Delete comment from: Simplicity @ the other side of Complexity
@ John and @ bombay dosti – Thank you very much for your comments
One of the factors that lead to ‘superiority illusion’ is the desire to maintain a favorable self-image. Even if we provide data on relative performance on pre-defined performance parameters (e.g. person x has sold more as compared to y), individuals can bring in other parameters (that are not in the standard/pre-defined list) and/or context specific factors (unique to their performance context) and conclude that their relative performance is better and hence they ‘deserve’ a better rating. Hence, we have a more fundamental issue here – people using a definition of ‘good’ (i.e. what good performance means) that is convenient for them (i.e. aligned to what they are good at/what they have done better than others). Also, this ‘definition of good’ (since this is essentially an intuitive one), can vary across time/context to suit the particular employee better!!
May 16, 2012, 10:04:17 PM
Posted to Performance ratings and the ‘above average effect’