Job Performance Ratings Research Articles

Do you really need help? A study of employee supplication and job performance in China

This study examines a relatively unexplored impression management tactic—supplication. Compared to other more popular impression management tactics such as ingratiation and self-promotion, we know relatively little regarding how employee supplication affects job performance. Using social role theory, we argued that when the images of Chinese employees were consistent with their social roles of receiving help, supplication would be viewed as acceptable. We tested our hypotheses among 158 supervisor–subordinate dyads in China and found that female and junior employees did not receive negative job performance ratings due to supplication. Age, on the other hand, did not moderate the supplication–performance relationship. We believe our findings are consistent with the social norms in the five cardinal relations of Confucianism regarding the modest role of certain social classes in enhancing social harmony. We discuss how our research contributes to the literature of impression management and impacts management practices in China.

Measuring Procedural Knowledge More Simply with a Single-Response Situational Judgment Test

Purpose This paper describes the development of a situational judgment test (SJT) based on single-response options developed directly from critical incidents and reports a study that tested the SJT’s concurrent validity against ratings of job performance.

Self–other agreement in job performance ratings: A meta-analytic test of a process model.

This meta-analysis explores agreement in self- and supervisory ratings of job performance (k = 128 independent samples). It suggests a 3-stage model of the rating process and reviews the empirical evidence for the relevance of each of these 3 stages to an understanding of agreement in ratings. The proposed 3-stage model serves as the guiding rationale for the examination of an extensive set of variables that moderate rater agreement. Results are reported for 2 indicators of rater agreement (correlational and mean-level agreement). Self-supervisor ratings yielded an overall correlation of .22 (rho = .34; k = 115; n = 37,752). Position characteristics and the use of nonjudgmental performance indicators were the main moderators. Leniency in self-ratings is indicated by higher mean levels of self-ratings compared with supervisory ratings. Within Western samples, performance self-ratings showed leniency (d = 0.32, Delta = .49; k = 89; n = 35,417) dependent on contextual features, scale format, and scale content.

Can Nonverbal Cues be Used to Make Meaningful Personality Attributions in Employment Interviews?

This study examines the role of personality attributions in understanding the relationships between nonverbal cues and interview performance ratings. A structured behavioral interview was developed for identifying management potential in a large, national company. Using a concurrent design to validate the interview, managers were interviewed and the interviews were videotaped (n = 110). These videotapes were used as stimuli for raters in this study. Results indicate that raters can make personality attributions using only one channel of information and these attributions partly explain the relationships between nonverbal cues and performance measures. Furthermore, conscientiousness attributions explain the relationship between visual cues and interview ratings, extraversion attributions mediate the relationship between vocal cues and interview ratings. Neuroticism attributions had a suppressing effect for both visual and vocal cues. No matter how much an interview is structured, nonverbal cues cause interviewers to make attributions about candidates. If we face this fact, rather than consider information from cues as bias that should be ignored, interviewers can do a better job of focusing on job-related behavior and information in the interview, while realizing that the cues are providing information that must be attended to. This study isolated the sources of information provided to raters to either the vocal or the visual channel to examine their impact individually. A Brunswik lens model shows the potential impact of personality attributions predicting both job and interview performance ratings when both channels of information are used.

Getting even for customer mistreatment: The role of moral identity in the relationship between customer interpersonal injustice and employee sabotage.

Research on the "dark side" of organizational behavior has determined that employee sabotage is most often a reaction by disgruntled employees to perceived mistreatment. To date, however, most studies on employee retaliation have focused on intra-organizational sources of (in)justice. Results from this field study of customer service representatives (N = 358) showed that interpersonal injustice from customers relates positively to customer-directed sabotage over and above intra-organizational sources of fairness. Moreover, the association between unjust treatment and sabotage was moderated by 2 dimensions of moral identity (symbolization and internalization) in the form of a 3-way interaction. The relationship between injustice and sabotage was more pronounced for employees high (vs. low) in symbolization, but this moderation effect was weaker among employees who were high (vs. low) in internalization. Last, employee sabotage was negatively related to job performance ratings.

