The Value of Common Perspectives in Self-Reported Appraisals

Abstract

This article uses the work of Smircich and Chesser on direct and meta-perspectives (i.e., points of view) to test the correspondence between self-reported and supervisory ratings of performance. Results from two field studies indicate a higher level of self-supervisor rating correlation when using a common perspective. Similar results were obtained using an alternative measure of rating correspondence. The results provide evidence that researchers using self-reports of performance as surrogates for archival performance data should ask respondents for their supervisor's assessment of their performance rather than for their own assessment. The practical implications of these results for field research are discussed.