Вопросы для повторения и обсуждения

1. Назовите те важные факторы, которые влияют на индивидуальный уровень вы­полнения «работы» каким-либо студентом в вашей Группе, и объясните, какое значение имеют обсуждавшиеся вопросы для оценки этой работы.

2. Опишите достоинства и недостатки трех основных вариантов ответа на вопрос, что следует оценивать при проведении оценки выполненной работы. Приведите но одному примеру ситуации, в которой может быть обоснованно использован каждый из этих вариантов, и объясните почему.

3. Составьте перечень (несбалансированный) адекватных, с вашей точки зрения, действий в аудитории преподавателя колледжа. Коротко объясните (в общих словах), как вы и ваши сокурсники могли бы воспользоваться своими перечнями при разработке BARS для оценки этого аспекта работы преподавателя (поведения в аудитории).

4. Сравните использование оценки работы в административных целях с использова­нием ее в целях профессионального роста. Какой из множества обсуждавшихся видов ошибок при оценке работы скорее всего будет иметь место, если оцениваю­щий знает, что результаты будут использованы в первых целях? Во вторых це­лях? Какой источник ошибок, на ваш взгляд, не зависит от цели оценки и почему?

5. Назовите основные проблемы, мешающие проведению эффективных и удовлет­ворительных интервью в ходе оценки работы, и укажите практические приемы их устранения.

Основные термины

детерминанты выполнения работы (determinants of work performance)

индивидуальная оценка выполнения работы (individualperformance appraisal)

интервью в ходе оценки работы (performance appraisal interview)

обучение аттестующих (rater training)

оценка выполнения работы (performance appraisal)

оценка выполнения работы, основанная на поведении (behavior-based performance appraisal)

оценка, даваемая сослуживцами (pee/appraisal)

подход к выполнению работы (performance management)

предрасположенность аттестующего (rater bias)

самооценка (self-appraisal)

сравнительная оценка выполнения работы (comparative performance appraisal)

электронный мониторинг работы (electronicperfoimance monitoring)

Литература

Aiello,j.r.,&chomiak, a.(1992).the effects of computer monitoring and distraction on task

Performance. Unpublished manuscript. Aiello, j. R., & kolb, k.j. (1995). Electronic performance monitoring and social context: impact on

Productivity and stress. Journal of applied psychology, 80, 339-353. Ambrose, m. L., & kulik, с. T. (1994). The effect of information format and performance pattern on

Performance appraisal judgments in a computerized performance monitoring context. Journal

(if applied social psychology, 24, 801-823. Amick, в. C, &;: smith, m.j. (1992). Stress, computer-based work monitoring and measurement

Systems: a conceptual overview. Applied ergonomics, 23, 6-16. Antonioni, d. (1994). The effects of feedback accountability on upward appraisal ratings. Personnel

Psychology, 47,349-356. Ash, a. (1994). Participants' reaction to subordinate appraisal of managers: results of a pilot. Public

Personnel .management, 23,237-256. Athey, t. R., &: mclntyre, r. M. (1987). Effect of rater trainingon rater accuracy: levels of processing

Theory and social facilitation theory perspectives. Journal of appjicd psychology, 72, 567-572. Austin, j. T„ & villanova, p. (1992). The criterion problem: 1917-1992. Journal of applied

Psychology, 77,836-874. Avolio, b.j., waldman, d. A., & mcdaniel, m. A. (1990). Age and work performance in nonmana-gerialjobs: the effects of experience and occupation type. Academy of management journal, 33,407-422.

Balzer, w. K. (1986). Biases in the recording of performance related information: the effects of initial impression and centrality of the appraisal task. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 37, 329-347.

Balzer, w. K., & sulsky, l. M. (1992). Halo and performance appraisal research: a critical exami­nation. Journal of applied psychology, 77, 975-985.

Banks, c. G., & roberson, l. (1985). Performance appraisers as test developers. Academy of management review, 10, 1.28-142.

