期刊文献+

评估者故意误差来源分析 被引量:2

Rater Intentional Bias Source Analysis
原文传递
导出
摘要 评估故意误差一直是组织绩效考核中人们关注的焦点问题。本文针对评估者故意误差中的宽大效应,通过文献综述的方法,从评估者动机、受评者因素、评估者与受评者二元关系、组织情境四个方面分析其来源。评估者动机主要包括和谐动机、激励动机和评估者印象管理;受评者因素主要包括受评者印象管理和其社会网络;评估者与受评者二元关系主要包括领导成员交换关系和评估者喜爱;组织情境主要包括组织文化、组织政治和绩效考核制度。研究首先指出评估者故意误差存在的合理性,同时给予企业管理者在实践工作中可以采取的减少评估故意误差的方法,最后指出未来研究方向。 Intentional Bias has been organizational performance appraisal focus of attention. In this paper, the leniency of intentional bias in the evaluation, from the four aspects, they are the rater' s motivation, the ratee issues, rater-ratee dyadic issues and organizational context. Rater' s motivation mainly includes harmony, motivation and rater' s impression management. Ratee issues including their impression management and their social network. Rater-ratee dyadic issues mainly include leader-member exchange relationship (LMX) and rater liking. Organizational context includes organizational culture, organizational political and performance appraisal system. It is proposed that the organization managers need to identify the different results caused by the intentional bias, and finally point out the future research direction.
作者 陈丽芬 王霖
出处 《中国人力资源开发》 北大核心 2017年第2期82-88,共7页 Human Resources Development of China
基金 国家社会科学基金"现代企业绩效工资与绩效评估公正性问题研究"(10BGL003) 国家自然科学基金"绩效评估公正感的结构 前因及效应研究"(71172103)资助
关键词 绩效考核 故意误差 宽大效应 评估者 Performance Appraisal Intentional Bias Leniency Rater
  • 相关文献

参考文献3

二级参考文献42

  • 1Hoy,W.K.& Miskel, C.G -(1996).Educational Adminiswation:Theory, research and practice(5fla.ed)[J].mMc Graw-hill,PP189-190,187.
  • 2Kanter, R.M. 1977.Men and Women of the Corporation. NewYork: Basic Books.
  • 3Rynes, S. and B.Gerhart.1990."Interviewer Assessments of Applicant Fic An Exploratory Invmigation." Personnel Psychology 43:13-35.
  • 4Viswesvaran C, Schmidt F, Ones D S. Is there a general factor in ratings of job performance? a meta-analytic framework for disentangling substantive and error influences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2005, 90(1): 108~131.
  • 5Scullen S E, Mount M K, Judge T A. Evidence of the construct validity of developmental ratings of managerial performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2003, 88(1):50~66.
  • 6Kane J S, Bernarbin H J, Villovina P et al. Stability of rater leniency: Three studies. Academy of Management Journal, 1995,38(4): 1036~1051.
  • 7Korsgaard M A, Meglino B M, Lester S W. The effect of other orientation on self-supervisor rating agreement. Journal of Organizational Behavior,2004,25(7):873~891.
  • 8Curtis A B, Darvey R D, Ravden D. Sources of political distortions in performance appraisals: appraisal purpose and rater accountability. Group & Organization Management,2005, 30(1): 42~60.
  • 9Jawahar I M, Williams C R. Where all the children are above average: The performance appraisal purpose effect. Personnel Psychology, 1997,50(4) :905~925.
  • 10Klimoski R, Inks L. Accountability forces in performance appraisal. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processess, 1990, 45:194~208.

共引文献37

同被引文献6

引证文献2

二级引证文献16

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部