Assessing the

influential behavioral
factors of performance
management system.

JOURNAL OF STRATEGY &

PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT
January 2015. Volume 3, Issue 1, 4-16.
Article Type: Original Research
Citation: Karim M. O. (2015). Assessing the influential behavioral factors of
performance management systems, Journal of Strategy and Performance
Management, 3(1), 4-16.

Muhammad Omer Karim

Center for Advanced Studies in Engineering, Islamabad.
m.omerkarim@gmail.com

ABSTRACT
Performance Management happened to be the most broken of all the management practices in the
current times (Forbes: Dec, 2012) mainly because of the People, Technology and the relationship
between the two have changed. The study explores the science of Human Behaviors as being an
individual and being part of a socially interactive group. It further bridges these behavioral attributes
with the performance management system. Multi criteria decision making approach was used to rank
the derived attributes in a prioritized manner. Analytical Hierarchy Process, being one of the most
common approach for multi criteria decision making was used to analyze the results attained from data
which was gathered by the head of departments from the understudy organization which currently is
a progressive telecom operator of Pakistan. Changing dynamics of business processes in terms of its
agility, speed, passion and alignment, does not match with the contemporary performance management
systems. The prevalent issue is a question mark not only for the local practitioners, but being taken
seriously at global level. This research aims to contribute positive value for the said issue.
Key words: Individual Behaviors, Group Behaviors, Performance Management System, Contextual
Performance, Analytical Hierarchy Process

INTRODUCTION
Knowledge transfer from academia towards practitioner world does lack for many a reasons, most
prominent of which appeared as the perception developed at the later who envision academic research
as nonconcrete instead of being practical and readily usable (Eastman, 1996). Since Performance
Management is a prevalent organizational practice; authors (Pierce H. A., 2008) suggests that its
practices would benefit from the research originating from the field of organizational behavior - a
thought provoking step in narrowing down the science-practice gap.
The foundations of performance management system can be laid upon behavioral approach, outcome
focused or a combination of both. Performance management at this stage must be differentiated in

comparison to performance appraisal which indeed is a systematic description of employees strengths

and weaknesses (Pierce H. A., 2008).
There are several potential areas within the field of organizational behavior that can influence the design
and implementation of performance management system, these includes and not limited to Social
power, influence & leadership, trust, social exchange, group dynamics & close interpersonal
relationships, negotiation & communication, mentorship.
The central role being played by performance management system in organizations worldwide is more
likely to grow by associating itself in research with the field of organizational behavior, not only that it
will embrace the two fields to grow; it will help in narrowing down the widely documented sciencepractice gap as well (Pierce H. A., 2008).

LITERATURE REVIEW
Since its origin, Science has been evolved unevenly, setting its focus in order to make a healthy, happy
and a productive world; there lies an uncertainty and as a result of 2 world wars in first half of the last
century there has been no further assurance of concluding peace.
The solution to the problem may invite different extreme proposals like abandoning science for the
time being and let the world be driven by opposing means such as arts or religion. A concern however
remains, is it the science that creates problem or its application? It further leads us to see if there exists
any possibility to apply science to human affairs. Circumstances suggest an objectively designed
observation of Human Behavior to understand what it is? Once the understanding is developed only
then it would be possible to plant a sensible course of action.
Science helps us understand the systematic order behind the events, by its very nature it not only assists
in describing them but also helps us in predicting them. With the control of systematic order behind
events; it is certain that future as well is controllable. If such methods are to be applied upon Human
Affairs, we must assume that behavior is lawful and determined. We need to determine those specific
systematic orders or conditions that generate specific behaviors. Once identified, we can forecast the
upcoming actions arising from them.
Behavior is not one of those subjects that became accessible with traditional scientific instruments like
a microscope or a telescope; its a difficult subject matter not because of its inaccessibility but for it
complexity. Since it is a process and not a thing yet it cannot be held still for observations because of
its dynamic capability.
Despite of the fact there exist many objections in the predict and control processes of behaviors, there
are considerable degree of control over many conditions. It is being managed in industries in the form
of wages, in institutions in the form of grades and through police in civil societies and so on. By
analyzing these causes we will be able to predict behavior; exploiting the opportunity, we will become
able to control them (B.F.Skinner, 1965).
One might disagree to the nature or extent of its control upon us but it is obvious. Number of theories
on human behavior has somehow neglected the action of the environment; interpreting behavior under

