IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/126546.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Appraisal process, merit pay and performance: evidence from a longitudinal survey of school teachers in England and Wales

Author

Listed:
  • Marsden, David
  • Sezer, Lisa A.

Abstract

This study investigates how the quality of performance appraisals influences perceptions of merit pay − whether it is viewed as motivating or divisive − and its impact on achieving performance objectives. Using longitudinal survey data collected from classroom teachers in England and Wales between 2014 and 2018, and employing an instrumental variable approach, the analysis reveals that the effectiveness of merit pay in improving employee performance is closely tied to the quality of appraisal processes. Procedural fairness emerges as a key factor in fostering both motivational and divisiveness attitudes, whereas poorly designed or disengaging appraisals tend to amplify divisiveness rather than motivation, undermining the achievement of performance objectives. These findings highlight the need to carefully weigh both the potential benefits and drawbacks of merit pay systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Marsden, David & Sezer, Lisa A., 2024. "Appraisal process, merit pay and performance: evidence from a longitudinal survey of school teachers in England and Wales," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 126546, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:126546
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/126546/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Della Torre, Edoardo, 2019. "Collective voice mechanisms, HRM practices and organizational performance in Italian manufacturing firms," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 398-410.
    2. DeNisi, Angelo S. & Pritchard, Robert D., 2006. "Performance Appraisal, Performance Management and Improving Individual Performance: A Motivational Framework," Management and Organization Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(2), pages 253-277, July.
    3. Sue Fernie & David Metcalf, 1999. "It’s Not What You Pay it’s the Way that You Pay it and that’s What Gets Results: Jockeys’ Pay and Performance," LABOUR, CEIS, vol. 13(2), pages 385-411, June.
    4. Thomas Dohmen & Armin Falk, 2011. "Performance Pay and Multidimensional Sorting: Productivity, Preferences, and Gender," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(2), pages 556-590, April.
    5. Angelo S. DeNisi & Robert D. Pritchard, 2006. "Performance Appraisal, Performance Management and Improving Individual Performance: A Motivational Framework," Management and Organization Review, The International Association for Chinese Management Research, vol. 2(2), pages 253-277, July.
    6. George Baker & Robert Gibbons & Kevin J. Murphy, 1994. "Subjective Performance Measures in Optimal Incentive Contracts," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 109(4), pages 1125-1156.
    7. Nick Adnett, 2003. "Commentary. Reforming teachers' pay: incentive payments, collegiate ethos and UK policy," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 27(1), pages 145-157, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bayo-Moriones, Alberto & Galdon-Sanchez, Jose Enrique & Martinez-de-Morentin, Sara, 2016. "Competitive Strategy, Performance Appraisal and Firm Results," IZA Discussion Papers 10041, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Edward P. Lazear, 1995. "Personnel Economics," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262121883, December.
    3. Sajid Hussain Awan & Nazia Habib & Chaudhry Shoaib Akhtar & Shaheryar Naveed, 2020. "Effectiveness of Performance Management System for Employee Performance Through Engagement," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(4), pages 21582440209, October.
    4. Decramer, Adelien & Audenaert, Mieke & Van Waeyenberg, Thomas & Claeys, Tine & Claes, Claudia & Vandevelde, Stijn & van Loon, Jos & Crucke, Saskia, 2015. "Does performance management affect nurses’ well-being?," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 98-105.
    5. Houldsworth, Elizabeth & Marra, Marianna & Brewster, Chris & Brookes, Michael & Wood, Geoffrey, 2021. "Performance appraisal and MNEs: The impact of different capitalist archetypes," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(5).
    6. Hada Izabela Diana & Burja Vasile, 2018. "Interference Between Profit And Cash-Flow In Evaluating Economic Performance," Annals - Economy Series, Constantin Brancusi University, Faculty of Economics, vol. 3, pages 96-101, June.
    7. Emanuele Gabriel Margherita & Ilenia Bua, 2021. "The Role of Human Resource Practices for the Development of Operator 4.0 in Industry 4.0 Organisations: A Literature Review and a Research Agenda," Businesses, MDPI, vol. 1(1), pages 1-16, April.
    8. Charness, Gary & Kuhn, Peter, 2011. "Lab Labor: What Can Labor Economists Learn from the Lab?," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 3, pages 229-330, Elsevier.
    9. Alberto Bayo-Moriones & Jose E. Galdon-Sanchez & Sara Martinez-de-Morentin, 2017. "Performance Measurement and Incentive Intensity," Journal of Labor Research, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 496-546, December.
    10. Rajesh Kumar Upadhyay & Khaliqur Rehman Ansari & Pankaj Bijalwan, 2020. "Performance Appraisal and Team Effectiveness: A Moderated Mediation Model of Employee Retention and Employee Satisfaction," Vision, , vol. 24(4), pages 395-405, December.
    11. Rawan Alafeshat & Cem Tanova, 2019. "Servant Leadership Style and High-Performance Work System Practices: Pathway to a Sustainable Jordanian Airline Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-21, November.
    12. Bloom, Nicholas & Van Reenen, John, 2011. "Human Resource Management and Productivity," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 19, pages 1697-1767, Elsevier.
    13. Donghun Yoon, 2021. "How Can Personnel Performance Evaluation Systems Be Improved?," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(1), pages 21582440209, January.
    14. Brice Corgnet & Roberto Hernán-González, 2019. "Revisiting the Trade-off Between Risk and Incentives: The Shocking Effect of Random Shocks?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 1096-1114, March.
    15. Christian Zehnder & Holger Herz & Jean-Philippe Bonardi, 2016. "A Productive Clash of Cultures: Injecting Economics into Leadership Research," CESifo Working Paper Series 6175, CESifo.
    16. Flora F. T. Chiang & Thomas A. Birtch, 2010. "Appraising Performance across Borders: An Empirical Examination of the Purposes and Practices of Performance Appraisal in a Multi‐Country Context," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(7), pages 1365-1393, November.
    17. Anupriya Singh & Tanuja Agarwala, 2011. "Software Services Industry Context and Performance Management," Vision, , vol. 15(1), pages 49-59, March.
    18. Edward P. Lazear & Paul Oyer, 2012. "Personnel Economics [The Handbook of Organizational Economics]," Introductory Chapters,, Princeton University Press.
    19. S. Panda* & M. Waris & K. Asadullah & U. Mehfooz & A. Q. Adeleke, 2018. "Analyzing Factors Attributing To Effectiveness of Performance Management System of a Manufacturing Industry," The Journal of Social Sciences Research, Academic Research Publishing Group, pages 907-914:6.
    20. Dilbar Hassan Ch & Rakhshanda Maqsood & Snawer Gill, 2018. "A Study of a Casual relationship between Performance Appraisal and Employee’s Performance: Evidence from the Textile Sector in Faisalabad," Journal of Education and Vocational Research, AMH International, vol. 9(1), pages 44-50.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    merit pay; public sector; teacher pay;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • R14 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Land Use Patterns
    • J01 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - General - - - Labor Economics: General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:126546. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: LSERO Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.