Effectiveness literature is concern

Effectiveness literature is concerned with assessing personality variables, particularly in the context of staff selection and performance. For example, an individual’s position along the dogmatism/authoritarianism scale, which can be determined with some accuracy, has a significant influence on his or her performance as an international manager. Dogmatism is a relatively closed conception of beliefs and disbeliefs about reality authoritarianism is a preoccupation with power and status considerations and a general hostility toward out groups. Authoritarian personality trauts and dogmatism tend to represent one end of the scale the other end is represented by the corresponding opposites of openness, social sensitivity, and empathy. These variables are relevant to the performance of international managers because open minded individuals seem to adapt more easly to new environments. Those who score high on authoritarianism/dogmatism often have difficulty accepting and adjusting to a new culture and, therefore, may be somewhat less effective in accomplasing tasks within the local cultural setting.
The five variables compensation package, tasks , headquarters support, host environment and cultural adjustment reviewed above and shown in exhibit 4-2 are not mutually exclusive they interact in a way that has significant implications for the evaluation of international employess performance. Designers and users of performance management system need to be conscious of and responsive to, the impact of these variables.
Criteria used for performance appraisal of international employees
Now that we have an understanding of the variables likely to influence expatriate performance, we can discuss the criteria by which performance is to be evaluated, or appraised (the terms are used interchangeably in the relevant literature). As you will recall from exhibit 4-1 individual performance management involves job analysis, job goals and standards, and performance appraisal . traditionally, it comprises a formal process of goal setting, performance appraisal, and feedback. Data from this process is often used to determine pay and promotion, and training and development requirements. Company goals, against which job goals and standards are established and measured, influence the individual’s job analysis and job description. There are differences in the way this process is handed within companies. For example, in germany and Sweden it is common for employees to have input into job goal setting , whereas in other countries such as the united states, job goals tend to be assigned
Performance criteria
Goals tend to be translated info performance appraisal eriteria so specificity and measurability issues are important aspects, and we need to recognize that hard,soft,and contextual goals are often used as the basis for performance criteria. Hard goals are objective, quantifiable, and can be directly measured such as return on investment (ROI), market share, and so on. Soft goals tend to be releationship or trait based, such as leadership style or interpersonal skills. Contextual goal attempt to take into consideration factors that result from the situation in which performance occurs. For example, multinationals commonly use arbitrary transfer pricing and other financial tools for transactions between subsidiaries in order to minimize foreign exchange risk exposure and tax expenditures. Another consideration is that all financial figures are generally subject to the problem off currency conversion, including sales and cash positions. Furthers complications arise because hose governments can place restrictions on repatrition of profits and currency conversion. The nature of the international monetary system and lopcal accounting differences may preclude and accurate measurement of result. This poses a dilemma. The use of transfer pricing and other financial tools is necessary because of the complexity of the internasional environment. Multinasionals cannot allw subsidiaries to become autonomous in financial management terms, and place controls on subsidiary managers. Thus, the financial result recorded for any particular subsidiary do not always reflect accurately its contribution to the achievements of the corporation as a whole. For this reason such results should not be used as a primary input in a performance appraisal, is now advocated sinceit allows clarification of goals and axpectations of performance against those goals.
Janssens suggest that performance evaluation of subsidiary managers against hard criteria is often supplemented by frequent visits by headquarter staff and meetings with executivesfrom the parent company. Soft criteria can be be used to complement hard goals, and take into account areas that are difficult to quantify, such as leadership skills, but their appraisal is somewhat subjective and, in the expatriate context, more complicated due to cultural exchanges and clashes. However, relying on hard criteria such as financial data to evaluate how well an expatriate manager operates a foreign subsidiary does not consider the way results are obtained and the behaviours used to obtaim these results.concerm with questionable ethical practices led to the enactment of the U.S foreign corrupt practices act (FCPA), which may prompt an increased use of behavioural as well as results data to appraise the performance of expatriate managers in foreign subsidiaries. However, an appraisal system that uses hard, soft, and contextual criteria builds on the strengths of each while minimizing their disadvantages. Using multiple criteria wherever possible is recommended in the relevant literature.