Beer, m. (1987). Performance appraisal. In j. W. Lorsch (ed.), handbook of organizational behavior englewood cliffs, nj: prentice-hall.

Benedict, m. E., & levinc, e. L. (1988). Delay and distortion: tacit influences on performance appraisal effectiveness. Journal of applied psychology, 73, 507-514.

Benson, p. G., buckley, m. R., & hall, s. (1988). The impact of rating scale format on rater accuracy: an evaluation of the mixed standard scale. Journal of management, 14, 415-423.

Bernardin, h.j., & buckley, m. R, (1981). A consideration of strategies in rater training. Academy o/management review, 6, 205-212.

Bernardin, h. J., & pence, e. C. (1980). Effects of rater training: creating new response sets and decreasing accuracy. Journal of applied psychology, 65, 60-66.

Bernardin, h. J., & smith, p. C. (1981). A clarification of some issues regarding the development and use of behaviorally anchored rating scales (bars), journal of applied psychology 66, 458-463.

Bernardin, h. J., & villanova, p. (1986). Performance appraisal. In e. A. Locke (ed.), generalizing

From laboratory to field settings. Lexington, ma: lexington. Blanz, f„ & ghiselli, e. E. (1972). The mixed standard scale: a new rating system. Personnel

Psychology, 2. 185-199.

Blumbcrg, m., & pringle, c. D. (1982). The missing opportunity in organizational research: some implications for a theory of work performance. Acliderr.'. O( management review, 7, 560-569.

Borman, w. C, & motowidlo, s.j. (1993). Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of

Contextual performance. In n. Schinitt & w. C. Borman (eds.). Personnel selection in

Organizations. San francisco: jossey-bass. Brewer, n., socha, l, & potter, r. (1996). Gender differences in supervisors' use of performance

Feedback. Journal of applied 5ocial psychology, 26, 786-8^a3, campbell, d. J., &: lee, c. (1988). Self-appraisal in performance evaluation: development versus

Evaluation. Academy of management review, 13.302-314. Campbell, j. P. (1990). Modeling the performance prediction problem in industrial and organizational

Psychology. In m. D. Dunnette & l. M. Hough (eds.). Handbook of industrial and organizational

Psychology (vol. 1. 2nd ed.). Palo alto. Ca: consulting psychologists' press. Carayon, p. (1993). Effect of electronic performance monitoring on job design and worker stress:

Review of the literature and conceptual model. Human. Factors, 35, 385-395. Cederblom, d. (1982). The performance appraisal interview: a review, implications, and suggestions.

Academy of management review, 7, 219-227. Cleveland, j. N., murphy, k. R., & williams, r. E. (1989). Multiple uses of performance appraisal:

Prevalence and correlates. Journal of applied psychology, 7-r. 130-135. Collins, m. A., & zebrowitz, l. A. (1995). The contributions of appearance to occupational outcomes

In civilian and military settings. Journal of applied 5ix»!>31 psychology, 25,129-163. Coward, w, m., & sackett, p. R. (1990). Linearity of ability-performaflcc relationships: a re­confirmation. Journal of applied psychology, 75, 297-300. Cummings, l. L., & schwab, d. P. (1973). Performance in organizations: determinants and

Appraisals. Glenview, 1l: scott, foresman. De nisi, a. S., randolph, w. A., & blencoe, a. G. (1983). Potential problems with peer ratings.

Academy of management journal. 26, 457—464. Dipboye, r. L., & depontbriand, r. (1981). Correlates of employee reactions to performance

Appraisals and appraisal systems. Journal of applied psychology, 66, 248-251. Duarte, n. T, goodson, j. R., & klich, n. R. (1993). How do 1 like thee? Let me appraise the ways.

Journal of organisational behavior, 14, 239-249. Dubois, c. L. Z., sackett, p. R„ zedeck, s., & fogli, l. (1993). Further exploration of typical and

Maximum performance criteria: definitional issues, prediction, and white-black differences.

