| Abstract: | A meta-analysis was conducted with 23 studies to assess the relationship between supervisory ratings and results-oriented measures of performance. As hypothesized, the corrected mean correlation was higher when a relative (versus absolute) rating format was used and when a composite (versus overall) rating method was used. These differences did not, however, account for all of the remaining variance around the relationship between ratings and results. Suggestions are offered for the direction of future research and practice. |
