This article was downloaded by: [Duke University Libraries]

On: 04 January 2013, At: 07:27

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

The International Journal of Human

Resource Management
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rijh20

Employee performance management

culture and system features in higher
education: relationship with employee
performance management satisfaction
a a a
Adelien Decramer , Carine Smolders & Alex Vanderstraeten
a
Faculty of Business Administration and Public Administration,
University College Ghent, Ghent, Belgium
Version of record first published: 12 Jun 2012.

To cite this article: Adelien Decramer , Carine Smolders & Alex Vanderstraeten (2013): Employee
performance management culture and system features in higher education: relationship with
employee performance management satisfaction, The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 24:2, 352-371

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2012.680602

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation
that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any
instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary
sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,
demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management,
Vol. 24, No. 2, January 2013, 352–371

Employee performance management culture and system features

in higher education: relationship with employee performance
management satisfaction
Adelien Decramer*, Carine Smolders and Alex Vanderstraeten

Faculty of Business Administration and Public Administration, University College Ghent,

Ghent, Belgium
Little is known about the satisfaction with employee performance management systems
in higher education institutions. In this study, we contribute to this field by focussing
Downloaded by [Duke University Libraries] at 07:27 04 January 2013

on the alignment features of employee performance management systems, on

communication related to these systems and on control tightness in the academic unit.
An important contribution to the literature is the adoption of an integrated approach to
employee performance management in higher education institutions. Employee
performance management system features and satisfaction result from a survey to which
589 employees of a Flemish University contributed. Separate estimations are done for
different tenure types of academics. The estimation results show that a higher level of
internally consistent employee performance management systems, more communi-
cation and tighter control are associated with higher academic employee performance
management satisfaction. The study also reveals that employee performance
management satisfaction depends on the tenure type, suggesting that a diversified
employee performance management policy should be considered in universities.
Keywords: communication; control tightness; employee performance management
systems; higher education; internal consistency; satisfaction; vertical alignment

Introduction
This article focuses on employee performance management systems in a university
context. The study explores the relationships between the characteristics of an employee
performance management system for research activities in higher education institutions
and the perceived satisfaction of academic employees with this system. This study aims at
contributing to the understanding of the outcomes of employee performance management
systems in the particular context of higher education.
In the last decade, the climate of higher education has been described as a ‘turbulent
environment’ (Middlehurst 2002). Several economic and political crises have had an
impact on higher education institutions. Higher education institutions have been
confronted with issues of expansion, decentralisation and financial pressures (Smeenk,
Teelken, Eisinga and Doorewaard 2009). In addition, these issues have been accompanied
by societal demands of accountability, efficiency and effectiveness (Chan 2001; Pollitt and
Bouckaert 2004). The changing environment has pressured higher education institutions to
seek ways to more actively manage their employees in order to meet with these
requirements.

*Corresponding author. Email: adelien.decramer@hogent.be

ISSN 0958-5192 print/ISSN 1466-4399 online

q 2013 Taylor & Francis
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2012.680602
http://www.tandfonline.com
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 353

At the same time, ‘managerialism’ has permeated into the management of universities
(Deem 1998; Ferlie, Musselin and Andresani 2008). As a response, many higher education
institutions have attempted – either voluntary or under pressure – to adopt new
management systems originally designed to meet the needs of business or private sector
organisations (Smeenk et al. 2009). Among these new management tools, employee
performance management systems are adopted by many higher education institutions in
Europe (Brennan and Shah 2000; Middlehurst 2004; Ferlie et al. 2008; Decramer,
Smolders, Vanderstraeten and Christiaens 2012). Employee performance management is a
‘continuous process of identifying, measuring and developing the employee performance
of individuals and teams and aligning employee performance with the strategic goals of
the organisation’ (Aguinis and Pierce 2008, p. 139).
There is a clear link between human resource management (HRM) and employee
performance management. Taking an employee performance management approach
Downloaded by [Duke University Libraries] at 07:27 04 January 2013

involves aligning HRM practices in such a way that they maximise current as well as
future employee performance, which in turn is expected to affect organisational employee
performance (den Hartog, Boselie and Paauwe 2004).
There is a consensus in the literature that strategic HRM has a significant positive
impact upon an organisations’ employee performance (Delery and Doty 1996; Ichniowski,
Kochan, Levine, Olson and Strauss 1996). HRM scholars have examined this relationship
between HRM and organisational employee performance. According to the causal model
commonly accepted in the literature, employee performance management practices are
thought to lead to the development of a skilled workforce, which engages in behaviour
functional for the organisation (Wright, Dunford and Snell 2001). This results in increased
operating employee performance, which ultimately should result in higher output
(Boselie, Paauwe and Jansen 2001; Boxall, Purcell and Wright 2007). More specifically,
research points out that HR practices and systems have been positively associated with
employee well-being and organisational performance (Veld, Boselie and Paauwe 2010;
Van de Voorde, Paauwe and Van Veldhoven 2011), also in public sector organisations
(Gould-Williams 2004).
HRM policies and systems, and as such employee performance management systems,
should ultimately result in lower employee absence, higher satisfaction, greater
willingness to stay with the organisation and higher effort. These HRM outcomes have
been emphasised in many of the main HRM – employee performance models that
have been presented, developed and tested in the literature over the past 20 years (Paauwe
2009). Satisfaction of academic employees could mediate the relationships between HRM
practices, antecedents and the quality of job employee performances (Paauwe and
Richardson 1997).
The reason why we choose to examine the HRM outcome ‘satisfaction’ is fivefold.
The HRM outcome ‘satisfaction’ explains most of the variance in the academic unit’s
(research group or department) employee performance (Stolte-Heiskanen 1979). Second,
there is general consensus among researchers and practitioners that the assessment of
employee performance management reactions is important (Kuvaas 2006). It is argued
that the knowledge of perceptions towards employee performance management can
improve the understanding of effectiveness of employee performance management
(Wright and Boswell 2002; Liao, Toya, Lepak and Hong 2009). Research has primarily
focused on managerial reports of the use of HRM and employee performance management
ignoring individual employees’ actual experiences with these systems (Lepak, Liao,
Chung and Harden 2006). Paauwe (2009) argues that employee perceptions have to be
considered when examining the relationship between HRM and various kinds of both
 354 A. Decramer et al.

individual- and organisational-level outcomes. Third, strategic HRM research has

predominantly taken a macro-level approach and focused on the establishment or
firm-level outcomes. To date, there is a ‘dearth of research aimed at understanding how
multiple (or systems of) HRM practices impact individuals’ (Wright and Boswell 2002,
p. 262). Fourth, the traditional research agenda was based on employee performance
appraisal, which is only one element of the system (Murphy and Cleveland 1995). This
study widens the concept and uses the employee performance management system as
dependent variable, which includes planning, monitoring and evaluation. Finally, much of
the foregoing employee performance appraisal studies has been conducted in laboratory
settings. This study will widen the concept of employee performance management and
tries to link integrated employee performance management systems with the HRM
outcome satisfaction in the ‘real-life’ context of higher education institutions.
In the next section, we review the literature and present the hypotheses to be tested
Downloaded by [Duke University Libraries] at 07:27 04 January 2013

regarding the relationships among employee performance management systems and

perceived satisfaction. This is followed by a discussion of the dataset, the methods of
analysis, the results, and some concluding observations concerning the implications of the
research for the study and practice of employee performance management in higher
education institutions.