Performance Appraisal: Issues of Validity

Performance ratings are probably the most widely used criteria in personnel evaluation. To determine the psychometric quality of performance ratings, practitioners generally evaluate ratings in terms of reliability and validity. This article presents generalizability theory as a measurement procedure that can be used to assess and improve the reliability and validity of ratings of employee job performance.

The Career Satisfaction Scale: Response bias among men and women

Recent studies demonstrate an increasing emphasis on subjective career success. This construct is typically measured using self-report scales, with the most used instrument being the Career Satisfaction Scale of Greenhaus, Parasuraman, and Wormley [Greenhaus, J. H., Parasuraman, S., & Wormley, W. M. (1990). Effects of race on organizational experiences, job performance evaluations, and career outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 64–86]. As career success is often studied in relation to gender, one may wonder whether men and women rate subjective career success, as measured by the Career Satisfaction Scale (Greenhaus et al., 1990), in the same manner—which is an important requirement when interpreting sex differences. Therefore, this study provides a rigorous evaluation of the Career Satisfaction Scale (Greenhaus et al., 1990) in terms of measurement invariance. The results show that gender invariance of the Career Satisfaction Scale (Greenhaus et al., 1990) does not hold. Implications of these findings in terms of optimal measurement of the subjective career success construct are spelled out.

Explaining the Weak Relationship Between Job Performance and Ratings of Job Performance

Ratings of job performance are widely viewed as poor measures of job performance. Three models of the performance–performance rating relationship offer very different explanations and solutions for this seemingly weak relationship. One-factor models suggest that measurement error is the main difference between performance and performance ratings and they offer a simple solution—that is, the correction for attenuation. Multifactor models suggest that the effects of job performance on performance ratings are often masked by a range of systematic nonperformance factors that also influence these ratings. These models suggest isolating and dampening the effects of these nonperformance factors. Mediated models suggest that intentional distortions are a key reason that ratings often fail to reflect ratee performance. These models suggest that raters must be given both the tools and the incentive to perform well as measurement instruments and that systematic efforts to remove the negative consequences of giving honest performance ratings are needed if we hope to use performance ratings as serious measures of job performance.

Perspectives on the Relationship Between Job Performance and Ratings of Job Performance

The comments and suggestions prompted by K. R. Murphy’s (2008) description of alternate models of the relationship between job performance and ratings of job performance reflect 3 broad themes: (a) the relationship between performance appraisal and performance measurement, (b) the best psychometric models for understanding performance ratings, and (c) the appropriateness of static measures for dynamic phenomena. This paper comments on these 3 themes and suggests directions for future research and practice in performance appraisal that focuses on rater goals, organizational interventions to improve the accuracy and value of ratings, and assessments of the value of performance ratings as criteria.

On the Relationship Between Job Performance and Ratings of Job Performance: What Do We Really Know?

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.

No New Terrain: Reliability and Construct Validity of Job Performance Ratings

Murphy (2008) covers the same terrain that has been extensively discussed and discredited, both theoretically and empirically, in the job performance literature. Murphy’s assertions about the inapplicability of the true performance plus measurement error model to performance ratings (termed the one-factor model of ratings by Murphy) do not hold up under close scrutiny and if accepted would raise serious concerns about extant research using performance measures as criteria or dependent variables to be influenced. We agree with Murphy that job performance ratings are fallible and imperfect. But we disagree that performance ratings as criteria have led to untrustworthy and uninterpretable results. We also disagree about the alleged ‘‘weaknesses’’ of one-factor models of performance ratings (Campbell, McHenry, & Wise, 1990; Viswesvaran, Schmidt, & Ones, 2005) and Murphy’s claimed superiority of the multifactor and mediated models. Murphy, as before (Murphy&DeShon,2000), confuses theconstruct validity of performance ratings with measurement model of ratings (Schmidt, Viswesvaran, & Ones, 2000). Our commentary is organized into three sections: (a) measurement models, (b) construct validity of ratings, and (c) implications.

