The impact of rater agreeableness and rating context on the evaluation of poor performance
journal contributionposted on 17.07.2014 by Raymond Randall, Daniel Sharples
Any type of content formally published in an academic journal, usually following a peer-review process.
We tested the effects of rater agreeableness on the rating of others’ poor performance in performance appraisal (PA). We also examined the interactions between rater agreeableness and two aspects of the rating context: ratee self-ratings and the prospect of future collaboration with the ratee after the feedback of PA ratings. Participants were government employees (N = 230) allocated to one of six experimental groups (a 3 × 2 between-groups design) or a control group (n = 20). Participants received accurate, low-deviated or high-deviated self-ratings from the ratee. Half were notified they would collaborate with the ratee in a future task. High rater agreeableness, positive deviations in self-rating, and the prospect of future collaboration were all independent predictors of higher PA ratings. The interactions between rater agreeableness and rating context were very small and inconsistent. We argue that conflict avoidance is an important motivation for those rating the performance of others.
- Business and Economics