ABSTRACT
Reading the chapters that comprise this book created something of an epiphany for us. We have been "doing" performance measurement for more than a half-century, and that is just the time we have spent together at Penn Sate (honesty can be a painful policy). We have very well structured, and somewhat historically dated mental models that place performance rating, appraisal, and feedback firmly on the "I" side of the industrial-organizational (I-O) psychology divide, Although we have both had occasion to have some private doubts about the wisdom of viewing performance measurement topics so narrowly as concerns, it was somewhat of a shock when we got together initially after having read all the chapter manuscripts to learn that we both had changed our minds. We each thought we would have to convince the other that performance measurement was strongly in the "organizational camp or, at least, one that is in the intersection of "I" and "O" concerns. We do recognize that we are not the first to come to this realization, but suggest that our having reached this conclusion indicates the undeniability of its truth. When old dogs learn new tricks, something very clear and convincing must be operating. We must acknowledge that Austin and Crespin (chap. 2, this volume) have done much to stimulate our thinking with their masterful discussion of the past, present, and future of performance appraisal. Their cogent writing served both to give us new ideas and to reinforce the belief we were headed on a useful and reasoned path.
