–member exchange quality, due process performance appraisal, and providing opportunities for voice in the appraisal review so as to improve performance appraisal effectiveness.


Performance Appraisal Performance Appraisal Reactions Employee Reactions Performance Appraisal Fairness Due Process 


  1. Aguinis, H. (2013). Performance management (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  2. Anseel, F., Van Yperen, N. W., Janssen, O., & Duyck, W. (2011). Feedback type as a moderator of the relationship between achievement goals and feedback reactions. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 84(4), 703–722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Balzer, W. K., & Sulsky, L. M. (1990). Performance appraisal effectiveness. In K. R. Murphy & F. E. Saal (Eds.), Psychology in organizations: Integrating science and practice (pp. 133–156). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  4. Bassett, G. A., & Meyer, H. H. (1968). Performance appraisal based on self-review. Personnel Psychology, 21, 421–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bernardin, H. J., & Beatty, R. W. (1984). Performance appraisal: Assessing human behavior at work. Boston, MA: Kent Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  6. Bonness, B., & Macan, T. (2006). Reactions to the performance appraisal process: Effects of self-appraisals. Paper presented at the Society for Industrial-Organizational Psychology conference.Google Scholar
  7. Borman, W. C. (1979). Format and training effects on rating accuracy and rater errors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64(4), 410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brett, J. F., & Atwater, L. E. (2001). 360° feedback: Accuracy, reactions, and perceptions of usefulness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(5), 930.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Burke, R. J., Weitzel, W., & Weir, T. (1978). Characteristics of effective employee performance review and development interviews: Replication and extension. Personnel Psychology, 31, 903–919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cardy, R. L., & Dobbins, G. H. (1994). Performance appraisal: Alternative perspectives. Cincinnati, OH: Southwestern Publishing.Google Scholar
  11. Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1981). Attention and self-regulation: A control-theory approach to human behavior. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cawley, B. D., Keeping, L. M., & Levy, P. E. (1998). Participation in the performance appraisal process and employee reactions: A meta-analytic review of field investigations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(4), 615–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cobb, A. T., Vest, M., & Hills, F. (1997). Who delivers justice? Source perceptions of procedural fairness. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 27(12), 1021–1040.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Colquitt, J. A. (2001). On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure. Journal ofAapplied Psychology, 86(3), 386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. DeGregorio, M., & Fisher, C. D. (1988). Providing performance feedback: Reactions to alternate methods. Journal of Management, 14(4), 605–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dulebohn, J. H., & Ferris, G. R. (1999). The role of influence tactics in perceptions of performance evaluation’s fairness. Academy of Management Journal, 42(3), 288–303.Google Scholar
  17. Elicker, J. D. (2000). An organizational justice explanation of feedback reactions in different leader-member exchange relationships. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Akron.Google Scholar
  18. Erdogan, B. (2002). Antecedents and consequences of justice perceptions in performance appraisals. Human Resource Management Review, 12, 555–578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Erdogan, B., Kraimer, M. L., & Liden, R. C. (2001). Procedural justice as a two-dimensional construct: An examination in the performance appraisal context. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 37, 205–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Evans, E. M., & McShane, S. L. (1988). Employee perceptions of performance appraisal fairness in two organizations. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 20(2), 177–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fassina, N. E., Jones, D. A., & Uggerslev, K. L. (2008). Relationship clean-up time: Using meta analysis and path analysis to clarify relationships among job satisfaction, perceived fairness, and citizenship behaviors. Journal of Management, 34, 161–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ferris, G. R., Judge, T. A., Rowland, K. M., & Fitzgibbons, D. E. (1994). Subordinate influence and the performance evaluation process: Test of a model. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 58(1), 101–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Folger, R., Konovsky, M., & Cropanzano, R. (1992). A due process model of performance appraisal. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 14, pp. 129–177). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  24. Folger, R., & Konovsky, M. A. (1989). Effects of procedural and distributive justice on reactions to pay raise decisions. Academy of Management Journal, 32(1), 115–130.Google Scholar
  25. Giles, W. F., Findley, H. M., & Field, H. S. (1997). Procedural fairness in performance appraisal: Beyond the review session. Journal of Business and Psychology, 11(4), 493–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Greenberg, J. (1986). Determinants of perceived fairness of performance evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(2), 340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Greenberg, J. (1987). A taxonomy of organizational justice theories. Academy of Management Review, 12, 9–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Greller, M. M. (1975). Subordinate participation and reactions to the appraisal interview. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60(5), 544–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ilgen, D. R., Barnes-Farrell, J. L., & McKellin, D. B. (1993). Performance appraisal process research in the 1980’s: What has it contributed to appraisals in use? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 54, 321–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ilgen, D. R., Fisher, C. D., & Taylor, M. S. (1979). Consequences of individual feedback on behavior in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 349–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Inderrieden, E. J., Allen, R. E., & Keavey, T. J. (2004). Managerial discretion in the use of self-ratings in an appraisal system: The antecedents and consequences. Journal of Managerial Issues, 16(4), 460–482.Google Scholar
