Evaluating Performance: Methods and Impact

Project By: Brianna DiMaggio | Blog by: Kelsey Lack

There are many ways in which employers and companies assess their employees’ performance. These analyses can be objective(ex: # of cars sold) or subjective(ex: work attitude) and can be sourced from supervisors, subordinates, peers, and customers. Although beneficial, these evaluations of performance do not come without possible problems.

Typical measures used include graphic rating scales which rate general work-related traits on a scale of poor to excellent performance, behaviorally anchored rating scales(BARS) where more detailed examples of behaviors are used to rank, and behavioral observation scales(BOS) that focus ranking employees on key work behaviors. Another measure to rate performance are checklists on if the employee is performing their duties. 

Although these appraisals of performance can be helpful, major problems such as bias and errors can arise. These errors include the differing response tendencies to give workers either overly positive, negative, or midpoint appraisals. Effects such as halo effect and recency effects give more weight to an employee’s singular characteristic or action to evaluate them overall, particularly when the action was more recently performed. In addition, personal biases may be prejudiced in nature and cultural differences could sway one’s view of the worker. causal attribution and actor-observer bias can lead evaluators to overly attribute the cause of the action to the personal characteristics of the employee, leading to the development of beliefs around the employee, rather than the situation.

When giving performance evaluation feedback, it is most effective to be descriptive and specific. There should be an agreed appraisal for both employee and evaluator as to the issue, cause, solution, and future action steps that need to be taken.