A study was conducted to answer the following research questions: (1) to what extent is there consensus in the organizational culture on basic rules for an effective performance; (2) to what extent are there variations in rule consensus for an effective performance appraisal interview among groups within the organization; and (3) to what extent do the elicited rules reflect the experiences of the organization? A field descriptive study uncovered the participants' formal and informal rules that guided their behaviors in the context of their organization. Four hypothetical scenarios were constructed using the rules as structural guidelines. Scenarios were designed to elicit naturally occurring reactions on the subsequent set of 16 scalar items and various demographic questions. This two-step procedure facilitated inclusion of the "actors'" meanings into the research materials. Results solidly validated this method of gathering information about a particular organizational culture and the relative rule knowledge of the members in the context of that culture. The clerical employees and their managers agreed on several fundamental rules for the appraisal interview. The most potentially harmful disagreement between the two groups was the difference in the stated purpose of the appraisal session. The clerical employees saw the session as a chance to get performance feedback; the supervisors enlarged the purpose of the session to include mutual goal setting through employee participation. (Two tables of data are included and 23 references are attached. Appendixes list interview protocol, interview scenarios and questions, Survey Scalar Items, Survey Demographic Items, and ANOVA Results.) (MG)