Andrew B. Speer, Andrew P. Tenbrink, Michael G. Schwendeman
{"title":"Let’s Talk it Out: The Effects of Calibration Meetings on Performance Ratings","authors":"Andrew B. Speer, Andrew P. Tenbrink, Michael G. Schwendeman","doi":"10.1080/08959285.2019.1609477","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Despite their use in practice, calibration meetings of performance appraisal ratings have received little attention in the academic literature to date. The current paper addresses this gap by formally defining calibration meetings and by investigating the nature and impact of calibration meetings on performance ratings across two field studies. Results indicated that calibration meetings do occur in organizations. The nature and cadence of calibration meetings varied considerably, but managers generally perceived calibrations as attempts to improve rating quality. Calibration meetings were also associated with increases in perceived frame-of-reference, perceived accountability, and perceived total information to base ratings upon. Further, results showed that post-calibration ratings correlated more with other measures assessing the job performance domain than pre-calibration ratings.","PeriodicalId":47825,"journal":{"name":"Human Performance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/08959285.2019.1609477","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Performance","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08959285.2019.1609477","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6
Abstract
ABSTRACT Despite their use in practice, calibration meetings of performance appraisal ratings have received little attention in the academic literature to date. The current paper addresses this gap by formally defining calibration meetings and by investigating the nature and impact of calibration meetings on performance ratings across two field studies. Results indicated that calibration meetings do occur in organizations. The nature and cadence of calibration meetings varied considerably, but managers generally perceived calibrations as attempts to improve rating quality. Calibration meetings were also associated with increases in perceived frame-of-reference, perceived accountability, and perceived total information to base ratings upon. Further, results showed that post-calibration ratings correlated more with other measures assessing the job performance domain than pre-calibration ratings.
期刊介绍:
Human Performance publishes research investigating the nature and role of performance in the workplace and in organizational settings and offers a rich variety of information going beyond the study of traditional job behavior. Dedicated to presenting original research, theory, and measurement methods, the journal investigates individual, team, and firm level performance factors that influence work and organizational effectiveness. Human Performance is a respected forum for behavioral scientists interested in variables that motivate and promote high-level human performance, particularly in organizational and occupational settings. The journal seeks to identify and stimulate relevant research, communication, and theory concerning human capabilities and effectiveness. It serves as a valuable intellectual link between such disciplines as industrial-organizational psychology, individual differences, work physiology, organizational behavior, human resource management, and human factors.