Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Evaluation and Program Planning xxx (2010) xxx–xxx
G Model
EPP-907; No. of Pages 10
War outside, ceasefire inside: An analysis of the performance appraisalsystem of a public hospital in a zone of conflict
Antonio Giangreco a,*, Andrea Carugati b, Antonio Sebastiano c, Hadeel Al Tamimi d
a HEMO - IESEG School of Management, 3, Rue de la Digue, F-59800 Lille, Franceb Aarhus School of Business, University of Aarhus, Fuglesangs Alle 4, 8210 Arhus V, Denmarkc CREMS Centro di Ricerca in Economia e Management in Sanita, Universita Carlo Cattaneo – LIUC, Corso Matteotti, 24, 21053 Castellanza (VA), Italyd UNRWA – Environmental Health Division, Ein Sara St., Hebron (West Bank), Palestine
A R T I C L E I N F O
Article history:
Received 21 October 2010
Accepted 1 November 2010
Keywords:
Performance appraisal system
Palestine
Zone of conflict
Public hospital
A B S T R A C T
Our study examines the use of the performance appraisal system at Hebron Public Hospital (Palestine)
during the second intifada, started in 2000. The aim of the article is to shed light on the reasons behind
the use of performance appraisal systems in organizations operating in zones of conflicts, an area
relatively neglected by HR scholars. To create the theoretical fundament we draw on mainstream
literature on performance appraisal, contextualizing it to the Middle-Eastern context. From the literature
analysis, we identify five guiding logics for the implementation and use of performance appraisal
systems (Appendix A). We use a multi-method approach, qualitative and quantitative, to analyze the
longitudinal performance evaluation data over the period 2000–2002 for about 250 individuals. These
data are complemented with interviews and observations in the field.
Our analysis shows that the trends evidenced in the quantitative analysis are similar to trends evident
in Western contexts. However, these trends were not the consequence of the same five Western logics
found in the literature. The qualitative study allows us to identify two additional logics for making sense
of the performance appraisal system at Hebron Public Hospital: the need to find peace within the
organization (organizational peacefulness logic); and the need to maintain order through the acceptance
of the status quo (dominance logic). These results allow us to draw conclusions for theory and practice of
HR management and to identify useful criteria for doing research in areas of conflicts.
� 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Evaluation and Program Planning
journa l homepage: www.e lsev ier .com/ locate /eva lprogplan
Performance appraisal is a formal organizational processcarried out on systematic basis to provide a comparison betweenthe individual (or group) performance expected and the perform-ance provided, based on objective or subjective elements (Coates,2004; Paneforte, 1999). Performance appraisal has been exten-sively recognized as an essential process for the management anddevelopment of human resources (Eberhardt & Pooyan, 1988; Lee,1985). This importance is not merely attributed to the commonbelief that ‘‘where performance is measured, performanceimproves’’ (McConkie, 1979, p. 33), but also to two very importantarguments. Performance appraisal aims at motivating individualsand at driving their behavior towards the objectives of theorganization (Khoury & Analoui, 2004; West et al., 2002) and hasthe potential to activate a virtuous circle among the other humanresources management operational systems.
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +33 (0)320 545892; fax: +33 (0)320 574855.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (A. Giangreco), [email protected]
(A. Carugati), [email protected] (A. Sebastiano), [email protected]
(H.A. Tamimi).
Please cite this article in press as: Giangreco, A., et al. War outside, ceapublic hospital in a zone of conflict. Evaluation and Program Plannin
0149-7189/$ – see front matter � 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2010.11.004
However, the application of performance appraisal systems(PASs) is neither always smooth, nor necessarily productive. ‘‘It iswidely believed that performance appraisals are prone to bias, thatthey do not demonstrate high levels of accuracy, and that they arenot readily accepted by users’’ (Banks & Roberson, 1985, p. 128). Infact, although appraising is a very natural and frequent activity ofany human being (Wilson & Western, 2000), PASs have, in someoccasions, been linked to increase in dissatisfaction, lack ofmotivation, resistance and refusal especially on the part of theratees1/employees (Kammerlind, Dahlgaard, & Rutberg, 2004;Silverman & Wexley, 1984; Wright, 2004). These problems are dueto either errors in the content of evaluation (e.g. in Banks &Roberson, 1985), or biases in the process of evaluation (e.g. in Ilgen& Favero, 1985). Errors about the content refer to lack ofcustomization (Lee, 1985; Zamutto, London, & Rowland, 1982),or the absence of clear and independent performance dimensions
1 In this paper, we define ratee the person whose performance is rated, while we
call rater the individual who assesses the performance.
sefire inside: An analysis of the performance appraisal system of ag (2010), doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2010.11.004
A. Giangreco et al. / Evaluation and Program Planning xxx (2010) xxx–xxx2
G Model
EPP-907; No. of Pages 10
in favor of an overall impression (Lam & Schaubroeck, 1999;Woehr, 1992). Biases about the process relate to misperceptions ofthe rater coming from a leader-member exchange process (Duarte,Goodson, & Klich, 1993; Ilgen & Favero, 1985; Klaas & DeNisi,1989), or else lack of training of the rater/ratee about the PAS used(Chandra, 2006; Woehr, 1992).
The landscape traced by the theoretical developments up tothis moment is therefore rather controversial, both in thecontent of PASs and in the lack of contextualization beyond thetraditional Western corporate environment. These issues repre-sent a persisting problem both in research and application ofperformance appraisal systems above all in non-Western2 andcrisis contexts.
In order to address these problems, this article describes theexperience in the use of a personnel performance appraisalsystem implemented at the Hebron Public Hospital (HPH),3 inPalestine. The main research question is whether criticalexternal circumstances – e.g. the conflict situation in Hebronduring this research – influence the usage, sense-making andresults of performance appraisal systems. We use a combinationof qualitative and quantitative research methods to provideinformation about what happened and why it happened. Ourdataset is constituted by the outputs of the PAS for almost 250HPH employees, collected longitudinally for three consecutiveyears (2000, 2001 and 2002), along with the support ofqualitative data collected through observations and a series ofsemi-structured interviews. Based on this dataset, our aim istwofold. First, we aim at explaining the trend over the threeyears of observation, and the reasons that determined thoseresults. Second, we seek to contribute an understanding of theguiding logics in the adoption of performance appraisal systemsin the Middle East and in time of conflict.
The article is structured as follows. In the first section, weintroduce the reader to the HPH and the general workingconditions that the medical, paramedical and administrativepersonnel were dealing with in our research setting. Then, inspiredby the debate in the literature on the main logics guiding the use ofPASs with a contextualization for the Middle East and conflictzones (which is fully developed in Appendix A), we presents theresearch methods used in this particular context. After that, wedescribe in details the performance appraisal system used at theHPH, both in terms of content and process. In the second half of thepaper, we present the results, using data normalization andqualitative analysis. We conclude by discussing theoretical andpolicy implications.
