The impact of interdependence on performance evaluations: the mediating role of discomfort with performance appraisal

Putting the System Into Performance Management Systems: A Review and Agenda for Performance Management Research

“…Relevant ratee variables include performance, which affects both evaluations and feedback (e.g., van der Leeuw et al, 2013); ratee demographic and cultural variables, which affect ratings and preferences for PM (e.g., Ellis, 2012); and ratee individual differences (including feedback orientation; Linderbaum & Levy, 2010), which affect feedback and ratee reactions (e.g., Culbertson et al, 2013; Kuvaas, 2007). Relevant rater variables include individual differences and cultural variables, which affect attitudes toward PM and rating behavior and biases (e.g., Ng, Koh, Ang, Kennedy, & Chan, 2011; Saffie-Robertson & Brutus, 2014); rater abilities and skills, which affect a number of different PM tasks (e.g., Goerke, Möller, Schulz-Hardt, Napiersky, & Frey, 2004; Pesta, Kass, & Dunegan, 2005); and raters’ goals and other motivational variables (including self-efficacy; e.g., Ng et al, 2011; Wong & Kwong, 2007). Finally, regarding dyadic variables, we know rater-ratee similarity affects evaluations (e.g., Erez, Schilpzand, Leavitt, Woolum, & Judge, 2015; Pearce & Xu, 2012) and that several aspects of PM are affected by relational variables such as leader-member exchange and the quality of the coaching relationship (e.g., Elicker, Levy, & Hall, 2006; Gregory & Levy, 2012).…”

Performance Appraisal Problems in the Public Sector: Examining Supervisors’ Perceptions

“…However, the failure to differentiate properly between higher and lower performance yields inaccurate performance information and provides an inadequate basis for making important personnel decisions such as those associated with promotions, pay increases, and other actions (Guralnik, Rozmarin, & So, 2004; Jawahar & Williams, 1997). Nevertheless, supervisors often lack the energy, commitment, or motivation to assign low scores, even when they are justified (Saffie-Robertson & Brutus, 2014; Slaughter & Greguras, 2008; Tziner, Murphy, Cleveland, Yavo, & Hayoon, 2008). In addition, supervisors may wish to avoid harsh ratings to avoid alienating workers and to forestall the need to deal with unhappy employees who would be denied promotions or salary increases if low ratings are given (Jawahar & Williams, 1997; London, Mone, & Scott, 2004; Murphy & Cleveland, 1991).…”

Appraising the appraisal process

“…With regard to racial biases, Sackett and Dubois (in Jacobs et al ., 2011) found that both black and white raters were more likely to rate white officers more positively than black officers. Saffie-Robertson and Brutus (2014) found that discomfort with cultural difference could influence the results of performance appraisal. In a study on symbolic representation, Theobald and Haider-Markel (2009) found that black and white citizens stopped for traffic violations were more likely to perceive officer actions as legitimate when they were of the same race as the officer.…”