Who conducts the performance appraisal?
Another issue concerns who conducts the performance appraisal. Typically, employees are appraised by their immediate superiors, and this can pose problems for subsidiary managers. They work in countries geographically distant, yet are evaluated by superiors back at headquarters who are not in the position to see on a day to day basis how the expatriateperforms in a particular situation. Consequently, subsidiary managers tend to be assessed according to subsidiary performance, with a reliance on hard criteria similar to that applied to heads of domestic units or divisions. Of course, there is a danger that a PCN or TCN subsidiary manager will make decisions and implement local strategies that favor short term performance to the detriment of longer term organizational goals her or his subsidiary performance will not be affected if the expatriate assignment has been completed before the consequences of those decisions and strategies begin to take effect.
Appraisal of other expatriate employees is likely to be conducted by the subsidiary’s chief executive officer the immediate host country supervisor, or the individual’s home country manager, depending on the nature and level of the position concerned. Host country managers may have a clearer picture of expatriate performance and can take into consideration contextual criteria, but they may have culturally bound biases (e.g. about role behaviour) and lack an appreciation of the impact of the expatriate’s performance in the broader organizational context.
Some expatriates may prefer to have parent company evaluators given that their future career progression may depend on how the evaluation data is utilized back at headquarters this may be especially so in caseswhere foreign operations are relatively less important than domestic U.S operations. Others may prefer host country evaluation if they perceive it as a more accurate reflection of their performance. Multiple raters are sometimes used in the domestic context such as the technique referred to as “360 degree feedback” it has been argued that, given the crosscultural complexity of the foreign assignment , a team of evaluators should be used for expatriate performance evaluation. Gregersen et. Al. Found that most firms (81percent) in their survey of HR directors in 58 U.S. multinationals used more than one rater when assessing expatriate performance. The immediate superior (in either the home or host country), the expatriate as self rater, and the HR manager (either home or host country based) were commonly used as multiple evaluators of U.S. expatriate performance. Likewise, a survey of 99 finnish internationally operating companies repcrts that 79 percent of respondents indicated that expatriate performance evaluation was conducted by the superior located in finland. Often though, this was simply because there was no suitable person in the host country to conduct such evaluations. The availability of knowledgeable, trained raters may constrain the approach taken in the international context.
Standardized or customized
Performance appraisal form
Domestic companies commonly design performance appraisal forms for each job category, particularly those using a traditional performance appraisal approach rather than performance management. Such standardization assits in the collection of accurate performance data on which personnel decisionscan be made and allows for cross employee comparions. the questions often posed is, should these standardized forms be adapted when used for evaluating international manager? As gregersen et.al. argue:
In principle, performance appraisal system are designed carefully and often presumed to be static. Valid reasons exist for maintaining standard, traditionally used appraisal (e.g., when the system has been tested, has identified baselines, and reduces future development costs). These reasons are valid as long as the context of the performance does not change. in the expatriate setting, however, the performance context does change, and sometimes it changes dramtically. Given a global context, previous testing and established baselines grounded in domestic situations can become meaningless. Des pite this, they found in their sample of U.S. firms that 76 percent

Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 1:

