The social contexts of performance appraisal encompass a vast number of social,situational,affective,and behavioral factors in organization that may influence the performance appraisal process and outcome. The effect of social contexts in organization on the performance appraisal has received relatively little research attention yet merits increased attention. The purpose of this study is to identify the social contexts in organization affecting performance appraisal outcome and error, interrater reliability and agreement, and ratees' appraisal reaction. More specifically, the main purposes of this study are as follows:
1)Identifying the social contexts in organization affecting performance appraisal outcome(supervisor's ratings of subordinate's performance) and examining interrelationships among the social contexts and how the social contexts influence performance appraisal outcome.
2)Identifying the social contexts in organization affecting performance appraisal errors(halo effects and leniency tendency) and examining the relationships between the social contexts and the performance appraisal errors.
3)Identifying the social contexts in organization affecting interrater(self- supervisor and self-peer)reliability and agreement and examining the relationships between the social contexts and the interrater reliability and agreement.
4)Identifying the appraisal characteristics and social contexts in organization affecting ratees' appraisal reaction and examining the relationships among the appraisal characteristics, social contexts, and ratees' appraisal reaction.
In this study, I developed an integrative framework describing the social contexts in organization affecting the performance appraisal outcome and error, interrater reliability and agreement, and ratees' appraisal reaction, the interrelationships among the social contexts, and the relationships between the social contexts and each of the four outcome variables (performance appraisal outcome, performance appraisal error, interrater reliability and agreement, and ratees' appraisal reaction). Then, four hypothesized models that indicate the relationships between the social contexts and each of the four outcome variables were delineated from the integrative framework.
A field study was undertaken to test the hypothesized relationships between the social contexts and each of the four outcome variables. Data were collected from 146 subordinates and 52 supervisors of K corporation in Korea. Correlation analyses, t-tests, and moderated and hierarchical regression analyses were employed to test the hypotheses.
The major findings of this study are as follows:
1)Demographic similarity between a supervisor and a subordinate and the subordinate's supervisor-focused influence tactic positively influenced the supervisor's ratings of the subordinate's performance through their impact on the supervisor's perceptions of similarity to the subordinate and the supervisor's liking of the subordinate. The leader(supervisor)-member (subordinate) quality(LMX quality) and the supervisor's opportunity to observe the subordinate's performance were positively related to the supervisor's ratings of the subordinate's performance. Furthermore, the relationship between the LMX quality and the supervisor's ratings and the subordinate's performance was strongly positive if the dyadic duration between the supervisor and subordinate was long.
2)Halo effects were significantly greater in ratings by supervisors with high or low level of liking toward subordinates than in ratings by supervisors with medium level of liking toward subordinates. Leniency tendency was positively related to supervisors' sensitivity to the situational factors(e.g.,face-to-face feedback, less confidential performance appraisal, administrative-based performance appraisal, etc.) that may affect the supervisors' accountability to the ratings of the subordinates' performance.
3)Self-ratings of subordinates who had high quality exchanges with their supervisors were more congruent with their supervisors' ratings than those of subordinates who had low quality exchanges. A supervisor's opportunity to observe a subordinate's performance was positively related to the reliability and agreement between self-and supervisor ratings. Furthermore, subordinates who received supervisors' ratings higher than the self-ratings reported greater satisfaction with the appraisal, greater utility of the appraisal, and greater confidence in the operations of the appraisal system.
4)Each of the four characteristics of appraisal reviews(i.e., opportunity to participate, evaluation criteria used, goal setting, and career discussion) was significantly related to the subordinates' reactions to the appraisal (i.e.,satisfaction with the appraisal, utility of the appraisal, and confidence in the operations of the appraisal system). But, none of the four review characteristics had a positive impact on the subordinates' subsequent performance. The relationships between each of the four review characteristics and subordinates' reactions and performance were not moderated by the LMX quality.
The implications of the findings for performance appraisal theory and practice and the required future research were discussed.
