C Suite Accountability and Employee Performance Assessments in a U.S. Defense Contractor: A Qualitative Single Case Analysis

Abstract

This qualitative single-case study examined the relationship between C-suite accountability and the design and effectiveness of employee performance assessments in a rapidly expanding defense contracting firm. Although performance assessments are widely regarded as essential to organizational effectiveness, the defense sector presents distinct regulatory and security challenges that complicate their consistent execution. Using semi-structured interviews, a brief survey, and direct observations with 15 overhead employees across diverse roles, the study employed a constructivist orientation to capture nuanced perspectives. Findings indicated that C-suite leadership exerted a decisive influence on assessment quality, while frontline supervisors played a pivotal role in daily performance communication. Revenue-linked pressures altered both the timing and depth of evaluations, reflecting the “cost of making money” within compliance-driven procurement cycles. Informal assessments frequently shaped compensation and administrative actions, yet formal processes lagged behind the firm’s accelerated growth. Moreover, communication gaps emerged, with support staff often perceiving limited executive recognition of their contributions. The study concludes that executive accountability is closely associated with clearer expectations, enhanced supervisory coaching, and consistent feedback. Formalized appraisals were shown to function not only as governance mechanisms but also as cultural signals in a regulated industry. The research highlights the importance of sequenced performance management roadmaps, transparent communication, and explicit linkage of performance measures to strengthen engagement, retention, and audit readiness.