Efektivitas sastra berkaitan dengan menilai kepribadian variabel, khususnya dalam konteks pemilihan staf dan kinerja. Sebagai contoh, posisi individu sepanjang dogmatisme otoritarianisme skala, yang dapat ditentukan dengan ketepatan, memiliki pengaruh yang signifikan pada kinerja nya sebagai manajer internasional. Dogmatisme adalah konsepsi relatif tertutup keyakinan dan disbeliefs tentang realitas otoritarianisme keasyikan dengan kekuatan status pertimbangan dan umum permusuhan terhadap kelompok. Trauts otoriter kepribadian dan dogmatisme cenderung untuk mewakili salah satu ujung skala ujung diwakili oleh berlawanan sesuai keterbukaan, sensitivitas sosial dan empati. Variabel ini relevan dengan kinerja internasional manajer karena individu-individu yang berpikiran terbuka tampaknya beradaptasi lebih easly lingkungan yang baru. Mereka yang Skor tinggi pada otoritarianisme dogmatisme sering memiliki kesulitan menerima dan menyesuaikan diri dengan budaya baru dan, oleh karena itu, mungkin agak kurang efektif dalam tugas-tugas accomplasing dalam pengaturan budaya lokal.Paket kompensasi lima variabel, tugas, markas dukungan, tuan rumah lingkungan dan penyesuaian budaya ditinjau di atas dan ditampilkan di pameran 4-2 tidak saling eksklusif mereka berinteraksi dengan cara yang mempunyai implikasi yang signifikan untuk evaluasi kinerja CPNS internasional. Desainer dan pengguna sistem manajemen kinerja harus sadar dan responsif terhadap, dampak dari variabel ini.Kriteria digunakan untuk penilaian kinerja karyawan internasional Sekarang bahwa kita memiliki pemahaman tentang variabel-variabel yang cenderung mempengaruhi kinerja ekspatriat, kita bisa mendiskusikan kriteria yang kinerja yang harus dievaluasi, atau dinilai (istilah yang digunakan secara bergantian dalam literatur relevan). Seperti Anda akan ingat dari pameran 4-1 manajemen kinerja individu melibatkan analisis pekerjaan, pekerjaan tujuan dan standar dan penilaian kinerja. secara tradisional, itu terdiri dari sebuah proses formal penetapan sasaran, kinerja penilaian dan umpan balik. Data dari proses ini sering digunakan untuk menentukan membayar dan promosi, dan persyaratan pelatihan dan pengembangan. Tujuan perusahaan, terhadap pekerjaan yang tujuan dan standar yang ditetapkan dan diukur, mempengaruhi individu pekerjaan analisis dan deskripsi pekerjaan. Ada perbedaan dalam cara proses ini diserahkan dalam perusahaan. Sebagai contoh, di Jerman dan Swedia itu umum bagi karyawan untuk memiliki masukan ke dalam menetapkan tujuan pekerjaan, sedangkan di negara lain seperti Amerika Serikat, sasaran kerja cenderung untuk ditempatiKriteria kinerjaGoals tend to be translated info performance appraisal eriteria so specificity and measurability issues are important aspects, and we need to recognize that hard,soft,and contextual goals are often used as the basis for performance criteria. Hard goals are objective, quantifiable, and can be directly measured such as return on investment (ROI), market share, and so on. Soft goals tend to be releationship or trait based, such as leadership style or interpersonal skills. Contextual goal attempt to take into consideration factors that result from the situation in which performance occurs. For example, multinationals commonly use arbitrary transfer pricing and other financial tools for transactions between subsidiaries in order to minimize foreign exchange risk exposure and tax expenditures. Another consideration is that all financial figures are generally subject to the problem off currency conversion, including sales and cash positions. Furthers complications arise because hose governments can place restrictions on repatrition of profits and currency conversion. The nature of the international monetary system and lopcal accounting differences may preclude and accurate measurement of result. This poses a dilemma. The use of transfer pricing and other financial tools is necessary because of the complexity of the internasional environment. Multinasionals cannot allw subsidiaries to become autonomous in financial management terms, and place controls on subsidiary managers. Thus, the financial result recorded for any particular subsidiary do not always reflect accurately its contribution to the achievements of the corporation as a whole. For this reason such results should not be used as a primary input in a performance appraisal, is now