全面质量和放弃绩效评估:把好事做过头了?

Robert L. Cardy, Kenneth P. Carson
{"title":"全面质量和放弃绩效评估:把好事做过头了?","authors":"Robert L. Cardy,&nbsp;Kenneth P. Carson","doi":"10.1016/S1084-8568(96)90013-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Proponents of total quality management often argue that performance appraisal is fundamentally at odds with quality-oriented management. This argument is made both on the basis of logical analysis and statistical demonstration. We show that neither of these arguments creates a compelling case against performance appraisal. We conclude that thoughtful organizations need to make decisions about performance appraisal in the same way that other business decisions are made, that is, in terms of a cost-benefit analysis.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100829,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Quality Management","volume":"1 2","pages":"Pages 193-206"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1996-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S1084-8568(96)90013-9","citationCount":"12","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Total quality and the abandonment of performance appraisal: Taking a good thing too far?\",\"authors\":\"Robert L. Cardy,&nbsp;Kenneth P. Carson\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/S1084-8568(96)90013-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Proponents of total quality management often argue that performance appraisal is fundamentally at odds with quality-oriented management. This argument is made both on the basis of logical analysis and statistical demonstration. We show that neither of these arguments creates a compelling case against performance appraisal. We conclude that thoughtful organizations need to make decisions about performance appraisal in the same way that other business decisions are made, that is, in terms of a cost-benefit analysis.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100829,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Quality Management\",\"volume\":\"1 2\",\"pages\":\"Pages 193-206\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1996-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S1084-8568(96)90013-9\",\"citationCount\":\"12\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Quality Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1084856896900139\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Quality Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1084856896900139","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

摘要

全面质量管理的支持者经常争辩说,绩效评估从根本上与面向质量的管理不一致。这一论点是在逻辑分析和统计论证的基础上提出的。我们表明,这两种观点都不能构成反对绩效评估的令人信服的理由。我们得出的结论是,深思熟虑的组织需要以与其他商业决策相同的方式做出绩效评估决策,即根据成本效益分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Total quality and the abandonment of performance appraisal: Taking a good thing too far?

Proponents of total quality management often argue that performance appraisal is fundamentally at odds with quality-oriented management. This argument is made both on the basis of logical analysis and statistical demonstration. We show that neither of these arguments creates a compelling case against performance appraisal. We conclude that thoughtful organizations need to make decisions about performance appraisal in the same way that other business decisions are made, that is, in terms of a cost-benefit analysis.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信