Theory
The study primarily builds on strategic HRM literature (Guest, Conway and Dewe 2004)
and employee performance management literature (Fletcher 2001; Armstrong and Baron
2004; den Hartog et al. 2004; DeNisi and Pritchard 2006). In addition, we elaborate on the
goal-setting theory (Locke and Latham 1990; Lee, Bobko, Earley and Locke 1991) and the
expectancy theory (Vroom 1964).
There are many definitions of employee performance management, but in general it is
associated with ‘creating a shared vision of the purpose and aims of the organisation,
helping each individual employee to understand and recognise their part in contributing to
them, and in so doing to manage and enhance the employee performance of both
individuals and the organisation’ (Fletcher and Williams 1996, p. 169). Employee
performance management has moved from a single HRM practice (employee performance
appraisal) to a variety of (HRM) activities through which organisations seek to assess
employees and develop their competences, enhance employee performance and distribute
rewards (Fletcher 2001; Aguinis and Pierce 2008). Over the past two decades, these
systems converted into strategic and integrated processes (Aguinis and Pierce 2008).
Proponents of employee performance management assume that this strategic and
integrated approach is necessary to achieve sustained organisational success and to
develop the capabilities of individuals and wider teams (Bach 2000; Fletcher 2001;
Armstrong and Baron 2004; Aguinis and Pierce 2008). This evolution reflects broader
trends in HRM (Bach 2005). The alignment between HRM or employee performance
management practices and the organisation’s strategy has been labelled ‘vertical fit’ (also
strategic fit). The emphasis is on linking individual employee performance appraisal to
corporate objectives, ensuring that there is a clear line of sight between organisational and
individual requirements (Boswell 2006).
In addition to alignment with strategy, researchers in this area have also highlighted
the importance of intertwining HRM practices (Arthur 1994; Delery 1998). Goal-setting,
monitoring and evaluation (Storey and Sisson 1993) are to be incorporated into a unified
and coherent framework meant to align individual employee performance goals with the
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 355

organisation’s wider objectives (Williams 2002; Aguinis and Pierce 2008). This horizontal
type of alignment (Aguinis and Pierce 2008) indicates the presence of an internally
consistent employee performance management system. Our research questions are
summarised below. Note that the presumed mechanisms linking employee performance
management system features with employee performance management satisfaction are
elaborated after these questions.
The study concentrates on employees’ satisfaction with the employee performance
management system. It investigates whether specific features of this employee
performance management system influence the satisfaction with this system in
universities. In addition, we examine the relation between the tenure status of the
respondents and the satisfaction with the employee performance management system.
Four hypotheses were tested.
To assess the system approach, (1) we are interested in the impact of the perceived
Downloaded by [Duke University Libraries] at 07:27 04 January 2013

internal consistency of the system on satisfaction (e.g. the integrated approach or

horizontal alignment). (2) Next, we measure whether academic employees see how
employee goals fit in with organisational planning and objectives (e.g. the strategic feature
or vertical alignment) and how this influences their personal appraisal of employee
performance management systems. (3) In addition, this study focuses on effective internal
communication about employee performance management systems. (4) Are academics
more satisfied with employee performance management systems when there is a shared
understanding of and continuing dialogue and communication (Tang and Sarsfield-
Baldwin 1996; Erdogan 2002) about the goals of the academic employee and the standards
expected and the competencies needed? Next, satisfaction with the employee performance
management system is related to the control tightness of the academic unit of the academic
employee (4).
In the next paragraphs we further develop the tested hypotheses.

Internal consistency of the employee performance management system

Strategic HRM research (Boxall and Purcell 2011) argues that it is important to analyse the
HRM practices as a coherent system (Guest et al. 2004). The argument for the latter is that
HRM practices often complement each other (Ichniowski and Shaw 1999). MacDuffie
(1995) has shown that the systemic consideration of practices has a greater impact on
different employee performance indicators (outcomes) than the individual, isolated HRM
practices. The importance of a system approach is related to the need of employees to have
a clear understanding of what the targets are they have to achieve and how these are related
to employee performance indicators and rewards. Evaluating employee performance on
criteria or achievements that were not made explicit ex-ante will result in employees’
resentment towards employee performance management systems. This was clearly
pointed out by the expectancy theory (Vroom 1964). In contrast, goal-setting theory
stresses on the need for acceptance by employees of the goals in themselves, so that
motivation is more intrinsically based (Latham, Almost, Mann and Moore 2005). Scholars
(Bowen and Ostroff 2004) have labelled this as the ‘instrumentality’ feature of HRM
systems, which refers to establishing an unambiguous perceived cause – effect relationship
in reference to the HRM system’s desired content-focused behaviours and associated
employee consequences.
Consequently, we consider a set of employee performance management practices,
namely goal-setting (i.e. planning), monitoring (i.e. feedback) and evaluation (i.e.
appraising). This three-step configuration is recommended by several authors in the field
 356 A. Decramer et al.

(Ainsworth and Smith 1993; Torrington and Hall 1995; DeNisi 2000; Aguinis and Pierce
2008).
Levy, Cawley and Foti (1998) found that knowledge of the system was a significant
and positive influence on fairness perceptions. Knowledge of the system can be seen as
consisting of a number of elements: clarity about the role of appraisals, understanding of
employee performance objectives and acceptance of those objectives.
Each of these three dimensions of knowledge adds to an employee’s feelings of
process control: employees are aware of why the appraisal is taking place, what they are
required to do in order to be successful in the appraisal and the consequences of the
appraisal. There will be ‘no surprises’ for the employee during the evaluation, which is
likely to contribute to perceptions of fairness (Erdogan 2002).
Therefore, we hypothesise that:
Downloaded by [Duke University Libraries] at 07:27 04 January 2013

H1: Academic employees who report a higher level on internal consistency of the
employee performance management system will achieve higher employee
performance management satisfaction.

Vertical alignment of the employee performance management system

Employee performance management has shifted from an operational focus to a more
strategically oriented concept, i.e. where it plays an integral role in the formulation and
implementation of strategy (Armstrong and Baron 2004). Employee performance
management seeks to align employee goals and organisational objectives (Fletcher 2001).
The alignment of employee and organisational interests, which is defined as vertical or
strategic alignment/integration, has recently been examined by authors (Boswell 2006;
Claus and Briscoe 2009; van Riel, Berens and Dijkstra 2009). Aligning employees with
the organisation’s larger strategic goals is critical if organisations hope to manage their
human capital effectively and ultimately attain strategic success (Becker, Huselid and
Ulrich 2001). Recent literature has found that an important component of attaining and
sustaining this alignment is for employees to have ‘line of sight’ with their organisation’s
strategic objectives or ‘strategic aligned behaviour’ (Boswell and Boudreau 2001; Boswell
2006; van Riel et al. 2009). Employees with greater understanding of their organisation’s
strategic objectives, and how to contribute to them, should report higher satisfaction with
their job, feel greater affective commitment towards the organisation and ultimately desire
to stay with the organisation. Line of sight considering the organisation’s strategic
objectives should facilitate HRM satisfaction (Boswell 2006). Hence,
H2: Academic employees who report a higher level on vertical alignment of the
employee performance management system will achieve higher employee
performance management satisfaction.

