SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi / 2017 / Cilt: 12 - Sayı: 3

360 Derece Performans Değerleme Sisteminde Farklı Pozisyonlar İçin Dört Kaynaktan Performanslar Üzerine Bir Araştırma

An Investigation on the Ratings from Four Sources for Different Positions in a 360 Degree Feedback System

Fatih ÇEMREK
Emin KAHYA
Pages
49–64
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The findings indicate that the influence of bias on ratings was significantly greater in self, subordinate and peer feedback than in supervisor feedback

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The 360 degrees performance appraisal system, which is considered as the most popular evaluation system today, is based on the idea that the evaluations obtained from different sources are more objective and comprehensive.
📊
Key Findings & Data:It is investigated whether rater has a similar effect on the leniency of ratings from four sources (self, supervisor, peer, and subordinate) in multi-source assessment process.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings indicate that the influence of bias on ratings was significantly greater in self, subordinate and peer feedback than in supervisor feedback
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The 360 degrees performance appraisal system, which is considered as the most popular evaluation system today, is based on the idea that the evaluations obtained from different sources are more objective and comprehensive. Since the system gives the employee a chance to evaluate him/herself and others, it is commonly preferred. It is investigated whether rater has a similar effect on the leniency of ratings from four sources (self, supervisor, peer, and subordinate) in multi-source assessment process. In this study, the establishment and implementation of a 360-degree performance appraisal system for all task positions including both white and blue-collar personnel in a medium-sized furniture business is discussed. A total of 200 employees (39 white collar employees, 17 foremen and 144 workers) from all functional areas and reputational roles participated in the study. The findings indicate that the influence of bias on ratings was significantly greater in self, subordinate and peer feedback than in supervisor feedback

Özet

Günümüzde en popular değerlendirme sistemi olarak kabul edilen 360 derece performans değerleme sistemi, farklı kaynaklardan elde edilen değerlemelerin daha objektif ve kapsamlı olduğu görüşüne dayanmaktadır. Bu system, çalışana kendisini ve diğerlerini değerlendirme şansı tanıdığından, yaygın tercih edilmektedir. Çok kaynaklı değerleme sürecinde, dört kaynaktan (kendisi, yönetici, arkadaş ve ast) değerlemelerinde değerleyicinin aynı hoşgörüye sahip olup olmadığı araştırılmaktadır. Bu çalışmada, orta ölçekli bir mobilya işletmesinde, hem beyaz hem de mavi yakalı personeli kapsayan tüm görev pozisyonları için 360 derece performans değerleme sistemin kurulması ve uygulaması ele alınmıştır. Tüm fonksiyonel alanlardan ve pozisyonlardan toplam 200 çalışan (39 beyaz yakalı, 17 ustabaşı, 144 işçi) çalışmaya katılmıştır. Bulgular, değerlemelerde önyargı etkisinin, kendi, ast ve arkadaş değerlemelerinde yönetici değerlemesinden daha fazla olduğunu göstermiştir

🔖

Cite This Article

ÇEMREK, F., KAHYA, E. (2022). 360 Derece Performans Değerleme Sisteminde Farklı Pozisyonlar İçin Dört Kaynaktan Performanslar Üzerine Bir Araştırma. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 12 - Sayı: 3, 49–64. https://ajindex.com/articles/499358

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Akal, Z. (2005), İşletmelerde Performans Ölçüm ve Denetimi: Çok Yönlü Performans Göstergeleri, 6.Baskı, Milli Prodüktivite Merkezi Yayınları No: 473. Ankara.
  2. Akdemir, A. (2009),
  3. İşletmeciliğin Temel Bilgileri, Ekin Yayınları,
  4. Bursa. Antonioni, D.; H. Park (2001), “The relationship between rater affect and three sources of 360-degree feedback ratings”, Journal of Management, 27: 479-495.
  5. Antonioni, D.; D.J. Woehr (2000), “Improving the quality of multi-source rater performance”, In D.W. Bracken, C.W. Timmreck, and A.H. Church (Eds.). Handbook of Multisource Feedback (pp. 114-129). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Atwater, L.E.; C. Ostroff; F.J. Yammarino; J.W. Fleenor (1998), “Self-other agreement: Does it really matter?”, Personnel Psychology, 51: 577-598.
  6. Baltacı, A. İ.; H.Burgazoğlu (2014), “Değerlendiriciler Arası Güvenilirlik ve Tatmin Bağlamında 360 Derece Performans Değerlendirme”, Marmara Üniversitesi Öneri Dergisi, 11 (41): 57-76.
  7. Barutçugil, İ. (2002), Performans Yönetimi, 2. Basım, Kariyer Yayıncılık, İstanbul.
  8. Beehr, T.A.; L. Ivanitskaya; C.P. Hansen; D. Erofeev; D. Gudanowski (2001), “Evaluation of 360 degree feedback ratings: Relationships with each other and with performance and selection predictors”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22: 775-788.
  9. Bettenhausen, K.L.; D.B. Fedor (1997), “Peer and upward appraisals: A comparison of their benefits and problems”, Group and Organizational Management, 22: 236-263.
  10. Borman, W.C. (1974), “The rating of individuals in organizations: An alternative approach”, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 12: 105-124.
  11. Borman, W.C.; S.J. Motowidlo (1993), “Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual performance”, In N.Schmitt and W.C. Borman (Eds), Personnel Selection in Organizations (pp. 71-98),
  12. New York, JosseyBass. Borman, W.C.; L.A. White; E.D. Pulakos; S.H. Oppler (1991), “Models of supervisory job performance ratings”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 76 (6): 863-872.
  13. Brutus, S.; S. Petosa; E. Aucoin (2005), “Who will evaluate me? Rater selection in multi-source assessment contexts”, International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 13 (2): 129-138.
  14. Cardy, R.L. and G.H. Dobbins (1986), “Affect and appraisal accuracy: Liking as an integral dimension in evaluating performance”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 71: 672-678.
  15. Coates, D.E. (1998), “Don’t tie 360 feedback to pay”, Training, 35: 68-78.
  16. Coleman, V.I.; W.C. Borman (2000), “Investigating the underlying structure of the cit