1. The research context
Hebron is a city of about 500,000 people located in the 42% ofthe West Bank of Palestine which is controlled by the PalestinianAuthority. There has been international war with Israel for over 40years with the alternation of tough conflicts and retaliations, alsoagainst civilians on both sides, followed by periods of relativeceasefire. In the Palestinian view, the West Bank is occupied byIsrael and has been since 1967, as result of the six-day war. In theIsraeli view, both East Jerusalem (annexed in 1980) and the formerIsraeli–Jordanian (annexed in 1967) do not belong to the WestBank. Israel argues that both are under full Israeli law in contrast tothe 58% of the Israeli controlled West Bank which is under the
2 In countries moving towards market economy, many organisations are willing
to apply Western HRM practices for enhancing competitiveness and facing
globalization (Thang, Rowley, Quang, & Warner, 2007).3 We would like to thank both the Health Ministry and the top management of
the hospital for authorising the use of the HPH data. We would like to express our
gratitude to the managers, doctors, nursing staff, technicians and administrative
staff of the Hebron Public Hospital for their help and support to this study.
Please cite this article in press as: Giangreco, A., et al. War outside, ceapublic hospital in a zone of conflict. Evaluation and Program Plannin
Israeli ‘Judea and Samaria Civil Administration’, even if this has notbeen accepted by any other country.4
In addition, starting in 2006, there has been an interscenewarfare between Fatah, a major Palestinian political party and asignificant section of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO),and Hamas, an Islamist organization and political party that, sincethe last elections in 2006, has the majority of the elected legislativecouncil of the Palestinian Authority. As latest consequence, theWest Bank is controlled by Fatah and the Gaza Strip by Hamas.5
On the ground, the day-to-day conflict produces major effectson the quality of Palestinian daily life. For example, the mobility ofPalestinians within the West Bank is considerably limited by thepresence of Israeli check points and subjected to Israeli authorityapproval. Sometimes, public buildings are the target of militaryactions and occupations causing disruptions and suspensions ofpublic services for several weeks (e.g. Polytechnic of Hebron in2003).
This conflict has also clear and powerful consequences for thefunctioning and the development of the Hebron Public Hospital(HPH). The HPH, being the only public medical treatment facility inthe area, is definitely inadequate and under-structured for the sizeof the Hebron population. In fact, at the time of the data collection,in 2004, the HPH had a capacity of 147 beds. The average level ofbed occupation was 107%, with a peak of 197% in the maternityward. Some quantitative information relative to 2004 mightprovide an idea of the volume and complexity of services provided:26,932 patients treated representing 23% of total interventions ofpublic hospitals in the West Bank; 6273 births being 25% of allbirths in the West Bank; 4149 surgeries with total anesthesia; 600dialyses per month on 13 machines; 131,000 day-hospitalsurgeries corresponding to 21% of those done in the West Bank;and 10,000 interventions in emergency room.
In the last few years, the HPH has planned a development planfor getting closer to Western standards. The main upgrading from147 beds to 300 beds includes the following steps: the opening ofthe intensive care unit with 10 beds; the opening of a unit forhematic pathologies and thalassemia with 4 beds; expansion of thedialysis unit with 5 new machines for children; 15,000 m2 with 12beds in the emergency room, 15 new beds in the maternity ward,18 other beds in the cancer care unit; 7000 m2 with 35 beds inpediatrics, 15 incubators and additional 35 beds in the maternityward.
The workforce counted 335 employees, of which 29 specializeddoctors, 36 resident doctors, 147 nursing staff, 45 technicians and78 administrative staff. According to an organizational analysisdeveloped by its top management, the HPH was understaffed andneeded other 10 specialized doctors, 15 resident doctors and 50additional nursing staff.
The HPH has a structure that recalls a functional professionalstructure, which is a classic for hospitals. It is characterized, in fact,by the presence of several staff units (techno-structures andservices) that provide auxiliary support to the line units (depart-ments). The latter develop the professional activities according tothe different specializations. The priority is to encourage thedecisional and operative autonomy of each line unit. The careerpath of staff and line employees are autonomous. The generaldirector and the deputy general director of the HPH, like all theother public hospitals in Palestine, are appointed by the HealthMinister. In Palestine, these top managerial positions are alwaysoffered to doctors and never to managers, a scenario that oftenoccurs in Western countries.
In Palestine, war-like conditions have been deteriorating sinceSeptember 2000, when the conflict, the so called second intifada,
4 Source: Wikipedia.5 Source: Wikipedia.
sefire inside: An analysis of the performance appraisal system of ag (2010), doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2010.11.004
A. Giangreco et al. / Evaluation and Program Planning xxx (2010) xxx–xxx 3
G Model
EPP-907; No. of Pages 10
restarted after six years of relative ceasefire. These circumstancescannot be ignored in analysis of the HPH context, not only for thegeneral worsening of the economic conditions of the area,6 but alsobecause they determine two specific elements of complexity forthe performance assessment experience. The first has tangiblenature and refers to the limits on the circulation of goods andpeople. Such a constraint often determines lack or delay in thedelivery of medicinal and health materials and supports, thereforespoiling performances and services. The second has a moreintangible and refers to the general level of well being of theindividuals at work. In these conditions, in fact, we may expect thatpeople experiencing a general lack of freedom and physicalmobility in their daily life, will suffer of mental stress and overalllack of serenity (Giacaman et al., 2007). As a consequence, it islikely that people would concentrate more on basic needs, ratherthan on the appliance of advanced tools of human resourcemanagement policies.
2. Researching in a conflict zone
As noted, the purpose of this study was to explain the trend of aPAS adopted by the Hebron Public Hospital in the triennium 2000–2002 and to understand the guiding logics of such practice in anorganization operating in an area of conflict. Indeed, the researchwas focused by this question: how war-like conditions affect theusage, sense-making and results of performance appraisalsystems?
In non-conflict zones, we usually go about doing a PAS studyusing either quantitative research techniques (e.g. West et al.,2002), or qualitative techniques (Redman, Snape, Thompson, &Yan, 2000). A combination of techniques (Snow & Thomas, 1994) is,instead, appropriate in our case because of our interest for whathappened with PAS and why it happened. The main differencebetween carrying out research in stable environments and inconflict zones, is the extent to which is possible to plan the datacollection. In Hebron, the conflict was omnipresent and showeditself in several ways. In fact, apart from the indirect servicesdisruption coming from the difficult external conditions abovementioned (illness prevention is very difficult to put in place), thenumber of war related fatalities and injuries7 generated additionaltension to an already overstressed hospital. Occasionally, Israelisoldiers even entered into the hospital in search of woundedPalestinian military activists in violation of human rights conven-tions.8
Despite these difficulties, research in contexts characterized byconflict has to adhere to the same standard and procedure oftraditional research. However some adaptations have to beconsidered to gain access to data while maintaining rigor. Thereare four main issues to consider when researching in conflictzones: access, entrance, opportunity, and attachment.
Access to the data is extremely complex in zones of conflict.Access requires careful planning and long time frames. Withrespect to traditional organizational research, access is not byrequest from the researcher side but by invitation. This requiresthe researcher to work on the possibility to get the invitation ratherthan to seek access directly.
