What are the common biases in project team performance evaluations?
Project team performance evaluations are crucial for measuring the success of your projects and the development of your team members. However, they are also prone to various biases that can affect the accuracy, fairness, and effectiveness of your feedback. In this article, you will learn about some of the common biases in project team performance evaluations and how to avoid or minimize them.
Attribution bias is the tendency to attribute different causes to your own and others' behaviors, depending on whether they are positive or negative. For example, you may attribute your own success to your skills and efforts, but others' success to luck or external factors. Conversely, you may attribute your own failure to bad circumstances, but others' failure to lack of ability or motivation. This can lead to unfair and inconsistent evaluations of your team members, as well as undermine their confidence and trust.
To avoid attribution bias, you should try to consider multiple factors that may influence the performance of your team members, such as their goals, resources, constraints, and feedback. You should also ask for their perspectives and explanations, rather than making assumptions or judgments. Additionally, you should use objective and measurable criteria to evaluate their performance, rather than subjective and vague standards.
-
As a leader, I practice the principle of extreme ownership. Meaning, everything is in our responsibility as a team. My team members can’t attribute neither success nor failure to external circumstances solely. Even if external factors had an influence on the project results, it can be considered, but I’d coach them to see how they have impacted the result. The question is always HOW is something possible. Not if.
Halo effect is the tendency to form a general impression of a person based on one or a few traits, and then extend that impression to other aspects of their performance. For example, you may assume that a team member who is friendly and charismatic is also competent and reliable, or that a team member who is intelligent and creative is also organized and punctual. This can lead to overestimating or underestimating the performance of your team members, as well as overlooking their strengths and weaknesses.
To avoid halo effect, you should try to separate your personal feelings and opinions from your professional evaluations of your team members. You should also evaluate each aspect of their performance individually and specifically, rather than holistically and generally. Furthermore, you should seek feedback from other sources, such as peers, clients, or stakeholders, to get a more balanced and comprehensive view of your team members.
-
Halo effect can lead to favoritism. If someone is similar to us in some ways, If it’s easier to communicate with them, if they did one thing good once, we might build our opinion about them based on this. This could lead to unfair treatment of other team members and unsafe environment where others feel unappreciated. Teambuilding activities where everyone’s strengths are evaluated and improvement points are discussed are a way to create a holistic picture of the team.
Recency bias is the tendency to give more weight to the most recent events or information, and less weight to the earlier or older ones. For example, you may focus more on the last project or task that your team member completed, and forget or ignore the previous ones. This can lead to distorted and incomplete evaluations of your team members, as well as missing the trends and patterns of their performance.
To avoid recency bias, you should try to review the entire period of your team member's performance, and not just the latest one. You should also document and track their performance regularly and consistently, rather than sporadically and randomly. Moreover, you should use a clear and consistent rating scale to evaluate their performance, rather than relying on your memory or intuition.
Similarity bias is the tendency to favor or prefer people who are similar to yourself in terms of personality, background, values, or beliefs. For example, you may relate more to a team member who shares your interests or opinions, and less to a team member who has different ones. This can lead to biased and unfair evaluations of your team members, as well as reducing the diversity and innovation of your team.
To avoid similarity bias, you should try to appreciate and respect the differences among your team members, and recognize the value and potential of their diverse perspectives and experiences. You should also evaluate your team members based on their performance and results, rather than their similarity or dissimilarity to you. Additionally, you should involve other evaluators who have different views and backgrounds, to ensure a more objective and fair evaluation process.
-
I love the practice they have at Google, where your promotion is not only decided by your direct lead but by other managers outside your team. It makes sure that even if one person falls prey to perception biases, you’ll not be stuck in a position you’ve outgrown and a more independent assessment still takes place.
Confirmation bias is the tendency to seek, interpret, and remember information that confirms your existing beliefs or expectations, and ignore or reject information that contradicts them. For example, you may look for evidence that supports your positive or negative impression of a team member, and disregard evidence that challenges it. This can lead to skewed and inaccurate evaluations of your team members, as well as reinforcing your stereotypes and prejudices.
To avoid confirmation bias, you should try to be open-minded and curious about your team members, and test your assumptions and hypotheses about them. You should also look for both positive and negative feedback and data, and weigh them equally and objectively. Furthermore, you should encourage your team members to provide you with constructive and honest feedback, and listen to them attentively and respectfully.
-
I personally find it challenging as a more intuitive leader to differentiate when a decision feels right based on my intuition or because of some biases influencing me at the moment. In such cases it really helps talking to your team members and asking them to coach you, asking questions to help you challenge your own perspective. “Imagine it’s 1 year later, which information would you like to have had today to take a better decision?” “Why would you take the opposite decision” (devils advocate) “If you’d be advising someone else on this decision, which perspectives would you give them?” “If you’d take the opposite decision, how would you debate for it?”
Rate this article
More relevant reading
-
Project LeadershipYour team's performance evaluations are falling short. What can you do to get them back on track?
-
Program ManagementHere's how you can spot and resolve performance gaps in your team members as a program manager.
-
System DevelopmentWhat do you do if your team manager lacks the key qualities for successful system development?
-
Project LeadershipWhat impact does emotional intelligence have on team performance?