werner legal
PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY
1997, 50
EXPLAINING U.S. COURTS OF APPEALS DECISIONS
INVOLVING PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL:
ACCURACY, FAIRNESS, AND VALIDATION
JON M. WERNER, MARK C. BOLINO
Department of Management
University of South Carolina
Accuracy and due process perspectives were used to extend policycapturing research concerning employment discrimination case law.
TWo-hundred ninety-five usable U.S. Circuit Court decisions concerning performance appraisal were located from 1980-1995. In both chisquare and multivariate LOGIT analyses, decisions were explained by: use of job analysis, provision of written instructions, employee review of results, and agreement among raters. Contrary to hypotheses, appraisal frequency and type (traits vs. behaviors or results) were unrelated to judicial decision. Rater training approached significance in chi-square analysis. Of other variables checked (e.g., type of discrimination claim, statutory basis, class action status, year of decision, circuit court, type of organization, purpose of appraisal, evaluator race and sex), only circuit court approached significance. We conclude that issues relevant to fairness and due process were most salient to Judicial decisions; issues pertaining to accuracy were important, yet validation was virtually ignored in this sample of cases.
Today there is no dispute that performance appraisal practices are
subject to employment legislation such as Title VII of the 1964 Civil
Rights Act. Further, many researchers and practitioners view performance appraisal as an employment "test" covered by the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (1978). The Guidelines were adopted in 1978 by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and other regulatory agencies, and emphasize the need for employers to validate all employment criteria, both "objective" and "subjective," where adverse impact has been found. This is the official position of
We would like to thank John HoUenbeck,
1997, 50
EXPLAINING U.S. COURTS OF APPEALS DECISIONS
INVOLVING PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL:
ACCURACY, FAIRNESS, AND VALIDATION
JON M. WERNER, MARK C. BOLINO
Department of Management
University of South Carolina
Accuracy and due process perspectives were used to extend policycapturing research concerning employment discrimination case law.
TWo-hundred ninety-five usable U.S. Circuit Court decisions concerning performance appraisal were located from 1980-1995. In both chisquare and multivariate LOGIT analyses, decisions were explained by: use of job analysis, provision of written instructions, employee review of results, and agreement among raters. Contrary to hypotheses, appraisal frequency and type (traits vs. behaviors or results) were unrelated to judicial decision. Rater training approached significance in chi-square analysis. Of other variables checked (e.g., type of discrimination claim, statutory basis, class action status, year of decision, circuit court, type of organization, purpose of appraisal, evaluator race and sex), only circuit court approached significance. We conclude that issues relevant to fairness and due process were most salient to Judicial decisions; issues pertaining to accuracy were important, yet validation was virtually ignored in this sample of cases.
Today there is no dispute that performance appraisal practices are
subject to employment legislation such as Title VII of the 1964 Civil
Rights Act. Further, many researchers and practitioners view performance appraisal as an employment "test" covered by the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (1978). The Guidelines were adopted in 1978 by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and other regulatory agencies, and emphasize the need for employers to validate all employment criteria, both "objective" and "subjective," where adverse impact has been found. This is the official position of
We would like to thank John HoUenbeck,