Smith: The Effects of Accountability on Leniency Reduction in Self- and Peer Ratings on Team-Based Performance Appraisals

Title: The Effects of Accountability on Leniency Reduction in Self- and Peer Ratings on Team-Based Performance Appraisals

A Dissertation Defense by Brett Smith
Friday April 6, 2012 at 10:30am in Brackett 414

Committee: Drs. Fred Switzer, III (Chair), Mary Anne Taylor, Claudio Cantalupo, and Harold Cheatham

Abstract:
The purpose of the present study was to assess the effects of accountability on leniency reduction in self- and peer ratings on team-based performance appraisals when they were used for different purposes (developmental, evaluative). I made the following hypotheses: 1) There would be a two-way interaction between rater source (self, peer) and accountability (e.g., no accountability) such that participants in the no accountability condition would assign significantly higher self-ratings of team behaviors than peer ratings regardless of purpose. 2) There would not be a significant three-way interaction between accountability, rater source, and purpose. 3) There would be a main effect for accountability such that participants in the accountability conditions would have significantly lower ratings of team behaviors than participants in the no accountability conditions. 4) There would be a main effect for purpose such that participants would give significantly higher ratings of team behaviors if the appraisals were used for evaluative purposes than if they were used for developmental purposes. Accountability was operationalized as participants being told they would have to justify their self and peer-ratings of team behaviors to their professors (field study) or a local nuclear process control plant supervisor (lab study). The results provided partial support for the hypotheses and offers evidence for the potential effects that accountability may have in reducing leniency in team-based performance appraisals.

Similar Posts (auto-generated):