All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Perceived Anonymity Adequacy in Performance Evaluations of Supervisors and Coworkers
Unformatted Document Text:  Perceived Anonymity Adequacy 2 Many organizations have discovered the importance of providing feedback to their members to improve performance and, ultimately, productivity. Mechanisms for formal feedback, such as 360-degree feedback and other multi-rater techniques, are becoming a useful resource for information about an organizational member’s performance (Atwater, Roush, & Fischthal, 1995; Fairhurst, 2001; Smither, Wohlers, & London., 1995, Walker & Smither, 1999). Multi-rater techniques require employees to provide performance assessments of supervisors, peers, as well as subordinates (Bloom & Hautaluoma, 1987; Fedor, 1997). One key component of many multi-rater techniques for organizational feedback is anonymity (London & Wohlers, 1991). Anonymity is “the degree to which a communicator perceives the message source as unknown or unspecified” (Anonymous, 1998, p. 387). Anonymity granted to those performing the evaluation “lessen[s] employee fears of the potential costs of participation, [such as] retribution by superiors and/or coworkers for low ratings” (Westerman & Rosse, 1997, p. 289). However, anonymity has not been thoroughly examined by scholars studying performance feedback. Current research on anonymity in the context of performance evaluations explores the influence of anonymity, as an independent variable, on the content of evaluations (Antonioni, 1994; Bloom & Hautaluoma, 1987; Klimonski & Inks, 1990; Rosen & Tesser, 1972). In essence, anonymity is assumed to produce more critical and effective evaluations (Antonioni, 1994; London, Wohlers, & Gallagher, 1990; Westerman & Rosse). The subjective perceptions of anonymity among those conducting performance evaluations have been largely overlooked in feedback research. Consequently, the purpose of this study is to investigate perceptions of anonymity during performance evaluations. In particular, this study will examine four factors related to the adequacy of anonymity a rater may feel when conducting a performance evaluation. Additionally, building on recent theorizing about

Authors: Rains, Stephen. and Young, Anna.
first   previous   Page 2 of 32   next   last



background image
Perceived Anonymity Adequacy 2
Many organizations have discovered the importance of providing feedback to their
members to improve performance and, ultimately, productivity. Mechanisms for formal
feedback, such as 360-degree feedback and other multi-rater techniques, are becoming a useful
resource for information about an organizational member’s performance (Atwater, Roush, &
Fischthal, 1995; Fairhurst, 2001; Smither, Wohlers, & London., 1995, Walker & Smither, 1999).
Multi-rater techniques require employees to provide performance assessments of supervisors,
peers, as well as subordinates (Bloom & Hautaluoma, 1987; Fedor, 1997).
One key component of many multi-rater techniques for organizational feedback is
anonymity (London & Wohlers, 1991). Anonymity is “the degree to which a communicator
perceives the message source as unknown or unspecified” (Anonymous, 1998, p. 387).
Anonymity granted to those performing the evaluation “lessen[s] employee fears of the potential
costs of participation, [such as] retribution by superiors and/or coworkers for low ratings”
(Westerman & Rosse, 1997, p. 289). However, anonymity has not been thoroughly examined by
scholars studying performance feedback. Current research on anonymity in the context of
performance evaluations explores the influence of anonymity, as an independent variable, on the
content of evaluations (Antonioni, 1994; Bloom & Hautaluoma, 1987; Klimonski & Inks, 1990;
Rosen & Tesser, 1972). In essence, anonymity is assumed to produce more critical and effective
evaluations (Antonioni, 1994; London, Wohlers, & Gallagher, 1990; Westerman & Rosse).
The subjective perceptions of anonymity among those conducting performance
evaluations have been largely overlooked in feedback research. Consequently, the purpose of this
study is to investigate perceptions of anonymity during performance evaluations. In particular,
this study will examine four factors related to the adequacy of anonymity a rater may feel when
conducting a performance evaluation. Additionally, building on recent theorizing about


Convention
All Academic Convention is the premier solution for your association's abstract management solutions needs.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 2 of 32   next   last

©2008 All Academic, Inc.