Entrance refers to the physical access to the research site.Conflict zones are not easily accessible so travel arrangements haveto be made specifically for the occasion. For example, when one theauthors was in Palestine also to carry out this research, the
6 For further information on the economic situation of Palestine, see, for example,
Esim and Kuttab (2001) and Al-Rimmawi, 2003.7 For detailed statistics please refer to B’TSELEM The Israeli Information Center
for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories (www.btselem.org).8 Please refer to the International Middle East Media Center (www.inemc.org) on
Saturday the 29th of December 2009.
Please cite this article in press as: Giangreco, A., et al. War outside, ceapublic hospital in a zone of conflict. Evaluation and Program Plannin
mobility was provided by vehicles belonging to the United Nationsor to Italian Consulate for security reasons.
Opportunity refers to the way in which data can be collected.Conflict zones are inherently unstable and shifty and therefore – aswe learned the hard way – specific research designs do not hold.Data has to be collected with a high degree of opportunism andflexibility. The main idea behind data collection in conflict zones istriangulation. Data may come from a class discussion, a formalinterview, an informal dinner, a discussion while queuing at acheck point, or while observing the ruins of the city. Thisopportunistic form of data collection has to be balanced by astrong focus on triangulation. If today we discuss performanceswith a doctor during a formal interview, we need to do the sametomorrow with a nurse maybe during lunch. One main trait ofpeople working in conflict zones is that they like, and maybe need,to externalize their experiences and worries so discussions areeasy.
Finally when doing this type of research, it is very easy to feelsympathy for the people in the organization. One tends to developan attachment with them and this skews the data analysis. Wehave tackled this issue, which is not uncommon in ethnographicresearch (Emerson, Fretz, & Shaw, 1995), in two ways: first byallowing some time to pass between the data collection and theanalysis and secondly by giving the analysis of the qualitative datato a researcher that was not present on location during datacollection.
2.1. Research methods
Given these limitations, for this research we collected differentforms of data: performance evaluations questionnaires, formal andinformal interviews data, and observations.
The quantitative data collection included the performanceevaluations of the HPH employees for three consecutive years(2000, 2001, and 2002). We collected the evaluation results forthe totality of the personnel evaluated which increased slightlyin the three years under exam from 218, to 256, to 281 (thequestionnaires are shown in Appendices B and C). The results ofthe evaluation questionnaires have been provided by the HRMdepartment of HPH and cover five personnel categories:specialized doctors, resident doctors, nursing staff, techniciansand administrative staff. For these data we computed theaverage scores and standard deviations (Appendix D) and thefrequency analysis (see histograms in Appendix E) which werecarried out for each professional profile, and per year, thereforeproviding a picture of the evolution of the appraisals over time.Aiming to highlight eventual differences among categories, wehave normalized the values per category not uniformly in theinterval [0,1], in order to make the cross comparison moreeffective (Serati & Zucchetti, 2003). The normalization procedurewas as follows:
Indji ¼ Valji�Mini Valji
Maxi Valji�Mini Valji
Qualitative data have instead been collected to understand whycertain usage patterns emerged (Barley, 1996). In particular wewanted to understand if – in conflict zones – the rational to use PASdiffers from Western contexts (see logics in Appendix A). Thedifferent qualitative data focused on different issues. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 representativesof the five personnel categories in June 2004 and with a follow-upin January 2005. These interviews focused on five main areas: thelived history with the appraisal system, the achievements of thehospital in its recent history, the interviewees’ point of view on theappraisal system quantitative results, the major problems and
sefire inside: An analysis of the performance appraisal system of ag (2010), doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2010.11.004
A. Giangreco et al. / Evaluation and Program Planning xxx (2010) xxx–xxx4
G Model
EPP-907; No. of Pages 10
obstacles lived in the area and in the hospital. To increase opennessand loquacity, some of the interviews were carried out by one ofthe authors with the knowledge of the local language and latertranscribed and translated into English (Kvale, 1996). Furthermore,another author taught a six-day course in June 2004 to themanagement of HPH on managerial tools, among which the usageof appraisal systems. On that occasion, the researcher carried outintensive discussions on the topic with representatives of allpersonnel categories. As it is common practice (Emerson et al.,1995), these discussions were subsequently transcribed to the bestmemory of the author. The time passed between the jotting downof the discussion notes and the time of execution of this research (3years) should be beneficial to the research as it eliminate biasesderived by emotional involvement (Emerson et al., 1995). The timeelapsed from the data collection to the research write-up is notinstead going to affect the results since we are interested in thereasons for adoption and use of PAS under conflict conditions sothe main concern is on collecting the data while conflict is on-goingand not on collecting recent data.
Since the purpose of the qualitative study was to understandthe specific logics of an appraisal system in conflict zones, wedecided not to use the known logics as framework for data analysis.We used instead grounded theory techniques (Strauss & Corbin,1997) to make new categories emerge. We performed contentanalysis of the transcriptions (Agrawal, Kishore, & Rao, 2006).Content analysis helps to let new categories emerge from thecollected statements. This would allow for the emergence of newlogics side by side with the known logics.
We took several steps to prevent the data coding from beinginfluenced by the attachment problem explained above. First,the coding was carried out by a researcher not used to work withevaluation. After this phase, the coding scheme was developed.In a second step the texts were re-coded by a second person,with the coding scheme at hand, to test for stability andreliability. The second coder had experience human resourcemanagement and public work. Following Agrawal et al. (2006),we used Cohen’s Kappa coefficient to test for inter-coderagreement. The Kappa coefficient was 0.78 allowing us toconsider high agreement between coders and therefore thecodes as valid.
The qualitative and quantitative results will be exposed in thefollowing sections in a complementary fashion to provide animmediate and complete understanding of usage and reasons forthe appraisal system at HPH.
3. The performance appraisal system at the HPH
The performance appraisal system adopted by the HebronPublic Hospital in the period of observation (2000, 2001 and 2002)has been used for the majority of employees belonging to the fivemain professional families: specialized doctors, resident doctors,nursing staff, technicians and administrative staff. The PAS has notbeen autonomously designed by the HPH, but it was inspired byprinciples and guidelines of the Palestinian Health Ministry. Thesystem has a yearly basis, although intermediate appraisals aredone by semester. The performance appraisal is formalized in thefirst two weeks of January of the following year through anindividual interview. In this section, we are going to present thecontent and the process of the PAS at HPH.
3.1. The content of the performance appraisal system at the HPH
The performance appraisal system at the HPH is based on twoevaluation tools: a detailed form appraising the strengths/weaknesses for each employee (Appendix B) and a syntheticevaluation form identifying recommendations (Appendix C). Both
Please cite this article in press as: Giangreco, A., et al. War outside, ceapublic hospital in a zone of conflict. Evaluation and Program Plannin
forms are stored by the HRM department in the historical dossier ofpersonnel.
