Work performance is one of the most important dependent variables in Work and Organizational Psychology. The main objective of this paper was to explore the relationships between citizenship performance and task performance measures obtained from different appraisers and their consistency through a seldom-used methodology, intraclass correlation coefficients. Participants were 135 public employees, the total staff in a local government department. Jobs were clustered into job families through a work analysis based on standard questionnaires. A task description technique was used to develop a performance appraisal questionnaire for each job family, with three versions: self-, supervisor-, and peer-evaluation, in addition to a measure of citizenship performance. Only when the self-appraisal bias is controlled, significant correlations appeared between task performance rates. However, intraclass correlations analyses show that only self- (contextual and task) performance measures are consistent, while interrater agreement disappears. These results provide some interesting clues about the procedure of appraisal instrument development, the role of appraisers, and the importance of choosing adequate consistency analysis methods.

Performance appraisal is a complex process by which an organization can determine the extent to which employees are performing their work effectively. However, this appraisal may not be accurate if there is no reduction in the impact of problems caused by possibly subjective rater judgements. The main objective of this work is to check the effectiveness—separately and jointly—of the following four training programmes in the extant literature aimed at improving the accuracy of performance assessment: 1) Performance Dimension Training, 2) Frame-of-Reference, 3) Rater Error Training, and 4) Behavioural Observation Training. Based on these training strategies, three programmes were designed and applied separately. A fourth programme was a combination of the other three. We analyzed two studies using different samples (85 students and 42 employees) for the existence of differences in the levels of knowledge of performance and its dimensions, rater errors, observational accuracy, and accuracy of task and citizenship performance appraisal, according to the type of training raters receive. First, the main results show that training based on performance dimensions and the creation of a common framework, in addition to the training that includes the four programmes (Training_4_programmes), increases the level of knowledge of performance and its dimensions. Second, groups that receive training in rater error score higher in knowledge of biases than the other groups, whether or not they have received training. Third, participants’ observational accuracy improves with each new moment measure (post-training and follow-up), though not because of the type of training received. Fourth, participants who receive training through the programme that combine the other four gave a task performance appraisal that was closer to the one undertaken by the judges-experts than the other groups. And finally, students’ citizenship performance appraisal does not vary according to type of training or to different moment measures, whereas the group of employees who received all four types of training gave a more accurate citizenship performance assessment.

No abstract

No abstract