5


any environment can be tricky e.g. if a child is taught to recognize a red ball and being trained /
conditioned to call it red, he might afterwards call a green ball red as well. As a matter of fact its not
just the color that the child has observed; it was also the size and shape of object that enforced him for
such a call (B.F.Skinner, 1965).
Under the context of psychology, Personality is a dynamic concept that involves growth and
development of whole psychological system. It does not support the fact that how charming a person
may look or the way he smiles.
Gordon Allport defined personality as The dynamic organization within the individual of those
psychophysical systems that determines his unique adjustments to his environment.
For the context of organizational behavior, Stephen P. Robbins defined it as The sum of total ways in
which an individual reacts to and interacts with others; often described in terms of measureable traits
that a person exhibits (Stephen P. Robbins, 2010).
The debate among earlier researchers on personality arguments around the fact whether an individuals
personality possibly an outcome of its heredity or the environment. The differentiation among the two
is not as simple; it so appears as the combination of both. In addition to these two, there may involve a
third factor today; the situation. An individuals personality therefor is an association of both heredity
and the environmental factors, moderated by situational conditions (Robbins, 2001).
There are number of personality attributes that have an influential role on human behaviors of which
they tend to be the powerful predictor within an organization. These are:
x

x
x

6


Locus of Control - It is the self-confidence that lies among the humans, the degree to which
they believe upon the results of their actions. The Internals who believe the outcomes are
within their control and the Externals who believe what happens to them is controlled by
external forces.
Machiavellianism - Machiavellianism (Mach) is the degree to which an individual is pragmatic,
maintains emotional distance and believes that ends can justify means. High-Mach
personalities tend to be more manipulative, possess more wins, less persuaded when compared
to Low-Mach personalities. It is the occupational demands that decide whether a HighMach or a Low-Mach personality suit fit for the desired job.
Self-Esteem - It is the tendency, the degree to which an individual likes or dislikes ones own
self. Individuals with High-Self Esteem tend to take more risk while selecting job; mostly
unconventional ones are adopted, in comparison to the individuals with Low-Self Esteem.
Self-Monitoring - Refers to an individuals ability to display flexibility within their behavior
towards the external, situational factors.
Risk Taking - Every individual possess a unique approach towards assuming or avoiding risks.
For managers, it plays a key role while making decisions. High risk taking individuals used to
make rapid decisions with less information as when compared to low risk taking individuals.
Type A Personality - Characteristics possessed by the individuals that are aggressively involved
to achieve more and more in lesser of time. They measure success materialistically i.e. on the
basis of material things they acquire.

Type B Personality - These individuals acquire characteristics exactly opposite to the Type A
personalities. They do not suffer from a sense of time urgency with its accompanying
impatience and feel no need to discuss their accomplishments unless needed be. They are more
of relaxed personalities and generally the ones that make it on the top of organizational
hierarchies. (Robbins, 2001)

When two or more individuals form a socially recognized association to achieve particular objectives,
they take shape of a group. They can be categorized as Formal Group, generally formed under
organizational hierarchy and Informal Group, these are informally structured, comprise of natural
formations that act in response to the desire of social contact.
Groups contain an organized structure within them; it helps its members in shaping their individual
behaviors along with their performance as a group. Some of these structural variables are:
x

Formal Leadership - Almost every group falls under a formal leadership. Groups success is
very much dependent upon how its leaders engage team members and utilize their potential at
maximum in order to achieve group objectives.
Roles - Every individual in a group is assigned with certain job tasks that are expected to be
accomplished by them and since individuals take part in various groups at the same time, their
roles and associated behaviors fluctuates with respect to that particular group demands.
Norms - Almost every group has certain norms that are the acceptable standards of behavior
shared by groups member. When its agreed upon by the group members, norms act as a means
of inducing behaviors.
Status - Existence of status in our lives plays an important linkage towards the behaviors we
possess. When it comes to groups, Status is a socially defined rank given to a group and its
members by others.
Size - Over the years, numerous researches have taken place towards the identification of
appropriate size for a group to perform in a productive manner. One of the prevalent issues was
to justify the total productivity of the group must equal the total sum of productivity of each
individual.
Composition - The groups in general requires to fulfill tasks that vary in their nature, this require
a group to hold multidimensional skill; various researches thus provides this answer as a
heterogeneous group. Although it may be more conflict laden and expedient as compared to
homogenous groups yet diversity promotes conflict, which stimulates creativity and leads to
improved decision making.
Cohesiveness - It refers the degree to which group members remain attracted to one another
and remain motivated to stay and work together as a group. Various studies have revealed the
relationship between the group cohesiveness and developed norms over its productivity; only
if both are high the output will be the highest (Robbins, 2001).