advocated sinceit allows clarification of goals and axpectations of performance against those goals. Janssens suggest that performance evaluation of subsidiary managers against hard criteria is often supplemented by frequent visits by headquarter staff and meetings with executivesfrom the parent company. Soft criteria can be be used to complement hard goals, and take into account areas that are difficult to quantify, such as leadership skills, but their appraisal is somewhat subjective and, in the expatriate context, more complicated due to cultural exchanges and clashes. However, relying on hard criteria such as financial data to evaluate how well an expatriate manager operates a foreign subsidiary does not consider the way results are obtained and the behaviours used to obtaim these results.concerm with questionable ethical practices led to the enactment of the U.S foreign corrupt practices act (FCPA), which may prompt an increased use of behavioural as well as results data to appraise the performance of expatriate managers in foreign subsidiaries. However, an appraisal system that uses hard, soft, and contextual criteria builds on the strengths of each while minimizing their disadvantages. Using multiple criteria wherever possible is recommended in the relevant literature.Who conducts the performance appraisal?Another issue concerns who conducts the performance appraisal. Typically, employees are appraised by their immediate superiors, and this can pose problems for subsidiary managers. They work in countries geographically distant, yet are evaluated by superiors back at headquarters who are not in the position to see on a day to day basis how the expatriateperforms in a particular situation. Consequently, subsidiary managers tend to be assessed according to subsidiary performance, with a reliance on hard criteria similar to that applied to heads of domestic units or divisions. Of course, there is a danger that a PCN or TCN subsidiary manager will make decisions and implement local strategies that favor short term performance to the detriment of longer term organizational goals her or his subsidiary performance will not be affected if the expatriate assignment has been completed before the consequences of those decisions and strategies begin to take effect. Appraisal of other expatriate employees is likely to be conducted by the subsidiary’s chief executive officer the immediate host country supervisor, or the individual’s home country manager, depending on the nature and level of the position concerned. Host country managers may have a clearer picture of expatriate performance and can take into consideration contextual criteria, but they may have culturally bound biases (e.g. about role behaviour) and lack an appreciation of the impact of the expatriate’s performance in the broader organizational context. Some expatriates may prefer to have parent company evaluators given that their future career progression may depend on how the evaluation data is utilized back at headquarters this may be especially so in caseswhere foreign operations are relatively less important than domestic U.S operations. Others may prefer host country evaluation if they perceive it as a more accurate reflection of their performance. Multiple raters are sometimes used in the domestic context such as the technique referred to as “360 degree feedback” it has been argued that, given the crosscultural complexity of the foreign assignment , a team of evaluators should be used for expatriate performance evaluation. Gregersen et. Al. Found that most firms (81percent) in their survey of HR directors in 58 U.S. multinationals used more than one rater when assessing expatriate performance. The immediate superior (in either the home or host country), the expatriate as self rater, and the HR manager (either home or host country based) were commonly used as multiple evaluators of U.S. expatriate performance. Likewise, a survey of 99 finnish internationally operating companies repcrts that 79 percent of respondents indicated that expatriate performance evaluation was conducted by the superior located in finland. Often though, this was simply because there was no suitable person in the host country to conduct such evaluations. The availability of knowledgeable, trained raters may constrain the approach taken in the international context.
