nach oben

Journal of Business and Psychology

Erschienen in:

01.09.2010

Rater Personality and Performance Dimension Weighting in Making Overall Performance Judgments

verfasst von: Babatunde Ogunfowora, Joshua Bourdage, Kibeom Lee

Erschienen in: Journal of Business and Psychology | Ausgabe 3/2010

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Purpose

The present study examined the effects of rater personality on the performance appraisal process. Specifically, we determined the relative weights that raters place on different performance dimensions when making overall performance evaluations, and examined whether rater personality influenced this weighting process. The literatures on social/political values and mate/friend selection were used as guiding frameworks in developing specific hypotheses.

Design/Methodology/Approach

A policy capturing method was used to address the research question in a sample of 192 Canadian undergraduate students. Students were asked to read a number of vignettes describing the teaching behaviours of hypothetical professors, and made overall performance judgments thereafter. Hierarchical Linear Modeling (HLM) was used to test the hypotheses.

Findings

Results indicated that when making overall performance ratings, raters with high levels of Openness to Experience place greater weight on adaptive performance (e.g., handling changing and uncertain work environments effectively), while raters with high levels of Modesty (a facet of Honesty-Humility) place greater weight on maintaining personal discipline (e.g., lack of deviant or condescending behaviours).

Implications

The finding that individuals vary systematically in their performance dimension weightings adds to a growing body of literature indicating that raters have unique implicit theories regarding performance. As such, there is a real need for organizations to impart a standard theory of performance to their employees.

Originality/Value

This study was the first to implicate the personality dimensions of Honesty-Humility and Openness to Experience in the performance weighting process, and as such, adds to our understanding of the nature of rater implicit theories.

Vorheriger Artikel Trait Entitlement and Perceived Favorability of Human Resource Management Practices in the Prediction of Job Satisfaction

Nächster Artikel Examining the Mechanisms Linking Transformational Leadership, Employee Customer Orientation, and Service Performance: The Mediating Roles of Perceived Supervisor and Coworker Support

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Some have suggested the use of an alternate index of rater agreement, the Average Deviation index, which puts inter-rater agreement into the context of raw scale points (Burke et al. 1999). For a 7-point scale such as the one above, the authors suggest values lower than 1 indicate acceptable inter-rater agreement. The mean average deviation for items retained for the final scales was .85, which is below this level of 1. The average deviation for items retained ranged from .46 to 1.21, indicating that some items were above this threshold, although not substantially. Generally, the retained items demonstrated acceptable levels of inter-rater agreement according to this index.

It should be noted that the slightly larger value obtained for maintaining personal discipline, compared to the other performance dimensions, is likely due to the fact that the average performance rating for behaviours in the maintaining personal discipline scale was lower than the other scale (3.78 vs. 4.07 and above). This, combined with the fact that negative information tends to be more salient, likely has combined to influence the slightly larger value obtained for the maintaining personal discipline dimension.

When an exploratory intercept-as-outcomes model was specified to determine the direct effects of the level-2 personality predictors on the level-1 outcome, conscientiousness was found to negatively relate to overall performance ratings (γ = −.161, p < .05), incremental to the predictability afforded by the five performance dimensions. This implies that raters who are more conscientious tend to be less lenient in evaluating overall job performance. Although the effect of personality on rating leniency (or severity) was not a direct focus of the present research, this result is consistent with a finding reported by Bernadin et al. (2000).

Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2005). Honesty-Humility, the Big Five, and the Five-Factor model. Journal of Personality, 73, 1321–1353.CrossRefPubMed

Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2007). Empirical, theoretical, and practical advantages of the HEXACO model of personality structure. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11, 150–166.CrossRefPubMed

Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., Perugini, M., Szarota, P., de Vries, R. E., Di Blas, L., et al. (2004). A six-factor structure of personality-descriptive adjectives: Solutions from psycholexical studies in seven languages. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 356–366.CrossRefPubMed

Bernadin, H. J., Cooke, D. K., & Villanova, P. (2000). Conscientiousness and agreeableness as predictors of rating leniency. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 232–234.CrossRef

Borman, W. C., Penner, L. A., Allen, T. D., & Motowidlo, S. J. (2001). Personality predictors of citizenship performance. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9, 52–69.CrossRef

Burke, M. J., Finkelstein, L. M., & Dusig, M. S. (1999). On average deviation indices for estimating interrater agreement. Organizational Research Methods, 2, 49–68.CrossRef

Campbell, J. P. (1990). Modeling the performance prediction problem in industrial and organizational psychology. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial, organizational psychology (Vol. 1, 2nd ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Campbell, J. P., McCloy, R. A., Oppler, S. H., & Sager, C. E. (1993). A theory of performance. In N. Schmitt & W. C. Borman (Eds.), Personnel selection in organizations (pp. 35–70). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Cheng, C., Bond, M. H., & Chan, S. C. (1995). The perception of ideal best friends by Chinese adolescents. International Journal of Psychology, 30, 91–108.CrossRef

Comber, C., Colley, A., Hargreaves, D. J., & Dorn, L. (1997). The effects of age, gender, and computer experience upon computer attitudes. Educational Research, 39, 123–133.

Conway, J. M. (1999). Distinguishing contextual performance from task performance for managerial jobs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(1), 3–13.CrossRef

Duckitt, J. (2001). A dual-process cognitive-motivational theory of ideology and prejudice. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 41–113. San Diego: Academic Press.

Hofmann, D. A. (1997). An overview of the logic and rationale of hierarchical linear models. Journal of Management, 23, 723–744.CrossRef

Jost, J., Nosek, B. A., & Gosling, S. D. (2008). Ideology: Its resurgence in social, personality, and political psychology. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3, 126–136.CrossRef

Kiker, D. S., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1999). Main and interaction effects of task and contextual performance on supervisory reward decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 602–609.CrossRef

Lee, K., & Ashton, M. C. (2004). Psychometric properties of the HEXACO Personality Inventory. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39, 329–358.CrossRef

Lee, K., & Ashton, M. C. (2006). Further assessment of the HEXACO Personality Inventory: Two new facet scales and an observer report form. Psychological Assessment, 18, 182–191.CrossRefPubMed

Lee, K., Ashton, M. C., & de Vries, R. E. (2005a). Predicting workplace delinquency and integrity with the HEXACO and Five-Factor models of personality structure. Human Performance, 18(2), 179–197.CrossRef

Lee, K., Ashton, M. C., Ogunfowora, B., Bourdage, J. S., & Shin, K. (in press). The personality bases of socio-political attitudes: The role of honesty-humility and openness to experience. Journal of Research in Personality.

Lee, K., Ashton, M. C., Pozzebon, J. A., Visser, B. A., Bourdage, J. S., & Ogunfowora, B. (2009). Similarity and assumed similarity in personality reports of well-acquainted persons. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 460–472.CrossRefPubMed

Lee, K., Ogunfowora, B., & Ashton, M. C. (2005b). Personality traits beyond the Big Five: Are they within the HEXACO space? Journal of Personality, 73, 1437–1463.CrossRefPubMed

LePine, J. A., & Van Dyne, L. (2001). Voice and cooperative behavior as contrasting forms of contextual performance: Evidence of differential relationships with big five personality characteristics and cognitive ability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 326–336.CrossRefPubMed

Marcus, B., Lee, K., & Ashton, M. C. (2007). Personality dimensions explaining relationships between integrity tests and counterproductive behaviour: Big Five, or one in addition? Personnel Psychology, 60, 1–34.CrossRef

Mount, M. K., Judge, T. A., Scullen, S. E., Sytsma, M. R., & Hezlett, S. A. (1998). Trait, rater, and level effects in 360-degree performance ratings. Personnel Psychology, 51, 557–576.CrossRef

Murphy, K. R., & Cleveland, J. (1995). Understanding performance appraisal: Social, organizational, and goal-based perspectives. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Murphy, K. R., & DeShon, R. (2000). Interrater correlations do not estimate the reliability of job performance ratings. Personnel Psychology, 53, 873–900.CrossRef

Organ, D. W., & Ryan, K. (1995). A meta-analytic review of attitudinal and dispositional predictors of organizational citizenship behaviour. Personnel Psychology, 48, 775–802.CrossRef

Paunonen, S. V. (2002). Design and construction of the Supernumerary Personality Inventory (Research Bulletin 763). London, Ontario: University of Western Ontario.

