IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/umiodp/122017.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Verzerrungen bei Personalbeurteilungen durch Führungskräfte
[Biases in performance appraisals by managers]

Author

Listed:
  • Müller, Julia

Abstract

Personalbeurteilungen sind ein wichtiges Führungsinstrument in Unternehmen. Da die Personalbeurteilungen von Personen durchgeführt werden, unterliegen die Beurteilungen auch subjektiven Einschätzungen. Bei der Durchführung von Personalbeurteilungen treten Verzerrungen auf, die teils vermieden werden können. Führungskräfte sollten diese Fehler daher kennen.

Suggested Citation

  • Müller, Julia, 2017. "Verzerrungen bei Personalbeurteilungen durch Führungskräfte [Biases in performance appraisals by managers]," Discussion Papers of the Institute for Organisational Economics 12/2017, University of Münster, Institute for Organisational Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:umiodp:122017
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/173231/1/1010643932.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Johannes Berger & Christine Harbring & Dirk Sliwka, 2013. "Performance Appraisals and the Impact of Forced Distribution--An Experimental Investigation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(1), pages 54-68, June.
    2. Frederiksen, Anders & Lange, Fabian & Kriechel, Ben, 2017. "Subjective performance evaluations and employee careers," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 408-429.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Werner, Peter, 2024. "On common evaluation standards and the acceptance of wage inequality," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 137-156.
    2. Irene Trapp & Rouven Trapp, 2019. "The psychological effects of centrality bias: an experimental analysis," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 89(2), pages 155-189, March.
    3. Patrick Kampkötter & Dirk Sliwka, 2016. "The Complementary Use of Experiments and Field Data to Evaluate Management Practices: The Case of Subjective Performance Evaluations," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 172(2), pages 364-389, June.
    4. Thuy-Van Tran & Sinikka Lepistö & Janne Järvinen, 2021. "The relationship between subjectivity in managerial performance evaluation and the three dimensions of justice perception," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 369-399, September.
    5. Angelovski, Andrej & Brandts, Jordi & Sola, Carles, 2016. "Hiring and escalation bias in subjective performance evaluations: A laboratory experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 114-129.
    6. Cassidy, Hugh & DeVaro, Jed & Kauhanen, Antti, 2016. "Promotion signaling, gender, and turnover: New theory and evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 126(PA), pages 140-166.
    7. Yifei Huang & Matt Shum & Xi Wu & Jason Zezhong Xiao, 2019. "Discovery of Bias and Strategic Behavior in Crowdsourced Performance Assessment," Papers 1908.01718, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2019.
    8. Dato, Simon & Feess, Eberhard & Nieken, Petra, 2024. "Lying in competitive environments: Identifying behavioral impacts," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    9. Anders Frederiksen & Lisa B. Kahn & Fabian Lange, 2020. "Supervisors and Performance Management Systems," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 128(6), pages 2123-2187.
    10. Kampkötter, Patrick & Sliwka, Dirk, 2011. "Differentiation and Performance: An Empirical Investigation on the Incentive Effects of Bonus Plans," IZA Discussion Papers 6070, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Fochmann, Martin & Sachs, Florian & Weimann, Joachim, 2019. "Managing wages: Fairness norms of low- and high-performing team members," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 238, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    12. Matthias Fahn & Giorgio Zanarone, 2021. "Pay Transparency Under Subjective Performance Evaluation," CESifo Working Paper Series 8849, CESifo.
    13. Matthias Fahn & Giorgio Zanarone, 2022. "Transparency in relational contracts," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(5), pages 1046-1071, May.
    14. Sausgruber, Rupert & Sonntag, Axel & Tyran, Jean-Robert, 2021. "Disincentives from redistribution: evidence on a dividend of democracy," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    15. Benistant, Julien & Galeotti, Fabio & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2022. "Competition, information, and the erosion of morals," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 148-163.
    16. Haeckl, Simone & Sausgruber, Rupert & Tyran, Jean-Robert, 2024. "Work motivation and teams," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 244(C).
    17. Kathrin Manthei & Dirk Sliwka, 2019. "Multitasking and Subjective Performance Evaluations: Theory and Evidence from a Field Experiment in a Bank," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(12), pages 5861-5883, December.
    18. Henry Eyring & V. G. Narayanan, 2018. "Performance Effects of Setting a High Reference Point for Peer‐Performance Comparison," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(2), pages 581-615, May.
    19. Bol, Jasmijn C. & Kramer, Stephan & Maas, Victor S., 2016. "How control system design affects performance evaluation compression: The role of information accuracy and outcome transparency," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 64-73.
    20. Dohmen, Thomas, 2014. "Behavioral labor economics: Advances and future directions," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 71-85.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • M12 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Personnel Management; Executives; Executive Compensation
    • M51 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Personnel Economics - - - Firm Employment Decisions; Promotions
    • M54 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Personnel Economics - - - Labor Management

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:umiodp:122017. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ilmuede.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.