Leniency Error: An Overview of its Effects on Decision Making
Leniency error is a type of response bias in which individuals rate something more favorably than it might deserve. This bias is pervasive in decision-making processes across many domains, including performance appraisals, educational evaluations, and clinical assessments. Leniency error is thought to be caused by a combination of cognitive factors, such as lack of awareness of one’s own bias, difficulty with objective ratings, and a desire to please the person being rated. The effects of leniency error on decision-making can be substantial, leading to distorted and inaccurate outcomes.
In performance appraisals, leniency error is associated with inflated ratings of employees. This bias can lead to misappropriation of rewards and resources, as well as hamper an organization’s ability to track progress and identify areas of improvement. Similarly, leniency error can cause inaccurate evaluations in educational settings, leading to inflated grades and distorted assessment of student performance. Leniency error can also have a significant impact on clinical decisions, such as diagnosis and the selection of treatments, due to the subjective nature of such decisions.
To reduce the effects of leniency error, it is important to be aware of one’s own biases and to strive for objectivity in decision-making. Additionally, organizations have implemented various strategies such as providing training on the effects of leniency error, using multiple raters, and using structured assessments to reduce the impact of this bias. Research suggests, however, that the most effective way to mitigate leniency error is to create an organizational environment that values objectivity and accuracy in decisions.
In conclusion, leniency error is a pervasive response bias that can lead to inaccurate decision-making outcomes. It is important to be aware of one’s own bias and strive for objectivity in order to reduce the effects of leniency error. Organizations should also consider implementing strategies such as providing training, using multiple raters, and using structured assessments to reduce the impact of this bias.
References
Achilles, C., & Chen, Y. (2005). The impact of leniency error in performance appraisal. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16(10), 1785–1799. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585190500304719
Grierson, E., & Farndale, E. (2014). Performance appraisal and reward systems: A review of the literature. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(4), 576–593. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2013.801092
Kolb, B., & Kolb, D. A. (2009). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development (Vol. 2). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Luk, R., & Ng, S. (2009). Bias in performance appraisal: A review of the literature and directions for future research. Human Performance, 22(6), 545-572. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959280903508519
Nguyen, H. T., & Le, D. T. (2015). The effects of leniency error on decision making in educational setting. International Journal of Education and Research, 3(10), 165–174.
Rousseau, D. M. (2011). The challenge of accurate performance appraisal. Organizational Dynamics, 40(3), 258–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2011.04.001