1. Home
  2. ORGB
  3. ORGB 319v7: Motivation and Productivity

ORGB 319v7: Motivation and Productivity Report a Broken Link

ORGB 319 introduces you to the concept of performance management, as well as the design and implementation of performance management systems to increase the value of human capital, thus providing a unique competitive advantage for organizations in any industry. Performance management systems provide key tools for transforming people’s skills and motivation into a strategic business advantage. Performance management is a continuous process of identifying, measuring, and developing individual and team performance that is aligned with organizational goals, creating a distinct competitive advantage.

The assignments in this course require you to read and critically review a journal article. For each assignment, pick one article that you think might be interesting or applicable for you personally and/or professionally from among those designated for that particular assignment in the lists below.

Assignment 1

Bedeian, A. G., & Armenakis, A. A. (1998). The cesspool syndrome: How dreck floats to the top of declining organizations. The Academy of Management Executive, 12(1), 58-67.

'Full PDF text' link of above article is at left side of web page.
Aguinis, H., & Pierce, C. A. (2008). Enhancing the relevance of organizational behavior by embracing performance management research. Journal Of Organizational Behavior, 29(1), 139-145.
Liu, Y., Combs, J. G., Ketchen, D. J., Jr., & Ireland, R., D. (2007). The value of human resource management for organizational performance. Business Horizons, 50(6), 503-511.
 
Cleveland, J. N., Murphy, K. R., & Williams, R. E. (1989). Multiple uses of performance appraisal: Prevalence and correlates. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(1), 130-135.
 
Werbel, J., & Balkin, D. B. (2010). Are human resource practices linked to employee misconduct?: A rational choice perspective. Human Resource Management Review, 20(4), 317-326.
 
Elmuti, D., Kathawala, Y., & Wayland, R. (1992). Traditional performance appraisal systems: The Deming challenge. Management Decision, 30(8), 42-48.
 

Assignment 2

Murphy, K. R., Cleveland, J. N., Skattebo, A. L., & Kinney, T. B. (2004). Raters who pursue different goals give different ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(1), 158-164.
Rynes, S. L., Gerhart, B., & Minette, K. A. (2004). The importance of pay in employee motivation: Discrepancies between what people say and what they do. Human Resource Management, 43(4), 381-394.
Kerr, S. (1999). Organizational rewards: Practical, cost-neutral alternatives that you may know, but don't practice. Organizational Dynamics, 28(1), 61-70.
Kerr, S. (1995). An academy classic: On the folly of rewarding A, while hoping for B. The Academy of Management Executive, 9(1), 7-14.
 
Weber, A. J. (1995). Making performance appraisals consistent with a quality environment. Quality Progress, 28(6), 65-70.
 
Wilkerson, J. L. (1995). Merit pay-performance reviews: They just don't work! Management Accounting, 76(12), 40-45.
 

Assignment 3

Naquin, C. E., & Tynan, R. O. (2003). The team halo effect: Why teams are not blamed for their failures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(2), 332-340.
Tziner, A., Murphy, K. R., & Cleveland, J. N. (2005). Contextual and rater factors affecting rating behavior. Group & Organization Management, 30(1), 89-98.
DeNisi, A. S., & Kluger, A. N. (2000). Feedback effectiveness: Can 360-degree appraisals be improved? The Academy of Management Executive, 14(1), 129-139.
Beckton, J. B., & Schraeder, M. (2004). Participant input into rater selection: Potential effects on the quality and acceptance of ratings in the context of 360-degree feedback. Public Personnel Management, 33(1), 23-32.
Rowland, C. A., & Hall, R. D. (2012). Organizational justice and performance: Is appraisal fair? EuroMed Journal of Business, 7(3), 280-293.
MacBryde, J., & Mendibil, K. (2003). Designing performance measurement systems for teams: Theory and practice. Management Decision, 41(8), 722-733.