Human errors are common when writing performance appraisals and
evaluating employee behaviors. We all have biases we are unaware of and
they are often reflected in the employee appraisal process. This can be
unfair to the employee or to others in their peer group.
In Human Resource Strategy,
by Drehere/Dougherty, rater errors reflect the imperfect judgment we
all have toward others. Understanding these biases is important when
preparing a performance appraisal document.
Dreher/Doughtery state that "A barrier to the accuracy and credibility of performance measures is posted by a number of rater errors, perceptual biases and other sources of distortion in performance ratings."
6 Rater Errors
1. Halo Effect
Halo effect is when an employee is rated the same across all performance dimensions due to a positive or negative rater impression. This typically is when the rater either likes or dislikes the employee and allows those feelings to influence their performance rating of them.
2. Leniency Error
Managers who over-emphasize either negative or positive behaviors make leniency errors. This is when employees are rated either at the low end of the scale (negative leniency) or at the positive end (positive leniency).
3. Central Tendency Errors
Managers who are uncomfortable with making "extreme" judges of performance tend to rate their employees in the middle of the scale. This central tendency error happens with managers who don't deal well with behavioral issues and avoid conflict.
4. Recency Error
Recency error happens when a manager allows recent incidents of employee behaviors to influence the performance rating over the entire rating period. This can be extreme on either end of the spectrum where by an employee has had a successful project or a negative event right before the performance evaluation. Keeping accurate performance records during the year helps to provide evaluation data for the rating period.
5. First Impression Error
Managers who allow their first impressions of employee performance to influence their evaluation make the first impression error. New employees tend to have a "honeymoon" period and perform at high levels but often lose some of that momentum over time.
6. Similar-to-me Errors
Everyone relates to people who are like them but that should not influence the evaluation of employee performance. Managers who are biased toward employees who are similar to themselves make this similar-to-me rater error.
It is important to have objective measures for rating performance because of these natural human biases. Using data gathered over an entire rating period can help minimize these errors. But most importantly, performance appraisals should be used to reflect on employee performance, course correct when needed, celebrate successes and strategize employee development. If done well, the process can be a positive one and beneficial for both the employee as well as the manager.
Dreher/Doughtery state that "A barrier to the accuracy and credibility of performance measures is posted by a number of rater errors, perceptual biases and other sources of distortion in performance ratings."
6 Rater Errors
1. Halo Effect
Halo effect is when an employee is rated the same across all performance dimensions due to a positive or negative rater impression. This typically is when the rater either likes or dislikes the employee and allows those feelings to influence their performance rating of them.
2. Leniency Error
Managers who over-emphasize either negative or positive behaviors make leniency errors. This is when employees are rated either at the low end of the scale (negative leniency) or at the positive end (positive leniency).
3. Central Tendency Errors
Managers who are uncomfortable with making "extreme" judges of performance tend to rate their employees in the middle of the scale. This central tendency error happens with managers who don't deal well with behavioral issues and avoid conflict.
4. Recency Error
Recency error happens when a manager allows recent incidents of employee behaviors to influence the performance rating over the entire rating period. This can be extreme on either end of the spectrum where by an employee has had a successful project or a negative event right before the performance evaluation. Keeping accurate performance records during the year helps to provide evaluation data for the rating period.
5. First Impression Error
Managers who allow their first impressions of employee performance to influence their evaluation make the first impression error. New employees tend to have a "honeymoon" period and perform at high levels but often lose some of that momentum over time.
6. Similar-to-me Errors
Everyone relates to people who are like them but that should not influence the evaluation of employee performance. Managers who are biased toward employees who are similar to themselves make this similar-to-me rater error.
It is important to have objective measures for rating performance because of these natural human biases. Using data gathered over an entire rating period can help minimize these errors. But most importantly, performance appraisals should be used to reflect on employee performance, course correct when needed, celebrate successes and strategize employee development. If done well, the process can be a positive one and beneficial for both the employee as well as the manager.
No comments:
Post a Comment