Since its origin; most organizations are now using a performance management system but how well it
is being used? What benefits have companies drawn from it? De Waal (Waal, 2004) in his recent studies
answers it as Behavioral Factors involved in the development, implementation and use of
performance management system. Of all the management practices in an organization; Performance
Management happened to be the most broken of all (Vorhauser-Smith, 2012). Changing dynamics of

7


business processes in terms of its agility, speed, passion and alignment does not match with the
contemporary performance management systems (Berson, 2013).
Performance management today enforce employees contribution in achieving organizational
objectives; systems that failed to do so are not considered to be a true performance management system,
it must not be confused with the performance appraisal system that involves employee evaluation
conducted once a year. Performance management therefore is a continuous process of identifying,
measuring and developing the performance of individuals and teams and aligning performance with the
strategic goals of the organization. (Aguinis, 2009)
Performance management is a continuous ongoing process and not just once in a year activity, with an
effective performance management system intact to an organization, strategic, administrative,
informational, developmental, organizational maintenance and documentation purposes can be served
in an effective and efficient manner.
Performance happened to be multidimensional; Task performance that focus over the activities which
involve transformation of raw materials into goods and services produced by the organization. It
enables organization to function effectively and efficiently and Contextual performance that focus on
behaviors that contributes in creating a culture and environment where task performance can occur.
Expending extra effort towards job, assisting and helping co-workers, helping out customers, respect
for authority, compliance with organizational values are some of the key examples that fall under the
umbrella of contextual performance. (Aguinis, 2009).

RESEARCH QUESTIONS
1. Which behavioral attributes of an individual are most influential for embracing performance
in an organization?
2. Which behavioral attributes of group are most influential for embracing performance in an
organization?
The study aims to identify and assess the contributive behavioral factors that can play pivotal role in
enhancing the performance of an organization. The main purpose of the study is to highlight the
importance of contextual performance that is generally ignored or given less importance when
compared with attributes fall under the umbrella of task performance.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
A detailed literature review for Human Behavior, Organizational Behavior and Performance
Management was conducted. Afterwards the understudy organization was analyzed over its
performance management system and organizational structure. Data collection was conducted from the
relevant stake holders and analyzed to achieve the desired objective. The research methodologies used
in this study were descriptive, empirical, quantitative and qualitative.

Sampling
Headquarter of the understudy organization based at Islamabad Pakistan was chosen for the collection
of primary data. The hierarchal structure reveals Head of departments as the potential stakeholders of
the study. These are responsible for the departments overall performance. The company is currently
operational with 93 head of departments nationwide, 29 of them are working at head quarter.
Data Collection
Expert Opinion as a primary data was collected through semi structured interviews conducted with
the Head of Departments at multiple functional units of organization. Questionnaire was designed by
identifying variables through literature review for individual and group attributes both. The level of
importance of these variables is determined by engaging the head of departments through semi
structured interviews.
Data Analysis Method
Multi Criteria Decision Making approach was used for the analysis of data gathered through semi
structured interviews.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Multiple criteria decision-making (MCDM) approaches are considered to be pivotal for better decision
making (Belton, 1990). The MCDM methods let decision-makers to learn about the issues they incur,
learning their own as well as the ones that stand with other parties' personal values, to know what
organizational values are, what objectives they behold, which led them to develop understanding of
problem and to devise a preferred course of action. (Zeleny, 1982). Analytical Hierarchal process
(AHP) is the method whose foundations are laid on the multi criteria decision making approach.
Multiple criterias are taken in account with respect of each Category comparison before choosing the
best category.
Identified attributes from the literature review were classified into two main categories Individual and
Group. Both the categories were analyzed separately and were identified over the most prioritized
attribute with the help of analytical hierarchy process.
The attributes identified for the individual variable are categorized as Locus of Control,
Machiavellianism, Self Esteem, Self-Monitoring, Risk Taking, Personality. Similarly the attributes
identified for the group variable are categorized as Roles, Norms, Status, Size, Composition, and
Cohesiveness. The Hierarchy of the prime goal, criterions and risk categories are shown in Figure 1.
For particular criteria each category was given weights which ranged from 1 9 as shown in Table 1.

