THE MEDIATING ROLE OF JOB PERFORMANCE AND THE REGULATORY ROLE OF LEADER-MEMBER EXCHANGE ON THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ACCURACY AND INDIVIDUAL REPUTATION

Öz

Purpose: Employees demand an accurate and fair measurement of their performance and appropriate performance management systems to be developed in business life. Thanks to the accuracy of the performance management system, employees can receive positive or negative feedback and their job performance is affected by this. . The purpose of this study is to determine the regulatory and mediating effect of leader-member exchange and job performance on the relationship between performance management system accuracy dimension and individual reputation. Method: In order to test relevant research hypotheses data collected from employees of banks whose performance management system is considered to be applied the most and most effectively in Turkey were used. Research workers in the context of banks operating in the banking sector in Turkey's 32 provinces have been the subject of research and the questionnaire was distributed to the employees using the convenience sampling method. Findings: As a result of the data obtained, it has been observed that the job performance has increased with the correct perception of the performance management system by the employee. In addition, the increase in job performance has led to an increase in individual reputation. Originality: There is a common consensus in the literature that job performance is affected by leader-member interaction in various ways. In addition, there are studies found that the accuracy of the performance management system positively affects the job performance. Increasing job performance of the employee with all these will affect the reputation of the individual within the organization positively. The relationship between performance management system accuracy and individual reputation examined in this study constitutes the original side of the research.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Performance Management System
• Leader-Member Exchange
• Job Performance
• Individual Reputation.

PERFORMANS YÖNETİM SİSTEMİNİN DOĞRULUĞUNUN İTİBAR İLE İLİŞKİSİNDE İŞ PERFORMANSININ ARACI, LİDER-ÜYE ETKİLEŞİMİN DÜZENLEYİCİ ROLÜ

Öz

Amaç: Çalışanlar iş yaşamında, performanslarının doğru ve adaletli ölçülmesini ve buna uygun performans yönetim sistemleri geliştirilmesini istemektedirler. Performans yönetim sisteminin doğruluğu sayesinde, çalışanlar olumlu ya da olumsuz geri bildirim alabilmekte ve iş performansları bundan etkilenmektedir. Bu çalışmanın amacı, performans yönetim sistemi doğruluk boyutu ve bireysel itibar arasındaki ilişkide, lider-üye etkileşiminin düzenleyici ve iş performansının aracı etkisini belirlemektir. Yöntem: İlgili araştırma hipotezlerini test etmek amacıyla Türkiye’de bulunan ve performans yönetim sisteminin en fazla ve en etkin uygulandığı düşünülen banka çalışanlarından toplanan veriler kullanılmıştır. Araştırma kapsamında Türkiye’nin 32 ilindeki bankacılık sektöründe faaliyet gösteren bankalardaki çalışanlar araştırmaya konu edilmiş ve anket formu çalışanlara kolayda örnekleme yöntemiyle dağıtılmıştır. Bulgular: Ulaşılan veriler neticesinde performans yönetim sisteminin çalışan tarafından doğru algılanmasıyla iş performansının arttığı görülmüştür. Ayrıca iş performansı artışı bireysel itibarın yükselmesine neden olmuştur. Özgünlük: Literatürde iş performansının lider-üye etkileşiminden çeşitli şekillerde etkilendiği konusunda yaygın bir fikir birliği mevcuttur. Ayrıca performans yönetim sisteminin doğruluğunun iş performansını olumlu etkilediği bulunan çalışmalar mevcuttur. Çalışanın tüm bunlarla beraber artan iş performansı bireyin kurum içindeki itibarını da olumlu yönde etkileyecektir. Bu çalışmada incelenen performans yönetim sistemi doğruluğu ile bireysel itibar arasındaki ilişki araştırmanın özgün tarafını oluşturmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Performans Yönetim Sistemi
• Lider-Üye Etkileşimi
• İş Performansı
• Bireysel İtibar

Kaynakça

1. Ahn, H. (2001). Applying the balanced scorecard concept: an experience report. Long Range Planning, 34: 441-61.
2. Aiken, L. S., and West, S. G. Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions, Sage, London, 1991.
3. Anseel, F., Lievens, F., & Schollaert, E. (2009). Reflection as a strategy to enhance task performance after feedback. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 110: 23–35.
4. Arain, G., Bhatti, Z., Hameed, I. and Fang, Y. (2019), Top-down knowledge hiding and innovative work behavior (IWB): a three-way moderated-mediation analysis of self-efficacy and local/foreign status, Journal of Knowledge Management, 24, 2: 127-149.