Journal of applied psychology, 78, 205-211. Dunnette, m. D., & borman, w. C. (1979). Personnel selection and classification systems. Annual

Review of psychology, 30,477-525. Farh, j. L, & werbel, j. D. (1986). Effects of purpose of the appraisal and expectation of validation

On self-appraisal leniency. Journal of applied psychology, 71, 527-529. Feild, h. S., & holley, w. H. (1982). The relationship of performance appraisal system characteristics

To verdicts in selected employment discrimination cases. Academy of management journal, 25,.

392-406.

Ferris, g. R., judge, t. A., rowland. К. M., & fitzgibbons, d. E. (1994). Subordinate influence and the performance evaluation process: test of a model. Organizational behavior and human deci­sion processes, 58,101-135.

Finkelstein, l. M., burke. M j„ & raju, n. S. (1995). Age discrimination in simulated employment contexts: an integrative analysis. Journal of applied psychology, 80. 652-663.

Fisher, c. D. (1979). Transmission of positive and negative feedback to subordinates: a laboratory investigation, journal of applied psychology, 64, 533-540.

Fisher, с. D. (1989). Current and recurrent challenges in hrm. Journal of management, 15, 157— 180.

Flanagan, j. C. (1951). The critical incident technique. Psychological bulletin. 51, 327-358. L-'lynn, c. F., sipes, w. F., grosenbach, m. J., & ellsworth, j. (1994). Top performer survey:

Computerized psychological assessment in aircrew. Aviation, spuce,and environmental medicine,

65, a39-a44.

Flynn, g. (1995). Employee evaluations get so-so grades. Personnel journal, 74. 21-22.

Fox, s., caspy, т.. & reisler, a. (1994). Variables affecting leniency, halo and validity of self-appraisal.

Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 67, 45-56. Fried, y.. & tiegs, r. B. (1995). Supervisors' role conflict and role ambiguity differential relations

With performance ratings of subordinates and the moderating effect of screening ability journal

Of applied psychology 80, 282-291. Furnham, a., & stringfield, p. (1994). Congruence of self and subordinate ratings of managerial

Practices as a correlate of supervisor evaluation. Journal of occupational and op'gamzationa!

Psychology, 67, 57-67.

Gallatin, l. (1989). Electronic monitoring in the workplace; supervision or surveillance? Boston:

Massachusetts coalition on new office technology. Gandz, j., & murray, v. V (1980). The experience of workplace politics. Academy of management

Journal, 23,237-251.

George, d. I., & smith, m. C. (1990). An empirical comparison of self-assessment and organizational assessment in personnel selection. Public personnel management. 19, 175-190.

Gioia, d. A,, & longneckcr, с. O. (1994). Delving into the dark side: the politics of executive appraisal. Organizational dynamics, 22, 47-58.

Glen, r. M. (1990). Performance appraisal: an unnerving yet useful process. Public personnel management, 19, 1-10.

Gomez-mcjia, l. R. (1988). Evaluating employee performance: does the appraisal instrument make a difference? Journal of organizational behavior management, 9, 155-172.

Hall. J. (1994). Americans know how to be productive if managers will let them. Organizational dynamics, 22, 33-46.

Harris, m. M., & schaubroeck, j. (1988). A meta-analysis of self-supervisor, self-peer, and peer-supervisor ratings. Personnel psychology, 41, 43-62.

Harris, m. M., smith, d. E., & champagne, d. (1995). A field study of performance appraisal purpose: research versus administrative-based ratings. Personnel psychology, 48, 151-160.

Hassell, b. L., & perrewe, p. I.. (1995). An examination of beliefs about older workers: do stereotypes still exist? Journal of organizational behavior, 16, 457-468.

Hedge, j. W, & kavanagh, m. J. (1988). Improving the accuracy of performance evaluations: comparison of three methods of performance appraiser training. Journal of applied psychology, 73,68-73.

