Which is the Best Way to Measure Job Performance: Self-Perceptions or Official Supervisor Evaluations?

Which is the Best Way to Measure Job Performance: Self-Perceptions or Official Supervisor Evaluations?

Ned Kock
Copyright: © 2021 |Pages: 10
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-9020-1.ch022
OnDemand:
(Individual Chapters)
Available
$33.75
List Price: $37.50
Current Special Offers
10% Discount:-$3.75
TOTAL SAVINGS: $3.75

Abstract

Among latent variables that can be used in e-collaboration research, job performance is a particularly important one. It measures what most e-collaboration tools in organizations aim to improve, namely the performance at work of individuals executing tasks collaboratively with others. The authors report on a comparative assessment of scores generated based on a self-reported job performance measurement instrument vis-à-vis official annual performance evaluation scores produced by supervisors. The results suggest that the self-reported measurement instrument not only presents good validity, good reliability and low collinearity; but that it may well be a better way of measuring job performance than supervisor scores.
Chapter Preview
Top

Illustrative Model And Data

Our discussion is based on the illustrative model depicted in Figure 1. This illustrative model addresses the organizational effect of the use of social networking sites (SN), such as Facebook and LinkedIn, on job performance (JP). In the model, this effect (i.e., of SN on JP) is hypothesized to be indirect and mediated by intermediate effects on job satisfaction (JS) and organizational commitment (OC). These hypotheses are generally supported by the structural model coefficients; notable among these are the path coefficients and P values indicated next to each arrow in the model. This illustrative model is based on an actual study.

Figure 1.

Illustrative model used. Notes: SN = social networking site use; JS = job satisfaction; OC = organizational commitment; JP = job performance; notation under latent variable acronym describes measurement approach and number of indicators, e.g., (R)5i = reflective measurement with 5 indicators

978-1-7998-9020-1.ch022.f01

Complete Chapter List

Search this Book:
Reset