UNINTENTIONAL ERRORS

 Similar-to-me - We can all relate to people who are like us but cannot let our ability to
relate to someone influence our rating of their employee performance.
Ex. When employee 1 rates employee 2 without observing him, employee 1 rates
employee 2 according to his rate to his self.
 Contrast - It is an error where a person sets a certain benchmark, which affects the
appraisal of the candidate being interviewed.
Ex.
 Halo - tendency for positive impressions of a person, company, brand, or product in one
area to positively influence one's opinion or feelings in other areas.
Ex. The person tends to acknowledge his colleague to a job well done presentation.
 Primacy - the primacy bias error occurs when an assessor's selection is made based on
information that was presented earlier (primary information) rather than later in a
process.
Ex. When a first presenter
 Recency - Rating only recent performance, good or bad. Data should be representative
of the entire review period. If you’re not keeping good notes, you may not remember
the whole period.
Ex. you want to make sure, again, that you’re keeping records so that you can
adequately describe performance over an entire performance period.
 Negativity – Negativity bias can also get in the way of our professional development.
Instead of learning from constructive feedback, it can instead induce fear or anger.
Ex.
 First impression - the tendency for a manger to make an initial favorable or unfavorable
judgment about someone, and then ignore subsequent information that does not
support this impression.
Ex. Manager Jang needs a new employee, then Rita approach Manager Jang to an
interview in an impolite way. Manager Jang take his first impression to Rita and not
looking for his skills and ability.
 Spillover - occurs when managers continue to rate an employee based on past
performance, failing to consider recent improvements.
Ex. Manager Jang, rates employee 1 based on his past performance and compare his
recent performance.
 Stereotype – Stereotypes become a problem when reviewing an employee's
performance because it will be subject to a pre-conceived idea we have about the group
in which we have labelled them.
Ex. Employee 1 describes employee 2 lazy because he always gets overtime to finish his
work and employee 1 thinks that every employee gets overtime for their work is lazy.
  Attribution - an attribution error could happen when an employee gives a negative
answer to a question and the appraiser assumes that they have a negative attitude
towards their work.
Ex. When James becomes sarcastic in answering questions in the interview.

INTENTIONAL ERRORS

 Leniency - Leniency error is when a raters’ tendency is to rate all employees at the
positive end of the scale (positive leniency) or at the low end of the scale (negative
leniency).
 Severity - It is caused by the rater's tendency to be too strict or negative and thus to
give undeservedly low scores.
Ex. James, the executive manager of a restaurant rates his secretary, Rita, a low rating
because she is always tardy and absent.
 Central tendency - Clustering everyone in the middle performance categories to avoid
extremes of good or bad performance; it’s easy, but it’s wrong. This isn’t fair to
employees who are really making an effort, and it can be demoralizing.
Ex.