• Compensation (raises, merit pay, bonuses)

• Personnel Decisions (e.g., promotion, transfer, dismissal)

• Identification of Training Needs

• Research Purposes (e.g., assessing the worth/validity of selection tests

Uses of Performance Appraisal

Basic Performance Appraisal Process

Conduct a Job Analysis (e.g., specify tasks and KSAs)

Develop Performance Standards (e.g., define what is superior,

acceptable, and poor job performance)

Develop or Choose a Performance Appraisal System

Performance Appraisal Process

Observation

• Selective Attention

• Timing

• Structure

• Frequency

Storage

• Encoding of Information (e.g., categorization)

• Short vs. Long-term

• Memory

Evaluation

• Retrieve Information

• Combine information

• Decision-making (judgment)

Sources of Information

1) Supervisors (most common)

• Role Conflict (e.g., judge and trainer/teacher)

• Motivation

• Time availability

• Friendship

2) Co-Workers (Peers)

• Friendship bias

• Leniency

• High level of accuracy

• Best used as a source of feedback

Sources of Information (cont)

3) Self

• Lots of knowledge

• Leniency effect

• Good preparation for performance appraisal meeting (conducive for dialog)

4) Subordinates

• Biases (e.g., # of subordinates, type of job, expected evaluation from supervisor)

5) Client

• Good source of feedback

• Negativity bias

Subjective Appraisal Methods (can be used with any type of job)

Relative Methods

1) Ranking

1st _____

2nd_____

3rd _____

2) Pair Comparison

Employee-1 _____ versus Employee-2 _____

Employee-1 _____ versus Employee-3 _____ etc.

• Both are difficult to use with a large number of subordinates

Subjective Appraisal Methods

Absolute Methods

1) Narrative essay

• Unstructured (e.g., content, length)

• Affected by the writing ability of supervisors and time availability

2) Graphic Rating Scale (most common)_____ _____ _____ _____ _____ Very Average Excellent Poor

1) Leniency (positive bias)

X _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ Very Average Excellent Poor

2) Severity (negative bias)

X _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ Very Average Excellent

Poor

3)Central Tendency (midpoint) X _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ Very Average Excellent Poor

All lead to a restriction in the

range of performance

scores

Common Rating Scale Errors

Responsibility

Commitment

Initiative

Sensitivity

Judgment

Communication

Observation of specific behavior (s) (e.g., volunteers to work

overtime)

Halo Error

High ratings on other performance dimensions

Supervisor Characteristics

Subordinate Characteristics (e.g., age, gender, race,

attractiveness)

Labels for Subordinate (positive or negative)

Expectations for

Subordinate

Liking of subordinate

Observation of Subordinate

Job Performance

(e.g., gender, race, age)

Selective Attention

Attitudes, Stereotypes

Encoding of Information Recall

Information

Evaluate Performance

Subjective Appraisal Methods

Behavioral Methods (use of critical incidents; examples of good and poor job behavior collected by job experts over time)

Behavior Observation Scales (BOS)

• Rate the frequency in which critical incidents are performed by employees

• Sum the ratings for a total “performance” score

1) Assists others in job duties._____ _____ _____ _____ _____Never Usually Always

2) Cleans equipment after each use._____ _____ _____ _____ _____Never Usually Always

Objective Appraisal Data

1) Production Data (e.g., sales volume, units produced)

• When observation occurs (timing), and how data is collected

• Fairness and relevancy issue

• Potential limited variability

• Limitations regarding supervisory personnel2) Personnel Data

• Absenteeism (excused versus unexcused)

• Tardiness

• Accidents (fault issue)

Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale (BARS) Process

1) Generate critical incidents (examples of good and poor job performance)

2) Place Critical Incidents Into performance dimensions (e.g., Responsibility, Initiative, Safety)

3) Retranslation Step (do step # 2 again with a separate group of job experts. Discard incidents where disagreement exists as to which dimension in which they belong)

4) Calculate the mean and standard deviation of each critical incident (discard those with a large standard deviation)

5) Place critical incidents on a vertical scale

BARS (Pros and Cons)

• Process involves various employees (increases the likelihood of usage)

• Job specificity (different BARS need to be developed for each position)

• Not any better at reducing common rating scale errors (e.g., leniency, halo)

• Time consuming

Performance Appraisal Training

1) Frequent observation of performance and feedback (both positive and negative)

2) Recordkeeping (ongoing if possible)

3) Encourage self-assessment of employees

4) Focus on behaviors (not traits)

5) Use specific behavioral criteria and standards

6) Set goals for employees (specific and challenging ones)

7) Focus on how to observe job behaviors and provide incentives to do so

1) Ensure that procedures for personnel decisions do not differ as a function of the race, sex, national origin, religion, or age of those affected by such decisions.

2) Use objective and uncontaminated data whenever they are available.

3) Provide a formal system of review or appeal to resolve disagreements regarding appraisals.

4) Use more than one independent evaluator of performance.

5) Use a formal, standardized system for personnel decisions.

6) Ensure that evaluators have ample opportunity to observe and rate performance if ratings must be made.

7) Avoid ratings on traits such as dependability, drive, aptitude, or attitude.

8) Provide documented performance counseling prior to performance,-based termination decisions.

