A MULTIPLE LEVEL INVESTIGATION OF PERSONNEL RATINGS

A multiple levels of analysis approach was used to assess whether job performance and skill importance ratings were based on individual differences, incumbent/supervisor dyadic agreement, group membership, or functional department. Data were collected as part of a managerial training needs analysis conducted at a large gold and silver mining organization. Participants included 140 incumbent managers and their immediate supervisors, who were embedded in 140 incumbent/supervisor dyads, 39 managerial work groups, and eight departments of the organization. Results from Within and Between Analysis (WABA) suggested that (a) incumbent ratings of both performance and skill importance were characterized by individual differences, (b) supervisory ratings of both performance and skill importance were primarily characterized by between‐groups (supervisors) differences, (c) matched incumbent‐supervisory performance ratings displayed individual differences, and (d) matched incumbent‐supervisory importance ratings displayed dyadic agreement (i.e., between‐dyads differences). Practical implications of these results for interpreting these and other types of personnel‐related data are discussed.