Promotion Decisions and the Adoption of Explicit Potential Assessment

References

• Baker GP, Jensen MC, Murphy KC (1988) Compensation and incentives, practice vs. theory. J. Finance 43(3):593–616.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Benson A, Li D, Shue K (2019) Promotions and the Peter Principle. Quart. J. Econom. 134(4):2085–2134.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berger J, Harbring C, Sliwka D (2013) Performance appraisals and the impact of forced distribution: An experimental investigation. Management Sci. 59(1):54–68.Link, Google Scholar
• Bol JC (2011) The determinants and performance effects of managers’ performance evaluation biases. Accounting Rev. 86(5):1549–1575.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bol JC, Estep C, Moers F, Peecher ME (2018) The role of tacit knowledge in auditor expertise and human capital development. J. Accounting Res. 56(4):1205–1252.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bushman RM, Indjejikian RJ, Smith A (1996) CEO compensation: The role of individual performance evaluation. J. Accounting Econom. 21(2):161–193.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cappelli P, Keller JR (2014) Talent management: Conceptual approaches and practical challenges. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psych. Organ. Behav. 1:305–331.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chan EW (2018) Promotion, relative performance information, and the Peter Principle. Accounting Rev. 93(3):83–103.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Church AH, Rotolo CT, Ginther NM, Levine R (2015) How are top companies designing and managing their high-potential programs? A follow-up talent management benchmark study. Consulting Psych. J. Practice Res. 67(1):17–47.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Correll SJ, Weisshaar KR, Wynn AT, Wehner JD (2020) Inside the black box of organizational life, the gendered language of performance assessment. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 85(6):1022–1050.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Deller C (2023) Beyond performance: Does assessed potential matter to employees’ voluntary departure decisions? J. Accounting Res. 61(4):981–1024.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Demeré BW, Sedatole KL, Woods A (2019) The role of calibration committees in subjective performance evaluation systems. Management Sci. 65(4):1455–1947.Google Scholar
• DeVaro J, Gürtler O (2016) Strategic shirking in promotion tournaments. J. Law. Econom. Organ. 32(3):620–651.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fernández-Aráoz C (2014) 21st century talent spotting. Harvard Bus. Rev. 92(6):46–56.Google Scholar
• Fernández-Aráoz C, Groysberg B, Nohria N (2011) How to hang on to your high potentials. Harvard Bus. Rev. 89(10):76–83.Google Scholar
• Gibbons R, Waldman M (1999) A theory of wage and promotion dynamics inside firms. Quart. J. Econom. 114(4):1321–1358.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gibbs M (1995) Incentive compensation in a corporate hierarchy. J. Accounting Econom. 19(2):247–277.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grabner I, Moers F (2013) Managers’ choices of performance measures in promotion decisions, an analysis of alternative job assignments. J. Accounting Res. 51(5):1187–1220.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grabner I, Künneke J, Moers F (2020) How calibration committees can mitigate performance evaluation bias, an analysis of implicit incentives. Accounting Rev. 95(6):213–233.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harris S, Schwartz J (2020) Why competing for new talent is a mistake. Harvard Business Review Digital Articles (February 5), https://hbsp.harvard.edu/product/H05E3X-PDF-ENG.Google Scholar
• Holmström B (1979) Moral hazard and observability. Bell J. Econom. 10(1):74–91.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Indeed (2023) What is a 9 box matrix? Accessed August 24, 2023, https://in.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/9-box-matrix#:∼:text=All%20industries%20can%20benefit%20from,goals%20based%20on%20the%20outcome.Google Scholar
• Ittner CD, Larcker DF (2003) Coming up short on nonfinancial performance measurement. Harvard Bus. Rev. 81(11):88–95.Google Scholar
• Ittner CD, Larcker DF, Rajan MV (1997) The choice of performance measures in annual bonus contracts. Accounting Rev. 72(2):231–255.Google Scholar
• Kampkötter P, Sliwka D (2018) More dispersion, higher bonuses? On differentiation in subjective performance evaluations. J. Labor Econom. 36(2):511–549.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lambert RA, Larcker DF (1987) An Analysis of the use of accounting and market measures of performance in executive compensation contracts. J. Accounting Res. 25:85–125.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lazear EP (2004) The Peter Principle, a theory of decline. J. Political Econom. 112 (S1):S141–S163.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lazear EP, Rosen S (1981) Rank–Order tournaments as optimum labor contracts. J. Political Econom. 89(5):841–864.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lucy D (2016) Nine box grid. Training J. 20–22.Google Scholar
• Martin J, Schmidt C (2010) How to keep your top talent. Harvard Bus. Rev. 88(5):54–61.Google Scholar
• Manthei K, Sliwka D (2019) Multitasking and subjective performance evaluations: Theory and evidence from a field experiment in a bank. Management Sci. 65(12):5861–5883.Link, Google Scholar
• Mercer and Mettl (2020) High–Potential identification survey 2020. Accessed June 1, 2021, https://blog.mettl.com/...2&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&hss_channel=fbp-171382302924212&fbclid=IwAR0kqz01Q52sE5C664ctGNQvuv7dj5CIjy36PkiI_ErrGXTiqFXypH3EMQQ.Google Scholar
• Prendergast C (1998) What happens within firms? A survey of empirical evidence on compensation policies. Haltiwanger J, Manser ME, Topel R, eds. Labor Statistics Measurement Issues (University of Chicago Press, Chicago), 329–356.Google Scholar
• Ruddy T, Anand P (2010) Managing talent in organizations. Silzer RF, Dowell B, eds. Strategy-Driven Talent Management (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco), 549–593.Google Scholar
• Silzer RF, Church AH (2010) Identifying and assessing high-potential talent. Silzer RF, Dowell B, eds. Strategy-Driven Talent Management (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco), 213–279.Google Scholar
• Strack R, Caye JM, Lassen S, Bhalla V, Puckett J, Espinosa EG, Francour F, et al. (2010) Creating people advantage 2010: How companies can adapt their HR practices for volatile times. Boston Consulting Group, Boston.Google Scholar
• Talent Management Institute (2021) Talent management and the 9-box grid: What you must know. Accessed July 7, 2023, https://www.tmi.org/blog/talent-management-and-the-9-box-grid-what-you-must-know.Google Scholar
• Talent Strategy Group (2015) Potential: Who’s doing what to identify their best? Talent Strategy Group. Accessed June 16, 2021, https://www.hoganassessments.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/NTMN20Potential20Study202015.pdf.Google Scholar
• Whatfix (2022) The 9-box grid: Benefits & limitations in 2023. Accessed July 7, 2023, https://whatfix.com/blog/9-box-grid/.Google Scholar
• WorldatWork (2017) WorldatWork research report: Performance management and rewards 2017. Accessed March 7, 2023, https://worldatwork.org/media/CDN/dist/CDN2/documents/pdf/resources/research/performance-mngmnt-rewards-2017.pdf.Google Scholar