Pulakos, E. D., Arad, S., Donovan, M. A., & Plamondon, K. E. (2000). Adaptability in the workplace: Development of a taxonomy of adaptive performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(4), 612–624.CrossRefPubMed

Pulakos, E. D., Schmitt, N., Dorsey, D. W., Arad, S., Hedge, J. W., & Borman, W. C. (2002). Predicting adaptive performance: Further tests of a model of adaptability. Human Performance, 15, 299–323.CrossRef

Rotundo, M., & Sackett, P. R. (2002). The relative importance of task, citizenship, and counterproductive performance to global ratings of job performance: A policy-capturing approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 66–80.CrossRefPubMed

Rotundo, M., & Xie, J. L. (2006). Rater personality and ability in the performance appraisal process. In Annual conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychologists, Dallas, TX.

Rytting, M., Ware, R., & Hopkins, P. (1992). Type and ideal mate: Romantic attraction or type bias? Journal of Psychological Type, 24, 3–12.

Schmidt, F. L., Viswesvaran, C., & Ones, D. S. (2000). Reliability is not validity and validity is not reliability. Personnel Psychology, 53, 901–912.CrossRef

Schneider, B., Hanges, P. J., Goldstein, H. W., & Braverman, E. P. (1994). Do customer service perceptions generalize? The case of student and chair ratings of faculty effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 685–690.CrossRef

Steel, P. D. G., Huffcutt, A. I., & Kammeyer-Mueller, J. (2006). From the work one knows the worker: A systematic review of challenges, solutions, and steps to creating synthetic validity. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 14, 16–36.CrossRef

Uggerslev, K. L., & Sulsky, L. M. (2008). Using Frame-of-Reference training to understand the implications of rater idiosyncrasy for rating accuracy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 711–719.CrossRefPubMed

Viswesvaran, D., Ones, D. S., & Schmidt, F. L. (1996). Comparative analysis of the reliability of job performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 557–574.CrossRef

Viswesvaran, D., Schmidt, F. L., & Ones, D. S. (2002). The moderating influence of job performance dimensions on convergence of supervisory and peer ratings of job performance: Unconfounding construct-level convergence and rating difficulty. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 345–354.CrossRefPubMed

Wherry, R. J., & Bartlett, C. J. (1982). The control of bias in ratings: A theory of rating. Personnel Psychology, 35, 521–555.CrossRef

Titel: Rater Personality and Performance Dimension Weighting in Making Overall Performance Judgments
verfasst von: Babatunde Ogunfowora
Joshua Bourdage
Kibeom Lee
Publikationsdatum: 01.09.2010
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Journal of Business and Psychology / Ausgabe 3/2010
Print ISSN: 0889-3268
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-353X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-009-9144-y

Springer Professional

Abstract

Purpose

Design/Methodology/Approach

Findings

Implications

Originality/Value

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2010

Flight from Unfairness: Effects of Perceived Injustice on Emotional Exhaustion and Employee Withdrawal

Response Rates in Organizational Science, 1995–2008: A Meta-analytic Review and Guidelines for Survey Researchers

The Alignment of Measures and Constructs in Organizational Research: The Case of Testing Measurement Models of Creativity

A Meta-Analytic Review of the Consequences Associated with Work–Family Enrichment

Unrealistic Optimism: Still a Neglected Trait

Resistance to Socialization into Organizational Corruption: A Model of Deontic Justice

Premium Partner