Standardized or customized
Performance appraisal form
Domestic companies commonly design performance appraisal forms for each job category, particularly those using a traditional performance appraisal approach rather than performance management. Such standardization assits in the collection of accurate performance data on which personnel decisionscan be made and allows for cross employee comparions. the questions often posed is, should these standardized forms be adapted when used for evaluating international manager? As gregersen et.al. argue:
In principle, performance appraisal system are designed carefully and often presumed to be static. Valid reasons exist for maintaining standard, traditionally used appraisal (e.g., when the system has been tested, has identified baselines, and reduces future development costs). These reasons are valid as long as the context of the performance does not change. in the expatriate setting, however, the performance context does change, and sometimes it changes dramtically. Given a global context, previous testing and established baselines grounded in domestic situations can become meaningless. Des pite this, they found in their sample of U.S. firms that 76 percent

Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 2:

Literatur Efektivitas berkaitan dengan menilai variabel kepribadian, terutama dalam konteks pemilihan staf dan kinerja. Misalnya, posisi individu sepanjang skala dogmatisme / otoritarianisme, yang dapat ditentukan secara akurat, memiliki pengaruh yang signifikan terhadap kinerja nya sebagai manajer internasional. Dogmatisme adalah konsepsi yang relatif tertutup keyakinan dan disbeliefs tentang realitas otoritarianisme adalah keasyikan dengan kekuasaan dan pertimbangan status dan permusuhan umum terhadap kelompok luar. Trauts kepribadian yang otoriter dan dogmatisme cenderung untuk mewakili salah satu ujung skala ujung diwakili oleh berlawanan sesuai keterbukaan, kepekaan sosial, dan empati. Variabel ini relevan dengan kinerja manajer internasional karena terbuka hati individu tampaknya beradaptasi lebih mudah dalam lingkungan baru. Mereka yang skor tinggi pada otoritarianisme / dogmatisme sering mengalami kesulitan menerima dan menyesuaikan diri dengan budaya baru dan, oleh karena itu, mungkin agak kurang efektif dalam accomplasing tugas dalam pengaturan budaya lokal.
Paket lima variabel kompensasi, tugas, dukungan markas, lingkungan host dan penyesuaian budaya Ulasan di atas dan ditampilkan dalam pameran 4-2 tidak saling eksklusif mereka berinteraksi dengan cara yang memiliki implikasi yang signifikan untuk evaluasi kinerja CPNS internasional. Desainer dan pengguna sistem manajemen kinerja harus sadar dan responsif terhadap, dampak dari variabel-variabel ini.
Kriteria yang digunakan untuk penilaian kinerja karyawan internasional
Sekarang kita memiliki pemahaman tentang variabel akan mempengaruhi kinerja asing, kita bisa mendiskusikan kriteria dimana kinerja harus dievaluasi, atau dinilai (istilah yang digunakan secara bergantian dalam literatur yang relevan). Seperti yang Anda ingat dari pameran 4-1 manajemen kinerja individu melibatkan analisis pekerjaan, tujuan pekerjaan dan standar, dan penilaian kinerja. tradisional, itu terdiri dari suatu proses formal penetapan tujuan, penilaian kinerja, dan umpan balik. Data dari proses ini sering digunakan untuk menentukan gaji dan promosi, serta pelatihan dan pengembangan persyaratan. Tujuan perusahaan, terhadap yang tujuan kerja dan standar yang ditetapkan dan diukur, mempengaruhi individu analisis jabatan dan job description. Ada perbedaan dalam cara proses ini diserahkan dalam perusahaan. Sebagai contoh, di Jerman dan Swedia itu adalah umum bagi karyawan untuk memiliki masukan ke dalam penetapan tujuan kerja, sedangkan di negara-negara lain seperti Amerika Serikat, tujuan pekerjaan cenderung ditugaskan
kriteria kinerja
