An examination of the interrater agreement between self- and supervisory performance ratings in a subjective occupation.

Abstract

Employees need to have feedback about their work performance through a formal performance appraisal system. A performance appraisal can be defined as the process of evaluating employees on multiple job-related dimensions. Most organizations utilize some type of formal performance appraisal to evaluate an employee's performance on the job. Traditionally, these performance evaluations have consisted of supervisors rating their subordinates on multiple work-related dimensions. However, several studies have indicated some inherent problems with this type of evaluation. Therefore, organizations are increasingly utilizing a combined ratings method of obtaining multiple raters, including self-ratings, to improve their performance appraisal system. The present study examined the effects of six differential comparison standards (ambiguous, internal, absolute, relative-inside, relative-outside, and multiple) on the level of agreement between self-and supervisory performance ratings within the context of a subjective occupation. Forty-five self-supervisor dyads evaluated three work performance dimensions using the comparison standards. Results supported the effects of these differential comparison standards on significantly increase when raters were using similar comparison standards. Various supported hypotheses and research implications are discussed.