Final answer:
Managers usually try to rate subordinates objectively, but studies show performance ratings can be skewed by perceived modesty in self-evaluations. The 360-degree appraisal system aims to provide a comprehensive view of performance, which can be beneficial for growth but may be less effective if not aligned with organizational culture.
Step-by-step explanation:
According to the research on performance appraisals, including Longenecker's work and others, managers are generally viewed as attempting to rate their subordinates as accurately and objectively as they can.
Despite this, studies such as those by Atkins and Wood have shown that both self and peer ratings can be unreliable, and managers may unintentionally rate employees harsher if they perceive modest self-feedback by the employees. Alternately, the discrepancies between different raters in a 360-degree appraisal system can foster constructive discussions and opportunities for employee learning and development.
The purpose of this system, which includes feedback from supervisors, peers, self, and sometimes customers, is to provide a multifaceted view of an employee's performance, which can inform personal growth and organizational decisions concerning position and compensation. However, the effectiveness of performance evaluations can be hindered by improper implementation or mismatch with the organization's culture, as stated by Schraeder, Becton, & Portis.