Management Accounting Section Midyear Meeting

Performance Assessments in Diverse Teams: Who Gets Unfair Credit for Joint Team Performance?

• In Event: Break and Research Exhibition 1
  In Paper Session: Room 1

Abstract

In team-based work settings, peer performance assessments are becoming increasingly popular. Since peer assessments avoid single-rater bias and potentially provide a more balanced view on team member performance, they are held to be fairer than traditional “boss-centric” performance evaluations. This study analyzes team diversity as a possible source of systematic bias in peer performance assessments. We use social comparison theory to explain the attribution of team success or failure to similar (in-group) versus dissimilar (out-group) team members within teams that are set up as mixed teams along visible criteria such as gender, race/ethnicity, or age. We argue and provide experimental evidence that team members show a tendency to assess the performance of in-group peers more favorably. However, in-group favoritism breaks down or even turns into the opposite when the team has information on (positive) joint team performance.

Authors

• Gerhard Speckbacher, WU Vienna University

• Martin Wiernsperger, WU - Vienna University of Economics and Business