In the first form (Appendix B), the appraisal is expressed interms of points (on 100 points base) on attitudinal/behavioraldimensions. It considers four different dimensions: first, produc-tivity which includes general comprehension of the job, speed,accuracy (max 10 points each) and efficiency (max 20 points);second, commitment expressed in negative terms which com-prises absence, lateness and laziness (5 points each, overall 15points); third, behavior which covers team work, cooperation andpersonality (5 points each, overall 15 points); last, personal skillswhich consider planning, adaptability, assumption of responsibil-ities and decisions, and ability to organize work (5 points each,overall 20 points). As it is clearly indicated in this form, theappraisal should be done by the direct superior, the GeneralDirector of the Ministry and also the Health Minister or DeputyMinister, although not all of them are really in the practicalconditions to evaluate the performance of each employee.
The second form (Appendix C) displays a qualitative evaluationon 8 dimensions. The 8 appraisal dimensions may be classified in 3sub-groups: relational area, technical area and normative behav-ior. In the relational area we find relationships with colleagues,with direct supervisor, with the public (patients and their families)and courtesy indicator; in the technical area we have accuracy,abilities in the performance development and quality of achievedresults; as a normative behavior we refer to the respect of workschedule. Evaluations are scored on a five-point Likert scalesmeasuring the qualitative appraisal with the dimension inquestion (excellent, very good, good, sufficient, insufficient). Inthe second part of the form, there is a second box devoted to theconsequences of the appraisal process, with four different optionalrecommendations: the first is the renewal of the contract; thesecond one relates to the end of the probation period and thechange into a permanent status; the third one refers to the requestof a further appraisal; the fourth relates to the promotion of theperson. Furthermore, the form leaves some room for comments. Atthe bottom of the form, the signatures of the raters – the directsupervisor, the Head of Department, the Administrative Directorand the General Director – are required, although, de facto, theappraisal is done by the direct supervisor and the Head of theDepartment.
3.2. The process of the performance appraisal system at the HPH
The dynamics of the performance appraisal system at the HPHfollow the guidelines most popular among Western organizations,even though there are some peculiar aspects that deserveattention.
As first step, using the first form (Appendix B), the appraisal isdone by the direct supervisor. A higher institutional level comesinto play when the General Director of the Ministry and, in asecond moment, the Health Minister (or Deputy Minister), areformally involved in the process. For instance, the appraisal of anurse is done first by the head of the nursing department, then bythe General Director of Ministry and the Health Minister (orDeputy Minister). The involvement of the political authority is avery uncommon procedure according to Western standardsbecause it is usually expected that political power will notinterfere with managerial decisions. As a matter of fact, the role ofthe political authority has a formal nature, rather than a practicalfunction, and concerns mostly the management of cases whereperformances are negative. In fact, even if the final performanceappraisal score should be the average of the three differentassessment scores, in practice, the appraisal done by the directsupervisor is confirmed by the other two raters. However, theparticipation of the political authority may give an idea of the
sefire inside: An analysis of the performance appraisal system of ag (2010), doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2010.11.004
Table 1Representation of average performance at HPH per professional profile (2000-01-02).
65,00
70,00
75,00
80,00
85,00
90,00
2000 2001 2002
specialised doctorsresident doctorstechniciansadministrative staffnursing staff
Table 2Normalization of average performance at HPH (2000-01-02).
-0,3000
-0,1000
0,1000
0,3000
0,5000
0,7000
0,9000
1,1000
2000 2001 2002
specialised doctorsresident doctorstechniciansadministrative staffnursing staff
A. Giangreco et al. / Evaluation and Program Planning xxx (2010) xxx–xxx 5
G Model
EPP-907; No. of Pages 10
degree of centralization of the political leadership style at the timeof the observation.
The output of the first evaluation form is the input for thesecond one (Appendix C). In fact, on the basis of the scores, acommittee composed by the direct supervisor, the Head of theDepartment, the Administrative Director and the General Directorof the HPH assesses the eight dimensions in the second form. Thiscommittee decides (where applicable) whether the employeeshould receive a renewal of the contract, be confirmed, promotedor re-assessed in a shorter period. Continuing with the example ofthe nurse, the second appraisal will practically be done by theNursing Coordinator, the Head of the Nursing Department, theAdministrative Director and the General Manager of the HPH.
The most important and evident characteristic of the HPHperformance appraisal is the lack of connection with theremuneration policies. The informative output coming from theappraisal system is oriented to the mid-long term. Based on amulti-annual trend, it represents the principal input for decisionsabout career development.
The iter that the HPH activates in presence of negativeperformances deserves some attention. In fact, once the negativeperformance is observed, the organization intensifies the frequen-cy of the appraisal going from the yearly and semester basis, downto a quarterly basis. The philosophy behind this is very interesting.In fact, the objective is not to retrace the responsibility to theindividual, but to really understand whether there is space forimproving the contextual conditions to support the performanceamelioration. After one year, if the process ascertains anincompatibility between the worker and the hospital, the healthministry is called to find a new organization for the worker.Moreover, if the performance persists at insufficient levels, asimilar procedure could end up in a unilateral termination of theemployment. However, in the observation period this proceduredid not occur.
4. The results of the performance appraisal system
The results of the performance appraisal at HPH are representedthrough the histograms of means and standard deviations(Appendices D and E). Means are expressed in hundredths.
In 2000 (218 observations), the mean is 74 and the SD is 7.79.The distribution is symmetrical and approximately normal aroundthe third quartile (75), with a range between 53 and 93. Thefrequency analysis reveals that the aggregate at 50% falls between73 and 74, therefore the median is almost coincident with theaverage. The symmetric drag of the Gaussian curve on the thirdquartile is a very common phenomenon in the public sector, giventhat values in the first and second quartile would be considered asa punishment or a manifestation of prejudice (Mastrogiuseppe,2004). Therefore, the real appraisal scale is between 50 and 100,area in which the appraisals distribution resembles a normal curve.In 2001 (256 observations), the mean is 73.2 and the SD is 7.65 in arange between 61 and 92. The distribution is very similar to the oneof 2000, and then we can extend those observations to the year2001. In 2002 (281 observations), the mean (77) and the SD (8.09),in a range between 70 and 95, reveal a more narrow distributiondragged up towards higher values. Table 1 summarizes theappraisal trend segmented by professional profiles (specializeddoctors, resident doctors, administrative staff, technicians, andnursing staff).
Two main phenomena deserve further explanations. First, theabove mentioned order shows an increase in the average appraisalvalues per category and per year. In fact, specialized doctors showthe highest average and nursing staff show the lowest one. It iscommon belief at HPH that the performances of specializeddoctors will be better than those of resident doctors, which will be
Please cite this article in press as: Giangreco, A., et al. War outside, ceapublic hospital in a zone of conflict. Evaluation and Program Plannin
better than those of technicians, which in turn will be better thanthose of administrative staff, which finally will be better thanthose of nursing staff. Although this vision is strongly debatable, itmay find an explanation in the fact that the appraisal tool at HPH isuniversal for every category without any customization. There is alack of customization not only in the appraisal dimensions, butalso in the weight attributed to each of them. In this way,heterogeneous performances are compared with the erroneouscommon beliefs that the higher the status the better theperformance.
