Section FourPerformance Evaluation of Executives
In spite of the value of performance evaluation systems,
Longenecker and Gioia have found that such systems are not
used very frequently for executives. More specifically, “the
higher one rises in an organization the less likely one is to
receive quality feedback about job performance.”^14 Several
questionable beliefs or myths are apparently responsible for the
low regard for performance evaluation at the executive level.
These myths are that performance evaluation is (1) not needed
or desired by executives, (2) inconsistent with an executive’s
dignity, (3) too time consuming for the schedules of the
superiors of executives, (4) detrimental to executive creativity
and autonomy, (5) irrelevant since executives must meet
“bottom line” criteria, and (6) executive performance is too
intangible for description. Nonetheless, Longenecker and Gioia
found that these myths lack a factual basis. In marked contrast,
their research found that executives desire feedback and that
even though bottom line results are critical for executives, they
still need process-type feedback. Further, when executive
performance is considered too intangible for description, the
vacuum of explanation may be filled by political explanations.
Some suggestions may be helpful in encouraging the use of
performance evaluation at executive levels. For example, the
process should utilize written narratives instead of standard
rating forms because of the highly individualistic nature of