If the question is in relation to conducting performance reviews in the absence of other continuous performance management activities (i.e.feedback, goal setting, recognition and ongoing 1-on-1 conversations), then they are certainly less beneficial and are unlikely to overcome the challenges and biases of the traditional review as we discussed in the webinar (e.g.The conversations should also inform where individuals want to move – could it be lateral, progress into leadership or even diagonal?
If your company insists on only having annual reviews alone (not ideal), then I would try and refocus them to come back to the “why? finding the purpose of running the review in the first place) work to enhance the perceived fairness of the process overall in order to ensure the process is as motivating as possible for those involved.
The intention is to push people to achieve big gains.
Tracking employee performance for patterns over the year is one of the most effective ways to derive quality data for performance reviews.
In statistics, inter-rater reliability, inter-rater agreement, or concordance, is the degree of agreement among raters.
It gives a score of how much homogeneity, or consensus, there is in the ratings given by judges, and it is one of the aspects of test validity.