  32. Inderrieden, E. J., Keaveny, T. J., & Allen, R. E. (1988). Predictors of employee satisfaction with the performance appraisal process. Journal of Business and Psychology, 2(4), 306–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Jawahar, I. M. (2010). The mediating role of appraisal feedback reactions on the relationship between rater feedback-related behaviors and ratee performance. Group & Organization Management, 35(4), 494–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kavanagh, P., Benson, J., & Brown, M. (2007). Understanding performance appraisal fairness. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 45(2), 132–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kay, E., Meyer, H. H., & French, R. P. (1965). Effects of threat in a performance appraisal interview. Journal of Applied Psychology, 49, 311–317.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Keeping, L. M., & Levy, P. E. (2000). Performance appraisal reactions: Measurement, modeling, and method bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(5), 708–723.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kinicki, A. J., Prussia, G. E., Wu, B., & Mckee-Ryan, F. M. (2004). A covariance structure analysis of employee’s response to performance feedback. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(6), 1057–1069.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kleiman, L. S., Biderman, M. D., & Faley, R. H. (1987). An examination of employee perceptions of a subjective performance appraisal system. Journal of Business and Psychology, 2(2), 112–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Klein, H. J., & Snell, S. (1994). The impact of interview process and context on performance appraisal interview effectiveness. Journal of Managerial Issues, 6(2), 160–175.Google Scholar
  40. Klein, H. J., Snell, S. A., & Wexley, K. N. (1987). Systems model of the performance appraisal interview process. Industrial Relations, 26(3), 267–280.Google Scholar
  41. Korsgaard, M. A., & Roberson, L. (1995). Procedural justice in performance evaluation: The role of instrumental and non-instrumental voice in performance appraisal discussions. Journal of Management, 21(4), 657–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Korsgaard, M. A., Roberson, L., & Rymph, R. D. (1998). What motivates fairness? The role of subordinate assertive behavior on manager's interactional fairness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(5), 731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kossek, E. E., Pichler, S., Bodner, T., & Hammer, L. B. (2011). Workplace social support and work–family conflict: A meta-analysis clarifying the influence of general and work–family-specific supervisor and organizational support. Personnel Psychology, 64(2), 289–313.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Landy, F. J., Barnes, J. L., & Murphy, K. R. (1978). Correlates of perceived fairness and accuracy of evaluation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63(6), 751–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Levy, P. E., Cavanaugh, C. M., Frantz, N. B., & Borden, L. A. (2015). The role of due process in performance appraisal: A 20-year retrospective. In The Oxford Handbook of Justice in the Workplace, NY: Oxford University Press, 605–620.Google Scholar
  46. Levy, P. E., & Williams, J. R. (1998). The role of perceived system knowledge in predicting appraisal reactions, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19, 53–65.Google Scholar
  47. Levy, P. E., & Williams, J. R. (2004). The social context of performance appraisal. Journal of Management, 30(6), 881–905.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Liden, R. C., Sparrowe, R. T., & Wayne, S. J. (1997). Leader-member exchange theory: The past and potential for the future. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 15, 47–120.Google Scholar
  49. Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting and task performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  51. Lombardi, M. (2011). The engagement/performance equation. Aberdeen Group. Retrieved from:
  52. Masterson, S. S., Lewis, K., Goldman, B. M., & Taylor, M. S. (2000). Integrating justice and social exchange: The differing effects of fair procedures and treatment on work relationships. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 738–748.Google Scholar
  53. Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Meinecke, A. L., Lehmann-Willenbrock, N., & Kauffeld, S. (2017). What happens during annual appraisal interviews? How leader–follower interactions unfold and impact interview outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102, 1054–1074.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Murphy, K. R., & Cleveland, J. N. (1995). Understanding performance appraisal: Social, organizational, and goal-based perspectives. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  56. Nathan, B. R., Mohrman, A. M., & Milliman, J. (1991). Interpersonal relations as a context for the effects of appraisal interviews on performance and satisfaction: A longitudinal study. Academy of Management Journal, 34(2), 352–369.Google Scholar
  57. Nemeroff, W. F., & Wexley, K. N. (1979). An exploration of the relationships between performance feedback interview characteristics and interview outcomes as perceived by managers and subordinates. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 52, 25–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Pichler, S. (2012). The social context of performance appraisal and appraisal reactions: A meta-analysis. Human Resource Management, 51(5), 709–732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Pichler, S., Beenen, G., & Wood, S. (2018). Feedback frequency and appraisal reactions: a meta-analytic test of moderators. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 1–26.
