Performance Rating as a Function of Trust in Appraisal and Rater Individual Differences.

Job performance measurement in the military: A classification scheme, literature review, and directions for research.

“…Although DeCotiis and Petit (1978) incorporated rater motivation as an important part of their model of the appraisal process, they cited only Taft's (1971) theory of interpersonal judgments as support for the inclusion of this variable in the model. Recently, Bernardin and his colleagues Bernardin, Orban, & Carlyle, 1981) have focused on rater motivation, but only in terms of how it might be affected by the level of trust a rater has in the appraisal system. It is hypothesized that there are differences in motivation and trust in the appraisal system across raters.…”

“…Within the performance measurement literature, research on observational processes (Hedge, 1982;Murphy, 1982), decision processes (Borman, 1977;Hedge, 1982), cognitive processes (Feldman, 1981), rater motivation and trust (Bernardin, Orban, & Carlyle, 1981;, and acceptability of the rating system (Dipboye & dePontbriand, 1981;Kavanagh & -• Hedge, In press;Landy, Barnes, & Murphy, 1978) indicates these can be important determinants of rating quality. All of this research was conducted either in a laboratory or a field setting using operational measures of job performance.…”

“…1978) and, their trust in the appraisal process (Bernardin, Orban, & Carlyle, .1981) are considered important process variables. Although there is little empirical evidence in the literature with respect to the role of these variables, there are indications that they act as intervening process variables.…”

The Development for Performance Appraisal System of Secondary School Teachers under Local Administrative Organization

“…In addition, they were not ready for accepting the mistake in evaluative technique or outcome. It was congruent with Bernardin, Orban and Carlisle (1981) that the different problems in performance appraisal such as the high score of evaluation was caused by limitation in designing and applying the system which were not studied appropriately. Therefore, the guidelines for solving the problem caused by work practice evaluation, were presented by improving the measurement instrument, training program, policy as well as process of work performance appraisal.…”

“…(Bernardin, Orban and Carlisle, 1981;Heron, 1956;Sharon and Bartlett, 1969;Taylor and Wherry, 1951) Although there was the improvement of training, project, appraisal policy and process of Performance Appraisal for 40 years, those problems were still occurred. It was indicated that there were other problems in applying the Performance Appraisal in the organization or the problems were not being able to be solved.…”