Who are we to judge? Implications of judgment assessments in organizations

Who are we to judge? Implications of judgment assessments in organizations

Speaker: Professor Simon Lloyd D. Restubog, School of Labor and Employment Relations, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign

Topic: Who are we to judge? Implications of judgment assessments in organizations

Venue: 4 Eastern Road, Seminar Room 623

Date: Tuesday 25th June 2019

Time: 11-12pm

RSVP: Friday the 21st June 2019 to carly.mccabe@mq.edu.au

Abstract:

Conventional wisdom and empirical research suggest that people’s moral and health dispositions can elicit polarizing responses from those around them. In this presentation, I will present two working papers which highlight the role of judgment assessments to explain its implications in predicting both work-related and selection outcomes.

In the first empirical paper, we propose that exposure to moral identity symbolization (i.e., outwardly projected displays of one’s morality) leads observers to increase their prosocial behavior because they perceive the symbolizer as more scrutinizing of their moral disposition. Empirical data from four studies, consisting of field surveys and experiments, suggest that the presence of moral identity symbolization in the workplace creates benevolence among observers as a function of heightened perceptions of moral scrutiny.

However, such outward displays of morality are only related to co-worker helping behavior when the symbolizers avoid proselytizing and when there is an ongoing relationship between the observers and the symbolizers.

In the second empirical paper, we propose that individuals who show signs of sickness are likely to receive negative appraisals and subsequent judgments from others.  We also investigate whether perspective taking influences the appraisals of sick applicants and, in turn, selection outcomes.  Data from two experimental studies suggest that attending a job interview with a common health-related condition can result in biased appraisals, which in turn are carried over to judgment penalties.  We also found that assessors with low as opposed to high perspective taking gave lower competence appraisals to a job applicant showing signs of sickness and this effect carried over to more unfavorable judgments.

I will conclude by discussing practical implications and future research directions, including other current on-going projects.

Back to the top of this page