Second, the only exception to this trend is the appraisal ofadministrative staff that shows the highest average value in 2000and 2001. Moreover, in general terms, we may observe that itsvalues are almost constant over the analyzed period. This ispartially explainable by the fact that sense of belonging to anorganizational unit or a professional family, in professionalstructures like hospitals, is stronger between line people, ratherthan staff. Therefore, it is more likely that both inflation andleveling off of performance appraisal will occur among the former,rather than the latter (Giovannetti, 2003).
4.1. A further analysis: the normalization of results
Aiming to make the comparison more effective, we havedeveloped the normalization of values per category (not uniform-ly) in the interval [01]. The analysis compares the appraisals of the5 professional families of HPH, longitudinally in the triennium2000–2002 (Table 2). It is worth noting that the trend issubstantially homogeneous for all categories over the triennium.In 2000, the values are quite diversified, while in 2001, there is a
sefire inside: An analysis of the performance appraisal system of ag (2010), doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2010.11.004
Table 3Normalization of performance standard deviations at HPH (2000-01-02).
-0,2000
0,0000
0,2000
0,4000
0,6000
0,8000
1,0000
1,2000
2000 2001 2002
specialised doctorsresident doctorstechniciansadministrative staffnursing staff
A. Giangreco et al. / Evaluation and Program Planning xxx (2010) xxx–xxx6
G Model
EPP-907; No. of Pages 10
general tendency to decline, due to a higher knowledge of theappraisal tool. In 2002, there is a general augmentation of values.The normalization of SD (Table 3) displays lower levels of SD andhigher concentration of performance values. If put together,normalized higher values and lower SD may demonstrate thepresence of conciliatory behaviors, rather than growth ofperformance (Mastrogiuseppe, 2004).
The category of resident doctors shows instead a growing trendof normalized SD towards a more spread distribution. This is theeffect of changes in performance values both in positive (10 cases)and negative (2 cases) direction.
On the whole, over the first three years of application of the PASat HPH, it is possible thus to observe a trend of inflation andleveling off of performance appraisal results. This tendency is,indeed, common in hospitals and, more in general, in organizationsbelonging to the public sector. However, the very particularcontext in which the Hebron Public Hospital operates – a war-likesituation – and the related constraints and complexities providedus room for further investigation and analysis.
5. Interpreting the results
The discussions we had with the personnel of the HPH canilluminate the reasons behind the results of the appraisal systemdescribed above. The employees were quite in agreement injustifying the planning and selection of the appraisal systemaccording to the five traditional logics (control, continuity,formality, information and motivation) presented in Appendix A.This is in fact in line with the timing of the planning decision, in aperiod of relative peace, before the re-explosion of the conflict inthe year 2000. In this situation, a performance appraisal systemthat would further professionalize the organization could easily beaccepted.
When the system was introduced we thought that it was a way to
shelter ourselves from the politics of this organization. . . it was an
opportunity for emancipation (nurse, discussion in class).
However the fall back into conflict caused a change in thereasons of use of the appraisal system. The first to fall were the verylogics behind the decision for the implementation of the system.
Most strikingly, the first logic to fall was the motivation one,which is the pillar of the assessment movement. For the motivationlogic to work there is the need for availability of resources todistribute to the best performers. But HPH operated belowacceptable standards in many areas and the available resources
Please cite this article in press as: Giangreco, A., et al. War outside, ceapublic hospital in a zone of conflict. Evaluation and Program Plannin
were channeled into infrastructural and instrumental improve-ments. So, while the motivation logic would like to see rewardedthe people with high scores, this was not possible and the highscores for certain categories came from the implicit assumptionthat higher education also means higher performance. Indeed, overthe years specialized doctors were rated higher than otheroccupational groups. When asked about the reasons behind thisevaluation disparity the most common answer was:
It is obvious that a doctor scores higher since he is the one with the
higher education (Nurse, discussion in class).
Imputing the high scores to education instead of to skillseliminates the motivation logic instituting a dominance logic in itsstead. The dominance logic is a logic that, for the same type ofevaluation as the motivation logic, furthers the status quo insteadof evolution. The dominance logic reflects the need for stabilityprovided by the hierarchy.
The control logic also decreased its influence very rapidly afterthe beginning of the conflict. For the control logic to work there is theneed that a certain disciplinary action can be executed. Ultimatelythe most extreme disciplinary action can be the removal of theemployee from the organization. However this was not happening inHPH. The conflict surrounding the organization was already causingenough to be removed (permanently) from this earth. So thispractice was not used and since the promotion practice was also rarethe control logic ceased to function.
It is very very rare that a contract is not renewed . . . otherwise
where do you think these guys will find another job? (Specialized
doctor, head of a department, interview).
Despite observing the breakdown of the traditional logics, weidentified statements about the appraisal system that would not fitany logic. These were not statements about the organizational useof the individual scores, but rather about the individual use of theorganizational scores. In other words, the fact that the scores wereincreasing year by year across all professional groups, created inthe individual a sense of purpose and belonging. As a nurse put it:
I received higher evaluations this year than last year and for what I
know the same has happened for almost everybody in my unit. We
celebrated this . . . we ate too much cake . . . [laughs] (Nurse,
discussion in class).
This statement from the nurse finds parallels in otheroccupational groups. The main purpose of the appraisal systemseems to become a conveyor of happiness, at least in the case of thenurses or, in any case, of peace and quite. As a doctor said:
My dear friend, do you think we want this evaluation system to
cause stress and strain in the organization? Don’t you think we
have enough of that outside? (Doctor, private conversation).
The idea of using the appraisal system – which by definition ofthe five logics can be quite stressful – as a creator of internal peacewas shared across hierarchical levels. In particular – and this isextremely important – this idea was clear and shared by the peoplethat were appointed to carry out the evaluation.
The people here are subjected to enough rough conditions in their
everyday lives to be able to cope with more of that inside. At least
between us we can have a bit of peace. (Senior Nurse Coordinator,
interview)
Even though the employees did not discuss these ideas in anopen debate, they all agree in stating a very simple truth: that withthe right amount of humanity, savoir fair and flexibility, it is
sefire inside: An analysis of the performance appraisal system of ag (2010), doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2010.11.004
A. Giangreco et al. / Evaluation and Program Planning xxx (2010) xxx–xxx 7
G Model
EPP-907; No. of Pages 10
possible to take an instrument of evolution and strain, andtransform it into an instrument of peace and quite. We will call thislast logic for the use of a performance appraisal system in a conflictzone as: organizational peacefulness logic. The organizationalpeacefulness logic is the need for an organization to create apleasant environment for its employees to shelter them from thetragic events happening outside the walls of the organization. Thisconclusion is in line with the results of Giacaman et al. that ‘‘. . .
social networks function to protect individuals in lieu of socialsecurity systems’’ (2007, p. 77).
These new logics of dominance and organizational peacefulnesslive in symbiosis with the official exposed logics. In reality, noorganization can justify the decision to implement an appraisalsystem based on the two logics evidenced by this study. The otherlogics are needed to give to the implementation decision the auraof rational decision. What happens in reality is that the fiveWestern logics (presented in Appendix A) opened up for theemergence of other logics that are contextually dependent and thatturned out to be the dominance logic and the organizationalpeacefulness logic in this study.
