Performance Reviews and Evaluations - How Well Do You Rate?
By Wendy S. Sweet, CLM
Vice President and Managing Editor
Association of Legal Administrators (ALA) - Greater Los Angeles Chapter
Office Administrator - Andrews Kurth LLP
A list of common mistakes made during the evaluation process
Most firms are in the thick of their annual evaluation process. This got me thinking about one of the chapters in Human Resource Management, a text I read in preparation for the CLMSM exam. The chapter was entitled "Performance Management and Appraisal" and it was included in the "Training and Developing Human Resources" section of the book.
I think some firms probably do a pretty good job of training their evaluators on how to conduct performance evaluations. I also think too many other firms probably don't even address it. Here's a list I extracted of common "rater errors." If you review evaluations that contain these patterns, perhaps it's time to train/re-train your evaluators.
| Rater Error |
Practical Impact |
| Varying Standards |
Similar performances rated differently: evaluators should avoid applying different standards and expectations for employees performing similar jobs. |
| Recency/Primacy Effects |
Timing of information affects rating: "recency effect" occurs when greater weight is given to recent events; "primacy effect" is the opposite, when older info is given the most weight. |
| Central Tendency, Leniency, Strictness |
Everyone is rated the same: evaluators often make the mistake of falling into rating patterns where everyone is judged exactly the same... either middle of the line, low or high. |
| Rater Bias |
Certain factors overwhelm others: evaluators should not let their own values or prejudices (both unconscious and intentional) distort their rating of employees. |
| Halo/Horn Effect |
Generalization is made from only one trait: often evaluators make unyielding judgments based on one thing an employee has done either exceptionally well or very poorly. |
| Contrast Error |
Comparison is made to other people, not standards: every employee should be rated on their own ability to meet/exceed the firm's standards. |
| Similar to Me/Different from Me |
Rater compares employees to self: employees should be rated on their ability to meet/exceed the firm's standards, rather than on their personal characteristics. |
| Sampling Error |
Available information is insufficient or inaccurate: evaluations of employees with whom the evaluator has limited contact can skew evaluation results. |
Adapted from Human Resource Management, Tenth Ed., Mathis/Jackson
Published in the June 2004 Issue of Leadership Exchange, an Educational Resource of the Greater LA Chapter of ALA (www.glaala.org).
Back to Legal Job Articles for Employers