9


AnalyticalHierarchalProcess

Individual Attributes:
x
x
x
x
x
x

Locus of Control
Machiavellianism
Self Esteem
Self-Monitoring
Risk Taking
Personality

Group Attributes:
x
x
x
x
x
x

Roles
Norms
Status
Size
Composition
Cohesiveness

Figure 1: Hierarchy of the variables (Individual and Group)

Numerical Rating
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1

Verbal Judgment of Preferences

Extremely preferred
Very strongly to extremely
Very strongly preferred
Strongly to very strongly
Strongly preferred
Moderately to strongly
Moderately preferred
Equally to moderately
Equally preferred

Table 1: Pair-wise comparison scale for AHP preferences

Identified group of experts were asked to illustrate each criterion in term of its importance for both
variable. Self-esteem depicts the psychological wellbeing of an individual. Higher the degree of selfesteem, lesser is the probability for depression (Crandal, 1973) and hopelessness. It plays a pivotal role
in enhancing organizational performance and improving employee behavior (Malhi, n.d.). High selfesteem is the key driving force towards enthusiasm and optimism; such individuals are keen towards
challenging goals and are expected to perform better than individuals possessing low self-esteem
(Hulton) (Ambady). The understudy organization also revealed Self-Esteem as the highly weighted
(21.30%) attribute of an individual that is most influential towards the overall organizational
performance. There exists substantial evidence that suggests significant positive relationship within the
roles assigned to individuals in a team and teams overall performance (Chong, 2007). Research is
based on Belbins support for teams overall performance which according to other researchers
including Belbin, was a function of number and type of roles team members played (Belbin, 1993). The
understudy organization ranked the importance of roles as their highly weighted (32.44%) factor
towards organizational performance.
Both variable (individual and group) were prioritized by performing following steps for each criterion
within the categories:
x

Synthesizing the pair-wise comparison matrix (5*5).

Calculating the consistency ratio.

Calculating .

10


Calculating consistency index CI.

Selecting appropriate value of random consistency ratio.

Checking the consistency of pair-wise comparison matrix.

While analyzing individual attributes, Self-Esteem attribute was highly weighted with 21.30% with a
narrowly marginal attribute Self-Monitoring with 21.24%, Risk Taking stood as third priority with
18.15% followed by Locus of Control with 15.70% and Personality with 13.39%.
Machiavellianism stood last with 10.22%. Similarly analyzing group attributes, Roles attribute was
highly weighted with 32.44% afterwards is the Norms with 23.93%, Status stood as third priority
with 11.83% followed by Size with 11.32% and Cohesiveness with 10.62%. Composition stood
last with 9.85%. Synthesized matrixes for both the variables are shown below from Table 2 3.
Matrix

Locus
of
Control
of 0.161

Machiavelli
anism

Self
Esteem

SelfMonitoring

Risk
Taking

Personality

Priority
vector

0.142

0.157

0.171

0.180

0.131

0.157

Locus
Control
Machiavellianis
m
Self Esteem

0.118

0.104

0.100

0.105

0.088

0.099

0.102

0.218

0.219

0.212

0.289

0.208

0.131

0.213

Self-Monitoring

0.192

0.201

0.150

0.204

0.268

0.258

0.212

Risk Taking

0.154

0.202

0.175

0.131

0.172

0.256

0.182

Personality

0.156

0.132

0.205

0.100

0.085

0.126

0.134

max = 6.122, CI = 0.0244, RI = 1.24, CR = 0.0197 0.1 OK

1.000

Table 2: Synthesized matrix for Individual

Matrix

Roles

Norms

Status

Size

Composition

0.331
0.374
0.303
0.360
0.317
Roles
0.204
0.230
0.276
0.239
0.255
Norms
0.129
0.099
0.118
0.122
0.117
Status
0.099
0.103
0.105
0.107
0.155
Size
0.097
0.083
0.094
0.064
0.093
Composition
0.110
0.105
0.108
0.064
Cohesiveness 0.140
max = 6.097, CI = 0.0194, RI = 1.24, CR = 0.0156 0.1 OK

Cohesiveness

0.262
0.232
0.125
0.110
0.160
0.111

Normalized
Principal
Eigenvector
0.324
0.239
0.118
0.113
0.098
0.106
1.000

Table 3: Synthesized matrix for Groups

Impact pair-wise comparison matrices resulted in Consistency Ratio (CR) less than 0.10, i.e. 0.0156,
0.0197, respectively, so all the judgments are acceptable as shown in Table 2 3.