I [encman, r. L., & wexlcy, k.n. (1983). The effects of time delay in rating and amount of information

Observed on performance rating accuracy academy of management journal, 26, 677-686. Hunt, s. T. (1996). Generic work behavior: an investigation into the dimensions of entry-level,

Hourly job performance. Personnel psychology, 49, 1-49. Ilgen, d. R., & fcldman, j. M. (1983). Performance appraisal: a process focus. In l. L. Cummings &

В. M. Stavv (eds.), research in organizational behavior (vol. 5). Greenwich, ctjai. Ilgen, d. R., peterson, r. В.. Martin, в. А., & boeschen, d. A. (1981). Supervisor and .subordinate

Reactions to performance appraisal sessions. Organizational behavior and human performance,

28,311-330.

[yancevich, j. M. (1979). Longitudinal study of the effects of rater training on psychometric error

In глип^я. Journal of applied psychology, 64. 502-508. Judge, t. A., & ferris, g. R. (1993). Social context of performance evaluation decisions. Academy of

Management journal, 36. 80-105.

Kane, j. S., bernardin, h.j., villanova. R. & peyrcfitte, j. (1995). Stability of rater leniency: three

Studies. Academy of management journal, 38. 1036-1051. Karl, k. A., & wexley, k.n. (1989). Patterns of performance and rating frequency: influence on the

Assessment of performance. Journal of management, 15,5-20. Katz, d. (1964). The motivational basis of organizational behavior. Behavioral science:. 9.131-146. Kay, e., meyer, h. H., & frenchj. R. P. (1965). Effects of threat in a performance appraisal interview.

Journal of applied psychology. 49,311-317. Kingstrom, p. O., &: bass, a. R. (1981). A critical analysis of studies comparing behaviorally anchored

Rating scales (bars) and other rating formats. Personnel psychology. 34, 263-289. Kinicki, a. J., horn. R w., trost, m. R., & wade, k. J. (1995). Effects of category prototypes on

Performance-rating accuracy, journal of applied psychology, 80. 354-370. Klimoski, r., & inks, l. (1990). Accountability forces in performance appraisal. Organisational

Behavior and human decision processes. 5. 194-208. Knauft, e. B. (1948). Construction and use of weighted checklist rating scales for two industrial

Situations. Journal of applied psychology 32. 63-70. Kraiger. K. (1985). Analysis of relationships among self. Peer, and supervisory ratings of performance.

Prepublication report.

Kraiger, k., & ford. J. K. (1985). A meta-analysis of ratec race effects in performance ratings. Journal

Of applied psychology, 70. 56-65. Landau, j. (1995). The relationship of race and gender to managers' ratings of promotion potential.

Journal of organizational behavior. 16, 391-400. Landy, f.j., & farr, j. L. (1980). Performance rating. Psychological bulletin. 87, 72-107. Latham, g. P., fav, c, & saari, l. M. (1979). The development of behavioral observation scales for

Appraising the performance of foremen. Personel psychology, 32, 299-311. Latham, g. P. & wexlcy, k. N. (1981). Increasing productivity through performance appraisal.

Reading, m a: addison-wesley. Lawrence, b. S. (1988). New wrinkles in the theory of age: demography norms, and performance

Ratings. Academy of management journal, 31. 309-337. Lazer, r. 1., & wikstrom, w. S. (1977). Appraising managerial performance: current practices and

Future directions. New york: the conference board. Mabe, p. A., iii., & west, s. G. (1982). Validity of self-evaluation of ability: a review and meta­analysis. Journal of applied psychology, 67, 280-296. Mager, r. F. & pipe. P. (1970). Analyzing performance problems or «you really oughta \vanna!»

Belmont, c. A: fearon.

