Factors that affect peer rater accuracy in multirater feedback systems

Abstract

Multirater feedback, also referred to as multisource feedback or 360 degree feedback, has evolved into the performance appraisal system. The process of providing individuals with feedback from several sources, including coworkers, subordinates, clients, and supervisors, has emerged as a popular technique because it has the potential to provide a more complete picture of performance. Traditionally, the immediate supervisor was judged to be in the best position to evaluate an employee; however, using multiple rating sources leads to increased reliability, fairness and observational power as raters with differing perspectives and roles evaluate the employee (Harris & Scharbroeck, 1988; Latham 1989; Borman, 1997). Despite considerable research that has focused on the validity and accuracy of multirater feedback ratings compared to supervisory ratings, what remains ambiguous is a complete understanding of factors that may influence ratings provided by individuals who are not in roles traditionally known to evaluate employees, such as supervisors. Although multirater feedback holds promise as a means of evaluation that is less biased, more reliable, and more valid than the traditional

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 1 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.