Evaluation Protocols
Jeopardy Statements
A peer evaluation Jeopardy Statement 1:
This method involves having employees assess the work of their peers and can be helpful in identify areas where employees need improvement.
A peer evaluation Jeopardy Statement 2:
This method can promote a sense of ownership and responsibility among employees, as they are actively involved in the evaluation process.
A peer evaluation Jeopardy Statement 3:
With this method there is the potential for personal biases to creep into the process, and some employees may feel uncomfortable being evaluated by this method.
An observational evaluation Jeopardy Statement 1:
This method of evaluation involves observing people as they carry out tasks or interact with others.
An observational evaluation Jeopardy Statement 2:
This method of evaluation is often used to assess individual performance, identify training and development needs, and assess the effectiveness of workplace interventions, without having to interview or survey workers.
An observational evaluation Jeopardy Statement 3:
This method of evaluation can be biased if the observer does not have a clear understanding of the objectives of the evaluation.
A subordinate evaluation Jeopardy Statement 1:
This is a method in which workers evaluate the performance of their supervisors and managers.
A subordinate evaluation Jeopardy Statement 2:
This method gives employees the opportunity to give feedback to their supervisors about how well the supervisors are doing at the their job.
A subordinate evaluation Jeopardy Statement 3:
Some managers may be uncomfortable with this evaluation method, especially if they have been unfair or mean towards their employees.
A 360 appraisal Jeopardy Statement 1:
Also known as multi-rater feedback, this method relies on anonymous feedback from others who have a working relationship with a member of the staff.
A 360 appraisal Jeopardy Statement 2:
To start this method, HR will ask for a list of raters from the employee participant.
A 360 appraisal Jeopardy Statement 3:
The ability to conductmeaningful comparisons of rater perceptionsboth between and within groups is central to this method of evaluation.
Potential...
For example, individuals who are friends or who share similar characteristics may be more likely to give each other favorable ratings. Additionally, those who have recently had a
conflict with the individual being evaluated may give a lower rating in order to punish them (Catts et al., 2010).
The possibility of bias using an observational evaluation?
One type of bias that can occur is known as observational bias. This occurs when the observer forms judgments about individuals based on their own personal...
…to remain objective.
2. Another potential issue is that it can be difficult to ensure that all relevant behaviors are observed and recorded (Ehigie & Ehigie, 2005).
Two strengths of a subordinate evaluation?
1. One strength of subordinate evaluations is that they can provide a more complete picture of job performance than supervisor ratings alone, as subordinates are likely to have different perspectives and experiences than supervisors.
2. It gets subordinates engaged and gives them an opportunity to provide meaningful feedback to their bosses.
Two weaknesses of a subordinate evaluation?
1. Subordinates may be more likely to give higher ratings to supervisors who are popular or who have shown favoritism.
2. Subordinates may be reluctant to give negative feedback for fear of reprisal (Aguinis, 2009).
Two strengths of a 360 appraisal?
1. One strength of 360 degree appraisals is that they provide a well-rounded view of an individual's performance.
2. One strength of 360 degree appraisals is that they provide a well-rounded view of an individual's performance.
Two weaknesses of a 360 appraisal?
1. 360 degree appraisals include the potential for bias and the amount of time required to collect and analyze the data can be high.
2. 360 degree appraisals may not always be accurate, as they rely on people's perceptions which can be influenced by a…