11


CONCLUSION
Decision making remains one of the essential skills for any organization. Whether it is an investment
decision, launching a new product, giving alternate options to the customer, employee training
programs; decision making skills play a conclusive role for any organization to sustain its growth.
There are numerous business intelligence and statistical tools available in the markets that are widely
used by the organizations to help them ease their process of making decisions. The situation however
becomes more complex when it needs to be taken on the basis of data that is more subjective in nature
rather than being numerical.
Analyzing human behaviors for the cause of enhancing organizational performance is one of those
subjective lines that needs not to be ignored and must be incorporated with any organizations
performance management system.
Analytical hierarchy process remains one of the essentials tools that can assist the performance
management stakeholders for any organization however, there are certain observations that must be
fulfilled for its effective implementation, these include and not limited to:
x

Individual and Group attributes that were identified from the literature; were not all familiar
with the head of departments from different functional units.
Organizations today stand on the pillars of their functional units and employees in those units
hold a distinct background and roles to be performed.
It will be more beneficial for the organizations to conduct workshops for such strategic
initiatives where head of departments from different background can be brought up to a nearly
standard level in terms of understanding behavioral aspects and its bridging with the
performance management system.
Such exercises will help in narrowing down the inconsistencies that occur while seeking the
expert opinion during data collection process.

x
x

LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

Following are the limitations of the study:
x
x
x

The study was conducted at one of the progressive telecom operators in Pakistan.
Attained results are achieved by utilizing one tool (Multi Criteria Decision Making).
Due to resources research was conducted only at the head quarter of the understudy
organization.
Time constraint caused the hindrance in outreach to head of departments nationwide.
More FGDs should be conducted, to come up with more generalized results.

x
x

12

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aamodt, M. &. (1982). Effects of group hetrogeneity on quality task solutions. Psychological Reports,
171-174.
Aguinis, H. (2009). Performance Management (2nd ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice
Hall.
Ahmad, Z. &. (2003). The association between organizational commitment among white collar
workers in Malaysia. International Journal of Training and Development, 166-185.
Ambady, H. a. (n.d.). Self-Esteem, Self prediction and living upto the commitments. 133.
Becker, J. O. (2007). Machiavellians motives in organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of
Applied Communications research, 246-267.
Belbin, R. (1993). Team Roles at Work. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
B.F.Skinner. (1965). Science and Human Behavior. NY: The Free Press.
Belton, V. (1990). Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: practically the only way to choose.
Operational Research Tutorial Paper, 53-102.
berson, J. (2013, April 11). The end of a job as we know it. Forbes.
Brocato, F. &. (1987). Psychological type and task accomplishment in the public school management
team. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, (p. 799). Washington, DC:
ERIC Document reproduction services.
Cascio, W. F. (2006). Global performance management systems. Handbook of research in
international human resource management, 176-196.
Chong, E. (2007). Role balance and team development: A study of team role characteristics
underlying high and low performing teams. Institue of Behavioral and Applied Management, pp. 202217.
Colquitt, J. L.-p. (2009). Organizational Behavior: improving performance and commitment in the
workplace. New York: McGraw Hill, Irwin.
Corzine, J. B. (1999). Machiavellianism in US Bankers. International Journal of Organizational
Analysis, 72-83.
Dahling, J. C. (2012). Correlates and consequences of feedback orientation in organizations. Journal
of Management, 531-546.
Eastman, B. J. (1996). Handbook of research in international human resource management. Journal
of Applied Behavioral Sciences, 139-145.

