Multirater Assessment Process - A Literature Review.

Abstract : This report is a review of the literature associated with multirater assessments. An analysis of this literature indicates that multirater assessment systems may be a useful tool for promoting accurate self-assessment of strengths and weaknesses among Army personnel. Furthermore, multirater assessments encourage developmental growth in areas relevant to leadership and reinforce organizational values. The United States Army is concerned with continuous self-development of all soldiers. Self-development often begins with an accurate assessment of strengths and weaknesses. This literature review was conducted to examine the potential of multirater assessments, also known as 360-degree evaluations, for systematic use by the Army. Possible utilization of multirater assessments includes applications which would promote accurate self-assessment, encourage developmental growth in areas relevant to leadership, and reinforce organizational values. A growing literature on the use of multirater assessments in commercial organizations is reviewed and discussed in this report. This review was completed by the ARI Research Unit at Fort Leavenworth in conjunction with the Leadership Research and Assessment Division of the Center for Army Leadership (CAL), and the results were briefed to the Director, CAL, February 1997.

[1]  H. J. Bernardin,et al.  Attitudes of first-line supervisors toward subordinate appraisals , 1993 .

[2]  H. John Bernardin,et al.  Performance appraisal : assessing human behavior at work , 1984 .

[3]  Craig Eric Schneier,et al.  The Influence Of Role Prescriptions On The Performance Appraisal Process , 1978 .

[4]  J. S. Shrauger,et al.  Symbolic interactionist view of self-concept: Through the looking glass darkly. , 1979 .

[5]  C. Cooley.  Human nature and the social order , 1902 .

[6]  P. Muchinsky,et al.  Work as an information environment. , 1978, Organizational behavior and human performance.

[7]  Walter C. Borman,et al.  The rating of individuals in organizations: An alternate approach , 1974 .

[8]  A. Bandura.  Social learning theory , 1977 .

[9]  Cynthia D. McCauley,et al.  BENCHMARKS: An instrument for diagnosing managerial strengths and weaknesses. , 1990 .

[10]  Richard R. Reilly,et al.  AN EXAMINATION OF THE EFFECTS OF AN UPWARD FEEDBACK PROGRAM OVER TIME , 1995 .

[11]  Francis J. Yammarino,et al.  DOES SELF‐OTHER AGREEMENT ON LEADERSHIP PERCEPTIONS MODERATE THE VALIDITY OF LEADERSHIP AND PERFORMANCE PREDICTIONS? , 1992 .

[12]  C. Carver,et al.  Attention and Self-Regulation: A Control-Theory Approach to Human Behavior , 1981 .

[13]  F. Yammarino,et al.  Congruence of Self and Others' Leadership Ratings of Naval Officers for Understanding Successful Performance , 1991 .

[14]  Stephen G. West,et al.  Validity of self-evaluation of ability: A review and meta-analysis , 1982 .

[15]  Robert E. Kaplan,et al.  360‐degree feedback PLUS: Boosting the power of co‐worker ratings for executives , 1993 .

[16]  Thomas E. Becker,et al.  A FIELD STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE ORGANIZATIONAL FEEDBACK ENVIRONMENT AND PERFORMANCE , 1989 .

[17]  Dianne Nilsen,et al.  Self–observer rating discrepancies: Once an overrater, always an overrater? , 1993 .

[18]  Angelo S. DeNisi,et al.  A cognitive view of the performance appraisal process: A model and research propositions , 1984 .

[19]  H. G. Heneman,et al.  Comparisons of self- and superior ratings of managerial performance. , 1974 .

[20]  Mark R. Edwards,et al.  360゜ feedback : the powerful new model for employee assessment & performance improvement , 1996 .

[21]  W. Harvey Hegarty,et al.  Using subordinate ratings to elicit behavioral changes in supervisors. , 1974 .

[22]  George C. Thornton,et al.  PSYCHOMETRIC PROPERTIES OF SELF-APPRAISALS OF JOB PERFORMANCE , 1980 .

[23]  L. Atwater,et al.  Understanding self‐perception accuracy: Implications for human resource management , 1993 .

[24]  C. Dweck,et al.  A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality , 1988 .

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

[26]  T. Abel,et al.  Mind, Self, and Society , 1934 .

[27]  J. Leslie,et al.  An examination of the relationships among self‐perception accuracy, self‐awareness, gender, and leader effectiveness , 1993 .

[28]  Michael M. Lombardo,et al.  Off the Track: Why and How Successful Executives Get Derailed , 1983 .

[29]  Martin M. Greller,et al.  Sources of feedback: A preliminary investigation , 1975 .

[30]  Sarah A. Hezlett,et al.  The impact of 360‐degree feedback on management skills development , 1993 .

[31]  Glenn M. McEvoy,et al.  User Acceptance of Peer Appraisals in an Industrial Setting , 1987 .

[32]  B. Tuckman,et al.  Effectiveness of feedback to teachers as a function of source. , 1968, Journal of educational psychology.

[33]  Robert L. Holzbach,et al.  Rater bias in performance ratings: Superior, self-, and peer ratings. , 1978 .

[34]  L. Atwater,et al.  THE INFLUENCE OF UPWARD FEEDBACK ON SELF‐ AND FOLLOWER RATINGS OF LEADERSHIP , 1995 .

[35]  John Schaubroeck,et al.  A meta-analysis of self-supervisor, self-peer, and peer-supervisor ratings. , 1988 .

[36]  Richard W. Beatty,et al.  360‐degree feedback as a competitive advantage , 1993 .