Search results

The growing recognition of the role of teacher innovative behavior in educational improvement has led to more systematic assessment of teacher-driven innovations, usually through expert panels. Innovative peer-teachers may be more closely aligned with the correlates of teacher innovative behavior than experts, and hence their participation in such panels might make the process more robust. Hence, the authors ask, “Do expert and peer assessments relate to individual-related correlates of innovative teacher behavior differently?”

Innovations of 347 teachers in India were assessed by an expert panel and a peer-teacher panel using the consensual technique of rating innovations. Structural equation modeling was used to study the relationships of the ratings with the innovative teachers' self-reported creative self-efficacy, intrinsic motivation, learning orientation and proactive personality.

Expert ratings were significantly related to creative self-efficacy beliefs (β = 0.53, p < 0.05), whereas peer ratings were not. Peer ratings were significantly related to learning orientation (β = 0.19, p < 0.05), whereas expert ratings were not. Also, expert ratings were found to be indirectly associated with teachers' proactive personality and intrinsic motivation via creative self-efficacy beliefs; peer ratings were not associated with proactive personality.

The paper, through a robust methodology that relates expert and peer assessments with individual-related correlates of innovative behavior, makes a case for educational innovation managers to consider mixed panels of experts and innovative teacher-peers to make the assessment process more robust.

Complex issues arise when personality variables are incorporated into traditional approaches to personnel selection. Personality assessment and testing in employment contexts is more complicated than it would appear. Rather than arguing against considering personality variables, wefocus on five problematic issues associated with their use in personnel selection. These issues are: the appropriateness of linear selection models; the problem of personality‐related self‐selection effects; the multi‐dimensionality of personality; bias associated with social desirability, impression management, and faking in top‐down selection models; and the legal implications of personality assessment in employment contexts. Recommends that practitioners and researchers be cognizant of these issues in the use of personality tests in employment decisions.

Managers frequently complain that performance ratings are inflated; thus, this study aims to explore what extent two motivational factors theoretically associated with accountability, rating audience and incentive, can influence rating inflation.

One hundred and forty‐nine raters were assigned to one of four audience conditions (ratee, expert, both ratee and expert – dual, and no audience) and either to an incentive or no incentive condition.

Results showed that when an incentive was offered, raters expecting an expert audience to view their ratings provided significantly lower ratings, and raters expecting a dual audience provided significantly higher ratings compared to raters not offered an incentive. Furthermore, raters expecting a ratee audience inflated their ratings, regardless of incentive.

Financial incentives were used in this study and more research is needed to explore other types of incentives. Nonetheless, this research shows that incentives influence rating level.

The research suggests that if managers wish to reduce rating inflation, they should ensure that an audience, other than the person being rated, will view the ratings.

This study is the first to show that feelings of accountability and rating level are influenced by incentives, and that the audience of the ratings can determine whether incentives result in lower or higher ratings. Furthermore, it appears that the tendency to inflate ratings given a ratee audience may be quite powerful, even in the absence of specific incentives.

In recent years, practitioners have identified a number of problems with traditional performance management (PM) systems, arguing that PM is broken and needs to be fixed. In this chapter, we review criticisms of traditional PM practices that have been mentioned by journalists and practitioners and we consider the solutions that they have presented for addressing these concerns. We then consider these problems and solutions within the context of extant scholarly research and identify (a) what organizations should do going forward to improve PM practices (i.e., focus on feedback processes, ensure accountability throughout the PM system, and align the PM system with organizational strategy) and (b) what scholars should focus research attention on (i.e., technology, strategic alignment, and peer-to-peer accountability) in order to reduce the science-practice gap in this domain.

Benchmark surveys regarding talent management assessment practices and interventions of choice for organization development (OD) practitioners have shown 360-degree feedback to be a popular tool for both development and decision-making in the field today. Although much has been written about implementing 360-degree feedback since its inception in the 1990s, few longitudinal case examples exist where interventions have been applied and their impact measured successfully. This chapter closes the gap by providing research findings and key learnings from five different implementation strategies for enhancing 360-degree feedback in a large multi-national organization. Recommendations and implications for future research are discussed.

This study examines the accuracy of individual perceptions (self‐estimates) of acquired competence. A concept of relative competence is introduced to account for variation in rater elevation and differences in importance (significance) of specific competencies. The results indicate that the self‐estimates of job‐specific competencies are well executed. Because the distortion in elevation and stereotype accuracy is largely associated with general constructs, the findings suggest that we should focus on modeling competencies to the job. The results also show that even without a correction for interrater differences or a correction for the importance of different competencies, the competency model carries value‐relevant information.