Substance versus Style: Distinguishing Presidential Job Performance from Favorability

Although much of the systematic, over‐time research on the presidency has focused on presidential approval and how it varies in response to economic conditions and world events, there is growing interest in the impact that the public's character evaluations of the president can have on presidential approval. In an age when “image is everything,” it is important to understand how these character evaluations of the president vary over time and to assess their impact on presidential approval. Here, I develop a measure of the favorability of the president and show its utility for studying the personal dimension of the public's assessment of the president and its impact on the president's job performance rating.

Using personality traits to predict police officer performance

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to evaluate the usefulness of personality traits, namely the Big Five, as a means of selection in good police officers.Design/methodology/approachThe current study examines a sample of 96 police officers from eight non‐urban police departments.FindingsAge and attitude were found to be better predictors of job performance measures than were personality traits. A cynical work attitude was negatively related to ratings of job performance. Officer age was found to have a non‐linear relationship to job performance.Research limitations/implicationsDifficulties in measuring police performance are discussed, as is the relative importance of individual officer personality versus organizational culture.Originality/valueThe study extends the research on police officer selection and issues of job performance and measurement.

The relative importance of task, citizenship and counterproductive performance to job performance ratings: Do rater source and team‐based culture matter?

This study contributes to our understanding of which factors predict raters' policies for combining performance components into an overall job performance rating. We used a work‐roles framework to examine the effects of rater source and team‐based culture. The sample consisted of 612 individuals in three job categories (317 nurses, 168 personnel recruiters and 127 sales representatives). Respondents rated employee performance profiles that were described on task, citizenship and counterproductive performance. Raters' weights differed by (a) organizational culture (low‐ vs. high‐team‐based); (b) rating source (supervisor vs. peer) and (c) job. In a team‐based culture, more weight was given to citizenship performance and less to task performance. Peers attached more importance to citizenship performance and less to task performance. Implications of these findings for performance management are discussed.

Faking and the validity of conscientiousness: A Monte Carlo investigation.

The article reports the findings from a Monte Carlo investigation examining the impact of faking on the criterion-related validity of Conscientiousness for predicting supervisory ratings of job performance. Based on a review of faking literature, 6 parameters were manipulated in order to model 4,500 distinct faking conditions (5 [magnitude] x 5 [proportion] x 4 [variability] x 3 [faking-Conscientiousness relationship] x 3 [faking-performance relationship] x 5 [selection ratio]). Overall, the results indicated that validity change is significantly affected by all 6 faking parameters, with the relationship between faking and performance, the proportion of fakers in the sample, and the magnitude of faking having the strongest effect on validity change. Additionally, the association between several of the parameters and changes in criterion-related validity was conditional on the faking-performance relationship. The results are discussed in terms of their practical and theoretical implications for using personality testing for employee selection.

Political skill and influence effectiveness: Testing portions of an expanded Ferris and Judge (1991) model

The present study tested por tions of an expanded Ferris and Judge (1991) framework regarding influence processes in human resources decisions and actions. In particular, the roles of political skill and a particularly efficacious influence tactic, rationality, were examined with respect to their interactive effects on supervisor perceptions and evaluations. Online questionnaires were used to collect data from full-time, non-faculty employees of a large south-eastern US public university. To avoid problems associated with common method variance resulting from same source data, supervisors rated subordinates on outcome measures and subordinates supplied data on predictors. The final sample was comprised of a matched dyadic data set of 291 subordinates and their supervisors. Results indicated support for the hypotheses. Specifically, political skill was found to directly relate to the use of rationality and moderate the positive relationship between rationality and two supervisory perceptions known to affect supervisor ratings of job performance, notably supervisor liking of subordinates and perceived similarity to subordinates. Further, perceptions of liking and similarity were positively related to supervisor ratings of both task performance and two important contextual job performance components. Implications of the results, strengths and limitations of the research, and directions for future research are discussed.

