This study explores the moderating factors determining the motivational effect of performance-based human resource management. The analysis of the data from the 2010 Merit Principle Survey (MPS) reveals that the motivational effect of performance-based human resource management was weaker for those who have (a) a strong public service motivation, (b) a low self-efficacy, (c) enjoyed a high level of job autonomy, and (d) had enough resources necessary to get the job done. The directions of the first two moderating effects were consistent with common beliefs. However, those of job autonomy effect and of organizational resource effect were incompatible with the popular beliefs that autonomy and resources are necessary conditions for successful performance management. These unexpected results shed some lights on the political dynamics around performance management, indicating that those who have enjoyed a considerable discretion are more likely to perceive the practice of performance management as a threat to their autonomy and that those who have had sufficient organizational resources may fear for future change in resource allocation as a result of regular performance re-appraisal.
