Premium
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL, PROMOTION AND THE COURTS: A CRITICAL REVIEW
Author(s) -
KLEIMAN LAWRENCE S.,
DURHAM RICHARD L.
Publication year - 1981
Publication title -
personnel psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 6.076
H-Index - 142
eISSN - 1744-6570
pISSN - 0031-5826
DOI - 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1981.tb02181.x
Subject(s) - adjudication , performance appraisal , objectivity (philosophy) , promotion (chess) , psychology , ignorance , critical appraisal , set (abstract data type) , law , political science , management , computer science , epistemology , medicine , philosophy , alternative medicine , pathology , politics , economics , programming language
Twenty‐three Title VII court cases were reviewed in order to determine the standards set by the courts in their assessment of performance appraisal systems when used as the basis for promotion decisions. The topics covered were adverse impact determination, the courts' adjudication strategy, and the evidence needed to justify the performance appraisal procedures. Among the major findings was the courts': (1) failure to adhere to the “applicant flow technique” of adverse impact determination, (2) interest in assessing performance appraisal systems regardless of their adverse impact, (3) ignorance regarding acceptable validation procedures, and (4) focus on objectivity in lieu of validity. The discussion offered suggestions to employers for developing a professionally sound and legally defensible appraisal system.