6. Discussion
Our research partially confirms previous studies in the area ofperformance evaluation. In particular, the guiding logics forimplementing the performance appraisal system at HPH are thesame as we would expect in other Western organizations in time ofpeace. The quantitative results also show similar trends to resultsthat are known from previous studies. The inflation and leveling offof performances founded at HPH are in line with Fried, Levi, Ben-David, and Tiegs (1999) and Mastrogiuseppe (2004). However,when we move beyond the numbers and the traditional exposedlogics (of Western origin), and we try to understand the logics inactions, we obtain a very different picture from the one we wouldexpect in a Western organization. While in non-crisis zones, weexpect evaluation to be linked to motivation, control, improvementand social rising, in conflict zones the picture of why and howperformance appraisal systems are used is much richer andcomplex.
Maybe the main conclusion of our study is that in order to havean appraisal system that works according to the Western logics,you need to be in a condition of peace inside, as well as outside theorganization. If an organization is under the constant threat ofmilitary actions, if the supplies are in constant danger of notarriving, if the employees experience problems of mobility on theterritory, there is little chance that a performance appraisal systemwould motivate or control people.
Our study has proven exactly this point: when there is a waroutside, we need ceasefire inside. At HPH, the implementationdecision was taken before the conflict re-started, so the logicsapplied were those of motivation, control, continuity, formality,and information (Appendix A). One could ask why is controlneeded when there is no freedom, why continuity when thehope for tomorrow is fragile, why formality when standardizationis low and improvisation is high, why information where thereis no fairness, why motivation when additional remunerativeresources are inexistent? The five logics presented in Appendix Aare very normal in Western public and private organizations bothin the planning phase (why should we do it?) and in the usagephase (why do we do it?). However, Fried et al. (1999) andMastrogiuseppe (2004) proved that planning logics and usagelogics can be at odds. Since in zones of conflict the basics uponwhich organizations function are very different from peacefulzones, then we wanted to investigate if and how different logicsemerge in conflict zones. Since the beginning of the conflict, thelogic in use has been instead for the conservation of the status
Please cite this article in press as: Giangreco, A., et al. War outside, ceapublic hospital in a zone of conflict. Evaluation and Program Plannin
quo through the organizational peacefulness and dominancelogics.
6.1. Theoretical implications
The results of our study point at some theoretical implications.First, scores and trends of performance appraisal systems in time ofpeace and in time of war show the same phenomena of inflationand leveling off. However, this happens for different reasons, giventhat the leading logics refer to the need for establishing a peacefulenvironment inside the organization as a form of counter-balancewith the war-like conditions outside the organization. In fact, it isan established fact that strong social support mechanisms areespecially important in times of conflict (Giacaman et al., 2007).Furthermore, the dominance logic and organizational peacefulness
logic ensure the function and progress of the organization. Thepeacefulness logic in an organization without hierarchy wouldresult in anarchy because there would be no respect of roles andtherefore no control.
Second, our results contribute to the debate of what char-acterizes failure or success of a PAS. While the HPH performanceappraisal system would be considered as a failure according toWestern standards, and a success for HPH employees, our researchpropose a way for conciliation. Success and failure depend, in fact,on the dominating logic active in a specific context. At HPH, theywere able to enhance the well being of employees and to relive partof the stress coming from objectively difficult working and livingconditions. Therefore, albeit in an untraditional way, the perform-ance appraisal system has contributed to the maintenance ofcertain level of standards, if not even to the improvement of thelevel of services.
Finally, these conclusions were reachable only through thecombination of quantitative and qualitative research methodsminding the four research design factors: access, entrance,opportunity, and attachment which characterize research inconflict zones. In fact, while the analysis of the scores wasimportant to understand what happened, the content analysiswas helpful to gain an understanding of why certain occurrencestook place. In critical conditions such as war-like situations, infact, our results justify the use of open-ended research methodslike content analysis. This is because standard Westerncorporate frameworks may lack the necessary explanatorypower to understand phenomena for which they were notdesigned.
6.2. Policy implications
The results of our study allow us to distil specific advices forfuture implementers along two lines of action. The first refers tothe qualitative improvement, from the point of view of the fiveWestern guiding logics (control, continuity, formality, informationand motivation), of the assessing tool and process used at HPH. As amatter of fact, there are three potential areas of improvement formanagement: (i) the introduction of some objective data on theservices provided by the organizational units and individuals; (ii)the need to customize the assessment tool to the differentprofessional families and profiles; (iii) the streamlining of theassessment process through the involvement of only ratersprofessionally close to the ratee.
The second policy implication regards the consideration thatthe success of a performance assessment system depends on thecontext and, therefore, the guiding logic(s) active in that specificcontext. In this direction, a more customized performanceassessment system would, in war-like situations, achieve thesame results (ceasefire within the organization) obtained by aunified system. For this reason, it would be appropriate for
sefire inside: An analysis of the performance appraisal system of ag (2010), doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2010.11.004
Palestinian National Authority
General Council of Personnel
Annual Report—Year 200_
Health Ministry Department/HPH Name of employee
Current Position Category Supervisor
Areas Dimensions Max
score
Appraisal
Direct
supervisor
General
manager
Health
minister
or deputy
Productivity
(50 points)
General
comprehension
of the job
10
Rapidity 10
Accuracy 10
Efficiency 20
Subtotal 50
(Lack of)
commitment
(15 points)
Absence 7
Lateness 4
Laziness 4
Subtotal 10
Behavior
(15 punti)
Team work 7
Cooperation 4
Personality 4
Subtotal 10
Personal
characteristics
(20 punti)
Planning 5
Adaptability 5
Assumption of
responsibilities
and decisions
5
Ability in
organising work
5
Subtotal 20
Total 100
Signature:
A. Giangreco et al. / Evaluation and Program Planning xxx (2010) xxx–xxx8
G Model
EPP-907; No. of Pages 10
managers in organizations active in war-like situations, to plan andimplement a performance appraisal system that conforms toguiding logics fitting peaceful times, in the hope that the crisissituation will soon end.
7. Study limitations and future research
This study presents two novel reasons – the dominance logic andthe organizational peacefulness logic – for making sense of PASbased on quantitative and qualitative data. While the internalvalidity of the result is considerable, doubts may be raised on theexternal validity given that we have multiple data sets but from asingle organization. While we acknowledge this limitation, we alsopoint out that the results that ‘the context defines the logics’ ishighly portable to other cases. The same is true for the combinationof qualitative and quantitative research as a tool for identifyingemerging logics in use.
Recommendations for future research include three directions:(i) exploring multiple permanent settings in crisis zones tostrengthen the external validity of our results; (ii) conductingresearch on temporary or ephemeral organizations (Lanzara, 1983)not only in war-like situations but also in zones hit byhumanitarian emergencies due to natural disasters; (iii) develop-ing surveys to study systematically the presence of differentevaluation logics in action in zones of conflicts.
