Does performance management benefit both employers and employees

Performance management often plays a key role in the strategic human resource management (unitarist) approach.

While the unitarist approach has become increasingly popular over the past three decades, there is also a body of research which disputes its benefits and emphasises the conflicting interests of employers and employees.

Question:
Does performance management (which includes the monitoring and review of employee progress) benefit both employers and employees?

Refer to the HRM (unitarist) and IR (pluralist) frames of reference in answering this question and use specific examples to support your argument.

There are a number of different parts to this question

Theoretical framework:
Provide definitions for all of the technical or academic terms used in the essay (do not use dictionaries or wikepedia). Refer to unitarism and pluralism to support your argument.

Evidence:
What evidence have you provided to support your argument? You should give several examples, and references to support your claims. Don’t use examples from just one case or industry – this will not provide enough evidence to support your argument. Use at least 7 academic sources (NOT the text book).

Context:
Which time period is your essay focussed on (the past 20 years) and which examples are you using? Are they from a particular country? Remember, this is NOT a case study so you need several examples.

Argument:
What point is your essay making? Does PM benefit BOTH employers and employees, or one over the other, and which employees are more at risk than others? Be specific.

Academic sources: minimum 7 (journal articles and academic books)