Legally Defensible Appraisal Systems

9) Communicate specific performance standards to employees.

10) Provide raters with written instructions on how to complete performance evaluations.

11) Evaluate employees on specific work dimensions, rather than on a single overall or global measure.

12) Require documentation in terms of specific behaviors (e.g., critical incidents) for extreme ratings.

13) Base the content of the appraisal form on a job analysis.

14) Provide employees with an opportunity to review their appraisals.

15) Educate personnel decision-makers regarding laws on discrimination.

Legally Defensible Appraisal Systems (cont)

• Asking for (and using) performance information/input from employees

• Ensure a 2-way interaction during the performance appraisal meeting

• Provide a way for employees to counter or challenge the appraisal

• Sufficient detail and knowledge of employee performance by supervisors

• Consistent use of performance standards across employees

• Basing performance evaluation on actual job behaviors

• Using performance ratings for personnel decisions (e.g., pay, promotion)

Factors Affecting Employees Acceptance of Performance Evaluations

Importance of rater training

(importance of using employee self-evaluations)

x

GENDER

FEMALE MALE

REGULAR FAST REGULAR FAST

UNATTRACTIVE

ATTRACTRIVE

RATED ON VARIOUS FACTORS (E.G., ABILITY, INTEGRITY, LIKEABILITY)

KEY IS PERCEPTION OF LEVELS OF FEMININITY. IF HIGHLY FEMININE, NOT SEEN AS VERY CAPABLE.

Female attractiveness and corporate success

RATE TRAITS OF TYPICAL MALES

RATE TRAITS OF TYPICAL FEMALES

RATE TRAITS OF TYPICAL OF LEADERS

MALE TRAITS SEEN AS SIMILAR TO LEADERSHIP TRAITS

Female traits and leadership

WHITES INTERVIEWED BLACK APPLICANTS

• MORE DISTANCE

• LESS EYE CONTACT

• LESS OPEN

• BLACKS VIEWED LESS WELL

WHITES INTERVIEWERS TREATED WHITE APPLICANTS THE SAME WAY AS BLACKS

• WHITE APPLICANTS VIEWED LESS WELL

Race Discrimination

QUALIFICATIONS

LOW AVERAGE HIGH

YOUNG

OLD

EASIER QUESTIONS ASKED TO OLDER APPLICANTS DESPITE QUALIFICATIONS

AGE AND INTERVIEW QUESTIONS

EFFECT OF LABELS

ARMY RECRUITS

RANDOMLY ASSIGNED LABELS

LOW

AVERAGE

HIGHTHIS GROUP HAD BETTER PERFORMANCE SCORES ON VARIOUS MEASURES

ALSO VIEWED THEIR LEADERS AS MORE EFFECTIVESELP-FULFILLING PROPHECY AT WORK

(LEADERS SPENT MORE TIME WITH THE “HIGH” EXPECTATION GROUP)

IN-GROUP OUT-GROUP

• LIKING, SPEND TIME WITH LEADER

• CHALLENGING, VISIBLE JOBS

• BETTER MEMORY FOR GOOD BEHAVIOR

• TREATED WARMLY

• PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS

• ALLOCATION OF REWARDS

SELECTION TO THE IN-GROUP

1) ABILITY

2) RESPONSIBILITY

3) TRUST

• LESS DESIREABLE JOBS

• LESS TIME SPENT WITH SUPERVISOR

• TREATED FORMALLY

• LOWER PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS

• LESS REWARDS

PERCEIVED SIMILARITY

IN AND OUT-GROUP BIAS

Occupations with Highest and Lowest Mean Earnings, 1990Ranking Occupation % Female Mean Earnings

HighHigh 1 Physicians 11 $57,166 2 Dentists 5 46,369 3 Lawyers 10 39,132 4 Podiatrists 5 38,402 5 Medical science teachers 17 37,958 6 Law Teachers 13 36,411 7 Securities and financial services sales 17 35,448 8 Airline pilots and navigators 1 34,488 9 Optometrists 6 34,211 10 Medical Scientists 35 33,909

LowLow 1 Child care workers, private household 98 $4,473 2 Private household cleaners/servants 92 5,530 3 Housekeepers and butlers 95 5,612 4 Child care workers, other 89 6,617 5 Cooks, private household 83 7,082 6 Waiters and waitresses 83 7,095 7 Misc. food preparation occupations 56 7,548 8 Waiters and waitresses’ assistants 46 7,632 9 Teachers’ aides 88 7,628 10 Textile sewing machine operators 93 7,726

If everyone were compensated for education and experience to the same degree as White men, the following differences in pay would occur:

Projected Pay Adjustments Based on Education and Experience

Observed Pay Projected Pay Difference % DifferenceWomen:

Black

Latina

Asian

Native Amer.

White

Men:

Black

Latino

Asian

Native Amer.

White

$ 10,429 $ 14,367 +$3,983 +37.8

9,725 13,189 +3,464 +35.6

12,432 16,111 +3,679 +29.6

10,052 13,663 +3,611 +35.9

11,213 14,662 +3,449 +30.8

$ 14,372 $ 16,263 +$1,891 +13.2

14,935 16,473 +1,538 +10.3

20,148 21,288 +1,140 +5.7

16,019 17,420 +1,401 +8.7

20,335 21,449 +1,114 +5.5