Fuzzy logic and performance evaluation: discussion and application

Purpose - This paper seeks to describe the development of the fuzzy logic model approach to decision making and its value for managers by illustrating its application to employee performance appraisals. Design/methodology/approach - An extensive literature review provided the framework for the model development in this research. Performance evaluations represent a critically important decision that often involves subjective information. Models and heuristic techniques that focus on the use of different types of information are available; however, with few exceptions, the models are not robust enough to be applied in a practical, managerially useful manner. Fuzzy logic models provide a reasonable solution to these common decision situations. Findings - Fuzzy logic can be a powerful tool for managers to use instead of a traditional mathematical model when evaluating the performance of personnel or teams. The flexibility of the model allows the decision maker to introduce vagueness, uncertainty, and subjectivity into the evaluation system. Research limitations/implications - This research calls attention to an alternative method of the performance evaluation system as opposed to the traditional quantitative methods. Future research in this area is needed to develop a method for relating membership values to linguistic variables in performance evaluation, as well as testing the sensitivity of membership values and their impact on the outcome. Originality/value - This paper provides a simple-to-use fuzzy logic model for establishing a more meaningful evaluation system.

[1]  Guido Capaldo,et al.  Applying fuzzy logic to personnel assessment : a case study , 2001 .

[2]  Jeffrey S. Hornsby,et al.  Current Trends in Performance Appraisal: An Examination of Managerial Practice , 1996 .

[3]  Bart Kosko,et al.  Neural networks and fuzzy systems , 1998 .

[4]  Thomas Whalen,et al.  Presumption, prejudice, and regularity in fuzzy material implication , 1992 .

[5]  Lotfi A. Zadeh,et al.  Fuzzy Sets , 1996, Inf. Control..

[6]  J. Mendel Uncertain Rule-Based Fuzzy Logic Systems: Introduction and New Directions , 2001 .

[7]  George M. Alliger,et al.  Fuzzy sets and personnel selection: discussion and an application , 1993 .

[8]  Michael D. Coovert,et al.  Mathematical Modeling of Decision Making: A Soft and Fuzzy Approach to Capturing Hard Decisions , 2003, Hum. Factors.

[9]  Jon R. Katzenbach,et al.  The Wisdom of Teams: Creating the High-Performance Organization , 1992 .

[10]  Ajay Mehra,et al.  Top Management-Team Diversity and Firm Performance: Examining the Role of Cognitions , 2000 .

[11]  Kurt J. Schmucker,et al.  Fuzzy Sets, Natural Language Computations, and Risk Analysis , 1983 .

[12]  Juan I. Sanchez,et al.  A second look at the relationship between rating and behavioral accuracy in performance appraisal. , 1996 .

[13]  Juhee Hahn,et al.  Does pay‐for‐performance enhance perceived distributive justice for collectivistic employees? , 2006 .

[14]  R. Arvey,et al.  Performance evaluation in work settings. , 1998, Annual review of psychology.

[15]  Daryl R. Armentrout,et al.  Engineering Productivity Management and Performance Measurement , 1986 .

[16]  Corey E. Miller,et al.  How Accurate Are Your Performance Appraisals? , 2006 .

[17]  T. Ross Fuzzy Logic with Engineering Applications , 1994 .

[18]  Urbano Nunes,et al.  A Wheelchair Steered through Voice Commands and Assisted by a Reactive Fuzzy-Logic Controller , 2002, J. Intell. Robotic Syst..

[19]  Alexander D. Stajkovic,et al.  Behavioral management and task performance in organizations: Conceptual background, meta-analysis, and test of alternative models. , 2003 .

[20]  Siegfried Gottwald,et al.  Fuzzy Sets and Fuzzy Logic , 1993 .

[21]  Gary Klein,et al.  A new view of IS personnel performance evaluation , 2001, CACM.

[22]  Beloslav Riečan,et al.  Sets and fuzzy sets , 1997 .

[23]  James H. Stronge,et al.  The dynamics of effective performance evaluation systems in education: Conceptual, human relations, and technical domains , 1991 .

[24]  M. Higgs,et al.  Influence of team composition and task complexity on team performance , 2005 .