Differential Dimensions Employed in Rating Subordinates, Peers, and Superiors

Abstract

In this research, we examined whether people utilize different dimensions in their ratings of subordinates, peers, and superiors. Middle managers (N = 98) from various Israeli organizations were asked to nominate three pairs of superiors, peers, and subordinates, reflecting excellence and failure. They then selected, for each nominee, the three dimensions out of seven that they considered as central to their performance rating. A 7 × 2 × 3 (Dimension × Performance Quality × Status Group) analysis of variance (ANOVA) yielded significant results, p < .05, for the Dimension × Status interaction. Five out of the seven dimensions had differential effects on the impression of the three ratee groups. The dimensions of obedience, motivation, and efficacy were used more often to characterize subordinates, whereas interpersonal relations and managerial ability were used more commonly to describe peers and superiors. We also found that the weight of some dimensions differed as a function of performance quality. The results indicate that variations in the use of dimensions were an outcome of functional interactions between rater and ratee tasks.