Communication
The line managers’ discussion of objectives and clarification of employee performance
duties with employees is part of the planning or goal-setting phase of the employee
performance management system (Findley, Giles and Mossholder 2000). When line
managers outline criteria for employee performance and give appraisal notice in advance
of employee performance completion, employees feel respected (Findley et al. 2000).
Next, managers are encouraged to establish a two-way communication system; identify
needs, desires and expectations of employees; assist in achieving their goals; recognise
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 357

achievements; give regular feedback; and allow employees’ input. Reinke (2003) reported
a positive correlation between the two-way communication: the willingness to improve
employee performance and the perceived fairness of the employee performance appraisal.
Employee appraisal system satisfaction was correlated with the quality of the appraisal
discussion and the degree to which the rating form facilitated feedback (Roberts 2003).
Beliefs about fair employee performance management evaluations are based on the
procedures by which the evaluations are conducted. This procedural justice (Reinke 2003)
perspective on the fairness of the evaluation procedures has been related to several process
variables, and many laboratory studies have shown the importance of procedural variables
on the perceived fairness of the appraisal (Greenberg 1986). Communication about
procedures will have a positive impact on the employee performance management
satisfaction (Tang and Sarsfield-Baldwin 1996; Cawley, Keeping and Levy 1998).
Downloaded by [Duke University Libraries] at 07:27 04 January 2013

H3: Academic employees who report a higher level of communication about employee
performance management will achieve higher employee performance management
satisfaction.

Control tightness
‘Tight versus loose control’ relates to the emphasis on control of activities. Hofstede
(1998) described units that have a tight control culture as being extremely cost conscious.
Tight control is also seen as involving extensive and continuous flows of information and
‘an extremely detailed planning, budgeting and reporting system’ (Merchant and Van der
Stede 2003, p. 133).
In literature, there has been doubt about the extent to which managerialism and
control can be imposed on academic employees (Stiles 2004). Some have stressed the
difficulties of bringing order into the chaos of collegial control, while others would point
to the resistant academic employee ‘whose identity has traditionally been constitute
through the twin discourse of academic freedom and professional autonomy’ (Harley and
Lee 1997, p. 1430). Within the environment of higher education institution, professionals
are at work who are resistant to change (Middlehurst 2004). Management and the
implementation of management systems seem to be viewed by them as interference.
Pressures from within the university and external sources have been resisted by
academics in various ways. In reacting to processes of managerial change, academics
have sometimes accommodated, for example to peer review, ignored or circumvented
pressures to increase workload and act in autocratic ways, and (re)negotiated, mediated
and moderated the harsher effects of the recent managerial changes (Barry, Chandler and
Clark 2001).
Academic employees with lower academic rank and academic employees without
tenure seem more positive about the introduction of ‘Management By Objective’
programmes than those of higher rank who are tenured (Shetty and Carlisle 1974). As
such, we assume that the tenure status of the respondents is related to the satisfaction of the
employee performance management system. Non-tenured faculty are expected to score a
higher level of employee performance management satisfaction than tenured faculty. The
significance of tenure to one’s perception of satisfaction can reflect the fact that once an
academic employee acquires tenure, his resistance to controls of any type increases.
Academic employees with tenure and higher academic rank might feel that they have
already passed evaluation hurdles, and any new system of evaluation represents a threat to
and a reflection on their established identity and reputation (Shetty and Carlisle 1974). We
 358 A. Decramer et al.

assume that the tenure status of the respondents will be related to the satisfaction of the
employee performance management system.
H4: Academic employees with lower academic rank who experience tight control are
more likely to be satisfied with the employee performance management system
than those with a higher academic rank.

Methods
This study focuses on the actual and perceived satisfaction with HRM practices. The data
were gathered using a structured questionnaire addressed to 4700 academic employees
involved in academic teaching and research (technical and administrative employees are
not included) from a Flemish public university in 2009. The questionnaires were
Downloaded by [Duke University Libraries] at 07:27 04 January 2013

distributed using a web-based tool (Qualtrics) using e-mail addresses provided by the
HRM departments of the university.
The survey instrument resulted from multiple discussions and brainstorming sessions.
The questionnaire was subjected to pre-testing and pilot testing. After a period of intensive
follow-up (mail and telephone), the survey resulted in data from 1322 employees,
representing a response rate of approximately 28%. This is consistent with the mean
response rate found in a meta-analysis of web-based survey response rates, which was
34.6% with a standard deviation of 15.7% (Cook, Heath and Thompson 2000).
Some of the questionnaires were not finished by the respondents. Unit or item non-
response was checked (Sax, Gilmartin and Bryant 2003). Item non-responses related to the
dependent variables (last items in the questionnaire) were deleted from the analysis,
resulting in an overall loss of 733 cases, leaving us with 589 cases, representing 13% of the
population invited to fill in the survey.
SPSS Software was used to tabulate the results.

Measures
To achieve high levels of content validity, most of the measures used in the survey were
already verified in earlier research. Unless noted otherwise, all items were measured using
a five-point Likert response scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
Factor analysis (principal component analysis with varimax rotation) was performed on all
multiple scale items to determine item retention (Kuvaas 2008).
The questionnaire was constructed to focus on the four specific aspects of employee
performance management systems (internal consistency, vertical alignment, communi-
cation and control tightness) listed earlier, along with the outcome, namely employee
performance management satisfaction.

Dependent variables: employee performance management satisfaction

In this study, we measure the satisfaction (SATi) with the employee performance
management system (goal-setting, monitoring and evaluation).
As such, employee performance management satisfaction is measured by asking about
subject satisfaction with three employee performance management practices (i.e. goal-
setting, monitoring and evaluation). For each practice, binary responses were collected, 0
indicating ‘not satisfied’ versus 1 ‘satisfied’. A count variable was constructed for
satisfaction with the system where 0 ¼ if the respondent was not satisfied with 1, 2 or 3
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 359

employee performance management practices; 1 ¼ for each practice within the system
the respondent was satisfied.

Independent variables
We focus on several aspects of employee performance management. The specific aspects
of employee performance management that were the main sources of interest are the
degree to which employees perceive the internal consistency of the system; the extent to
which employees are able to see how employee goals fit in with organisational planning
and objectives; effective communication and the reported academic unit control tightness.
(1) The internal consistency of the employee performance management system. To
investigate whether planning, monitoring and evaluation were seen as being linked
Downloaded by [Duke University Libraries] at 07:27 04 January 2013

in a consistent way, we developed a scale with three items. We asked the academic
employee: ‘to what extent is there a link between monitoring and formal
evaluation of research; between goal-setting and formal evaluation of research and
to what extent are research goals, monitoring of research and research evaluation
linked?’ Higher scores represent higher internal consistency (a ¼ 0.90). Factor
analysis revealed 1 factor (principal components analysis): HOR (horizontal
alignment or internal consistency of the employee performance management
system).
(2) The vertical alignment of the employee performance management system. To
assess whether the academic employees could see the relationship between their
goals and organisational and departmental goals, a scale developed by Fletcher
and Williams (1996) was used. We adapted this scale to the context of our study
and asked the respondent: ‘to what extent do your research goals fit in with the
goals of the academic unit?’ and ‘to what extent do your research goals fit in with
the goals of the university?’ and last, ‘to what extent do the research goals of the
academic unit fit in with the goals of the university?’ Higher scores represent
higher vertical alignment (a ¼ 0.83). We explored whether underlying factors
could be identified for data reduction purposes. Principal component analysis
(varimax rotation) was used to construct one new factor: VER (vertical alignment).
(3) Communication. We use the two-way communication variable constructed by
Tang and Sarsfield-Baldwin (1996). This is a six-item scale that measures the level
of communication between the employee and the supervisor during an employee
performance management cycle. A score of 5 on the two-way communication
scale represents a high level of two-way communication. Two-way communi-
cation comprises six items in the ‘Distributive and Procedural Justice Scale’
(a ¼ 0.90) (Tang and Sarsfield-Baldwin 1996). We explored whether underlying
factors could be identified for data reduction purposes. Principal component
analysis (varimax rotation) was used to construct 1 new factor: COM
(communication).
(4) Tight control. Tight control is measured with an eight-item summated scale ‘tight
versus loose control’ developed from Merchant and Van der Stede (2003). We
adapted the scale to the context of higher educations. Respondents will be asked to
indicate the extent to which they agreed that each statement in the scale reflected
practices within their academic unit. Each item was scored on a seven-point scale,
anchored on 1 for ‘strongly disagree’ and 7 for ‘strongly agree’, so that higher
scores represented tighter control (a ¼ 0.92). We explored whether underlying
 360 A. Decramer et al.

