THE EFFECTS OF INTERPERSONAL AFFECT AND OPPORTUNITY TO OBSERVE ON RATINGS IN MULTI-SOURCE ASSESSMENT PROCESS

In related literature, although various rater demographic characteristics, opportunity to observe and interpersonal affect have been considered in many studies, a small number of investigations has indicated the influence of interpersonal affect and opportunity to observe on ratings in multi- source assessment process. In this study, we investigated whether rater affect has a similar effect on the ratings from three sources in multi-source assessment process and whether there is an interaction between rater’s affect and the opportunity to observe the rate. All the white collar employees (39 persons) within a medium-sized manufacturing company participated in the study. The findings indicate that the influence of interpersonal affect on ratings was significantly greater in subordinate and peer feedback than in supervisor feedback.

___

  • AKAL, Z. (2005). İşletmelerde Performans Ölçüm ve Denetimi: Çok Yönlü Performans Göstergeleri, 6.Baskı, Milli Prodüktivite Merkezi Yayınları No: 473, Ankara.
  • AKDEMİR, A. (2009). İşletmeciliğin Temel Bilgileri, Ekin Yayınları, Bursa.
  • ANTONIONI, D. and PARK, H. (2001). “The relationship between rater affect and three sources of 360-degree feedback ratings”. Journal of Management, 27: 479-495.
  • ANTONIONI, D. and WOEHR, D.J. (2000). “Improving the quality of multi-source rater performance” In D.W. Bracken, C.W. Timmreck, and A.H. Church (Eds.). Handbook of Multisource Feedback (pp.114-129). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  • BALTACI, A. İ. and BURGAZOĞLU, H. (2014). “Değerlendiriciler Arası Güvenilirlik ve Tatmin Bağlamında 360 Derece Performans Değerlendirme”. Marmara Üniversitesi Öneri Dergisi, 11(41): 57-76.
  • BEEHR, T.A., IVANITSKAYA, L., HANSEN, C.P., EROFEEV, D. and GUDANOWSKI, D. (2001). “Evaluation of 360 degree feedback ratings: Relationships with each other and with performance and selection predictors”. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22: 775-788.
  • BARUTÇUGİL, İ. (2002). Performans Yönetimi, 2. Basım, Kariyer Yayıncılık, İstanbul.
  • BORMAN, W.C. and MOTOWİDLO, S.J. (1993). “Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual performance”, In N.Schmitt and W.C. Borman (Eds), Personnel Selection in Organizations, pp. 71-98, New York, Jossey-Bass.
  • BRUTUS, S., PETOSA, S. and AUCOIN, E. (2005). “Who will evaluate me? Rater selection in multi-source assessment contexts”. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 13(2): 129-138.
  • CARDY, R.L. and DOBBINS, G.H. (1986). “Affect and appraisal accuracy: Liking as an integral dimension in evaluating performance”. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71: 672-678.
  • DENISI, A. S. and MURPHY, K. R. (2017). “Performance appraisal and performance management: 100 years of progress?”. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(3): 421-433.
  • DENISI, A. S. and SONESH, S. (2011). “The appraisal and management of performance at work”. In S. Zedeck (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 255–280). Washington, DC: APA Press.
  • DENISI, A.S., CAFFERTY, T.P. and MEGLINO, B.M. (1984). “A cognitive view of the performance appraisal process: a model and research propositions”. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 33(3): 360-396.
  • FLETCHER, C. and BALDRY, C. (1999). “Multi-source feedback systems : A research perspective”. In International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 14: 149-193.
  • KAHYA, E. and ÇEMREK, F. (2017). “An Investigation on the Ratings from Four Sources for Different Positions in a 360 Degree Feedback System”. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 12(3): 49-64.
  • KANASLAN, E. K. and IYEM, C. (2016). “Is 360-degree feedback appraisal an effective way of performance evaluation?”. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 6(5): 172-182.
