Abstract
Recent reviews of performance evaluation process and practices indicate that there is substantial variability in the structure and formalization of performance evaluations in organizations across cultures and call for further exploration of the role of cultural variables on the performance evaluation process. In the current study, we use self-construal priming procedures to evaluate the effects of cultural mindset on the performance evaluation process. Specifically, the effects of independent (individualistic) and interdependent (collectivistic) mindset priming on relative importance given to performance behaviors when making judgments of overall job performance was investigated. Participants first completed either independent (n = 87) or interdependent (n = 87) priming tasks by circling either I/me/my or we/us/our in a paragraph of text. Following this, they completed a managerial role-play exercise in which they read employee performance vignettes (manipulated on task, citizenship and counterproductive performance behaviors) and rated the overall performance of each employee. Rater policies were captured using regression analyses and relative weights placed on each performance behavior were computed. Results suggest that when making judgments of overall performance, as compared to raters primed with interdependence, raters primed with independence placed less weight on citizenship behaviors and higher weights on counterproductive performance behaviors. No significant differences were observed in the weights placed on task performance behaviors. Study limitations and implications for research are discussed.