  60. Pichler, S., Varma, A., Michel, J. S., Levy, P. E., & Budwar, P. S. (2016). Leader-member exchange, group and individual-level procedural justice reactions to performance appraisals. Human Resource Management, 55(5), 871–883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Pichler, S., Varma, A., & Petty, R. (2008). Rater–ratee relationships and performance management. In A. Varma, P. Budhwar, & A. DeNisi (Eds.), Performance management systems: A global perspective. (pp. 55–66). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  62. Russell, J. S., & Goode, D. L. (1988). An analysis of manager’s reactions to their own performance appraisal feedback. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73(1), 63–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Rynes, S. L., Gerhart, B., & Parks, L. (2005). Personnel psychology: Performance evaluation and pay for performance. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 571–600.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Steelman, L. A., Levy, P. E., & Snell, A. F. (2004). The feedback environment scale: Construct definition, measurement, and validation. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64(1), 165–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Suh, Y. (1992). Instrumental and noninstrumental voice effects on perceptions of procedural justice in a performance appraisal. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, The University of Nebraska – Lincoln.Google Scholar
  66. Taylor, M. S., Masterson, S. S., Renard, M. K., & Tracy, K. (1998). Manager’s reactions to procedurally just performance management systems. Academy of Management Journal, 41(5), 568–579.Google Scholar
  67. Taylor, M. S., Tracy, K. B., Renard, M. K., Harrison, J. K., & Carroll, S. J. (1995). Due process in performance appraisal: A quasi-experiment in procedural justice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 495–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Tharenou, P. (1995). The impact of a developmental performance appraisal program on employee perception in an Australian federal agency. Group & Organization Management, 20, 245–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Tziner, A., & Kopelman, R. E. (2002). Is there a preferred performance rating format? A non-psychometric perspective. Applied Psychology, 51(3), 479–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Tziner, A., Kopelman, R. E., & Joanis, C. (1997). Investigation of raters’ and ratees’ reactions to three methods of performance appraisal: BOS, BARS, and GRS. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 14(4), 396–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Tziner, A., Kopelman, R. E., & Livneh, N. (1993). Effects of performance appraisal format on perceived goal characteristics, appraisal process satisfaction, and changes in rated job performance: A field experiment. The Journal of Psychology, 127(3), 281–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Tziner, A., Murphy, K. R., & Cleveland, J. N. (2005). Contextual and rater factors affecting rating behavior. Group and Organization Behavior, 30(1), 89–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Varma, A., Pichler, S., & Srinivas, E. S. (2005). The role of interpersonal affect in performance appraisal: Evidence from two samples–the US and India. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16(11), 2029–2044.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Williams, J. R., & Levy, P. E. (1992). The effects of perceived system knowledge on the agreement between self-ratings and supervisor ratings. Personnel Psychology, 45(4), 835–847.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Williams, J. R., & Levy, P. E. (2000). Investigating some neglected criteria: The influence of organizational level and perceived system knowledge on appraisal reactions. Journal of Business and Psychology, 14(3), 501–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Zander, A., & Gyr, J. (1955). Changing attitudes toward a merit rating system. Personnel Psychology, 8(1955), 429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of ManagementMihaylo College of Business & Economics, California State University, FullertonFullertonUSA

Personalised recommendations