5. Aryee, S., Chen, Z. X., Budhwar, P. S. (2004). Exchange fairness and employee performance: An examination of the relationship between organizational politics and procedural justice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 94: 1-14.
6. Azofra, V., Prieto, B., Santidri´an, A. 2003. The usefulness of a performance measurement system in the daily life of an organization: A note on a case study. Br. Account. Rev. 35: 367–384.
7. Bailly, F. and Léné, A. (2013). The personification of the service labour process and the rise of soft skills: a French case study, Employee Relations, 35, 1: 79-97.
8. Berdicchia, Domenico, (2015). The relationship between LMX and performance: the mediating role of role breadth self efficacy and crafting challenging job demands, Impresa Progetto – Electronic Journal of Management, 1: 1-28.

9. Borman, W. C, Motowidlo, S. J. (1993). Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual performance. In N. Schmitt, W. C. Borman, & Asso ciates (Eds.), Personnel selection in organizations: 71-98.
10. Bromley, D. B. (2001). Relationships between personal and corporate reputation, European Journal of Marketing 35,3/4, 316-334.
11. Browne, M. W., Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of addressing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation, models: 136-162. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
12. Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS, EQS, and LISREL: Comparative approaches to testing for the factorial validity of a measuring instrument. International journal of testing, 1,1: 55-86.
13. Chan, S.C.H., Mak, W. (2012). Benevolent leadership and follower performance: The mediating role of leader–member exchange (LMX). Asia Pac J Management, 29: 285–301.
14. Chen, Z., Lam, W., Zhong, J. A. (2012). Effects of perceptions on LMX and work performance Effects of supervisors’ perception of subordinates’ emotional intelligence and subordinates’ perception of trust in the supervisor on LMX and, consequently, performance, Asia Pac J Manag, 29, 597–616.
15. Chiaburu D.S., Smith T.A., Wang, J., Zimmerman, R.D. (2014). Relative Importance of Leader Influences for Subordinates’ Proactive Behaviors, Prosocial Behaviors, and Task Performance A Meta-Analysis, Journal of Personnel Psychology, 13, 70-86.
16. Clarke, N., Mahadi, N. (2016). Differences between follower and dyadic measures of LMX as mediators of emotional intelligence and employee performance, wellbeing, and turnover intention. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 1-12.
17. Cleveland, J.N., Huebner, L.A., Anderson, K.J., Agbeke, D.V. (2019). Lifespan Perspective on Job Performance. Performance Appraisal/Management and Creative Performance: 291-321.
18. Colbert, B. (2004). The complex resource-based view: Implications for theory and research in strategic HRM. Academy of Management Review 29,3: 341–580.
19. Cooke, F. L., Cooper, B., Bartram, T., Wang, J., & Mei, H. (2019). Mapping the relationships between high-performance work systems, employee resilience and engagement: A study of the banking industry in China. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 30,8: 1239-1260.
20. Cropanzano, R., Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social Exchange Theory: An Interdisciplinary Review. Journal of Management, 31,6: 874–900.
21. Cutcher, L., Kirsch, A., & Lansbury, R. D. (2012). The ‘lucky’LME: the mediation of globalizing effects on employment relations in the Australian auto assembly and retail banking industries. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23,10: 1999-2015.
22. David, E. M. (2013). Examining the role of narrative performance appraisal comments on performance. Human Performance, 26: 430 – 450.
23. Davis, S. and Albright, T. (2004). An investigation of the effect of balanced scorecard implementation on financial performance, Management Accounting Research, 15: 135-153.
24. DeNisi, A. S., Pritchard, R. D. (2006). Performance Appraisal, Performance Management and Improving Individual Performance: A Motivational Framework. Management and Organization Review, 2, 2: 253–277.
25. Dunegan, Kenneth J., Uhl-Bien, Mary, Duchon, Dennis. (2002). LMX and subordınate performance: The moderatıng effects of task characterıstıcs, Journal of Business and Psychology, 17, 2: 275-311.
26. Emler, N., Hopkins, N. (1990). Reputation, social identity and the self. In D. Abrams & M. A. Hogg (Eds.), Social identity theory: Constructive and critical advances: 113-130.
27. Epstein, M. J., Rejc, A., and Slapnicar, S. (2004). The impact of performance measurement on corporate financial performance. In Neely, A., Kennerly, M., andWalters, A. (eds.), Performance Measurement and Management: Public and Private, Centre for Business Performance: 339–346.
28. Fang Lee Cooke, Brian Cooper, Tim Bartram, Jue Wang & Hexuan Mei (2019). Mapping the relationships between high-performance work systems, employee resilience and engagement: a study of the banking industry in China, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 30, 8: 1239-1260.
