Performance Management - Human Resources

Running head: PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author Note:

PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT1
Provide a detailed discussion of the intentional rating distortion factors that may come into
play in this situation.
The case study has shown that a number of factor can impact upon the rating system,
especially for the new hiring. In this notion, some of the conscious and unconscious factors of
rating system have been mentioned that lead to the distortion of the rating system in a firm. First,
the conscious errors have been documented.
Similarity Error:
It is observed that the raters often try to find a link or similarities between them and the
employees or the candidates that they are rating. Therefore, in case of finding such a similarity, it
is likely that the raters or the supervisors will rate them in a convenient manner. In case of new
hiring the raters will try to include or hire the candidates who share the similar characters with
them (Bianchi, & Williams, 2015).
Leniency Factor:
The factor of leniency refers to the biasness practiced by the raters or the supervisors of a
firm. The supervisors practice the factors of leniency especially when they identify that there is a
similarity in the value system, they often tend to develop a biasness towards the candidates
(Park, 2014).
Halo Error:
The Halo error refers to the distortion in the rating system that take space because of the
impressions made by the candidates on the supervisor or the rater. The aim of the candidates to
be interviewed is to create an impression upon the supervisors or the interviewers or the raters,

PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT2
and their success in doing so, can lead to biasness in the rating system (Breuer, Nieken, &
Sliwka, 2013). This is known as the Halo Error.
Central Tendency:
Central Tendency refers to the distortion in the rating system due to the characteristic
default of the raters or the supervisors. Austin (2013), had mentioned that there are certain raters
or supervisors who mark all the candidates as average performers. They rate everyone an average
marks, which therefore, affect their actual performance and in certain case decreases the chances
for selection in case of a potent employee.
Low Appraiser Motivation:
Sutton et al., (2013), have mentioned that the raters often tend to perceive the future of
the employees and therefore, they are the employees as according to that perception. This
essentially impacts upon the rating system and the position of the candidates.
Apart from these conscious rating errors, there are certain other unconscious rating errors
as performed by the raters and the supervisors.
First is, the negativity bias. It is often noticed that the reviews generated upon the
candidates often influence upon the rating system, and therefore, the negative reviews regarding
a candidate is likely to be included while rating the person (Ayub, Gan, & Kadir, 2014).
Second is the Recency Bias, which refers to the impact or the influence of the memory
that the raters or the supervisors have of a candidate. Now, if the memory is a positive one, then
the candidates are going to get a good rating, and if the memory is a negative one, then it is likely