Abstract
This study explored the impart of process-oriented variables on the measurement of job performance by examining raters' weighting strategy. Weighting strategy was defined as the manner in which raters weight or combine their evaluations of a subordinate's job performance to reach an over-all judgment on a dimension. Specifically, three issues were examined: (1) the amount of relative weight raters place on favorable, neutral, and unfavorable information, (2) the number of pieces of information raters utilize in reaching an over-all judgment on a performance dimension, and (3) the extent to which raters agree on which piece(s) of information should be most heavily weighted in arriving at such a decision. An analysis of the job-performance ratings of 132 police officers showed that the most favorable information receives the most weight, raters utilize multiple pieces of information when arriving at an over-all judgment, and raters disagree on the relative importance they attribute to each piece of information in the decision-making process. The discussion centered on ways of improving the psychometric properties of measures for performance appraisal.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