29. Ferris, G. R., Witt, L. A., & Hochwarter, W. A. (2001). Interaction of social skill and general mental ability on job performance and salary. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 6: 1075–1082.
30. Ferris, G.R., Blass, F.R., Douglas, C., Kolodinsky, R.W., Treadway, D.C. (2003). Personal reputation in organizations. In J. Greenberg (Ed.), Organizational behavior: The state of the science: 211–246.
31. Ferris, G. R., Harris, J. N., Russell, Z. A., Ellen, B. P., Martinez, A. D., & Blass, F. R. (2014). The role of reputation in the organizational sciences: A multilevel review, construct assessment, and research directions. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management: 241–303.
32. Fletcher, C. (2001). Performance appraisal and management: The developing research agenda. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74, 4: 473–487.
33. Folger, R., Konovsky, M.A., Cropanzano, R. (1992). A due process metaphor for performance appraisal. Research in Organizational Behavior, 14, 1: 129-77.
34. Foste, E. A., & Botero, I. C. (2011). Personal Reputation. Management Communication Quarterly, 26, 1: 48–73.
35. Fu, N., Flood, Patrıck C., Bosak, J., Rousseau D. M., Morrıs, T., O’regan P. (2015). Hıgh Performance Work Systems In Professıonal Servıce Fırms: Examınıng The Practıces-Resources Uses performance Lınkage, Human Resource Management, 4: 124-138.
36. Gabris, G., Ihrke, K. (2000). Improving employee acceptance toward performance appraisal and merit systems: The role of credible leadership. Review of Public Personnel Administration 20, 1: 41–53.
37. Gioia, D. A., & Sims, H. P. (1983). Perceptions of Managerial Power as a Consequence of Managerial Behavior and Reputation. Journal of Management, 9, 1: 7–24.
38. Glendinning, P. M. (2002). Performance Management: Pariah or Messiah. Public Personnel Management, 31, 2: 161–178.
39. Graen, G.B., & Scandura, T. (1987). Toward a psychology of dyadic organizing. In B. Staw 8c L.L. Cumming (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior, 9: 175-208.
40. Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. The Leadership Quarterly, 6, 2: 219–247.
41. Griffin, M. A., Neal, A., Parker, S., K., (2007). A new model of work role performance: posıtıve behavıor ın uncertaın and ınterdependent contexts, Academy of Management Journal, 50, 2: 327–347.
42. Gündüz, A., Akman, H., Kurban, S. (2019). Performans Yönetim Sistemi Açısından Türkiye’de Yerel Yönetim Mevzuatı, Sciences Uluslararası Uygulamalı Sosyal Bilimler Kongresi, 118-131.
43. Gürbüz, S., Ayhan, Ö. (2017). Lidere Yakın Olmanın Dayanılmaz Hafifliği: Lider-Üye Etkileşimi, Görev Performansı, Tecrübe ve Terfi Edebilirlik Arasındaki İlişkilerin Testi, Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 32, 80: 1–15.
44. Hall, A. T., Zinko, R., Perryman, A. A., & Ferris, G. R. (2009). Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Reputation. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 15, 4: 381–392.
45. Hochwarter, W. A., Ferris, G. R., Zinko, R., Arnell, B., & James, M. (2007). Reputation as a moderator of political behavior-work outcomes relationships: A two-study investigation with convergent results. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 2: 567–576.
46. Hogan, R., & Shelton, D. (1998). A socioanalytic perspective on job performance. Human Performance, 11, 129–144.
47. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural equation modeling: a multidisciplinary journal, 6, 1: 1-55.
48. Huang, L.-C., Ahlstrom, D., Lee, A. Y.-P., Chen, S.-Y., & Hsieh, M.-J. (2016). High performance work systems, employee well-being, and job involvement: an empirical study. Personnel Review, 45, 2: 296–314.
49. Hunter, L. W., & Katz, H. C. (2012). The impact of globalization on human resource management and employment relations in the US automobile and banking industries. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23, 10: 1983-1998.
50. Ittner, C. D., Larcker, D. F., & Randall, T. (2003). Performance Implications of Strategic Performance Measurement in Financial Services Firms. Organizations and Society, 28, 7-8: 715–741.
51. Jawahar, I. M., Meurs, J. A., Ferris, G. R., & Hochwarter, W. A. (2008). Self-Efficacy and Political Skill as Comparative Predictors of Task and Contextual Performance: A Two-Study Constructive Replication. Human Performance, 21, 2: 138–157.
52. Joo, B.-K. (Brian). (2011). Leader–Member Exchange Quality and In-Role Job Performance. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 19, 1: 25–34.