8. Conclusions
The present study sought to give a contribution to the analysisof performance assessment systems in a particular context aszones of conflict. Using the scores of the performance assessmentsystem for the personnel of the Hebron Public Hospital(Palestine) collected longitudinally in the triennium 2000–2002, along with interview data and field notes, we haveobtained results that confirm and extend previous research onthe topic.
Similarly to Western organizations, our analysis shows thephenomena of inflation and leveling off in performance assess-ment scores. Through qualitative research methods, we demon-strate that the reasons behind these trends in scores were notlinked to traditional Western guiding logics, but to two new logicsthat we identify in this study: organizational peacefulness logic anddominance logic. These two logics promote harmony through themaintenance of the status quo, indicating that the ceasefire withinthe organization is the most likely response to the conflict outside.This paper carries some significant analytical and practicalimplications for research in conflict zones and it provides avaluable point of departure for future research.
Appendix A. Guiding logics of performance appraisalsystems
Our literature review focused on the reasons behind PAS
implementations has provided us with five main dominating
Western logics: control, continuity, formality, information and
motivation.
Control. Managers use the performance evaluation process as a
means by which to enhance their personal control over employees’
(Klaas & DeNisi, 1989, p. 706). In the Western business culture, the
object of control is generally the individual performance, while the
Arab culture has a tendency to be collective (Zaharna, 1996) and
bureaucratic oriented (Hofstede, 1991).
Continuity. The use of PAS intends to systematize the activity of
evaluation that would otherwise remain concealed and una tantum. In
Please cite this article in press as: Giangreco, A., et al. War outside, ceapublic hospital in a zone of conflict. Evaluation and Program Plannin
Palestine, there is a strong need for continuity of performance
appraisal (Kanan, 2005; Khoury & Analoui, 2004) in a variety of fields
(e.g. Al-Madhoun, 2006; Al-Madhoun & Analoui, 2003, 2004; Al-
Rimmawi, 2003; As-Sadeq & Khoury, 2006; Baidoun, 2003, 2004;
Kanan & Baker, 2006).
Formality. A formal PAS guarantees fairness of the whole process
both for the rate and the rater (Banks & Roberson, 1985; Woehr,
1992). While in the Western culture, the value of formalization is
mainly in rapidity and accuracy, in the Arab culture it is placed on the
respect of rituals and forms (Zaharna, 1996).
Information. The use of PAS is an unrepeatable opportunity for
collecting and exchanging information regarding the employees and
the organization (Costa & Gianecchini, 2005). In the experience of a
Palestinian public university, the PAS helped in maintaining a
communication channel between supervisor and subordinates,
through the clarification and correction of performances (Khoury &
Analoui, 2004).
Motivation. PAS can be implemented for the intrinsic motivating
effect of receiving feedback (Campbell & Lee, 1988). This need is so
felt that often individuals activate a process of self-evaluation
(Mullins, 2007). The difficult war-like conditions of Palestine raise
the problem of the lack of financial resources for reinforcing proper
behaviors of employees (Khoury & Analoui, 2004), through either
additional remuneration, or career opportunity (Najeh & Kara-
Zaitri, 2007).
Appendix B. Quantitative performance appraisal form at theHPH (adapted)
sefire inside: An analysis of the performance appraisal system of ag (2010), doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2010.11.004
A. Giangreco et al. / Evaluation and Program Planning xxx (2010) xxx–xxx 9
G Model
EPP-907; No. of Pages 10
Appendix C. Qualitative performance appraisal form at theHPH (adapted)
Palestinian National Authority
Health Ministry
Hospital Management
Hebron Public Hospital
Employee Appraisal Form
Department Name
Dimensions Appraisal
Excellent Very good Good Suffic. Insuff.
Respect of work schedule
Abilities in the performance
development
Relationship with colleagues
Relationship with direct
supervisor
Accuracy
Quality of achieved results
Relationship with the public (pa
Courtesy
Recommendations
1 Contract renewal
2 Change to a permanent job
3 Further grading
4 Promotion
Comments
Appraisal Committee
Appendix D. Histograms of performance appraisal at HPH(2000-01-02)
Please cite this article in press as: Giangreco, A., et al. War outside, ceapublic hospital in a zone of conflict. Evaluation and Program Plannin
Appendix E. Average and standard deviation per professionalprofile and per year (2000-01-02)
Professional profile 2000 2001 2002 Av. average
Specialized doctors
Average 76.7 75.7 88.1 80.2
SD 8.3 8.4 5.2 7.3
Resident doctors
Average 75.3 75.8 84.5 78.5
SD 7.0 6.7 9.13 7.6
Technicians
Average 74.1 74.4 75.7 74.8
SD 9.2 8.8 8.7 8.9
Administrative staff
Average 77.3 76.1 78.5 77.3
SD 8.7 8.4 8.4 8.5
Nursing staff
Average 71.7 70.6 73.5 71.9
SD 6.2 6.0 4.7 5.6
References
Agrawal, M., Kishore, R., & Rao, H. R. (2006). Market reactions to E-business outsourcingannouncements: An event study. Information & Management, 43, 861–873.
Al-Madhoun, M. (2006). Training under fire—The relationship between obstacles facingtraining and SMEs’ development in Palestine. Journal of European Industrial Train-ing, 30(2), 110–116.
Al-Madhoun, M. I., & Analoui, F. (2003). Managerial skills and SME’s development inPalestine. Career Development, 8(7), 367–379.
Al-Madhoun, M. I., & Analoui, F. (2004). Developing SME managers under fire—Negotiating obstacles and weaknesses in Palestine. Journal of Management Devel-opment, 23(5), 479–495.
Al-Rimmawi, H. A. (2003). Palestinian tourism: A period of transition. InternationalJournal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 15(2), 76–85.
As-Sadeq, H. A., & Khoury, G. C. (2006). Leadership styles in the Palestinian Larhe-scaleindustrial enterprises. Journal of Management Development, 25(9), 832–849.
Baidoun, S. (2003). An empirical study of critical factors of TQM in Palestinianorganizations. Logistics Information Management, 16(2), 156–171.
Baidoun, S. (2004). The implementation of TQM philosophy in Palestinian organiza-tion: A proposed non-prescriptive generic framework. The TQM Magazine, 16(3),174–185.
Banks, C. G., & Roberson, L. (1985). Performance appraisers as test developers. TheAcademy of Management Review, 10(1), 128–142.
Barley, S. R. (1996). Technicians in the workplace: Ethnographic evidence to bring workinto organization studies. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(3), 404–441.
Campbell, D. J., & Lee, C. (1988). Self-appraisal in performance evaluation: Develop-ment versus evaluation. The Academy of Management Review, 13(2), 302–314.
Chandra, A. (2006). Employee evaluation strategies for healthcare organizations—Ageneral guide. Healthcare and Public Policy, 84(2), 34–38.
Coates, G. (2004). En-trusting appraisal to the trust. Gender, Work and Organization,11(5), 566–588.
Costa, G., & Gianecchini, M. (2005). Risorse umane: Persone, relazioni e valore. Milan:McGraw-Hill.
