Self- versus others' ratings as predictors of assessment center ratings: Validation evidence for 360-degree feedback programs.

By Paul W. B. Atkins, Robert E. Wood. 2002

249 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f466d734244b3c4639414abdcc51908b4d68c897

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Authentic leadership: development of a new three pillar model (2015, methodology): “As leaders tend to consistently over-estimate their own performance (Atkins and Wood, 2002), a 360° design was used with 54 senior serving military officers.”
Conflicts in the Work–Family Interface: Links to Job Stress, Customer Service Employee Performance, and Customer Purchase Intent (2005, background): “Second, evidence suggests that as predictors of a criterion variable other than that rated by employees or supervisors, supervisor-rated measures of employee performance have the stronger predictive validity (Atkins and Wood 2002).”
Multisource feedback: Lessons learned and implications for practice (2007, unknown): “Assessment Center/Performance Appraisal Ratings MSF ratings by peers, supervisors, and subordinates predicted assessment center ratings of the manager’s competence that were generated by trained assessors not involved in the MSF process (r = .29, p < .05; Atkins & Wood, 2002).”
How work engagement relates to performance and absenteeism: a meta-analysis (2021, background): “Further, the correlation based on peer-rated performance was also significantly lower than that of self-rated performance, which is in accordance with previous research claiming that peer ratings of performance correlate highly with supervisor ratings but not with self-ratings (Atkins & Wood, 2002).”
Ceo Transformational Leadership: The Role of Goal Importance Congruence in Top Management Teams (2008, background): “However, because there may be problems with extrapolating response surface graphs to points where few or no data occur (Atkins & Wood, 2002), caution needs to be taken in interpreting points on the financial goals graph below the midpoint of the importance scale.”
Fostering a culture shift : Assessment of competence in the education and careers of professional psychologists (2005, background): “…multirater feedback that integrates input from multiple sources, including supervisors, peers, those who might be supervised by the individual, and perhaps clients, as well as the individual’s self-analysis (e.g., Atkins & Wood, 2002; Fletcher & Bailey, 2003; Maurer, Mitchell, & Barbeite, 2002).”
Guiding principles and recommendations for the assessment of competence. (2007, unknown): “…(e.g., supervisors, peers and colleagues within and outside the profession, subordinates—e.g., supervisees—oneself, and possibly patients– clients; Atkins & Wood, 2002; Fletcher & Bailey, 2003; Koeske, Koeske, & Mallinger, 1993; Maurer, Mitchell, & Barbeite, 2002) regarding professionalism,…”
The Social Context of Performance Appraisal: A Review and Framework for the Future (2004, unknown): “…psychometric properties of multi-source ratings (Conway & Huffcutt, 1997; Scullen, Mount & Judge, 2003), the correlations between ratings sources (Atkins & Wood, 2002; Beehr, Ivanitskaya, Hansen, Erofeev & Gudanowski, 2001; Conway & Huffcutt, 1997; Facteau & Craig, 2001; Warr & Bourne, 1999),…”