Maroncy, b. P. &: buckley, m. R. (1992). Does research in performance appraisal influence the

Practice of performance appraisal? Regretfully not public personnel management, 21.185-196. Martell, r. F. & borg, m. R. (1993). A comparison of the behavioral rating accuracy of groups and

Individuals. Journal of applied psychology, 78. 43-50. Maurer, t. J., palmer, j. K., & ashe, d. K. (1993). Diaries, checklists, evaluations, and contrast

Effects in measurement of behavior. Journal of applied psychology. 78, 226-231. Maurer, t, steilberg, c, & mccoyj. (1991). Effects of reviewing prior performance information

Immediately before subsequent evaluations. Presented at the 99th convention of the american

Psychological association. San francisco. Maurer, t.j'., & taylor, m. A. (1994). Is sex by itself enough? An explanation of gender bias issues

In performance appraisal. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 6c. 231-251. Mccloy, r. A., campbell, j. P. & cudcck, r. (1994). A confirmatory test of a model of performance

Determinants, journal of applied psychology. 79, 493-505. Mcevoy, g. M. (1990). Public sector managers' reactions to appraisals by subordinates. Public

Personnel management, 19, 201-212. Mcevoy, g. M., & buller, p e (1987). User acceptance of peer appraisals in an industrial setting.

Personnel psychology, 40, 785-797.

Mcneely, в. L., & meglino, в. M. (1994). The role ofdispositional and situational antecedents in

Prosocial organizational behavior: an examination of the intended beneficiaries of prosocial

Bdvdvior.journal of applied psychology, 79. 836-844. Meyer, h. H. (1991). A solution to the performance appraisal feedback enigma. Academy of

Management executive, 5, 68-76. Miner, j. B. (1988). Development and application of the rated ranking technique in performance

Appraisaljouma/o/ occupational psychology, 61, 291-305. Mitchell, t. R., & kalb, l. S. (1981). Effects of outcome knowledge and outcome valence on

Supervisors' evaluations. Journal of applied psychology, 66, 604-612. Mitchell, t. R., & liden, r. C. (1982). The effects of social context on performance evaluations.

Oiganisational behavior and human perfoimance. 29, 241-256. Moravec, m., juliff, r., & heslcr, k. (1995). Partnerships help a company manage performance.

Personnel journal, 75, 104-108. Murphy, k. R., gannett, b. A., herr, в. M., & chen, j. A. (1986). Effects of subsequent performance

On evaluations of previous performance. Journal of applied psychology, 71, 427-431. Murphy, k. R.,jako, r. A., & anhalt, r. L. (1993). Nature and consequences of halo error: a critical

Analysis. Journal of applied psychology, 78, 218-225. Murphy, k. R., & reynolds, d. H. (1988). Docs true halo affect observed halo? Journal of applied

Psychology, 73, 235-238. O'reilly, c., & chatman, j. A. (1994). Working smarter and harder: a longitudinal study of

Managerial success. Administrate science quarterly, 39, 603-627. Ostroff, c. (1993). Rater perceptions, satisfaction and performance rating-s./owmfl/ of occupational

And organizational psychology, 66, 345-356. Pearce, j. L., & porter, l. W. (1986). Employee responses to formal performance appraisal feedback.

Journal of applied psychology, 71, 211-218. Peters, l. H., & o'connor, e.j. (1980). Situational constraints and work outcomes: the influence

Of a frequently overlooked construct. Academy of management review, 5, 391-397. Piotrowski, m. J., barnes-farrcll, j. L., & esrig, e. H. (1989). Behaviorally anchored bias: a rep­lication and extension of murphy and constans.joumal of applied psychology, 74, 823-826. Posdakoff, p. M., & mackenzie, s. B. (1994). Organizational citizenship behaviors and sales unit

Effectiveness. Journal of marketing research, 31, 351-363. Pulakos, e. D. (1984). A comparison of rater training programs: error training and accuracy training.