Tujuan cenderung diterjemahkan eriteria penilaian Info kinerja sehingga spesifisitas dan Masalah terukurnya merupakan aspek penting, dan kita harus mengakui bahwa tujuan keras, lunak, dan kontekstual sering digunakan sebagai dasar untuk kriteria kinerja. Tujuan keras yang objektif, terukur, dan dapat diukur secara langsung seperti return on investment (ROI), pangsa pasar, dan sebagainya. Tujuan lembut cenderung releationship atau sifat berbasis, seperti gaya kepemimpinan atau kemampuan interpersonal. Usaha tujuan kontekstual untuk mempertimbangkan faktor-faktor pertimbangan yang dihasilkan dari situasi di mana kinerja terjadi. Sebagai contoh, perusahaan multinasional biasanya menggunakan transfer pricing yang sewenang-wenang dan alat-alat keuangan lainnya untuk transaksi antara anak perusahaan untuk meminimalkan eksposur risiko valuta asing dan pengeluaran pajak. Pertimbangan lain adalah bahwa semua angka-angka keuangan umumnya tunduk pada masalah off konversi mata uang, termasuk penjualan dan posisi kas. Furthers komplikasi muncul karena pemerintah selang dapat menempatkan pembatasan repatrition keuntungan dan konversi mata uang. Sifat dari sistem moneter internasional dan perbedaan akuntansi lopcal dapat menghalangi dan pengukuran akurat dari hasil. Ini menimbulkan dilema. Penggunaan transfer pricing dan alat-alat keuangan lainnya diperlukan karena kompleksitas lingkungan internasional. Multinasionals tidak bisa allw anak untuk menjadi otonom dalam hal pengelolaan keuangan, dan kontrol tempat di manajer anak perusahaan. Dengan demikian, hasil keuangan yang tercatat untuk setiap anak tertentu tidak selalu mencerminkan secara akurat kontribusinya terhadap prestasi perusahaan secara keseluruhan. Untuk alasan ini hasil seperti tidak boleh digunakan sebagai masukan utama dalam penilaian kinerja, kini menganjurkan sinceit memungkinkan klarifikasi tujuan dan axpectations kinerja terhadap tujuan tersebut.
Janssens menunjukkan bahwa evaluasi kinerja manajer anak perusahaan terhadap kriteria keras sering dilengkapi dengan sering Kunjungan oleh staf kantor pusat dan pertemuan dengan executivesfrom perusahaan induk. Kriteria lunak dapat digunakan untuk melengkapi tujuan keras, dan mengambil ke daerah rekening yang sulit untuk diukur, seperti keterampilan kepemimpinan, tetapi penilaian mereka agak subjektif dan, dalam konteks asing, lebih rumit karena pertukaran budaya dan bentrokan. Namun, bergantung pada kriteria keras seperti data keuangan untuk mengevaluasi seberapa baik manajer asing beroperasi anak perusahaan asing tidak mempertimbangkan cara hasil diperoleh dan perilaku yang digunakan untuk obtaim results.concerm ini dengan praktek etika dipertanyakan menyebabkan diberlakukannya AS asing yang korup praktek tindakan (FCPA), yang dapat mendorong peningkatan penggunaan data perilaku serta hasil untuk menilai kinerja manajer ekspatriat di anak perusahaan asing. Namun, sistem penilaian yang menggunakan kriteria keras, lunak, dan kontekstual dibangun di atas kekuatan dari masing-masing sambil meminimalkan kerugian mereka. Menggunakan beberapa kriteria sedapat mungkin dianjurkan dalam literatur yang relevan.
Siapa yang melakukan penilaian kinerja?
Lain kekhawatiran masalah yang melakukan penilaian kinerja. Biasanya, karyawan dinilai oleh atasan langsung mereka, dan ini bisa menimbulkan masalah bagi manajer anak perusahaan. Mereka bekerja di negara-negara secara geografis jauh, namun dievaluasi oleh atasan kembali di kantor pusat yang tidak berada dalam posisi untuk melihat pada hari ke hari bagaimana expatriateperforms dalam situasi tertentu. Akibatnya, manajer anak perusahaan cenderung dinilai berdasarkan kinerja anak perusahaan, dengan ketergantungan pada kriteria keras serupa dengan yang diterapkan pada kepala nasional atau divisi. Tentu saja, ada bahaya bahwa PCN atau TCN manajer anak perusahaan akan membuat keputusan dan menerapkan strategi lokal yang mendukung kinerja jangka pendek dengan mengorbankan tujuan organisasi jangka panjang nya atau kinerja anak-Nya tidak akan terpengaruh jika tugas ekspatriat telah selesai sebelum konsekuensi dari keputusan dan strategi mulai berlaku.