The syllabus serves as a plan that can be utilized for discussing course (re)design. The Online Community of Inquiry Syllabus Rubric© (OCOISR) was developed for collaborators to review online course plans for continuous improvement. It assesses the potential to engender cognitive presence (CP), social presence (SP), teaching presence (TP), and learner support (LS) in online college courses based on interactive treatments. In one case study, two raters with advanced degrees in instructional design and online teaching experience reviewed 31 online syllabi across disciplines to determine their potential for producing an online community of inquiry. They achieved a good degree of consistency among measurements, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.821, p < 0.001, and 95% CI [0.40, 0.932]. Raters found above-average CP, moderate SP, and basic TP. These results mirrored that of the previous case study at a different institution. Other findings included basic educational technology use in both cases. The lead author, serving as the college’s instructional designer, provided course-specific recommendations to instructors based on their syllabi review for action research. This chapter describes the use of the OCOISR© to maximize student–student, student–teacher, and student–content planned engagement for improved online learning experiences.

This chapter presents two established pedagogical techniques to increase student engagement, simulations and peer assessment. The use of each technique, its benefits and drawbacks, and how content knowledge and student engagement increase are detailed. While each of the approaches can be utilized independently to create active learning environments, this chapter illustrates the potential to extend these approaches further. An overview of an MBA-level elective on competitive analysis structured around a simulation and peer assessment is presented. The result is a highly interactive and engaging course where the simulation and peer assessments achieve symbiotic benefits. Learning and performance in the simulation is enhanced by the application of competitive analyst reports which are used by peer “clients.” Assessment in turn leads to greater insights to the simulation, and subsequently higher levels of performance on both the simulation and future analysis work. Insights on these instructional methods, their limitations, and potential barriers to adoption are offered with the hope of inspiring others to utilize and experiment with novel approaches for further enhance learner engagement.

Relative performance evaluation (RPE) is a widely practiced employee appraisal process in the services industry. In a global delivery model, teams are spread across different geographical locations. The team members work on various tasks under the guidance of different managers and at times under more than one manager for performing the same task. Such complexities make RPE of the team members quite challenging. The paper proposes a methodical step-by-step approach to simplify the evaluation process without compromising on the rigour.

RPE has followed three different approaches. First is the traditional way, wherein evaluators had a common meeting to discuss and arrive at relative evaluation and ranking of members of the peer group employees. In the second, the number of evaluators and employees in a peer group were split in to 2 subgroups. The evaluators provided independent ratings and rankings. Simple mathematical tool then derived the combined ranking. In the third approach, each evaluator evaluated each employee in the peer group and provided the relative ranking for each employee. Again, mathematical tools provided the final ranking considering inputs from all evaluators. All the three evaluation approaches were analysed through an inter-rater agreement method.

All the three approaches for evaluation provided similar results giving confidence that less time-consuming methods could be adopted by evaluators without compromising on the rigour of the evaluation. The outcome of the exercise proved effective as the complaints reaching the ombudsmen reduced as compared to the earlier years. Considerable evaluation time was also saved. The study described in this paper is carried out in a non-unionized, Indian private sector services firm. Its effectiveness in other set ups is yet to be tested.

The research is carried out in the Indian Engineering services firm operating in the Knowledge based sector. Though study results are encouraging, the adaptability of methodology across different sectors and geographies is yet to be tested. More broad based studies are needed to evaluate suitability across firms and regions.

Relative evaluation exercise is challenging for evaluators. Although openness in evaluation is desired, it also makes evaluators uncomfortable in appearing to be taking sides or being opposing a candidate's ranking. The proposed approach brings in anonymity to each evaluator without scarifying individual evaluation.

The proposed methodology can be deployed across different services industries as the proposed methodology is business domain agnostic. It can be easily ported and tailored to align with an individual organization's evaluation philosophy. The suitability and effectiveness of the method can be studied under various types of firms like manufacturing, private, public, NGO, labour oriented, etc. As the proposed method reduces efforts, the stake holders can focus on understanding the relation between employee performance measurement, employee engagement, and long-term outcomes related to employee performance evaluation.

The proposed employee evaluation method leverages inter-rater reliability and agreement tool as a consensus approach to the relative performance ranking exercise. Such an approach to relative performance ranking is original as no prior studies with such an approach are found in the existing Literature.