Enhancing importance‐performance analysis

Abstract

Purpose

The interpretation of the importance/performance map is based on an assumption of independence between importance and performance but many studies question the validity of this assumption. The aim of this research is to develop a new typology for job satisfaction attributes as well as a new importance/performance map that can be an aid for organizations when they prioritize their improvement actions based on a job satisfaction study.

Design/methodology/approach

A typology for possible relationships between importance and performance in job satisfaction studies is developed based on theoretical considerations. This typology is then applied and validated on approximately 10,000 responses from the European Employee Index 2002. Ultimately a new importance/performance map for priority setting in job satisfaction studies is developed based on the new typology for possible relationships between importance and performance.

Findings

The result of this analysis showed that the assumption of independence between the importance and performance is invalid in certain situations.

Research limitations/implications

The subsets in the analysis are not all independent since a respondent may appear in more than one subset. This is a problem with the data generating process that to some extent might influence the analysis.

Practical implications

Profound impact on the way that the importance/performance map should be interpreted since non‐proportional attributes will move both vertically as well as horizontally in the traditional importance/performance map as performance changes.

Originality/value

This paper gives a theoretical explanation for the presence of non‐proportional satisfiers and develops a new importance/performance map that takes the presence of non‐proportional satisfiers into account.

Citation

Eskildsen, J.K. and Kristensen, K. (2006), "Enhancing importance‐performance analysis", International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 55 No. 1, pp. 40-60. https://doi.org/10.1108/17410400610635499