factors could be identified for data reduction purposes. Principal component

analysis (varimax rotation) was used to construct the factor: COT (control
tightness).

Control variables
We ask how much time the respondent spends on research (TIME), which was measured as
a percentage of the total working time allocated by the respondent to research (Van Der
Weijden, De Gilder, Groenewegen and Klasen 2008). Next, information including gender
(SEX) (0 ¼ male, 1 ¼ female), position tenure (POSITION) (0 ¼ tenure, 1 ¼ non-
tenure)1 and Discipline (DISCIPLINE) (0 ¼ alpha sciences, 1 ¼ beta and gamma
sciences) were integrated in the estimation.
Downloaded by [Duke University Libraries] at 07:27 04 January 2013

Analyses
The sample population
Various demographic characteristics were assessed to describe the study’s sample
population. They are described in Table 1. More than half of the respondents reported in
Table 2 not being satisfied with the employee performance management system. Given the
dichotomous nature of the dependent variable, logistic regression analysis (Gujarati 1995)
was used to test the hypotheses. Separate equations were estimated for the pooled sample
and for each group of academic employees.

Estimation model
The logit models are estimated from
 
Pi SAT
Li ¼ ln
1 2 Pi SAT

¼ a þ b1 ðHORi Þ þ b2 ðVERi Þ þ b3 ðCOTi Þ þ b4 ðCOMi Þ þ b5 ðTIMEi Þ þ b6 ðSEXi Þ

þ b7 ðPOSITIONi Þ þ b8 ðPOSITIONi £ COTi Þ þ Ui

where Pi is the probability that the dependent variable satisfaction equals 1, 1– Pi is the
probability of it being 0 and Li is the log of the odds ratio. Since the log of the odds ratio is
linear in the parameters, the logit model can be estimated in the linear form (Gujarati
1995).

Table 1. Demographic characteristics.

Frequency Percent
Gender Female 219 36.2
Male 362 61.5
Not notified 8 1.4
Type position Professor 128 21.7
Specific statute 104 17.7
PhD students 336 57
Other 21 3.6
Discipline Alpha Sciences 158 26.8
Beta/Gamma Sciences 427 72.5
Not notified 4 0.7
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 361

Table 2. Satisfaction with performance management practices and systems.

Satisfaction with . . . Frequency Percent

. . . planning No 229 38.9
Yes 356 60.4
Missing 4 0.7
. . . monitoring No 251 42.6
Yes 325 55.2
Missing 13 2.2
. . . evaluation No 263 44.7
Yes 326 55.3
Missing – –
. . . system (SATi) No 294 49.9
Yes 278 47.2
17a
Downloaded by [Duke University Libraries] at 07:27 04 January 2013

Missing 2.9
a
These missing values are respondents who are due to recently recruiting at the university, not yet subjected to
planning, monitoring and evaluation.

Results
The correlation matrix for the variables comprising our estimation model is presented in
Table 3. These correlations underpin the link between system features and satisfaction.
Multicollinearity is not a problem, as none of the pair-wise correlation coefficients
depasses 0.80 (Gujarati 1995). The results of the logistic regression are presented in
Table 4. Collinearity diagnostics indicated no multicollinearity (VIF , 2) (Hair, Black,
Babin, Anderson and Tatham 2005).
The first three models contain the equation for the whole group of academic
employees. Column 1 provides the initial estimation: all the key explanatory variables are
included. The second model adds the interaction variable and the third column reports the
results for the significant variables in the model only. Models IV and V report the results
for the PROF group (tenured respondents); the next two models are the estimations for the
non-tenured group (PhD students and academic employees with a specific statute).
There is considerable variation in the explanatory power of the models. F-tests reveal
that the explanatory power of all regression models is significant. The regression explains
a large percentage of the variation in the NON-TENURE group, specifically some 0.418%
if we take as reference the Cox and Snell coefficient and 0.557% if we consider the
Nagelkerke coefficient (Model VII). The (pseudo) R 2 Figures (Nagelkerke R 2) for
the TOTAL, TENURE and NON-TENURE regressions are 0.460, 0.326 and 0.512,
respectively. Although we have to be cautious given the small number of questionnaires
for the specific categories, the fit of the TENURE regression is notably weaker than NON-
TENURE regressions.
We found evidence of employee performance management satisfaction with the
predicted features. The significant variables are horizontal alignment (Models I, II, III, IV,
V), tight control (Models I, VI, VII) and communication (Models I, II, III, VI, VII).
We included POSITION in the pooled sample, in order to examine the assumption
about the tenure status of the respondents and the relations with satisfaction. We observe –
as predicted in Hypothesis 4 – an interaction effect between control tightness and the non-
tenure position of the academic employee (Model II: odds ratio ¼ 2.815, p , 0.05). For
that reason, we then estimated four models, two for each group of academic employees.
Models IV and V report the results for the PROF group (tenured respondents); the next two
 Downloaded by [Duke University Libraries] at 07:27 04 January 2013

362

Table 3. Correlations.
Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
1. SATISFACTION 1
CONTROLS 2. TIME 0.178** 1
3. SEX 20.048 0.111** 1
4. PROF 20.113** 2 0.415** 2 0.157** 1
5. SPECIAL 0.004 2 0.016 0.014 20.244** 1
6. PHD 0.092* 0.443** 0.126** 20.607** 2 0.534** 1
7. DISCIPLINE 20.019 0.014 2 0.085* 0.012 2 0.005 2 0.004 1
ALIGNMENT 8. HOR 0.506** 0.094* 2 0.051 20.029 0.003 0.029 20.055 1
FEATURES
A. Decramer et al.

9. VER 0.207** 0.067 2 0.044 0.081 0.024 2 0.088 0.051 0.292** 1

10. COT 0.577** 0.171** 2 0.075 20.054 0.022 0.036 20.041 0.673** 0.297** 1
11. COM 0.541** 0.296** 0.031 20.300** 2 0.012 0.261** 20.035 0.544** 0.098 0.580** 1

*Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed)

**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed).
 Downloaded by [Duke University Libraries] at 07:27 04 January 2013

Table 4. Results of logit regression predicting employee performance management satisfaction.