53. Kapoutsis, I., Papalexandris, A., Nikolopoulos, A., Hochwarter, W. A., & Ferris, G. R. (2011). Politics perceptions as moderator of the political skill – job performance relationship: A two-study, cross-national, constructive replication. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 78, 1: 123–135.
54. Kenny DA, Kashy DA, Bolger N ve ark. (1998) Data analysis in social psychology. The handbook of social psychology, D.T. Gibert, S.T. Fiske, G.Lindzey (Ed), Berlin. Springer-Verlag: 203-227.
55. Kilduff, M., & Krackhardt, D. (1994). Bringing the Individual Back in: A Structural Analysis of the Internal Market for Reputation in Organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 1: 87–108.
56. Kinicki, A. J., Jacobson, K. L., Peterson, S. J., & Prussia, G. E. (2013). Development and validation of the performance management behavior questionnaire. Personnel Psychology, 66, 1– 45.
57. Konaklioglu, E., & Sevin, H. D. (2015). Defining the Relationship between Trust, Reputation and Political Skills in Service Business. International Journal of Business and Social Research, 5, 11: 1-8.
58. Koopmans, L., Bernaards, C. M., Hildebrandt, V. H., De Vet, H. C., Van der Beek, A. J. (2014). Construct validity of the individual work performance questionnaire. Journal of occupational and environmental medicine, 56, 3: 331-337.
59. KPMG, (2019). ‘’Sigortacılık: Sektörel Bakış 2019’’ https://home.kpmg/tr/tr/home/gorusler/2019/05/sektorel-bakis-2019-sigortacilik.html (Erişim tarihi: 01.04.2020)
60. Laird, M. D., Perryman, A. A., Hochwarter, W. A., Ferris, G. R., & Zinko, R. (2009). The moderating effects of personal reputation on accountability-strain relationships. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 14, 1: 70–83.
61. Laird, M. D., Zboja, J. J., Martinez, A. D., Ferris, G. R. (2013). Performance and political skill in personal reputation assessments. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 28, 6: 661–676.
62. Latham, G. P., & Wexley, K. N. (1977). Behavıoral Observatıon Scales For Performance Appraısal Purposes. Personnel Psychology, 30, 2: 255–268.
63. Law, K. S., Wang, H., Hui, C. (2009). Currencies of exchange and global LMX: How they affect employee task performance and extra-role performance. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 27, 4: 625–646.
64. Liden, R. C., Maslyn, J. M. (1998). Multidimensionality of leader-member exchange: An empirical assessment through scale development. Journal of management, 24, 1: 43-72.
65. Liu, J., Siu, O. L., Shi, K. (2010). Transformational leadership and employee well‐being: The mediating role of trust in the leader and self‐efficacy. Applied Psychology, 59, 3: 454-479.
66. Mcdonald, D., Smith, A. (1995). A Proven Connection. Compensation & Benefits Review, 27, 1: 59–64.
67. Mihail, D. M., & Kloutsiniotis, P. V. (2016). The effects of high-performance work systems on hospital employees’ work-related well-being: Evidence from Greece. European Management Journal, 34, 4: 424–438.
68. Motowidlo, S. J., Van Scotter, J. R. (1994). Evidence that task performance should be distinguished from con textual performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79: 475- 480.
69. Mueller, B. H., Lee, J. (2002). Leader-Member Exchange and Organizational Communication Satisfaction in Multiple Contexts. Journal of Business Communication, 39, 2: 220–244.
70. Nielsen, K., Randall, R., Yarker, J., Brenner, S.-O. (2008). The effects of transformational leadership on followers’ perceived work characteristics and psychological well-being: A longitudinal study. Work & Stress, 22, 1: 16–32.
71. Organ, D. W. (1997). Organizational Citizenship Behavior: It’s Construct Clean-Up Time. Human Performance, 10, 2: 85–97.
72. Ostrom, E. (2003). Toward a behavioral theory linking trust, reciprocity, and reputation. In E. Ostrom, J. Walker (Eds.), Trust and reciprocity: Interdisciplinary lessons from experimental research, 19-79.
73. Podsakoff, P. M., Mackenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how tocontrol it.Annual Review of Psychology,63, 539–569.
74. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 5: 879-903.
75. Preacher, K. J., Curran, P. J., Bauer, D. J. (2006). Computational tools for probing interactions in multiple linear regression, multilevel modeling, and latent curve analysis. Journal of educational and behavioral statistics, 31, 4: 437-448.
