Presentation Format of Performance Measures and Bias in Performance Evaluations

• In Event: Research Forum and Breakfast

Abstract

This experimental study examines the impact of different Balanced Scorecard (BSC) formats on ratings for performance evaluation, bonus and promotion purposes. It compares the decision outcomes of three presentation formats (table, graph, graph with a summary measure) using an extended cognitive theory framework. The participants completed two instruments: the first examines performance evaluation behavior in a BSC scenario; the second determines the personality type of each participant using the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator [MBTI] instrument. A total of 136 individuals participated in the experiment. The results show that evaluators rated managerial performance significantly higher in the traditional BSC table format compared to a graphical presentation of the BSC (graphs have a “toning down” effect). Decision efficiency was higher for the two graph formats compared to tables. In addition, we find that a summary measure in a graphical BSC did not significantly reduce the time to complete an evaluation judgment, and, surprisingly, employing such measure decreased the evaluators’ perceived informativeness of the BSC. Finally, we categorized the participants as “thinking types” and “feeling types” based on the MBTI instrument. We found that individuals that were considered “thinking types” needed significantly longer time to complete their performance evaluations than their “feeling types” counterparts.

Authors

• Lasse Mertins, The Johns Hopkins University

• Lourdes F White, University of Baltimore