Reliability and validation of an instrument for measuring problems with performance appraisal of automotive parts manufacturing employees

Abstract

PurposeTo develop and validate an instrument to measure the problems associated with performance appraisal.Design/methodology/approachThe implementation was in two phases. Phase 1 involved the development and validation of an instrument to measure the problems with performance appraisal. Phase 2 involved the exploration and confirm the construct measurement. Data used in Phase 1 were collected from interviews with administrators and employees in the automotive parts manufacturing industry and five experts. In Phase 2, data were derived from questionnaires sent to 320 employees of automotive parts manufacturers in the Eastern Region of Thailand.FindingsProblems concerning performance appraisals were classified into two components as problems with the appraisal process and problems with the appraising person. The concepts, theories and interview results that were used to develop the instrument and assess problems with performance appraisals were consistent with the empirical evidence.Practical implicationsThe developed instrument may be used to measure problem levels of performance appraisals in organizations with high accuracy and reliability. Findings may be used as guidelines for management to effectively reduce problems with performance appraisals. The instrument may also be used for research measurement of organizational problems concerning performance appraisal.Social implicationsFairness, transparency and testability are aspects of effective management. Ignorance of problems in performance appraisals may have negative effects on a conducive working atmosphere and behaviors at the personal, group and organizational levels. Therefore, the findings of this study have social implications for the capability to examine fairness in employees' performance appraisals.Originality/valueThe instrument for measuring problems with performance appraisal was developed based on the combination of concepts, theories and interview and questionnaire data. This instrument facilitates human resource officers, managers and organizations in measuring the levels of problems with performance appraisals.

Mediating Effects of Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment between Problems with Performance Appraisal and Organizational Citizenship Behavior

“…However, unfairness often occurs, especially in performance appraisal through problems with the appraisal process and problems with the appraising person [31]. These problems affect attitudes and behavior.…”

“…Na-Nan et al [31] studied problems with performance appraisal based on the theory of justice and the problems with performance appraisal concepts. Exploratory factor analysis found that the problems with performance appraisal can be divided into two components.…”

“…The scale for measuring problems of process and person performance appraisal was adapted from the employee perception scale of Na-Nan et al [31]. A 16-item scale was developed, based on concepts and theories in performance appraisal, such as "the targets of the performance appraisal are not clear", "the performance appraisal lacks involvement between employees and administrators", "administrators do not give importance to real performance appraisal", and "the boss has bias and lacks fairness in performance appraisal".…”

“…Based on Adams' equity theory [23], the findings of Na-Nan et al [31], and practical implications found by Gilliland and Langdon [37], Shrivastava, Jones, Selvarajah, and Van Gramberg [38], Umair, Javaid, Amir, and Luqman [39], and Pichler [40], combined with the latest findings of this research study, it is proposed that problems with performance appraisal can be divided into two categories, consisting of problems with the appraisal process and problems with the appraising person in the effect of JS, OC, and OCB.…”

Validation of diabetes-related awareness instrument (DRAI) to measure diabetics awareness towards risk factors and prevention strategies

“…According to Rubio et al (2003, p. 94), "Content validity refers to the extent to which the items on a measure assess the same content or how well the content material was sampled in the measure". Numerous studies by Gerbing and Anderson (1988), Farooq (2017), Dar and Mishra (2019) and Na-Nan et al (2021), defined content validity as the judgemental procedure in which an attempt is made to determine whether your instrument includes those behaviours that are relevant to the domain. In the present study, items included should be expressed unambiguously and exhibits imperative characteristics of diabetes-related awareness instrument (DRAI).…”