SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Ekonomi ve Yönetim Araştırmaları Dergisi / 2012 / Cilt: 1 - Sayı: 1

A PARADIGMATIC OVERVIEW FOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS: AN EPISTEMOLOGIC INVESTIGATION FROM THE POINT OF MANAGER AND EMPLOYEE RELATIONSHIPS

PERFORMANS DEĞERLENDİRMELERİNE PARADİGMATİK BİR BAKIŞ: YÖNETİCİ VE ÇALIŞAN İLİŞKİLERİ AÇISINDAN EPİSTEMOLOJİK BİR İNCELEME

Cemalettin Öcal FIDANBOY
Hale ALAN
Hakkı Okan YELOĞLU
Pages
75–90
Publication Date
2012-06-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In this paper, the contributions of accuracy of performance evaluation results are investigated with functionalist paradigm dealt with interpretivist paradigm together in the framework of manager and employee relationship and epistemological dimensions

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study is aimed to the contribution of interpretivist paradigm approach to performance evaluations.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Lots of research in literature show that performance evaluations perform in the frame of functionalist paradigm, positivist and objective approaches.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In this paper, the contributions of accuracy of performance evaluation results are investigated with functionalist paradigm dealt with interpretivist paradigm together in the framework of manager and employee relationship and epistemological dimensions
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Yorumsamacı Paradigma · Performans Değerlendirme · İşlevselci Paradigma

Abstract

This study is aimed to the contribution of interpretivist paradigm approach to performance evaluations. Lots of research in literature show that performance evaluations perform in the frame of functionalist paradigm, positivist and objective approaches. There are some researches, which shows that positivist approaches widely used in performance evaluations are dealt with interpretivist paradigm together, increase the accuracy of evaluation results. In this paper, the contributions of accuracy of performance evaluation results are investigated with functionalist paradigm dealt with interpretivist paradigm together in the framework of manager and employee relationship and epistemological dimensions

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı, yorumsamacı paradigma yaklaşımının performansdeğerlendirmelerine katkısını incelemektir. Yazında yer alan bir çokaraştırma, performans değerlendirmelerinin daha çok işlevselci paradigmaçerçevesinde, pozitivist ve nesnel bir yaklaşımla yapıldığını göstermektedir.Bununla birlikte yorumsamacı paradigma yaklaşımının, performansdeğerlendirmelerinde yaygın olarak kullanılan pozitivist yaklaşımlar ilebir arada ele alınmasının, değerlendirme sonuçlarının doğruluğuna katkısağlayacağı düşünülmektedir. Makalede yorumsamacı paradigmanın,işlevselci paradigmayla birlikte ele alınmasının performans değerlendirmesonuçlarının doğruluğuna sağlayacağı katkılar, yönetici ve çalışan ilişkileriçerçevesinde, epistemolojik boyutlarıyla değerlendirilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

FIDANBOY, C. Ö., ALAN, H., YELOĞLU, H. O. (2012). A PARADIGMATIC OVERVIEW FOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS: AN EPISTEMOLOGIC INVESTIGATION FROM THE POINT OF MANAGER AND EMPLOYEE RELATIONSHIPS. Ekonomi ve Yönetim Araştırmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 1 - Sayı: 1, 75–90. https://ajindex.com/articles/170689

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Baird, L. ve Meshoulam, I. (1988), “Managing two fits of strategic human resource management”, Academy of Management Review, 13, 1, 116-128.
  2. Banner D. K. ve Cooke R. A. (1984), “Ethical dilemmas in performance appraisals”, Journal of Business Ethics, 3. 327-333.
  3. Barlow, G. (1989), “Deficiencies and the perpetuation of power: Latent functions in management appraisal”, Journal of Management Studies, 26, 499−517. Bobic M. P. ve Davis W. E. (2003), “A kind word for Theory X: or why so many newfangled management techniques quickly fail”, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Vol 13, no 3, pp. 239-264.
  4. Boyd, N. M. ve Kyle, K. (2004), “Expanding the view of performance appraisal by introducing social justice concerns”, Administrative Theory and Praxis, 26, 249−278. Bretz, R. D., Milkovich, G. T ve Read, W. (1992), “The current state of performance appraisal research and practice: Concerns, directions, and implications”, Journal of Management, 18(2): 321. Buijs, Jan. (1998), “Viewpoint: towards a new theory X”, Creativity and Innovation Management. 7. No. 1: 17-22.
  5. Burrell, G. ve Morgan, G. (1979), Sociological paradigms and organizational analysis, Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing. Cooperrider D. L. ve Srivastva S. (1987), “Appreciative inquiry in organizational life”, Research in Organizational Change and Development, Vol.1, pages 129-169.
  6. Decotiis T. ve Petit A. (1978), “The performance appraisal process: a model and some testable propositions”, The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 3, No. 3 (Jul., 1978), pp. 635-646.
  7. Dixon J. ve Dogan R. (2003), “A philosophical analysis of management: improving praxis”, Journal of Management Development. Vol. 22 No. 6, 2003. pp. 458-482.
  8. Duarte N. T., Goodson J. R. ve Klick N. R. (1994), “Effects of dyadic quality and duration on performance appraisal”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 37, No. 3, 499-521.
  9. Evered R. ve Louis M. R. (1981), “Alternative perspectives in the organizational sciences: ‘Inquiry from the inside’ and ‘Inquiry from the outside’”. Academy of Management Review, Vol. 6, No. 3, 385-395.
  10. Flint D. H. (1999), “The role of organizational justice in multi-source performance appraisal: theory- based applications and directions for research”, Human Resource Management Review, Volume 9, Number 1, 1999, pages 1-20.
  11. Hartog D. N., Boselie P., ve Paauwe J. (2004), “Performance management: a model and research agenda”, Applied Psychology: An Interntional Review, 53 (4), 556 –569. Hogan, E, A. (1987), “E