Performans Değerlerinde Geleneksel Olmayan Değerlendirici Kaynaklarının Kullanımı

Bu çalışmanın amacı, bir kamu kuruluşunda çok kaynaklı performans değerlendirmesinin uygulanabilirliğini araştırmak ve geleneksel olmayan değerlendirici kaynakları (astlar, çalışma arkadaşları ve öz) tarafından yapılan performans değerlendirmelerini hem psikometrik açıdan hem de kullanıcı tepkileri temelinde incelemektir. Özellikle ast değerlendirmeleri için kaynak içi değerlendirmeler arasındaki korelasyonlar (değerlendiriciler arası tutarlılık katsayısı) (.49) oldukça yüksek bulunmuştur. Kaynaklar arası korelasyonların örüntüsü ise yazında rapor edilen örüntülere paralellik göstermiştir (örn., yönetici-çahşma arkadaşları = .31, öz-çalışma arkadaşları = .30, ast-yönetici = .26, öz-yönetici = .17). Yapılan varyans analizleri ve izleyen ikili karşılaştırmalar sonunda, öz ve çalışma arkadaşı değerlendirmelerinin cömertlik etkisine en yatkın değerlendirmeler olduğu, amir değerlendirmelerinin ise cömertlik etkisine görece daha az yatkın değerlendirmeler olduğu bulunmuştur. Bununla birlikte, hale etkisi en az öz değerlendirmelerinde gözlenmiştir. Geleneksel olmayan kaynakların kullanımına yönelik kullanıcı tepkilerinin yorumuyla birlikte, çok kaynaklı performans değerlendirmesi yaklaşımının Türkiye bağlamında uygulanabilirliği tartışılmıştır.

Kaynakça

1. Antonioni, D. (1996). Designing an effective 360-degree appraisal feedback process. Organizational Dynamics, 25, 24-38.

2. Atkins, P. W. B.( & Wood, R. E. (2002). Self versus others' ratings as predictors of assessment center ratings: Validation, evidence for 360-degree feedback programs. Personnel Psychology, 55, 871-904.

3. Atwater, L., Roush, P., & Fischtal, A. (1995). The influence of upward feedback on self- and follower ratings of leadership. Personnel Psychology, 48, 35-59.

4. Ayçan, Z. (2000). Cross-cultural industrial and organizational psychology: Contributions, past developments, and future directions. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31(1), 110-128.

5. Aycan, Z., Kanungo, R. N., Mendonca, M., Yu, K., DeUer, J., Stahl, G., & Kurshid, A. (2000). Impact of culture on human resource management practices: A 10-country comparison. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 49(\), 192-221.

6. Borman, W. C. (1997). 360°° ratings: An analysis of assumptions and a research agenda for evaluating their validity. Human Resource Management Review, 7(3), 299-315.

7. Bracken, D. W., Timmreck, C. W., Fleenor, J. W., & Summers, L. (2001). 360 feedback from another angle. Human Resource Management, 4Q(\), 3-20.

8. Conway, J. M. & Huffcutt, A. I. (1997). Psychometric properties of multisource performance ratings: A meta-analysis of subordinate, supervisor, peer, and self-ratings. Human Performance, 10(4), 331-360.

9. Dalessio, A. T. (1998). Using multisource feedback for employee development and personnel decisions. In J. W. Smither (Ed.), Performance appraisal: State of the art in practice (pp. 278-330). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc. Publishers.

10.Davis, D. D. (1998). International performance measurement and management. In J. W. Smither (Ed.), Performance appraisal: State of the art in practice (pp. 95-131). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc. Publishers.

11.De Luque, M. R S., & Sommer, S. M. (2000). The impact of culture on feedback-seeking behavior: An integrated model and propositions. Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 829-849.

12.Entrekin, L., & Chung, Y. W. (2001). Attitudes towards different sources of executive appraisal: A comparison öf Hong Kong Chinese and American managers in Hong Kong. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 12(6), 965-987.

13.Fletcher, C, & Perry, E. L. (2001). Performance appraisal and feedback: A consideration of national culture and a review of contemporary research and future trends. In N. Anderson, D, S. Ones, H. Kepir-Sinangil, & C. Viswesvaran (Eds.), Handbook of industrial, work, and organizational psychology. Vol. 1, pp-. 128-144, Sage.

