The Rhetorical Construction of Performance Appraisal: Argument and Persuasion in the Talk of Appraisees and Appraisers

Abstract

In view of the potential for controversy associated with performance appraisal (PA), the study considers it as the object of controversy worthy of rhetorical attention. However, being the object of controversy, which attracts rhetoric, PA becomes a less significant focus for the thesis. Instead, the argumentative and persuasive dimensions of rhetoric in the talk of appraisees and appraisers regarding the PA practiced in their banks becomes the primary subject of the research, particularly with regard to understanding how they construct the reality of their PA. Accordingly, the rhetorical framework of the study is drawn from the ideas of Aristotle (1991) and the contemporary authors, Billig (1987; 1991; 1996) and Potter (1996). The study contributes towards understanding the importance of rhetoric in an organisational context characterised by the controversy or the potential for controversy. For example, the evidence of the presence of the argumentative and persuasive dimensions of rhetoric in the talk of appraisees and appraisers throughout the analysis represents rhetoric not only as an important aspect of PA, but also demonstrates it as a valuable persuasive skill used by them. Respectively, this contributes towards building a theory of PA from the perspective of rhetoric. Hence, as a practical implication of the study, rhetoric should be regarded as an important skill to be mastered by appraisees and appraisers. Moreover, the application of the rhetorical framework for the analysis contributes towards testing the theory, which constitutes the rhetorical framework, on the talk of appraisees and appraisers. Similarly, the rhetorical framework used in the study provides an important methodological contribution and implication for future studies For example, it may be used in the future studies which are based on organisational practices characterised by the controversy or potential for controversy. Another important contribution of the study involves the ‘argumentative context’ and ‘justification process’ as the analysis demonstrates how people anticipate the arguments of absent audiences, and use rhetorical devices to justify their own arguments, regarding a potentially controversial matter. In this regard, an interesting phenomenon observed in the analysis is the code-switching of the appraisees and appraisers, from English to Urdu, when they discussed the sensitive or taboo subjects, which suggests their preference for their native language for the potency in their expressions.