Assessments of Higher‐level Personnel: Iii. Rating Criteria: A Comparative Analysis of Supervisor Ratings and Incumbent Self‐ratings of Job Performance

Culture, management accounting and managerial performance: Focus Iran

“…Second, this study is subject to the limitations of the questionnaire survey methodology (Birnberg, Shields, & Yong, 1990). The utilization of a self-rating scale to measure managerial performance is likely to have higher means (higher clemency error) and a restricted range (low variability error) in the score (Prien and Liske, 1962;Thornton, 1968). The third limitation of this study is that we used binary values of (0, 1) for our independent variables.…”

Testing the Contingency «fit» Between Management Accounting Systems and Managerial Performance: A Research Note on the Moderating Role of Tolerance for Ambiguity

“…Second, the regression model of performance explained a low level of variance (R 2 =12·6%), indicating that variables other than broad scope MAS information and tolerance for ambiguity will affect managerial performance. Finally, the use of a selfrating scale to measure managerial performance is likely to have higher mean values (higher leniency error) and a restricted range (lower variability error) in the score (Prien & Liske, 1962;Thornton, 1968).…”

The effect of subordinates’ gender on the difference between self-ratings, and superiors’ ratings, of subordinates’ performance in hotels

“…Cheung (1999), Lloyd (1977), Prien and Liske (1962) and Thornton (1968) found that the two sets of performance evaluations differed, whereas there are other researchers, such as Furnham and Stringfield (1994), Heneman (1974) and Somers and Birnbaum (1991) reported that the two sets of performance evaluations were similar. An explanation of the equivocal results is that the differences between the superiors' evaluation of subordinates' performance and subordinates' self-evaluation of their own performance could be due to two factors.…”

“…While some researchers report that there is no difference between the superiors', and the subordinates' self, evaluation of the subordinates' performance (Cheung, 1999;Churchill et al, 1985;Heneman, 1974;Somers and Birnbaum, 1991), there are other researchers who report that there is difference between the superior's evaluation of subordinates' performance and the subordinates' self-evaluation of their own performance (Jones and Fletcher, 2002;Prien and Liske, 1962;Scullen et al, 2000;Thornton, 1968).…”