Journal of applied psychology, 69, 581 -588. Quinones, m. A., ford.j. K., &c tcachout, m. S. (1995). The relationship between work experience

And job performance: a conceptual and meta-analytic review. Personnel psychology, 48, 887-

910.

Reilly, r., henry, s., & smither.j. (1990). An examination of the effects of using behavior checklists on the construct validity of assessment center dimensions. Personnel psychology, 43. 71-84.

Riggio, r. E., &c cole, e.j. (1992). Agreement between subordinate and superior ratings of super­visory performance and effects on self and subordinate job satisfaction. Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 65, 151-158.

Ross, j., & ferris, k. R. (1980). Interpersonal attraction and organizational outcomes: a field examination. Administrative science quarterly, 26, 617-632.

Saa'vcdra, r., & kwun, s. K. (1993). Peer evaluation in self-managing work groups. Journal of applied psychology, 78, 450-462.

Sackett, r. R., zedeck, s., & fogli, l. (1988). Relations between measures of typical and maximum job performance. Journal of applied psychology. 73. 482-486.

Sanchezj. 1., & de la torre, p. (1996). A second look at the relationship between rating and beha­vioral accuracy in performance appraisal .journal of applied psychology, 81. 3-10.

Schellhardt. T. D. (1996, nov. 19). It's time to evaluate your work, and all involved are groaning. Wall street journal, pp. Al. 5.

Schoorman, f d. (1988). Escalation bias in performance appraisals: an unintended consequence of supervisor participation in hiring decisions./ошж// of applied psychology. 73. 58-62.

Schrader, b. W, & stcincr, d. D. (1996). Common comparison standards: an approach to improving agreement between self and supervisory performance ratings. Journal of applied psychology 81, 813-820.

Shepherd, r.j. (1995). A personal perspective on aging and productivity, with particular reference to physically demanding work. Ergonomics. 38, 617-636.

Shore, l. N., & thornton, g. С, 111. (1986). Effects of gender on self- and supervisory ratings. Academy of management journal. 29, 115-129.

Sidanius.j., & crane, m. (1989). Job evaluation and gender: the case of university faculty. Journal of applied social psychology 19, 174-197.

Simonson, i., & nye, p. (1992). The effect of accountability on susceptibility to decision errors. Organizational behavior and human decision processes. 51. 416-446.

Smith, m. J., caravan, p., sanders, k. J., lim, s-y, & legrande, d. (1992). Employee stress and health complaints in jobs with and without electronic performance monitoring. Applied ergono­mics. 23,17-28.

Smith. R c, & kendall, l. M. (1963). Rctranslation of expectations: an approach to the construction

Of unambiguous anchors for rating scales. Journal of applied psychology 47. 149-155. Smither.j. W., wohlers, a. J., & london, m. (1995). A field study of reactions to normative versus

Individualized upward feedback. Group and organization management. 20, 61-89. Solomon, r.j. (1990). Developing job specific appraisal factors in large organizations. Public

Personnel management, 19, 11-24. Stamoulis, d. Т., & haucnstein, n. M. A. (1993). Rater training and rating accuracy: training for dimensional accuracy versus training for ratee differentiation. Journal of applied

Psychology. 78,994-1003. Stanton, j. M., & barnes-farrell, j. L. (1996). Effects of electronic performance monitoring on personal

Control, task satisfaction, and task performance./оип/я/ of applied psychology 81, 738-745. Steel, r. R, mento, a. J., & hcndrix, w. H. (1987). Constraining forces and the work performance

Of finance company cashiers. Journal of management. 13. 473-482. Steiner, d. D., rain, j. S., & smalley, m. M. (1993). Distributional ratings of performance: further

Examination of a new rating format. Journal of applied psychology, 78, 438-442. Sterns, h. L., & miklos, s. M. (1995). The aging worker in a changing environment: organizational

And individual issues. Journal of vocational behavior 7, 248-268. Sulsky, l. M., & day d. V. (1994). Effects of frame-of-refcrence training on rater accuracy under

Alternative time delays. Journal of applied psychology 79. 535-543. Sumer, h. C, & knight. R a. (1996). .assimilation and contrast effects in performance ratings:

Effects of rating the previous performance on rating subsequent performance. Journal of applied

Psychology, 8.1,436-442. Taylor, m. S., tracy, к в., renard, m. K., hamson.j. K., & carrol, j. J. (1995). Due process in

Performance appraisal: a quasi-experiment in procedural justice. Administrative science i

Quarterly, w. 495-523.

