LO4

• Multiple sources for performance ratings

  1. Peers
  2. Customers/Clients
  3. Self-appraisals
  4. Supervisors
  5. Direct reports
• 360-degree performance appraisal, or “multi-source

  feedback,” 


  is used by more than 85 percent of Fortune 500 companies
• Rater error training was commonly included:​(HELPRC)


  • Halo effect​
  • Error of central tendency​
  • Leniency and strictness biases​
  • Personal prejudice​
  • Recency effect​
  • Contrast errors
• Halo effect


  A favourable opinion of employee performance in one category skews ratings
• Error of central tendency


  Reluctance to give very poor or excellent ratings, instead placing ratings near the centre of the rating scale
• Leniency


  Raters are too easy in evaluating employee

  performance
• Strictness


  Raters are too harsh in evaluating employee

  performance
• Personal Prejudice


  A rater’s dislike for a person or group distorts ratings given
• Recency Effect


  Ratings are strongly affected by the employee’s most recent actions
• Contrast Errors


  Raters compare employees to each other rather than to a performance standard
• Evaluation interviews


  performance review sessions that give employees feedback​
• The evaluator may provide this evaluation interviews feedback through several approaches:


  • Tell-and-sell Approach​
  • Tell-and-listen Approach​
  • Problem-solving Approach
• tell-and-sell approach

  • reviews the employee’s performance and tries to convince the employee to perform better. It is best used on new employees.
• tell-and-listen approach


  • allows the employee to explain reasons, excuses, and defensive feelings about performance.

  
  

  • It attempts to overcome these reactions by counselling the employee on how to perform better
• problem-solving approach


  • identifies problems that are interfering with employee performance.
  • Then, through training, coaching, or counselling, efforts are made to remove these deficiencies, often by setting goals for future performance.