The Effect of Social Style on Peer Evaluation Ratings in Project Teams

Intragroup peer evaluations used for performance appraisal and compensation decisions are becoming an integral part of today's team-based organizations. However, the research on the validity of peer evaluation ratings in a team context is limited. This study contributes to the literature on peer-to-peer performance appraisal by applying social style theory to predict potential rater bias. The study employed an ex post facto design in a university setting to examine the effect of social style on peer evaluation ratings at the completion of a business communication team project. The findings suggest that rating bias based on a personality dimension, such as social style, can influence intragroup peer evaluations. Implications for organizations and suggestions for training to reduce rater bias are discussed.

[1]  David J. Woehr,et al.  Rater training for performance appraisal: A quantitative review , 1994 .

[2]  Michael D. Mumford,et al.  Social Comparison Theory and the Evaluation of Peer Evaluations: A Review and Some Applied Implications. , 1983 .

[3]  Stan Malos,et al.  Current legal issues in performance appraisal , 1998 .

[4]  Gary P. Latham,et al.  Increasing productivity through performance appraisal , 1981 .

[5]  James W. Smither.  Performance appraisal : state of the art in practice , 1998 .

[6]  Ann J. Ewen,et al.  How to Manage Performance and Pay With 360-Degree Feedback , 1996 .

[7]  S. Fox,et al.  Perceived similarity and accuracy of peer ratings , 1989 .

[8]  M. Merva.  Grades as Incentives: A Quantitative Assessment with Implications for Study Abroad Programs , 2003 .

[9]  E. A. Locke,et al.  Generalizing From Laboratory to Field Settings. , 1987 .

[10]  R. Zajonc.  Feeling and thinking : Preferences need no inferences , 1980 .

[11]  Jeffrey S. Kane,et al.  Methods of peer assessment. , 1978 .

[12]  D. R. Ilgen,et al.  Performance Appraisal Process Research in the 1980s: What Has It Contributed to Appraisals in Use? , 1993 .

[13]  Walter C. Borman,et al.  Examination of race and sex effects on performance ratings , 1989 .

[14]  A. Kluger,et al.  Feedback effectiveness: Can 360-degree appraisals be improved? , 2000 .

[15]  Bradley L. Kirkman,et al.  The Impact Of Collectivism And In-Group/Out-Group Membership On The Evaluation Generosity Of Team Members , 2000 .

[16]  J. Ghorpade,et al.  Managing five paradoxes of 360-degree feedback , 2000 .

[17]  Arthur G. Bedeian,et al.  The Impact of Purpose On Rating Quality and User Acceptance , 1991 .

[18]  David E. Smith,et al.  Training Programs for Performance Appraisal: A Review , 1986 .

[19]  Peter A. Heslin,et al.  Conceptualizing and Evaluating Career Success , 2005 .

[20]  A. Konrad,et al.  Demographic Differences and Reactions to Performance Feedback , 2003 .

[21]  Nancy Falchikov,et al.  Detecting Gender Bias in Peer Marking of Students' Group Process Work. , 1997 .

[22]  David I. Levine,et al.  Do birds of a feather shop together? The effects on performance of employees' similarity with one another and with customers , 2004 .

[23]  Gary L. May,et al.  Collaborative Peer Evaluation: Best Practices for Group Member Assessments , 2002 .

[24]  Shari Caudron.  Keeping team conflict alive , 1998 .

[25]  Robert Bolton,et al.  People Styles at Work: Making Bad Relationships Good and Good Relationships Better , 1996 .

[26]  Christopher P. Parker,et al.  The Practical Utility of Importance Measures in Assessing the Relative Importance of Work-Related Perceptions and Organizational Characteristics on Work-Related Outcomes , 2004 .

[27]  G. Milkovich,et al.  The Current State of Performance Appraisal Research and Practice: Concerns, Directions, and Implications , 1992 .

[28]  M. Cannon,et al.  Actionable feedback: Unlocking the power of learning and performance improvement , 2005 .

[29]  Luis R. Gomez-Mejia,et al.  Evaluating employee performance: Does the appraisal instrument make a difference? , 1988 .

[30]  Jason D. Shaw,et al.  IN CONFLICTED INTERDEPENDENT GROUPS: WHEN AND HOW DOES SELF ESTEEM MAKE A DIFFERENCE? , 2000 .

[31]  Aharon Tziner,et al.  Does Conscientiousness Moderate the Relationship Between Attitudes and Beliefs Regarding Performance Appraisal and Rating Behavior , 2002 .

[32]  Ryan A. Smith,et al.  Race, Gender, and Workplace Power , 2004 .

[33]  James V. Mitchell.  Interrelationships and Predictive Efficacy for Indices of Intrinsic, Extrinsic, and Self-Assessed Motivation for Learning. , 1992 .

[34]  Anne S. Tsui,et al.  Interpersonal affect and rating errors. , 1986 .

[35]  Douglas J. Brown,et al.  Elaborating the construct of transformational leadership: The role of affect , 2005 .

[36]  J. Hackman,et al.  Leading Teams: Setting the Stage for Great Performances , 2002 .

[37]  Jon R. Katzenbach,et al.  The Wisdom of Teams: Creating the High-Performance Organization , 1992 .

[38]  Gary P. Latham,et al.  Training managers to minimize rating errors in the observation of behavior. , 1975 .

[39]  Murray R. Barrick,et al.  An investigation of personality similarity effects (relational and perceived) on peer and supervisor ratings and the role of familiarity and liking , 2001 .

[40]  Feraidoon Raafat,et al.  An Empirical Study of Peer Bias in Evaluations: Students Rating Students , 1994 .

[41]  David W. Merrill,et al.  Personal Styles & Effective Performance , 1981 .

[42]  T. Beehr,et al.  Peer Appraisals: Differentiation of Individual Performance on Group Tasks , 2001 .

[43]  Bruce J. Avolio,et al.  Race effects in performance evaluations: Controlling for ability, education, and experience. , 1991 .

[44]  Heejoon Park,et al.  THE EFFECTS OF PERSONALITY SIMILARITY ON PEER RATINGS OF CONTEXTUAL WORK BEHAVIORS , 2001 .

[45]  Jay A. Conger,et al.  360-Degree Assessment: Time for Reinvention , 2003 .

[46]  Walter O. Einstein,et al.  Strategic performance appraisal in team-based organizations: One size does not fit all , 2001 .

[47]  J. Lackritz,et al.  Peer Evaluation in the Classroom: A Check for Sex and Race/Ethnicity Effects , 2001 .