Penilaian karyawan ekspatriat lainnya kemungkinan akan dilakukan oleh CEO anak perusahaan yang langsung pengawas negara tuan rumah, atau manajer negara asal individu, tergantung pada sifat dan tingkat Posisi yang bersangkutan. Tuan rumah manajer negara mungkin memiliki gambaran yang lebih jelas tentang kinerja ekspatriat dan dapat mempertimbangkan kriteria kontekstual, tetapi mereka mungkin memiliki bias budaya terikat (misalnya tentang perilaku peran) dan kurangnya apresiasi terhadap dampak kinerja ekspatriat dalam konteks organisasi yang lebih luas.
Beberapa ekspatriat dapat memilih untuk memiliki evaluator perusahaan induk mengingat bahwa perkembangan karir masa depan mereka mungkin tergantung pada bagaimana data evaluasi digunakan kembali di markas ini mungkin terutama jadi di caseswhere operasi luar negeri relatif kurang penting dibandingkan operasi domestik AS. Orang lain mungkin lebih memilih evaluasi negara tuan rumah jika mereka menganggap hal itu sebagai refleksi yang lebih akurat kinerja mereka. Beberapa penilai kadang-kadang digunakan dalam konteks domestik seperti teknik disebut sebagai "umpan balik 360 derajat" telah berpendapat bahwa, mengingat kompleksitas lintas budaya dari tugas asing, tim evaluator harus digunakan untuk evaluasi kinerja ekspatriat. Gregersen et. Al. Menemukan bahwa kebanyakan perusahaan (81percent) dalam survei mereka direksi HR di 58 perusahaan multinasional AS yang digunakan lebih dari satu penilai ketika menilai kinerja ekspatriat. Atasan langsung (baik dalam negeri atau host), ekspatriat sebagai penilai diri, dan manajer SDM (baik rumah atau host negara berbasis) yang biasa digunakan sebagai beberapa evaluator AS kinerja ekspatriat. Demikian juga, sebuah survei dari 99 perusahaan yang beroperasi secara internasional Finlandia repcrts bahwa 79 persen dari responden menunjukkan bahwa evaluasi kinerja ekspatriat dilakukan oleh atasan yang terletak di Finlandia. Seringkali meskipun, ini hanya karena tidak ada orang yang cocok di negara tuan rumah untuk melakukan evaluasi tersebut. Ketersediaan berpengetahuan, penilai terlatih dapat menghambat pendekatan yang diambil dalam konteks internasional.
Standar atau disesuaikan
formulir penilaian kinerja
perusahaan domestik yang biasa merancang bentuk penilaian kinerja untuk setiap kategori pekerjaan, terutama yang menggunakan pendekatan penilaian kinerja tradisional daripada manajemen kinerja. Assits standardisasi seperti dalam pengumpulan data kinerja yang akurat yang personil decisionscan dibuat dan memungkinkan untuk comparions lintas karyawan. pertanyaan yang sering diajukan adalah, harus bentuk-bentuk standar disesuaikan bila digunakan untuk mengevaluasi manajer internasional? Sebagai Gregersen dkk berpendapat:
Pada prinsipnya, sistem penilaian kinerja yang dirancang dengan hati-hati dan sering dianggap statis. Alasan yang sah ada untuk mempertahankan standar, secara tradisional digunakan appraisal (baseline misalnya, ketika sistem telah diuji, telah diidentifikasi, dan mengurangi biaya pembangunan masa depan). Alasan-alasan ini berlaku selama konteks kinerja tidak berubah. dalam pengaturan asing, namun konteks kinerja tidak berubah, dan kadang-kadang berubah dramtically. Mengingat konteks global, pengujian sebelumnya dan mendirikan basis didasarkan pada situasi dalam negeri bisa menjadi tidak berarti. Des Pite ini, mereka ditemukan dalam sampel mereka perusahaan AS yang 76 persen