TOTAL TENURE NON - TENURE
Variables Model I Model II Model III Model IV Model V Model VI Model VII
CONSTANT 0.023 0.073 20.131 20.613 2 0.467** 0.281 20.106
(0.833) (0.821) (0.136) (2.290) (0.223) (0.932) (0.145)
CONTROLS
TIME 0.006 0.008 – 0.017 – 0.009 –
(0.007) (0.007) (0.017) (0.009)
SEX 20.004 2 0.018 – 20.004 – 20.061 –
(0.312) (0.316) (0.805) (0.355)
DISCIPLINE 20.392 2 0.343 – 20.354 – 20.495 –
(0.339) (0.339) (0.834) (0.399)
POSITION 0.230 2 0.016 – – – – –
(0.408) (0.394)
ALIGNMENT
HOR 0.466** 0.468** 0.573*** 0.971* 1.092*** 0.329 –
(0.221) (0.222) (0.181) (0.542) (0.253) (0.253)
VER 0.131 0.152 – 20.022 – 0.187 –
(0.161) (0.162) (0.358) (0.189)

COT 0.858*** 0.121 – 20.115 – 1.192*** 1.503***

(0.216) (0.343) (0.456) (0.267) (0.204)
COM 0.796*** 0.798*** 0.979*** 0.601 – 0.872*** 1.030***
(0.198) (0.200) (0.179) (0.386) (0.242) (0.145)
INTCOT*POSITION – 1.035** 1.215*** – – – –
(0.405) (0.245)
2
Model x 127.704 133.847 200.204 15.771 26.182 113.081 200.140
Model x2 significance 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.027 0.000 0.000 0.000
2 2 log likelihood 290.109 283.966 332.873 61.112 122.017 209.598 312.616
The International Journal of Human Resource Management

Overall predictive 76.8% 77.2% 80.8% 71.9% 72.1% 77.4% 80.3%

accurancy
Cox & Snell R 2 0.345 0.358 0.405 0.242 0.210 0.382 0.418
Nagelkerke R 2 0.460 0.478 0.541 0.326 0.285 0.512 0.557

Note: Significant at 0.000 (***); , 0.05 (**) and , 0.100 (*); S.E. values in brackets. Dependent variable: Satisfaction with employee performance management system.
363
 364 A. Decramer et al.

models are the estimations for the non-tenured group (PhD students and academic
employees with a specific statute).
Hypothesis 1 predicts that academic employees reporting a higher level of internal
consistency also report higher employee performance management satisfaction. The
evidence in Table 4 supports this hypothesis. Academic employees in the pooled sample
(Model I: odds ratio ¼ 1.594, p , 0.05; Model II: odds ratio ¼ 1.597, p , 0.05; Model
III: odds ratio ¼ 1.774, p , 0.000) and in the tenure sample (Model IV: odds ratio
¼ 2.641, p , 0.100 and Model V: odds ratio ¼ 2.980, p , 0.100) reporting higher
internal consistency are more like to be satisfied about the employee performance
management system.
Next, the results show clear support for Hypothesis 3.
Academic employees in the pooled sample (Model II: odds ratio ¼ 2.221, p , 0.000)
and in the non-tenure sample (Model VI: odds ratio ¼ 2.391, p , 0.000 and Model VII:
Downloaded by [Duke University Libraries] at 07:27 04 January 2013

odds ratio ¼ 2.801, p , 0.000) who report that higher level of communication about
employee performance management coincides with more employee performance
management satisfaction.
In Model II, we can observe an interaction effect between control tightness and the
non-tenure position of the academic employee (Model II: odds ratio ¼ 2.815, p , 0.05).
Academic employees experiencing tight control in the non-tenure group (Model VI: odds
ratio ¼ 4.497, p , 0.000; Model VII: odds ratio ¼ 2.801, p , 0.000) and in the pooled
sample (Model I: odds ratio ¼ 2.358, p , 0.05) are more likely to be satisfied than those
who experience loose control cultures in their academic unit.
This is no surprising for the SPECIAL group within the non-tenure group were these
employees are appointed for a period of several years. At the end of this period, a tenure
decision will be taken, depending on an overall evaluation. Academic employees’
expectations concerning research within this group are specified in detail, and the desired
research results are explicitly defined.
No influence was found with respect to the variables of vertical alignment. Therefore,
Hypothesis 2 cannot be supported. In addition, discipline and gender have no influence on
the dependent variable. Last, the proportional amount of time spent on research has
statistically little or no influence on the satisfaction of the academic employee.

Discussion
The purpose of this study was to examine academic employees’ perceptions regarding the
employee performance management systems in use and to determine if their perceptions
about alignment features and communication were related to their reported employee
performance management satisfaction with the system. Our overall proposition was
inspired by the HRM literature implying that a system is more than single practices. We
therefore concentrate on the employee performance management process (Aguinis and
Pierce 2008), and widened the concept of employee performance management by using a
set of employee performance management practices.
The results of the study stress the importance of the internal consistency of employee
performance management practices. Horizontal alignment being related to the employee
performance management satisfaction raises a series of important implications for policy
and theory development. The results of the study suggest that a comprehensive approach
to performance management brings better results. If there is not a linkage between the
different elements of employee performance management, then problems arise. The
findings are consistent with other studies that demonstrated a relationship between other
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 365

aspects of HRM procedures and attitudes (Giles and Mossholder 1990; Fletcher and
Williams 1996) demonstrated that the degree of complexity of the appraisal system and
the implementation features are strongly related to satisfaction with employee
performance management.
The results indicate that the effect of employee performance management systems on
satisfaction with the system varies between the different employee groups in academic
institutions. Different groups have different needs and the utility of particular HRM
practices varies accordingly. These results largely support the configurationally approach
as proposed by Delery and Doty (1996). The use of different combinations of HR practices
has a positive impact on performance (Delery and Doty 1996). Higher level of
formalisation and tight control seems to be ‘rewarded’ with a high level of employee
performance management satisfaction among non-tenured academic employees. Finally,
it is surprising that in the tenured group we do not find higher levels of vertical alignment
Downloaded by [Duke University Libraries] at 07:27 04 January 2013

leading to employee performance management satisfaction. After all, since tenured track
are more involved in strategy issues, it could be expected that the line of sight of the
employee performance management system would increase their employee performance
management satisfaction. This is not confirmed by our results. We give a methodological
and a contextual possible explanation for these particular findings. There is a lot of
criticism on the measurement of vertical ‘fit’ in SHRM (Boon, Paauwe, Boselie and den
Hartog 2009). The current operationalisations do not do justice to the complexity of the
alignment or fit concept, according to several scholars (Gerhart 2004). To measure the
vertical alignment feature of employee performance management systems, we rely on the
work of Boswell. More specifically, we use the LOS (‘line of sight’), which refers to an
employee’s understanding of the organisation’s strategic goals as well as the actions
necessary to accomplish the goals (Boswell 2006). In accordance to several scholars
(Boswell 2006; Buller and McEvoy 2012), we acknowledge the limitations of the used
construct and formulate some recommendations for the measurement of this vertical
alignment feature. Our measurement can be widened by the broader concept of strategic
aligned behaviour (Gagnon, Jansen and Michael 2008; van Riel et al. 2009) and the
strategic consensus (Veld et al. 2010) concept that are broader measures. Literature also
emphasises the need for multi-level research in order to more fully examine the
relationships among various contextual variables, HRM practices, employee behaviours
and performance outcomes (Paauwe 2009). Last, in the future we could use a more
analytical and multilevel approach that combines both qualitative and quantitative
research methods in order to take the context into account (Veld et al. 2010). More
multilevel research is needed to examine how levels are connected in terms of HRM, well-
being and performance; and more longitudinal research is needed to clarify the dynamic
interplay between HRM, employee well-being and performance (Van de Voorde et al.
2011).
A next explanation for the lack of vertical alignment can be found in the context. Is it
possible to align individuals in higher education institutions to the goal of the
organisation? It seems that academic employees are aligned to their field of research rather
than to their university’s strategy. The alignment to the institution that happens to employ
them is of secondary importance. Yet, employee performance management systems could
be a tool to assure academic units’ and employees’ vertical alignment in accordance with
the organisational goal. Given that research production is perceived to be crucial to the
regions’ or country’s competitiveness, it is more dominantly present in the mission
statements of universities (Connell 2004). Vertical alignment features of employee
performance management then would be expected to be an important instrument to
 366 A. Decramer et al.