76. Prowse, P., Prowse, J. (2009). The dilemma of performance appraisal. Measuring Business Excellence, 13; 4: 69-77.
77. Razack, S. S., Upadhya, A. (2017). An Exploratory Study Of Performance Management Systems and Their Influence on Better Performance: A Literature Rewiev, Electronic journal, 1-15.
78. Saffie-Robertson, M. C., Brutus, S. (2014). The impact of interdependence on performance evaluations: The mediating role of discomfort with performance appraisal. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25, 459 – 473.
79. Said, A.A., HassabElnaby, H.R., Wier, B. (2003). An empirical investigation of the performance consequences of nonfinancial measures. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 15: 193-223.
80. Sandt, J., Schaffer, U., weber, J. (2001). Balanced performance measurement systems and manager satisfaction: empirical evidence from a German study.
81. Schleicher, D. J., Baumann, H. M., Sullivan, D. W., Yim, J. (2019). Evaluating the effectiveness of performance management: A 30-year integrative conceptual review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 104, 7: 851–887.
82. Sharma, N., Sharma, T. and Agarwal, M. (2016), Measuring employee perception of performance management system effectiveness: Conceptualization and scale development, Employee Relations, 38, 2: 224-247.
83. Shen, X. L., Li, Y. J., Sun, Y., Chen, Z., Wang, F. (2019). Understanding the role of technology attractiveness in promoting social commerce engagement: Moderating effect of personal interest. Information and Management, 56, 2: 294-305.
84. Shusha, Amir, (2013). The Mediating Role of Leader-Member Exchange in the Relationship between Transformational Leadership and Job performance, European Journal of Business and Management, 5, 8: 157-164.
85. Singh, P., Twalo, T. (2015). Effects Of Poorly Implemented Performance Management Systems On The Job Behavior And Performance Of Employees, International Business & Economics Research Journal, 14, 1: 79-94.
86. Singh, N. P., Hong, P. C. (2020). Impact of strategic and operational risk management practices on firm performance: An empirical investigation. European Management Journal: 1-47.
87. Taylor, M. S., Tracy, K. B., Renard, M., Harrison, J. K., Carroll, S. J. (1995). Due process in performance appraisal: A quasi-experiment in procedural justice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 495–523.
88. Tsui, A. S. (1984). A role set analysis of managerial reputation. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 34, 1: 64–96.
89. Tsui, A.S. (1994). Reputational effectiveness: toward a mutual responsiveness framework. in Staw, B.M. and Cummings, L.L. (Eds). Research in Organizational Behavior, 16: 257- 307.
90. Turulja, L. and Bajgoric, N. (2019). Innovation, firms’ performance and environmental turbulence: is there a moderator or mediator?, European Journal of Innovation Management, 22, 1: 213-232.
91. Vieira, R., O’Dwyer, B., Schneider, R. (2016). Aligning Strategy and Performance Management Systems. Organization & Environment, 30, 1: 3–26.
92. Walumbwa, F. O., Cropanzano, R., Hartnell, C. A. (2009). Organizational justice, voluntary learning behavior, and job performance: A test of the mediating effects of identification and leader-member exchange. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30, 8: 1103–1126.
93. Wang, H., Law, K. S., Hackett, R. D., Wang, D., & Chen, Z. X. (2005). Leader-Member Exchange as a Mediator of the Relationship Between Transformational Leadership and Followers’ Performance and Organizational Citizenship Behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 3: 420–432.
94. Wayne, S. J., Shore, L. M., Liden, R. C. (1997). Perceived Organizational Support And Leader-Member Exchange: A Social Exchange Perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 1: 82–111.
95. Williams, L. J., Anderson, S. E. (1991). Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment as Predictors of Organizational Citizenship and In-Role Behaviors. Journal of Management, 17, 3: 601–617.
96. Williams, J. R., Levy, P. E. (2000). Investigating some neglected criteria: The influence of organizational level and perceived system knowledge on appraisal reactions. Journal of Business and Psychology, 14: 501–513.
97. Zhao, S., Zhang, J., Zhao, W., Poon, T. S. C. (2012). Changing employment relations in China: A comparative study of the auto and banking industries. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23, 10: 2051-2064.
98. Zinko, R., Ferris, G., Blass, F., Laird, M. (2007). Toward a Theory of Reputation in Organizations. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 26: 163–204.
99. Zinko, R., Ferris, G. R., Humphrey, S. E., Meyer, C. J., Aime, F. (2011). Personal reputation in organizations: Two-study constructive replication and extension of antecedents and consequences. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 85, 1: 156–180.
100. Zinko, R., Rubin, M., (2015). Personal reputation and the organization, Journal of Management & Organization, 21, 2: 217 – 236.