This research compared ratings of task performance and contextual performance from three different sources: self, peer, and supervisor. Participants were service industry employees in the service industries in Yogyakarta, Indonesia. A Sample of 146 employees and 40 supervisors from the service ...
Read More
This research compared ratings of task performance and contextual performance from three different sources: self, peer, and supervisor. Participants were service industry employees in the service industries in Yogyakarta, Indonesia. A Sample of 146 employees and 40 supervisors from the service industries provided ratings of task performance and contextual performance. The results indicated that there were significant differences in the mean ratings across the two sources. Self-ratings and peer-ratings of task and contextual performance are not significantly different, but self-rating and supervisor-ratings of task and contextual performance are significantly different. Peer-ratings are significantly different from supervisor ratings of task performance, but not significantly different of contextual performance. Using MTMM matrix, there is a convergence for self-rating and peer-ratings of task and contextual performance. I also find strong method effects, indicating that ratings from different sources provide different information. Using raters from different levels may also help to develop consensus, eliminate bias, and perhaps in turn lead to general acceptance by ratee. Practitioner considering the use of self-rating should be aware that there is liable to be much disagreement.