Open AccessAre We Collaborating Yet? Employee Assessment of Peer’s Perceptions
Author(s) -
Benjamin Heslop,
Elizabeth Stojanovski,
Jay P. Paul,
Kylie Bailey
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
international journal of human resource studies
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 2162-3058
DOI - 10.5296/ijhrs.v7i4.11818
Subject(s) - psychology , perception , agency (philosophy) , unit (ring theory) , construct (python library) , collegiality , variety (cybernetics) , strengths and weaknesses , repertory grid , applied psychology , profitability index , social psychology , public relations , business , sociology , computer science , political science , pedagogy , social science , mathematics education , neuroscience , artificial intelligence , programming language , finance
Employers rarely utilise their employees’ capacity to assess the collegiality and productivity of their own work unit, yet they are determinants of employee retention and profitability. One reason is the lack of a reliable, valid survey instrument to measure collaboration viability (CoVi), which we postulate is the construct that employees use to implicitly assess their work unit. Inherent weaknesses of own-perception and peer-assessment instruments prevent them reliably measuring CoVi. A novel method overcoming respective deficiencies by combining the strengths of both approaches is proposed that we term peer’s-perception. It is contended that such an instrument may be improved through formulation in accordance with a universal model of collaboration. The model chosen is PILAR as it encapsulates a variety of social and organisational psychology theories. Prospects, involved, liked, agency and respect constitute five Pillars of collaboration (Heslop, Bailey, et al., 2017). Based on this review, we propose a peer’s-perception instrument (Pillar-PP) and that this instrument be formally evaluated.