13


Elangovan, R. &. (1999). Effects of precieved power of supervisor on subordinate stress and
motivation: The moderating role of subordinate characteristics. Journal of Organizational Behavior,
Vol.20, pp. 359-375.
Elenkov, D. (2002). Effects of leadership in organizational performance in Russian companies.
Journal of Business Research, 467-480.
Farmer, S. &. (2005). Accounting for subordinate perceptions of supervisor power: An identity
dependence model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 1069-1083.
Farr, J. &. (2006). Trust us: New perspective on performance appraisal. Performance Measurement:
Current perspective and future challenges, 321-337.
Fiol, C. O. (2001). All for one and one for all? The development and transfer of power across
organizational level. Academy of management Review, 224-242.
Feldman, D. C. (1984). The development and enforcement of group norms. Academy of Management
Review, 47-53.
Gangestad SW, S. M. (2000). Self Monitoring: Appraisal and reappraisal. Psychological Bulletin,
126( 4), pp. 530-555.
Gilson L. L., a. S. (2004). A little creativity goes a long way: An examination of team's engagement in
creative process. Journal of management, 453-470.
Hahn, D. M. (2007, 4 27). Article Gratuits . com. Retrieved from http://en.articlesgratuits.com/groupnorms-in-organizations-id1546.php
Hulton, B. a. (n.d.). How to reverse the viscious cycle of Low Self Esteem: The importance of
attentional focus. 565.
Hunt, S. &. (1984). Marketing & Machiavellianism. Journal of Marketing, 30-42.
Janssen, O. (2003). Innovative behavior and job involvement at the price of conflict and less
satisfactory relations with coworkers. Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 347364.
Kardi, T. (2006). Kardi Teknomo's page. Retrieved from Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP)
Tutorial: http://people.revoledu.com/kardi/tutorial/AHP/
Kinicki, J. &. (1994). Influence on quality of supervisor-subordinate relations: The role of timepressure, organizational commitment and locus of control. Journal of organizational behavior,
Vol.15, pp. 75-82.
Loughead, T. &. (2004). The mediating role of cohesion in the leader behavior-satisfaction
relationship. Psychology of sports and exercise, 355-371.

14

Malhi, R. S. (n.d.). TQM consultants. Retrieved from

http://www.tqm.com.my/web/05_bookArticle_17.html
March J.G., &. S. (1987). Managerial perspective on risk and risk taking. Management Sciences,
1404-1418.
Mehra A, K. M. (2001). The social network of high and low self monitors: Implications for workplace
performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46, pp. 121-146.
Moullakis, J. (2005, March 30). One in five worker "actively disengaged". The Australian Financial
Review, p. 10.
Nankervis, A. &. (2006). Performance management; Theory in practice? Asia Pacific Journal of
Human Resources, 44, 83-101.
Nelson R. R, &. W. (1985). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Belknap press of Harvard
University Press.
Ossa, M. (2013, 2 7). Homework Help. Retrieved from How do group norms and statuses affect
individual behavior?: http://www.enotes.com/homework-help/can-someone-how-do-group-normsstatuses-affect-383610
Pierce, C. B. (2004). Responding to sexual harassment complaints: Effects of a dissolved workplace
romance on decision making standards. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,
66-82.
Pierce, H. A. (2008). Enhancing the relevance of organizational behavior by embracing performance
management research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 139-145.
Robbins, S. P. (2001). Organizational Behavior 9th Ed. NJ: Prentice Hall.
Stephen P. Robbins, T. A. (2010). Organizational behavior 14th Ed. Prentice Hall.
Sikalieh, D. M. (2012). The influence of personality dimensions on organizational performance.
International Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 185-194.
T.L., S. (2008). Decision making with Analytic hierarchy process. International Journal Services
Sciences, 83-98.
Turnley WH, B. M. (2001). Achieving desired images while avoiding undesired images: Exploring the
role of self monitoring in impression management. Journal of Applied psychology, 86(2), 351-360.
Vorhauser-Smith, S. (2012, December 16). Three Reasons Performance Management will Change in
2013. Forbes.
Waal, A. A. (2004). Stimulating performance driven bahviour to obtain better results. Emarald, 301316.

15


Wang, L. &. (2007). Locus of control and three components of commitment to change. Personality
and Individual differences, 503-512.
Wengrzyn, R. (n.d.). Education Portal. Retrieved from How size affects group performance:
http://education-portal.com/academy/lesson/how-size-affects-group-performance.html#lesson
Zeleny, M. (1982). Multiple Criteria Decision Making. Newyork: Mac-Graw Hill.

16