Performance Appraisal of Behavior‐based Competencies: A Reliable and Valid Procedure

Abstract

A new performance appraisal system, developed for promotions in the Royal Canadian Mounted Police non-commissioned officer ranks, fairly differentiated among candidates. Members (N = 6,571) illustrated their performance on core competencies with behavioral examples. Supervisors and then review boards used a BARS procedure to reliably rate performance. Both candidates and supervisors supported the system. The performance appraisal scores predicted career advancement in the organization.The advantages and disadvantages of using performance assessment in making employment decisions are well documented (e.g., Murphy & Cleveland, 1995). The limitations of performance assessment, such as inflated ratings, lack of consistency, and the politics of assessment (Tziner, Latham, Price, & Haccoun, 1996), often lead to their abandonment. Managers responsible for delivering performance reviews who are uncomfortable with the performance rating system may give uniformly high ratings that do not discriminate between ratees. Poor ratings detract from organizational uses and increase employee mistrust in the performance appraisal system (Tziner & Murphy, 1999). Employees on the receiving end of the appraisal often express dissatisfaction with both the decisions made as a result of performance assessment and the process of performance assessment (Milliman, Nason, Zhu, & De Cieri, 2002), which may have longitudinal effects on overall job satisfaction (Blau, 1999) and commitmentWe thank all the members and staff of the RCMP who participated in this project and contributed to its success. We also thank the external reviewers and the editor for their comments and suggestions.Correspondence and requests for reprints should be addressed to Victor M. Catano,

Getting Rid of Performance Ratings: Genius or Folly? A Debate

“…Simplifying the cognitive demands and reducing, through simplification of the process and forms, the motivational barriers for managers is also likely to be helpful (Efron & Ort, 2010). Finally, performance review panels might be used, which would have similar advantages and disadvantages as promotion panels (Catano et al, 2007;Church, 1995;Gilliland & Langdon, 1998;Kozlowski, Chao, & Morrison, 1998;Vance, Winne, & Wright, 1983;Werner & Bolino, 1997). In our view, it is the consequences of leaders assigning and communicating evaluative judgments expressed as ratings that matter the most, not the ratings themselves.…”

“…Dozens of conceptualizations of what can and should be measured within an individual performance system have been put forth in the literature and in practice (five-, four-, three-, two-point rating scales; competency based, production based, objective based, task based, behavior based, etc. ; e.g., Benson, Buckley, & Hall, 1988;Bommer, Johnson, Rich, Podsakoff, & MacKenzie, 1995;Borman, 1979;Catano, Darr, & Campbell, 2007;Fay & Latham, 1982;Goffin, Jelley, Powell, & Johnston, 2009;Jelley & Goffin, 2001;Johnson, 2001;Latham, Fay, & Saari, 1979;Thompson & Thompson, 1985;Tziner & Kopelman, 2002). Irrespective of the manner in which evaluations happen, judgments are made and decisions about rewards and roles in the future are based on those judgments.…”

“…Many choices of rating scales and expected distributions of ratings might help, depending on the context and culture. A recent trend with considerable merit is the formal use of "calibration," which refers to meetings among managers for the purpose of justifying and comparing the proposed performance ratings of employees to ensure their accuracy and comparability across business units (Catano et al, 2007;Church, 1995;DeNisi & Pritchard, 2006). Another increasing trend is competency modeling, which involves (in part) the explicit establishment of behavioral descriptions of performance expectations, at each rating level, for important job competencies (M. A.…”

“…Another increasing trend is competency modeling, which involves (in part) the explicit establishment of behavioral descriptions of performance expectations, at each rating level, for important job competencies (M. A. Campion et al, 2011;Catano et al, 2007;Halim, 2011). Yet another trend worth considering is the use of 360 feedback as an input to performance management (Bracken & Rose, 2011;Gilliland & Langdon, 1998;Latham, Almost, Mann, & Moore, 2005;Reilly & McGourty, 1998).…”

Towards a Consensus of a Competency Framework for Clinical Supervision in Nursing: Knowledge, Attitudes, and Skills

“…Competency-based education (and training) is now fairly commonplace in nursing, clinical psychology, and counseling/psychotherapy programs (Mulholland, 1994;Manring, Beitman, & Dewan, 2003;Catano & Campbell, 2007;Anema & McCoy, 2010). Given the not insubstantial conceptual and practice overlap between CS and the aforementioned disciplines, it is perhaps not surprising that a competency-based approach to education and training in CS is starting to emerge (Bagnall, Sloan, Platz, & Murphy, 2011;U.S.…”