  • KARKOULIAN, S., ASSAKER, G. and HALLAK, R. (2016). “An Empirical Study of 360-degree Feedback, Organizational Justice, and Firm Sustainability”. Journal of Business Research, 69: 1862-1867.
  • LEFKOWITZ, J. (2000). “The role of interpersonal affective regard in supervisory performance ratings: A literature review and proposed causal model”. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73: 67-85.
  • MOSER, K., SCHULER, H. and FUNKE, U. (1999). “The moderating effect of raters’ opportunities to observe ratees’ job performance on the validity of an assessment centre”. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 7(3): 133-141.
  • NG, K.Y., KOH, C., ANG, S., KENNEDY, J.C. and CHAN, K.Y. (2011). “Rating leniency and halo in multisource feedback ratings: testing cultural assumptions of power distance and individualism-collectivism”. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(5): 1033-1044.
  • RAZZAQ, S., IQBAL, M.Z., IKRAMULLAH, M. and PROOIJEN, J.W.V. (2016). “Occurrence of rating distortions and ratees’ fairness perceptions per raters’ mood and affect”. Career Development International, 21(7): 726-743.
  • ROBBINS, T.L. and DENISI, A.S. (1994). “A closer look at interpersonal affect as a distinct influence on cognitive processing in performance evaluations”. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79: 341-353.
  • ROBBİNS, T.L. and DENISI, A.S. (1998). Mood vs. interpersonal affect: Identifying process and rating distortions in performance appraisal. Journal of Business and Psychology, 12(3), 313-325.
  • ROCH, S.G., WOEHR, D.J., MISHRA, V. and KIESZCZYNSKA, U. (2012). “Rater training revisited: an updated meta‐analytic review of frame‐of‐reference training”. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 85(2): 370-395.
  • ROTHSTEIN, H.R. (1990). “Interrater reliability of job performance ratings; Growth to asymptote level with increasing opportunity to observe”. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(3): 322-327.
  • SABUNCUOĞLU, Z. (2000). İnsan Kaynakları Yönetimi, Ezgi Kitabevi, Bursa.
  • SPENCE, J.R. and KEEPING, L. (2011). “Conscious rating distortion in performance appraisal: a review, commentary, and proposed framework for research”. Human Resource Management Review, 21(2): 85-95.
  • SUNDVIK, L. and LINDEMAN, M. (1998). Performance rating accuracy: Convergence between supervisor assessment and sales productivity. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 6(1): 9-15.
  • SUTTON, A.W., BALDWIN, S.P., WOOD, L. and HOFFMAN, B.J. (2013). “A meta-analysis of the relationship between rater liking and performance ratings”. Human Performance, 26(5): 409-429.
  • TSUI, A.S. and BARRY, B. (1986). “Interpersonal affect and rating errors”. Academy of Management Journal, 29(3): 586-599.
  • UYGUR, A. and SARIGÜL, S.S. (2015). “360 Derece Performans Değerleme ve Geri Bildirim Sistemi”. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 33: 189-201.
  • VAN SCOTTER, J.R. (2000). “Relationships of task performance and contextual performance with turnover, job satisfaction, and affective commitment”. Human Resource Management Review, 10(1): 79-95.
  • VARMA, A., DENİSİ, A.S. and PETERS, L.H. (1996). “Interpersonal Affect and Performance Appraisal: A Field Study”. Personnel Psychology, 49: 341–59.
  • VARMA, A. and PICHLER, S. (2007). “Interpersonal affect: Does it really bias performance appraisals?”. Journal of Labor research, 28(2): 397-412.
  • VARMA, A., PICHLER, S. and SRINIVAS, E.S. (2005). “The role of interpersonal affect in performance appraisal: Evidence from two samples – the US and India”. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16(11): 2029-2044.
  • ZAJONC, R.B. (1980). “Feeling and thinking: Preferences need to inferences”. American Psychologist, 35: 151-175.