streamline these strategies. However, our study revealed that the line of sight does not
determine academic employees’ satisfaction. The total absence of vertical alignment
seems not to fit in a good HRM. Universities might consider budget allocation as a tool for
guiding academic units. Budgets could create and ensure a direct line from the
organisation’s goals to departments to individuals.
The results of the present study suggest that the non-tenure position may be critical for
employee performance management satisfaction. The positive relationship between tight
control and employee performance management satisfaction for non-tenured staff
indicates that these academic employees are feeling the need for clear procedures
concerning planning, monitoring and evaluation.
The literature suggested that effective employee performance management systems
require alignment of individual goals with organisational objectives, which represents, on
Downloaded by [Duke University Libraries] at 07:27 04 January 2013

the one hand, the vertical alignment issue or the ‘line of sight’ issue (Boswell 2006) and
therefore goals should be cascaded down from the top of the organisation. However, no
association can be made between vertical alignment and employee performance
management satisfaction. This idea of cascading objectives top-down does not meet with
the approval of academics, according to a UK study. Academics in a UK higher education
context, for example, continue to assimilate the meaning and purposes of employee
performance management primarily in terms of how the concept applies at the individual
level and to neglect the organisational aspect as espoused in the policy (Tam 2008). The
lack of support for the relationship between the perception of vertical alignment and
employee performance management satisfaction may be due to the absence of clear
mission statements and goals for the university and faculty.
This study can give some managerial comments and suggestions for higher education
institutions, leaders and HRM departments. First of all, the study clearly points out the
need for a tight and internally consistent employee performance management system.
Communication with the supervisor is hereby put forward as a necessary prerequisite. The
role of the supervisor is emphasised by several authors who state that HRM and employee
performance management is owned and driven by line management rather than by the
Human Resource (HRM) function (Purcell and Hutchinson 2007; Wright and Nishii
2004). However, adopting and using an employee performance management system is
challenging. The role of the line manager is crucial but has to be well supported (Purcell
and Hutchinson 2007).
Because HRM practices communicate messages on what management expects,
supports and rewards, higher education institutions and their management need to improve
communication and prevent well-intended HRM practices from being misunderstood by
employees (Bowen and Ostroff 2004). A practical implication that results from these
findings is that practitioners in the field of university HRM should be cautious when
applying one generic employee performance management system for all employees. This
is a confirmation of the study of Lepak and Snell (2002) who sought to examine how
different HR configurations are used for different groups of employees. They
demonstrated that different HR configurations tend to be used to manage workers in
different modes of employment. These scholars stated the most likely form of HR
investment varies for different types of human capital (Lepak and Snell 2002).
Future research could examine the relationship between employee performance
management configurations, the employee performance indicators used and confront
performance management intensity and satisfaction with the research employee
performance of academic groups and individual employee performance. An understanding
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 367

of the determinants of research employee performance is a prerequisite for designing

effective micro- and macro-research policies (Van Der Weijden et al. 2008).
Effectiveness of the employee performance management systems in higher education
institutions could ultimately be examined by exploring or linking the outcome at
stakeholder level to the implementation of employee performance management systems:
to what extent can stakeholders – university administrators, faculty, funding
organisations, accrediting bodies, governors, state legislators, students, alumni, unions
and local community members – benefit from the implementation of employee
performance management systems for the academic employee?
Finally, we point to a number of limitations of the study.
First, the data were gathered at one point in time, making it impossible to draw
inferences of causality or rule out the possibility of reverse causality. The most scientific
way to examine the impact of employee performance management systems is to develop a
Downloaded by [Duke University Libraries] at 07:27 04 January 2013

pre- and post-test type of study. We could as such examine the employee performance
management satisfaction of the academic employees prior to the implementation of the
employee performance management system and then after a sufficient amount of time re-
examine their perceptions regarding the employee performance management system and
the associated satisfaction. Second, the reliance on self-reported questionnaire data causes
concern about possible mono-method variance. Third, the most serious threat against
generalisability is that the data were obtained only from employees from one Flemish
university, since employee performance management systems may differ in universities
and in other countries. On the other hand, this large research university represents an ideal
field for studying the relationship between employee performance management system
features and satisfaction, due to the large scale of the university, the presence of different
kinds of academic employees and the different disciplines within the university who all
use different kind of employee performance management systems for their employees. A
last possible limitation in our study is the fact that there is no relationship, or proved
relationship, between the employee performance management system and the actual job
employee performance of the academic employee. Accompanied with the foregoing
limitation, it is important to note that even though academic employees perceive employee
performance management as satisfactory; this may not always translate into higher work
employee performance.

Conclusion
In conclusion, this study developed and tested a model of satisfaction with employee
performance management system for academic employees in higher education
institutions. A higher level of internally consistent employee performance management
systems, tight control and a positive perception of two-way communication lead to a
higher level of satisfaction of employee performance management systems. A relation
between the line of sight between goal-setting and organisational goals and employee
performance management system satisfaction was not found in this study. These findings
support goal-setting theory and theories concerning HRM satisfaction. The results about
communication and tight control were consistent with findings of prior studies in other
settings, further validating that research. In addition, this study expands our understanding
by focussing on the alignment features of employee performance management systems in
higher education institution. Future research should examine whether satisfaction with
these employee performance management systems has an impact on organisationally
relevant outcomes. Furthermore, the applicability of the concept of employee performance
 368 A. Decramer et al.

management systems in other settings should be explored. The findings contribute to our
understanding of how an employee performance management system influences
individual satisfaction and highlight the importance of incorporating the employee
perspective into the examination of performance management.
HRM literature scholars have examined ‘why’ HRM practices lead to sustainable
competitive advantage. This study has added our knowledge on the strength of the HRM or
employee performance management system that can help us explain ‘how’ HRM systems
lead to outcomes the organisation desires.

Note
1. The dummy variables PROF (full and associate professors), SPECIAL (academic employees
with a tenure track statute) and PHD (researchers and PhD students) (see also the descriptive
Downloaded by [Duke University Libraries] at 07:27 04 January 2013

variables and correlation table) were used to construct the variable POSITION (the group of
PROF is 0 and SPECIAL and PHD is 1).