14.Frone, M. R., Adams, J., Rice, R. W., & Instone-Noonan, D. (1986). Halo error: A field study comparison of self- and subordinate evaluations of leadership process and leader effectiveness. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 12(4), 454-461.

15.Garavan, T. N., Morley, M., & Flynn, M. (1997). 360 degree fe­edback: Its role in employee development. Journal of Management Development, 76(2/3), 134.

16.Garson, D. (2005). Reliability analysis: Key concepts and terms. www2.chass.ncsu.edu/garson/pa765/reliab.htm# intraclass

17.Göregenli, M. (1995). Kültürümüz açısından bireycilik-toplulukçuluk eğilimleri: Bir başlangıç çalışması. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 10(35), 1-14.

18.Göregenli, M. (1997). Individualist-collectivist tendencies in a Turkish sample. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 28(6), 787-794.

19.Harris, M. M., & Schaubroeck, J. (1988). A meta-analysis of self-supervisor, self-peer, and peer-supervisor ratings. Personnel Psychology, 41, 43-62.

20.Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture's consequences: International differences in work-related values. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage.

21.Hofstede, G. H. (1991). Culture's Consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2ml edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

22.Huo, Y. P., & Von Glinow, M. A. (1995). On transplanting human resource practices to China: A culture driven approach. International Journal of Manpower, 16, 3-15.

23.Levy, P. E., & Williams, J. R. (2004). The social context of performance appraisal: A review and framework for the future. Journal of Management, 30(6), 881-905.

24.London, M., & Beatty, R..W. (1993). 360-degree feedback as a competitive advantage. Human Resource Management, 32, 353-372.

25.London, M., & Smither, J. W. (1995). Can multi-source feedback change perceptions of goal accomplishment, self-evaluations, and performance-related outcomes? Theory-based applications and directions for research. Personnel Psychology, 48, 803-839.

26.Murphy, K. R., & Cleveland, J. N. (1995). Understanding performance appraisal: Social, organizational, and goal-based perspectives. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

27.Ölmez, A. E., Sümer, H. C, Soysal, M. (2004). Organizational rationality in public, private and multinational firms in Turkey. Information Knowledge Systems Management, 4, 107-118.

28.Ramamoorthy, N., & Carroll, S. J. (1998). Individualism/ collectivism orientations and reactions toward alternative human resource management practices. Human Relations, 51, 571-588.

29.Seifert, C. F., Yukl, G., & McDonald, R. A. (2003). Effects of multisource feedback and a feedback facilitator on the influence behavior of managers toward subordinates. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(3), 561-569.

30.Shrout, P.E., and J. L. Fleiss (1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 420-428.

31.Sözer, S. (2004). An evaluation of current human resource management practices in the Turkish private sector. Unpublished manuscript. Middle East Technical University, Ankara, December, 2004.

32.Sümer, H. C. (2000). Performans değerlendirmesine tarihsel bir bakış ve kültürel bir yaklaşım. Z. Ayçan (Ed.). Akademisyenler ve profesyoneller gözüyle Türkiye 'de yönetim, liderlik ve insan kaynakları uygulamaları. Ankara: Türk Psikoloji Derneği Yayınları.

33.Thornton, G. C, III. (1980). Psychometric properties of self-appraisals of job performance. Personnel Psychology, 33, 263-271.

34.Triandis, H. C, & Bhawuk, D. P. S. (1997). Culture theory and the meaning of relatedness. In P. C. Earley & M. Erez (Eds.), New perspectives on international industrial/organizational psychology (pp. 13-52). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc. Publishers.

35.Tsui, A. S., & Ohlott, P. (1988). Multiple assessment of managerial effectiveness: Interrater agreement and consensus in effectiveness models. Personnel Psychology, 41, 779-803.

36.Westerman, J. W., & Rosse, J. G. (1997). Reducing the threat of rater nonparticipation in 360-degree feedback systems: An exploratory examination of antecedents to participation in upward ratings. Group & Organization Management, 22(2), 288-309.

37.Yaffee, R. A. (İ998). Enhancement of reliability analysis: Application of intraclass correlations with SPSS/Windows v.8. www.nyu.edu/its/socsci/Docs/intracls.html.

Kaynak Göster