Docsity
Docsity
Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity

Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan

Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips
Sell on Docsity
Sell on Docsity
Docsity AI
Docsity AI
Log inSign up

Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity

Find documents

Prepare for your exams with the study notes shared by other students like you on Docsity

Search for your university

Find the specific documents for your university's exams

Docsity AINEW

Summarize your documents, ask them questions, convert them into quizzes and concept maps

Explore questions

Clear up your doubts by reading the answers to questions asked by your fellow students

Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan

Share documents
download point icon20 Points

For each uploaded document

Answer questions
download point icon5 Points

For each given answer (max 1 per day)

All the ways to get free points
Get points immediately

Choose a premium plan with all the points you need

Study Opportunities

Choose your next study program

Get in touch with the best universities in the world. Search through thousands of universities and official partners

Community

Ask the community

Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts

Free resources

Our save-the-student-ebooks!

Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors

Performance Appraisal: Developmental Planning and Rating Formats - Prof. F. Adair, Study notes of Psychology

Louisiana State University (LSU) - System OfficePsychology
Prof. F. Adair

The contextual approach to performance appraisal (pa), moving beyond the belief that accuracy is the primary goal. It discusses various rating formats, including graphic rating scales, behaviorally anchored rating scales (bars), checklists, and employee comparison procedures. The document also covers central tendency and severity errors, distributional errors, and rater training. Contemporary research on the social-psychological context of pa is also presented.

Typology: Study notes

2011/2012

Uploaded on 05/06/2012

ink06
ink06 🇺🇸

3

(1)

32 documents

1 / 7

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
I/O Psychology Chapter 5 9.15.11
Performance Appraisal Defined
Systematic review and evaluation of employee’s job performance and the delivery of
performance feedback (positive and negative)
Uses:
oPersonnel Decisions –promoting, firing
oDevelopmental Purposes – Identify strengths and weaknesses (coaching)
oDocumentation – provide line of legal defense against lawsuits
Performance Appraisal Implications
Poorly designed systems result in very negative consequences
oWrong people get promoted or fired
oEmployees feel treated unfairly and behave accordingly (sabotaging the company,
quitting)
oOutcomes include: low motivation, low commitment to organize, counterproductive
behaviors, job dissatisfaction, etc.)
I/O and Performance Appraisal
I/O psychologists especially well-suited to be involved in PA because of training:
oMeasurement expertise
oHR knowledge
oOrganizational psychology
Performance management: process of individual performance improvement includes
1. Goal setting
2. Coaching/ feedback
3. Performance appraisal
4. Developmental planning
Contextual Approach
PA is a social-psychological process
Communication occurs within this social context
Used to believe that accuracy was the primary goal of performance appraisal – thus, research on
formats and errors
Now, we realize that the social context makes PA a complex process of which accuracy is just
one part
Rating Formats: Overview
Various ways to conduct appraisals
oGraphic Rating Scales
oBehaviorally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS)
oChecklists
oEmployee Comparison Procedures
1 | P a g e
pf3
pf4
pf5

Partial preview of the text

Download Performance Appraisal: Developmental Planning and Rating Formats - Prof. F. Adair and more Study notes Psychology in PDF only on Docsity!

Performance Appraisal Defined  Systematic review and evaluation of employee’s job performance and the delivery of performance feedback (positive and negative)  Uses: o Personnel Decisions –promoting, firing o Developmental Purposes – Identify strengths and weaknesses (coaching) o Documentation – provide line of legal defense against lawsuits Performance Appraisal Implications  Poorly designed systems result in very negative consequences o Wrong people get promoted or fired o Employees feel treated unfairly and behave accordingly (sabotaging the company, quitting) o Outcomes include: low motivation, low commitment to organize, counterproductive behaviors, job dissatisfaction, etc.) I/O and Performance Appraisal  I/O psychologists especially well-suited to be involved in PA because of training: o Measurement expertise o HR knowledge o Organizational psychology  Performance management: process of individual performance improvement includes

  1. Goal setting
  2. Coaching/ feedback
  3. Performance appraisal
  4. Developmental planning Contextual Approach  PA is a social-psychological process  Communication occurs within this social context  Used to believe that accuracy was the primary goal of performance appraisal – thus, research on formats and errors  Now, we realize that the social context makes PA a complex process of which accuracy is just one part Rating Formats: Overview  Various ways to conduct appraisals o Graphic Rating Scales o Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS) o Checklists o Employee Comparison Procedures

Graphic Rating Scales  Scales consisting of a number of traits or behaviors that the rater must judge based on how much the rate possesses or based on where EE falls on this dimension regarding expectations Dependability: |-------------------|-------------------|-------------------|-------------------|-------------------|-------------------| Does not meet Meets expectations expectations Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS)  Five steps in the development o Identification of important performance dimensions (job-specific) o Generation of behavioral example (Critical Incidents) at all levels of effectiveness o Retranslation of critical incidents (CIs) back into dimensions o Rating of each CI on effectiveness o Choose items with behavioral anchors  Strength and Weakness – very elaborate so takes much time and money to create Checklists  Read large number of behavioral statements and check if individual exhibits each behavior  Weighted checklist – variant of the checklists in which items are weighted by importance  Forced Choice Checklist – choose 2 out of 4 items describing the employee Employee Comparison Procedures  Ratees evaluated based on how well they measure up to peers/ colleagues o Rank-Ordering – employees ranked from best to worst o Paired Comparison – compare each employee to every other employee o Forced Distribution – Raters distribute rates into 5 to 7 categories Advantages and Disadvantages of Rating Formats (see book) Advantages Disadvantages Graphic Rating Scales 1. Easy to develop