References
Aguinis, H., and Pierce, C. (2008), ‘Enhancing the Relevance of Organizational Behavior by
Embracing Performance Management Research,’ Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29,
139– 145.
Ainsworth, M., and Smith, M. (1993), Making It Happen: Managing Performance at Work, Sydney:
Prenctice-Hall.
Armstrong, M., and Baron, A. (2004), Managing Performance: Performance Management in Action
(1st ed.), London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.
Arthur, J.B. (1994), ‘Effects of Human Resource Systems on Manufacturing Performance and
Turnover,’ The Academy of Management Journal, 37, 670– 687.
Bach, S. (2000), ‘From Performance Appraisal to Performance Management,’ in Personnel
Management: A Comprehensive Guide to Theory and Practice, eds. S. Bach and K. Sisson,
Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 241– 286.
Bach, S. (2005), Managing Human Resources: Personnel Management in Transition (3rd ed.),
Oxford: Blackwell.
Barry, J., Chandler, J., and Clark, H. (2001), ‘Between the Ivory Tower and the Academic Assembly
Line,’ Journal of Management Studies, 38, 88– 101.
Becker, B., Huselid, M., and Ulrich, D. (2001), The HR Scorecard: Linking People, Strategy, and
Performance, Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Boon, C., Paauwe, J., Boselie, P., and den Hartog, D. (2009), ‘Institutional Pressures and HRM:
Developing Institutional Fit,’ Personnel Review, 38, 492–508.
Boselie, P., Paauwe, J., and Jansen, P. (2001), ‘Human Resource Management and Performance:
Lessons from the Netherlands,’ International Journal of Human Resource Management, 12,
1107– 1125.
Boswell, W. (2006), ‘Aligning Employees with the Organization’s Strategic Objectives: Out of
‘Line of Sight’, Out of Mind,’ International Journal of Human Resource Management, 17,
1489– 1511.
Boswell, W., and Boudreau, J. (2001), ‘How Leading Companies Create, Measure and Achieve
Strategic Results Through ‘Line of Sight’,’ Management Decision, 39, 851– 860.
Bowen, D., and Ostroff, C. (2004), ‘Understanding HRM – Firm Performance Linkages: The Role of
the ‘Strength’ of the HRM System,’ The Academy of Management Review, 29, 203–221.
Boxall, P., and Purcell, J. (2011), Strategy and Human Resource Management, Houndmills:
Palgrave.
Boxall, P., Purcell, J., and Wright, P. (2007), The Oxford Handbook of Human Resource
Management, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Brennan, J., and Shah, T. (2000), ‘Quality Assessment and Institutional Change: Experiences from
14 Countries,’ Higher Education, 40, 331– 349.
Buller, P.F., and McEvoy, G.M. (2012), ‘Strategy, Human Resource Management and Performance:
Sharpening Line of Sight,’ Human Resource Management Review, 22, 43 – 56.
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 369

Cawley, B.D., Keeping, L.M., and 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, 615– 633.
Chan, K. (2001), ‘The Difficulties and Dilemma of Constructing a Model for Teacher Evaluation in
Higher Education,’ Higher Education Management, 13, 1, 93 – 111.
Claus, L., and Briscoe, D. (2009), ‘Employee Performance Management Across Borders: A Review
of Relevant Academic Literature,’ International Journal of Management Reviews, 11, 175–196.
Connell, H.M. (2004), University Research Management: Meeting the Institutional Challenge, Paris:
OECD.
Cook, C., Heath, F., and Thompson, R. (2000), ‘A Meta-Analysis of Response Rates in Web- or
Internet-Based Surveys,’ Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60, 821– 836.
Decramer, A., Smolders, C., Vanderstraeten, A., and Christiaens, J. (2012), ‘The Impact of
Institutional Pressures on Employee Performance Management Systems in Higher Education in
the Low Countries,’ British Journal of Management, 2, S88– S103.
Deem, R. (1998), ‘‘New Managerialism’ and Higher Education: The Management of Performances
Downloaded by [Duke University Libraries] at 07:27 04 January 2013

and Cultures in Universities in the United Kingdom,’ International Studies in Sociology of

Education, 8, 47 – 70.
Delery, J. (1998), ‘Issues of Fit in Strategic Human Resource Management: Implications for
Research,’ Human Resource Management Review, 8, 289– 309.
Delery, J., and Doty, D. (1996), ‘Modes of Theorizing in Strategic Human Resource Management:
Tests of Universalistic, Contingency, and Configurational Performance Predictions,’ The
Academy of Management Journal, 39, 802– 835.
den Hartog, D.N., Boselie, P., and Paauwe, J. (2004), ‘Performance Management: A Model and
Research Agenda,’ Applied Psychology: an International Review, 53, 556– 569.
DeNisi, A. (2000), ‘Performance Appraisal and Performance Management: A Multilevel Analysis,’
in Multilevel Theory, Research and Methods in Organizations, eds. K. Klein and S. Kozkowski,
San Fransico, CA: Jossey-Bass, pp. 121–156.
DeNisi, A., and Pritchard, R. (2006), ‘Performance Appraisal, Performance Management and
Improving Individual Performance: A Motivational Framework,’ Management and Organiz-
ation Review, 2, 253– 277.
Erdogan, B. (2002), ‘Antecedents and Consequences of Justice Perceptions in Performance
Appraisals,’ Human Resource Management Review, 12, 555– 578.
Ferlie, E., Musselin, C., and Andresani, G. (2008), ‘The Steering of Higher Education Systems: A
Public Management Perspective,’ Higher Education, 56, 325–348.
Findley, H., Giles, W., and Mossholder, K. (2000), ‘Performance Appraisal Process and System
Facets: Relationships With Contextual Performance,’ Journal of Applied Psychology, 85,
634– 640.
Fletcher, C. (2001), ‘Performance Appraisal and Management: The Developing Research Agenda,’
Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74, 473– 487.
Fletcher, C., and Williams, R. (1996), ‘Performance Management, Job Satisfaction and
Organizational Commitment,’ British Journal of Management, 7, 169– 179.
Gagnon, M.A., Jansen, K.J., and Michael, J.H. (2008), ‘Employee Alignment With Strategic
Change: A Study of Strategy Supportive Behavior Among Blue-Collar Employees,’ Journal of
Managerial Issues, 20, 425– 443.
Gerhart, B. (2004), ‘Research on Human Resources and Effectiveness: Selected Methodological
Challenges,’ in HRM: What’s Next? Rotterdam: Erasmus University.
Giles, W., and Mossholder, K. (1990), ‘Employee Reactions to Contextual and Session Components
of Performance Appraisal,’ Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 371– 377.
Gould-Williams, J.S. (2004), ‘The Effects of ‘High Commitment’ HRM Practices on Employee
Attitude: The Views of Public Sector Workers,’ Public Administration, 82, 63 – 81.
Greenberg, J. (1986), ‘Determinants of Perceived Fairness of Performance Evaluations,’ Journal of
Applied Psychology, 71, 340– 342.
Guest, D., Conway, N., and Dewe, P. (2004), ‘Using Sequential Tree Analysis to Search for
‘Bundles’ of HR Practices,’ Human Resource Management Journal, 14, 79 – 96.
Gujarati, D. (1995), Basic Econometrics (3rd ed.), Singapore: McGraw-Hill.
Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson, R., and Tatham, R. (2005), Multivariate Data Analysis (6th
ed.), Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice-Hall.
 370 A. Decramer et al.

