EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Cognitive biases policy (CBP) in performance improvements – the example of benchmarking

Konrad Kulikowski

International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 2021, vol. 71, issue 4, 1297-1311

Abstract: Purpose - Despite evidence showing that cognitive biases – the systematic errors made by humans during cognitive processing, are prevalent among decision-makers, there is a lack of theoretical models providing insight into how these limitations of human mind might affect decisions made during performance management. This study aims to fill this gap and contribute to performance management scholarship by proposing a conceptual framework broadening our understanding of the role of cognitive biases in performance improvements practices and by highlighting remedies for cognitive biases. Design/methodology/approach - Using benchmarking as an example, the authors integrate the knowledge from performance management and cognitive psychology literature. Examples of cognitive biases possible during benchmarking are used to illustrate how the limitations of human mind might have a critical role in performance management. Findings - The cognitive biases might diminish the positive effect of performance improvement practice on organizational performance. As there is a prevalence of cognitive biases coupled with the inability of individuals to recognize and face them, the remedy for cognitive biases should be sought not at an individual but rather on an organizational level, in creating organizational cognitive biases policy (CBP). Originality/value - The presented model provides new insights into the role of cognitive biases in performance management and allows seeing CBP as a safeguard against the effects of cognitive biases on performance. By referring to cognitive biases and CBP, our model also helps to understand why the same performance improvement practices might incite different opinions among decision-makers.

Keywords: Benchmarking; Cognitive biases; Cognitive biases policy; Performance management (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.110 ... d&utm_campaign=repec (text/html)
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.110 ... d&utm_campaign=repec (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eme:ijppmp:ijppm-02-2020-0060

DOI: 10.1108/IJPPM-02-2020-0060

Access Statistics for this article

International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management is currently edited by Dr Luisa Huatuco and Dr Nicky Shaw

More articles in International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management from Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Emerald Support ().

 
Page updated 2025-03-19
Handle: RePEc:eme:ijppmp:ijppm-02-2020-0060