This experiment investigated the effects of two factors felt to influence the quality of ratings: anticipated feedback sharing and knowledge of subordinates' self-assessment. One hundred and eighty subjects receiving either favorable, unfavorable, or no subordinate self-assessment information were led to anticipate either face-to-face, written, or no feedback sharing with a subordinate. Main effects were found both for type of feedback sharing and level of subordinate self-assessment. Partial support was also found for the interaction of feedback sharing and partial self-assessment effects. Supervisors anticipating sharing face-to-face feedback with a subordinate rated the latter's performance significantly more positively than did supervisors who received no self-assessment data; while supervisors receiving knowledge of an unfavorable self-assessment rated their subordinates significantly more negatively than those receiving no self-assessment information. Ancillary analyses support the contention that the impact of knowledge of self-assessment information is largely motivational, as opposed to informational, in nature. Despite their potential to influence ratings, it is suggested that face-to-face feedback sharing requirements and the use of subordinate self-assessment data are not necessarily detrimental, but rather that care should be taken to minimize their potential to reduce rating quality. © 1990.