  1. Easy to use
    1. Lack of precision in dimensions
    2. Lack of precision in anchors BARS 1. Precise and well-defined scales – good for coaching
  2. Well received by raters and ratees 1. Time and money intensive 2. No evidence that BARS are more accurate than other formats Checklists 1. Easy to develop
  3. Easy to use
  4. Rater errors like halo, leniency, severity, etc. are quire frequent Employee Comparison Methods 1. Precise rankings are possible
  5. Useful for making administrative rewards on a limited basis
  6. Time intensive
  7. Not well received by raters (e.g. Paired Comparison) or rates (e.g., Forced Distribution

Central Tendency  Raters use only the midpoint of the scale in rating their employees  Why? o Raters don’t have much experience with subordinates so they default with high marks o Raters may be lazy o Raters afraid of discriminating among EEs Severity  Tend to use only low end of the scale when rating employee performance  Why? o Motivate employees o Humble employees o Provide baseline for improvement o Maintain impression of being in control Problems with Distributional Errors  Ratings do not adequately discriminate between effective and ineffective employees o Range Restriction  If used for personnel decisions, will not provide adequate and needed information  Of course Distributional Errors could be of the “True” variety Other Errors  Recency Effect – raters rely heavily on most recent interactions or observations when rating performance  First Impression Error (Primacy) – raters pay inordinate amount of attention to initial experiences with rate  Similar-to-Me – raters give more favorable ratings to ratees they perceive to be like them Rater Training  Rater Error Training (RET) – to reduce errors through awareness of them o Assumption that reducing errors increases accuracy is faulty; in fact, it can reduce accuracy (there may be a person that deserves really high marks)  Frame of Reference (FOR) – enhance observational/ categorizational skills o Provides a common frame of reference to increase consistency of ratings o Improves accuracy Contemporary Research: The Social Psychological Context: Overview  Reaction Criteria o Trust  Supervision-Subordinate Relationship o Multiple source feedback (360 degree)  Organizational Politics o Participation o Knowledge of appraisal system

The Social-Psychological Context  Factors such as the social, legal and organizational cultures affect performance appraisal  Looking at PA from the “Organizational Side”  Get away from the industrial psych roots and broaden our look at PA Reaction Criteria  Rater and rate reactions to the appraisal process are important  Reactions may be a better indicator of viability of the PA system  Both appraisal characteristics and organizational factors impact  Reactions include satisfaction, perceived accuracy, feedback, etc.  What are the implications for organizations? Supervision-Subordinate Relationship  Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) – supervisors have different types of relationships with different subordinates  These relationships can affect the performance appraisal process  EEs with a favorable LMX have been rated higher than their counterparts regardless of objective performance  Implications? o Impacts EEs ideas of fairness and how much they trust employment ratings. We should be weary when we look at performance data Organizational Politics  Organizations are political entities – politics plays a role in appraisal  Subordinates use impression management strategies  Supervisors manage impressions too!  Implications? Trust  Extent to which raters believe that fair and accurate appraisals have and will be made in their organization  Related to employee acceptance of and trust in management  If the process is trusted, it will be utilized more effectively  PA can be a tool to enhance organizational trust  Implications? Multiple-Source Feedback (360)  Involves the use of ratings by subordinates, peers, supervisors, clients and self  Consistent with the participative, empowered organizations of the 21st^ century  Prevalent for development, but increasing for personnel decisions too  Three assumptions for 360 to work: o Using multiple sources overcomes individual rater idiosyncrasies o Involvement in process makes participants happy o Multiple raters bring multiple viewpoints about the ratee, which are valuable

Performance Appraisal and the Law  Cannot discriminate in U.S. on basis of non-performance related factors (age, gender, race, ethnicity, disability, & religion)  Eight legal Recommendations for Performance Appraisal (Austin, et al., 1995) o Start where? o Communicate performance standards in writing o Recognize separate performance dimensions rather than “overall” o Use objective criteria with subjective judgments where possible o Provide an appeal mechanism o Use multiple raters when possible o Document everything relating to decisions (ex: documenting an EE’s day) o Train raters and provide written instructions Evidence for Utility of Legal Recommendations  Werner & Bolino (1997) reviewed court decisions and found judgments for defendants when: o A job analysis is used o Written instructions are clear o Employees can review their appraisals (keeps the bosses honest) o Multiple raters agree on ratings o Rater training is used  Format didn’t seem to matter at all to the judges The Due Process Model  Model created to help guide the development of fair and legally defensible performance appraisal systems (Folger, Konovsky & Cropanzano, 1992)  Test Metaphor vs. Due Process Metaphor  Emphasis is on: o Adequate notice (ex: letting the EE know what’ll they’ll be rated on in X months)  Provide lots of information o Fair hearing  Includes an appeal mechanism o Judgments based on evidence  May include a self-assessment (focuses the individual inwardly and how they can improve)  Implications on this model?