Rating Biases & Personal Perceptions to Avoid
When evaluations are based on facts, the following situations can be avoided:
Waterfall Effect
The employee receives good evaluations for a long time then
suddenly is hit with a negative evaluation without having a clue
there was something wrong.
The Halo Effect
One positive item overshadows everything else during the rating
period. The employee is always seen in a positive light,
regardless of performance.
The Horns Effect
The Contrast Effect
One negative situation overshadows all positive performance
aspects during the rating period. The employee is perceived
negatively, regardless of performance.
An individual is judged either positively or negatively because of
comparisons with others or staff previously evaluated (rather
than on the relevant competencies needed for success in the
position or on the agreed upon performance objectives).
The People-Like-Me A Rater inflates the evaluation of an individual because of a
Effect
mutual personal connection, rather than job-related criteria.
The Recency Effect
The evaluation is based largely on the employee's most recent
behavior rather than on the behavior throughout the performance
review period.
The Primary Effect
The evaluation is based largely on the employee's early behavior
rather than on the behavior throughout the performance review
period.
Leniency or Strictness The Rater tends to give individuals either unusually high or
Effect
unusually low ratings.
Central Tendency
Effect
This error occurs when the Rater is reluctant to assign extremely
high or extremely low rating resulting in all individuals rated
average.