Thacker, r. A., & wayne, s.j. (1995). An examination of the relationship between upward influence j tactics and assessments of promotability. Journal of management, 21, 739-757.

Thorndike, e. L. (1920). A constant error in psychological ratings, journal of applied psychology. 4.я 25-29.

Thornton, g. С, iii. (1980). Psychometric properties of self-appraisals of job performance. Pei'sonnem psychology. 33, 263-271.

Tsui, a. S., & barry, b. (1986). Interpersonal affect and rating errors. Academy of management'"] journal, 29. 586-599.

Tziner, a., & latham, g. R (1989). The effects of appraisal instrument, feedback, and goal-setting on worker satisfaction and commitment. Journal of organizational behavior, jo, 145-153.

Van scottcr.j. R., & motowidio, s.j. (1996). Interpersonal facilitation and job dedication as separate

Facets of contextual performance, journal of applied psychology, 81, 525-531. Varca, p. E., & james-valutis, m. (1993). The relationship of ability and satisfaction to job

Performance. Applied psychology: an international review, 42, 265-275. Villanova, p., bernardin, h. J., dahmus, s. A., & sims, r. L. (1993). Rater leniency and performance

Appraisal discomfort. Educational and psychological measurement, 53, 789-799. Viswesvaran, c, schmidt, f. L., & ones, d. S. (1996). Comparative analysis of the reliability of job

Performance ratings. Journal of applied psychology, 81, 557-574. Waldman, d. A., & avolio, b.j. (1986). A meta-analysis of age-differences in job performance. Journal

Of applied psychology, 71, 33-38. Wayne, s. J., & liden, r. C. (1995). Effects of impression management on performance ratings:

A longitudinal study. Academy of management journal, 38, 232-260. Werner, j. M. (1994). Dimensions that make a difference: examining the impact of in-rolc and

Extrarole behaviors on supervisory ratings. Journal of applied psychology, 79, 98-107. Williams, j. R., & levy, p. E. (1992). The effects of perceived system knowledge on the agreement

Between self-ratings and supervisor ratings. Personnel psychology, 45, 835-847. Woehr, d.j. (1992). Performance dimension accessibility: implications for rating accuracy. Journal

Of organizational behavior; 13, 357-367. Woehr, d. J., & feldman, j. (1993). Processing objective and question order effects on the causal

Relation between memory and judgment in performance appraisal: the tip of the iceberg. Journal

Of applied psychology, 78, 232-241. Woehr, d.j., & huffcutt, a. I. (1994). Rater training for performance appraisal: a quantitative

Review. Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 67, 189-205. Wyer, r. S. Jr., & srull, т. K. (1981). Category accessibility: some theoretical and empirical issues

Concerning the processing of social stimulus information. In e. T. Higgins, c. P. Herman, &

M. R zanna (eds.), social cognition: the ontario symposium (vol. 1). Hillsdale, nj: lea. Zajonc, r. B. (1965, july 16). Social facilitation. Science, pp. 269-274.

Zalesny, m. D. (1990). Rater confidence and social influence in performance appraisal. Journal of

Applied psychology, 75, 274-289. Zalesny, m. D., & kirsch, m. P. (1989). The effect of similarity on performance ratings and interrater

Agreement. Human relations, 42, 81-96. Zammuto, r. E, london, m., & rowland, к. M. (1982). Organization and rater differences in

Performance appraisals. Personnel psychology, 35, 643-658.