Duarte, N. T., Goodson, J. R., & Klich, N. R. (1993). How do I like thee? Let me appraise theways. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 14(3), 239–249.
Eberhardt, B. J., & Pooyan, A. (1988). The effects of appraisal system redesign onperceptions of and satisfaction with performance appraisal: A quasi-experiment.Journal of Business and Psychology, 3(2), 230–241.
Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (1995). Writing ethnographical fieldnotes.Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press.
Esim, S. & E. Kuttab, (2001). Women’s informal employment in Palestine: Securing alivelihood against all odds. Economic Research Forum Working paper Series 0213.
Fried, Y., Levi, A. S., Ben-David, H. A., & Tiegs, R. B. (1999). Inflation of subordinates’performance ratings: Main and interactive effects of rather negative affectivity,documentation of work behavior, and appraisal visibility. Journal of OrganizationalBehavior, 20(4), 431–444.
Giacaman, R., Mataria, A., Nguyen-Gillham, V., Abu Safieh, R., Stefanini, A., & Chatterji, S.(2007). Quality of life in the Palestinian context: An inquiry in war-like conditions.Health Policy, 81, 68–84.
Giovannetti, R. (2003). La Gestione del Personale nelle Amministrazioni Pubbliche. Milan:Guerini ed Associati.
Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. London:McGraw-Hill.
Ilgen, D. R., & Favero, J. L. (1985). Limits in generalization from psychological researchto performance appraisal processes. The Academy of Management Review, 10(2),311–321.
Kanan, H. M. (2005). Assessing the roles and training needs of educational super-interdents in Palestine. Journal of Educational Administration, 43(2), 154–169.
Kanan, H. M., & Baker, A. M. (2006). Student satisfaction with an educational adminis-tration preparation program—A comparative perspective. Journal of EducationalAdministration, 44(2), 159–169.
sefire inside: An analysis of the performance appraisal system of ag (2010), doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2010.11.004
A. Giangreco et al. / Evaluation and Program Planning xxx (2010) xxx–xxx10
G Model
EPP-907; No. of Pages 10
Kammerlind, P., Dahlgaard, J. J., & Rutberg, H. (2004). Climate for improvement and theeffects on performance in Swedish healthcare—A survey in the county council ofostergotland. Total Quality Management, 15(7), 909–924.
Khoury, G. C., & Analoui, F. (2004). Innovative management model for performanceappraisal: The case of the Palestinian Public Universities. Management ResearchNews, 27(1/2), 56–73.
Klaas, B. S., & DeNisi, A. S. (1989). Managerial reactions to employee dissent: Theimpact of grievance activity on performance ratings. The Academy of ManagementJournal, 32(4), 705–717.
Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thou-sand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage Publications.
Lam, S. K., & Schaubroeck, J. (1999). Total quality management and performanceappraisal: An experimental study of process versus results and group versusindividual approaches. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20(4), 445–457.
Lanzara, G. F. (1983). Ephemeral organizations in extreme environments: Emergence,strategy, extinction. Journal of Management Studies, 20(1), 71–95.
Lee, C. (1985). Increasing performance appraisal effectiveness: Matching task types,appraisal process, and rater training. The Academy of Management Review, 10(2),322–331.
Mastrogiuseppe, P. (2004). Possibilita e Vincoli per una Politica Retributiva nelleAutonomie Locali. Risorse Umane, 1(1), 23–42.
McConkie, M. L. (1979). A clarification of the goal setting and appraisal processes inMBO. The Academy of Management Review, 4(1), 29–40.
Mullins, J. L. (2007). Management and organizational behaviour (8th edn.). EdimburghGate, UK: Prentice Hall; Financial Times.
Najeh, R. I., & Kara-Zaitri, C. (2007). A comparative study of critical quality factors inMalaysia, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Lybia. Total Quality Management &Business Excellence, 18(1&2), 189–200.
Paneforte, S. (1999). La gestione delle persone nell’impresa. Padova: CEDAM.Redman, T., Snape, E., Thompson, D., & Yan, F. K. (2000). Performance appraisal in an
NHS hospital. Human Resources Management Journal, 10(1), 48–62.Serati, M., & Zucchetti, S. (2003). Valutare e Programmare le Politiche di Sviluppo:
Teoria ed Applicazioni. Paper Liuc, 126(10), 1–45.Silverman, S. B., & Wexley, K. N. (1984). Reaction of employees to performance
appraisal interviews as a function of their participation in rating scale develop-ment. Personnel Psychology, 37, 703–710.
Snow, C. C., & Thomas, J. B. (1994). Field research methods in strategic management:Contributions to theory building and testing. Journal of Management Studies, 31(4),457–480.
Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. (1997). Grounded theory in practice. London: Sage Publications.
Please cite this article in press as: Giangreco, A., et al. War outside, ceapublic hospital in a zone of conflict. Evaluation and Program Plannin
Thang, L. C., Rowley, C., Quang, T., & Warner, M. (2007). To what extent can manage-ment practices be transferred between countries? The case of human resourcemanagement in Vietnam. Journal of World Business, 42, 113–127.
West, M. A., Borrill, C., Dawson, J., Scully, J., Carter, M., Anelay, S., et al. (2002). The linkbetween the management of employees and patient mortality in acute hospitals.International Journal of Human Resources Management, 13(8), 1299–1310.
Wilson, J. P., & Western, S. (2000). Performance appraisal: An obstacle to training anddevelopment? Journal of European Industrial Training, 24(7), 384–390.
Woehr, D. J. (1992). Performance dimension accessibility: Implications for ratingaccuracy. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13(4), 357–367.
Wright, R. P. (2004). Mapping cognitions to better understand attitudinal and beha-vioural responses in appraisal research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 339–374.
Zaharna, R. S. (1996). Managing cross-cultural challenges: A pre-k lesson for training inthe Gaza strip. Journal of Management Development, 15(5), 75–87.
Zamutto, R. F., London, M., & Rowland, K. M. (1982). Organization and rater differencesin performance appraisals. Personnel Psychology, 35, 643–658.
Antonio Giangreco is an associate professor of HRM and OB, and head of theManagement Department at IESEG School of Management—Catholic University ofLille (France). His main research interests are in the area of resistance to change,organizational identity, training evaluation and performance assessment systems.
Andrea Carugati, PhD, is an associate professor in MIS at Aarhus School of Business—University of Aarhus (Denmark). His research interests revolve around the behavior ofpeople with information technology, IT-driven change, and information systems inhuman resources.
Antonio Sebastiano is a PhD candidate at Universita’ Carlo Cattaneo LIUC (Italy) andvisiting research fellow at IESEG School of Management (France). At LIUC he alsocoordinates the observatory of retirement houses for the aged, where he conductsresearch in the field of training evaluation, change management and best practicesmainly applied to the health sector.
Hadeel O. Tamimi is an area coordinator at the Environmental Health Division ofUNRWA-WB United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in theNear East.
sefire inside: An analysis of the performance appraisal system of ag (2010), doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2010.11.004
