Workplace performance: a comparison of subjective and objective measures in the 2004 Workplace Employment Relations Survey

Abstract

subjective measure but, in addition, objective data on profitability and productivity were also collected. This allows a comparison to be made between the two types of measures. A number of validity tests are undertaken and the main conclusion is that subjective and objective measures of performance are weakly equivalent but that differences are also evident. Our findings suggest that it would be prudent to give most weight to results supported by both types of measure.

"High Performance Work Systems and workplace performance in small, medium-sized and large firms"

“…The reliability of such measures has been demonstrated in studies that suggest average positive correlations from 0.4 to 0.6 between subjective and objective performance measures (Wall et al, 2004: 113). In addition, analyses using both subjective and objective performance measures have been found to produce similar results in modelling the determinants of workplace performance within the WERS dataset (see : Forth and McNabb, 2008).…”

Does workplace partnership deliver mutual gains at work?

“…Specifically, the measures of 'task-based participation', 'direct communication between senior managers and the whole workforce', 'information sharing 2 Hence, our study follows a similar approach although we acknowledge that future research should also focus on comparing subjective and objective performance measures. However, Forth and McNabb (2008) find a strong correlation between the subjective and objective measures of firm performance using the WERS2004 dataset, suggesting that subjective financial performance are appropriate alternatives to objective measures. 3 We also estimate a probit and ordered probit model, but the results are generally consistent.…”

Knowledge Sharing Through Face-to-Face Communication and Labour Productivity: Evidence from British Workplaces

“…The extent to which subjective and objective measures of labour productivity converge is still an issue subject to debate (Forth and McNabb, 2008;Machin and Stewart, 1996;Wall et al, 2004). Nonetheless, the lack of availability of objective measures of productivity is generally regarded as a weak point of the UK-based empirical research on the HRMproductivity nexus.…”

“…5 Forth and McNabb (2008) analyse the extent to which subjective measures of productivity reported in the WERS 2004 and objective measures obtained after linking the Financial Performance Questionnaire with the Annual Business Inquiry converge.…”