PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL
Transcript: Supervisor's rating of a subordinate based on one single factor biases the rating of that same individual based on other factors (Boachie-Mensah and Seidu 2012) Attractive people are perceived to more likeable, friendly, intelligent, successful and competent than their non-attractive counterparts (James 2000) Employees with visible body decorations including tattoos and piercings experience more bias during performance appraisal than other employees. Perceived as unintelligent, untrustworthy and unprofessional- negatively impacting their performance appraisal (Dean 2010; Sarlak 2012) Occurs when an employee’s most recent events have a greater influence on the performance appraisal than overall performance (Boachie-Mensah and Seidu 2012) One single unfavourable recent event has a negative impact on Performance Appraisal even if overall performance was very favourable (Cintrón and Flaniken 2011) Very misleading as employees tend to extremely hard leading up to a Performance Appraisal (Boachie-Mensah and Seidu 2012) When the nature of the rater-ratee relationship influences the performance appraisal more than the subordinate's overall performance (Stone 2013) Rater is more likely to give a better appraisal to someone they like rather than someone they don't like, even though their performance may be identical (Kondrasuk 2011) Subjective criteria such as likeability, trustworthiness, ability to get along with others and dependability become more influential in the performance appraisal than the subordinate's actual performance (Duart, Goodson and Klich 1994) Occurs when a supervisor consistently gives average ratings to subordinates and avoids the favourable and unfabourable ends of the rating scale (Cintrón and Flaniken 2011) Affects employee morale as average employees are over-compensated and good performing employees are under-compensated (Curtis, Harvey and Rayden 2005) Consequently affects employee motivation, productivity and commitment to organisational activities Supervisors may consistently give average ratings to all subordinates because the supervisor believes the performance appraisal process is a waste of time or he/she lacks adequate information and knowledge of the subordinates (Boachie-Mensah and Seidu 2012) Leniency bias occurs when supervisors consistently give better performance appraisals to subordinates than their performance justifies (Boachie-Mensah and Seidu 2012) Lenient performance appraisals reduce employee motivation, and make it difficult to provide accurate performance feedback, terminate poor performing employees and identify areas for employee development improvements (Shore and Strauss 2008). Creates feelings of inequity amongst employees (Vipanchi, Mishra, and Sylvia G. Roch 2013) Raters tend to be more lenient in performance appraisals to not damage their relationship with subordinates or when rating a subordinate for a merit increase or promotion (Boachie-Mensah and Seidu 2012; Stone 2013) Strictness bias error occurs when supervisors consistently give poorer performance appraisals to subordinates than their performance justifies. Supervisors mainly give deflated appraisal to subordinates due to concerns that employees with consistently good appraisals may replace them in the future (Boachie-Mensah and Seidu 2012) When a supervisor clearly establishes a positive or negative bias towards a particular individual or group during a performance appraisal (Stone 2013) "Similar to me" error describes the tendency for superiors to give better performance appraisals to subordinates who are similar to them in terms of gender, age, race, or religion. For example, female superiors tend to give poorer performance appraisals to males than females (Boachie-Mensah and Seidu 2012) Boachie-Mensah, Francis and Peter Awini Seidu. 2012. "Employees' Perception of Performance Appraisal System: A Case Study." International Journal of Business and Management 7 (2): 73-88. http://search.proquest.com/docview/932073648?accountid=10382. Cintrón, Rosa and Forrest Flaniken. 2011. "Performance Appraisal: A Supervision Or Leadership Tool?" International Journal of Business and Social Science 2 (17). http:// search.proquest.com/docview/904522995?accountid=10382. Dean, Dwane H. 2010. "Consumer Perceptions of Visible Tattoos on Service Personnel." Managing Service Quality 20 (3): 294-308. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09604521011041998. http:// search.proquest.com/docview/198031702?accountid=10382. Duarte, Neville T., Jane R. Goodson, and Nancy R. Klich. 1994. "Effects of Dyadic Quality and Duration on Performance Appraisal." Academy of Management Journal 37 (3): 499. http://search.proquest.com/ James Poon, Teng Fatt. 2000. "Attractiveness and Outcomes of Job Interviews." Management Research News 23 (1): 11-18. http://search.proquest.com/docview/223541740? accountid=10382. Karimi, Rabia, Muhamad I. Malik, and Saddam Hussain. 2011. “Examining the relationship of performance appraisal system and employee