PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL (Strategy 4: Training Raters to rate more accurately…
Strategy 4: Training Raters to rate more accurately
Reduce halo effect errors and improve accuracy
Performance-dimension training and performance standard training
Longer training program
Extensive practice and feedback sessions
individualize or small-group discussion sections
Straightforward lecturing to ratees
STRATEGIES FOR BETTER UNDERSTANDING AND MEASURING JOB PERFORMANCE
Strategy 1: Improve Appraisal Formats
Types of formats
Straight ranking - employees are ranked relative to each other.
Alternation ranking - Raters are better at ranking people at extreme ends of the distribution. Raters are asked to indicate the best employee and then worst employee.
Paired-comparison ranking - Forcing raters to make ranking with judgement about discrete pairs of people.
Evaluating Performance Appraisal Formats
Employee development potential
Personnel research potential
Five main characteristics:
Employee development criterion
Personnel research criterion
Strategy 2: Select the Right Raters
Supervisors as raters
Supervisor assign what work employees are to perform
Supervisor frequently have considerable prior experience in rating employees
Peers as raters
Work closely with the ratee and probably have an undistorted perspective of typical performance, particularly in group assignments.
Self as raters
Done by someone who has the most complete knowledge about the ratee's performance.
More lenient and possibly more unreliable that rating from other sources.
Firms are asking employees to rate themselves as the first step in appraisal process.
Subordinate as raters
See their strengths and their weaknesses as a leader and to modify their behavior
Strategy 3: Understand How Raters Process Information
The rater observes the behavior of a ratee.
the rater encodes this behavior as part of a total picture of the ratee.
The rater stores this information in memory
The rater reviews the performance dimensions and retrieves stored observation/impression to determine their relevance to the performance dimensions.
Errors in the rating process
Common errors in appraising performance
Guilt, embarrassment about giving praise, taking things for granted, not noticing good or poor performance, the halo effect, dislike of confrontation and spending too little time on preparation of the appraisal.
Errors in storage and recalls
The raters stores information in the form of traits, a rater may remember events that didn't actually occur and memory decay. The longer the delay, the less accurate the rating.
Errors in the actual evaluation
Supervisors humiliate performance to send a signal to employee
and they tend to weight negative attributes more heavily than positive attributes.