Harley, S., and Lee, F. (1997), ‘Research Selectivity, Managerialism, and the Academic Labor
Process: The Future of Nonmainstream Economics in UK Universities,’ Human Relations, 50,
1427– 1460.
Hofstede, G. (1998), ‘Identifying Organizational Subcultures: An Empirical Approach,’ Journal of
Management Studies, 35, 1 – 12.
Ichniowski, C., Kochan, T., Levine, D., Olson, C., and Strauss, G. (1996), ‘What Works at Work:
Overview and Assessment,’ Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, 35,
299– 333.
Ichniowski, C., and Shaw, K. (1999), ‘The Effects of Human Resource Management Systems on
Economic Performance: An International Comparison of US and Japanese Plants,’ Management
Science, 45, 704– 721.
Kuvaas, B. (2006), ‘Performance Appraisal Satisfaction and Employee Outcomes: Mediating and
Moderating Roles of Work Motivation,’ The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 17, 504– 522.
Kuvaas, B. (2008), ‘An Exploration of How the Employee – Organization Relationship Affects the
Downloaded by [Duke University Libraries] at 07:27 04 January 2013

Linkage Between Perception of Developmental Human Resource Practices and Employee

Outcomes,’ Journal of Management Studies, 45, 1 – 25.
Latham, G.P., Almost, J., Mann, S., and Moore, C. (2005), ‘New Developments in Performance
Management,’ Organizational Dynamics, 34, 77 – 87.
Lee, C., Bobko, P., Earley, C.P., and Locke, E. (1991), ‘An Empirical Analysis of a Goal Setting
Questionnaire,’ Journal of Organizational Behavior, 12, 467– 482.
Lepak, D., Liao, H., Chung, Y., and Harden, E. (2006), ‘A Conceptual Review of Human Resource
Management Systems in Strategic Human Resource Management Research,’ in Research in
Personnel and Human Resource Management, ed. J. Martocchio, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press,
pp. 217– 271.
Lepak, D.P., and Snell, S.A. (2002), ‘Examining the Human Resource Architecture: The
Relationships Among Human Capital, Employment, and Human Resource Configurations,’
Journal of Management, 28, 517– 543.
Levy, P.E., Cawley, B.D., and Foti, R.J. (1998), ‘Reactions to Appraisal Discrepancies: Performance
Ratings and Attributions,’ Journal of Business and Psychology, 12, 437– 455.
Liao, H., Toya, K., Lepak, D., and Hong, Y. (2009), ‘Do They See Eye to Eye? Management and
Employee Perspectives of High-Performance Work Systems and Influence Processes on Service
Quality,’ Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 371– 391.
Locke, E.A., and Latham, G.P. (1990), Theory of Goal Setting and Task Performance, Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
MacDuffie, J. (1995), ‘Human Resource Bundles and Manufacturing Performance: Organizational
Logic and Flexible Production Systems in the World Auto Industry,’ Industrial & Labor
Relations Review, 48, 197– 221.
Merchant, K.A., and Van der Stede, W.A. (2003), Management Control Systems: Performance
Measurement, Evaluation and Incentives, Harlow, UK: Prentice-Hall.
Middlehurst, R. (2002), ‘The International Context for UK Higher Education,’ in The Effective
Academic: A Handbook for Enhanced Academic Practice, eds. S. Ketteridge, S. Marshall and
H. Fry, London: Kogan Page, pp. 13 – 31.
Middlehurst, R. (2004), ‘Changing Internal Governance: A Discussion of Leadership Roles and
Management Structures in UK Universities,’ Higher Education Quarterly, 58, 258– 279.
Murphy, K., and Cleveland, J. (1995), Understanding Performance Appraisal: Social,
Organizational, and Goal-Based Perspectives, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Paauwe, J. (2009), ‘HRM and Performance: Achievements, Methodological Issues and Prospects,’
Journal of Management Studies, 46, 129– 142.
Paauwe, J., and Richardson, R. (1997), ‘Introduction Special Issue on HRM and Performance,’ The
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 8, 257– 262.
Pollitt, C., and Bouckaert, G. (2004), Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis, Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Purcell, J., and Hutchinson, S. (2007), ‘Front-Line Managers as Agents in the HRM-Performance
Causal Chain: Theory, Analysis and Evidence,’ Human Resource Management Journal, 17,
3 – 20.
Reinke, S. (2003), ‘Does the Form Really Matter?’ Review of Public Personnel Administration, 23,
23 – 37.
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 371

Roberts, G.E. (2003), ‘Employee Performance Appraisal System Participation: A Technique That
Works,’ Public Personnel Management, 32, 89 – 98.
Sax, L., Gilmartin, S., and Bryant, A. (2003), ‘Assessing Response Rates and Nonresponse Bias in
Web and Paper Surveys,’ Research in Higher Education, 44, 409– 432.
Shetty, Y.K., and Carlisle, H.M. (1974), ‘Application of Management by Objectives in a University
Setting: An Exploratory Study of Faculty Reactions,’ Educational Administration Quarterly, 10,
65 – 81.
Smeenk, S., Teelken, C., Eisinga, R., and Doorewaard, H. (2009), ‘Managerialism, Organizational
Commitment, and Quality of Job Performances Among European University Employees,’
Research in Higher Education, 50, 589– 607.
Stiles, D. (2004), ‘Narcissus Revisited: The Values of Management Academics and Their
Roleinbusiness School Strategies in the UK and Canada,’ British Journal of Management, 15,
157– 175.
Stolte-Heiskanen, V. (1979), ‘Externally Determined Resources and the Effectiveness of Research
Units,’ in Scientific Productivity, ed. F. Andrews, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
Downloaded by [Duke University Libraries] at 07:27 04 January 2013

pp. 121– 153.

Storey, J., and Sisson, K. (1993), Managing Human Resources and Industrial Relations, Milton
Keynes: Open University Press.
Tam, W. (2008), ‘Academics’ Perspectives of Performance Management in a British University
Context,’ Ph.D. dissertation, University of Leicester.
Tang, T., and Sarsfield-Baldwin, L. (1996), ‘Distributive and Procedural Justice as Related to
Satisfaction and Commitment,’ SAM Advanced Management Journal, 61, 25 – 31.
Torrington, D., and Hall, L. (1995), Personnel Management: HRM in Action, New York: Prentice-
Hall.
Van Der Weijden, I., De Gilder, D., Groenewegen, P., and Klasen, E. (2008), ‘Implications of
Managerial Control on Performance of Dutch Academic (Bio) Medical and Health Research
Groups,’ Research Policy, 37, 1616– 1629.
Van de Voorde, K., Paauwe, J., and Van Veldhoven, M. (2011), ‘Employee Wellbeing and
the HRM – Organizational Performance Relationship: A Review of Quantitative Studies,’
International Journal of Management Reviews, http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.
1468-2370.2011.00322.x/abstract
van Riel, C.B.M., Berens, G., and Dijkstra, M. (2009), ‘Stimulating Strategically Aligned Behaviour
Among Employees,’ Journal of Management Studies, 46, 1197– 1226.
Veld, M., Boselie, P., and Paauwe, J. (2010), ‘HRM and Strategic Climates in Hospitals: Does the
Message Come Across at the Ward Level?’ Human Resource Management Journal, 20,
339– 356.
Vroom, V.H. (1964), Work and Motivation, New York: Wiley.
Williams, R. (2002), Performance Management, London: International Thomson Business Press.
Wright, P., and Boswell, W. (2002), ‘Desegregating HRM: A Review and Synthesis of Micro- and
Macro-Human Resource Management Research,’ Journal of Management, 28, 247– 276.
Wright, P., Dunford, B., and Snell, S. (2001), ‘Human Resources and the Resource Based View of
the Firm,’ Journal of Management, 27, 701– 721.
Wright, P.M., and Nishii, L.H. (2004), ‘Strategic HRM and Organizational Behaviour: Integrating
Multiple Levels of Analysis,’ in HRM: What’s Next? Rotterdam: Erasmus University.