The Validity of Assessment Centres for the Prediction of Supervisory Performance Ratings: A meta‐analysis

The current meta‐analysis of the selection validity of assessment centres aims to update an earlier meta‐analysis of assessment centre validity. To this end, we retrieved 26 studies and 27 validity coefficients (N=5850) relating the Overall Assessment Rating (OAR) to supervisory performance ratings. The current study obtained a corrected correlation of .28 between the OAR and supervisory job performance ratings (95% confidence interval .24≤ρ≤.32). It is further suggested that this validity estimate is likely to be conservative given that assessment centre validities tend to be affected by indirect range restriction.

Mind the Gap: Between‐group differences and fair test use

This paper integrates recent meta‐analytical findings regarding group differences in job‐ and educational‐related criteria and cognitive ability measures used as predictors in personnel selection and selection to higher education institutions. The findings suggest that cognitive ability measures reveal much higher group differences than the corresponding between‐group differences in job‐ and educational‐related criteria. One possible explanation for these differential gaps is that cognitive ability measures are objective and standardized while the typical measures used as job‐ and‐educational related criteria are non‐standardized subjective evaluations of job performance and academic achievement. While these findings are consistent with unbiased prediction or over‐prediction for lower scoring groups, they imply that selection is biased against them. Implications and future research are discussed.

The self‐rater's personality and self‐other disagreement in multi‐source performance ratings

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine relationships between a priori‐chosen personality traits and the tendency for a manager to rate his/her job performance more favourably than well‐acquainted superiors, peers, and subordinates do.Design/methodology/approachThe job performance of 204 managers was evaluated using multi‐source (i.e. 360E) ratings (self, subordinates, peers, and superiors). Managers also completed personality measures. Relationships between managers' personality and the tendency for managers to rate their own job performance higher than subordinates, peers, and superiors did were analyzed using advanced regression techniques.FindingsThe paper finds that self‐superior and self‐peer disagreement in performance ratings (i.e. self‐rating inflation) was associated with high Achievement and high Self‐Esteem. Additionally, self‐superior disagreement (i.e. self‐rating deflation) was associated with high Anxiety. Self‐subordinate disagreement was not associated with self‐rater personality.Research limitations/implicationsThe paper studied a single sample of financial services managers. Generalization requires cross‐validation with other occupational groups and organizations.Practical implicationsHuman resources professionals should be informed that self‐superior and self‐peer disagreement (i.e. self‐rating inflation) in multi‐source job performance ratings is potentially beneficial because it is associated with personality traits that can facilitate positive responses to feedback. Peers and superiors should therefore not inflate their ratings of managers in an effort to reduce self‐superior and self‐peer disagreement in ratings.Originality/valueThis study improved upon most previous investigations of this topic by using a field setting, considering a wider range of personality variables, using 360( job performance ratings (self‐, supervisor‐, peer‐, and subordinate‐ratings) rather than just a subset of these rating sources, and employing superior statistical procedures.

Status of human resource management in public university libraries in Bangladesh

The study conducted a survey in five prominent public university libraries in Bangladesh to explore the extent of Human Resource Management (HRM) usually practiced by them. The survey used a combination of structured questionnaire, unstructured interview, and observation methods to examine the nature and type of library human resources, their professional categories, management issues including staff selection and recruitment, salaries and wages, job analysis methods, performance evaluation, audit, and promotion, supporting Human Resource Development (HRD) programmes, etc. The study used a five point Likert scale to rank major problems of HRM in libraries, and also to record staff's opinion on twelve (12) indicators measuring their levels of job satisfaction. Finally, the paper provided future directions for better HRM practices in the common interest of public university libraries in Bangladesh.