Types of Biases: 10 Most Common of Performance Review Biases

There are plenty of different types of biases that can surface during a performance review. Regardless of intention, these performance review biases can cause great harm in an organization, disengaging your employees, and simply negating the efficiency of your performance appraisals.

In this article, we will go over 10 of the most common types of bias in performance reviews. We will not only discuss the definitions of each bias but also give you examples of biases in performance appraisals, as well as how to deal with each type of bias.

Can I Use AI to Check for Biases in Reviews and Feedback?!

Yes! Using performance review software standardizes your appraisals and leaves less room for biases to creep in.

Teamflect took this one step further. As the best performance review tool for Microsoft Teams, Teamflect’s performance review and feedback templates have an AI writing assistant built inside them.

This assistant not only helps you write the perfect review responses but can also check your performance review comments for any form of biased language!

10 Types of Bias in Performance Reviews

1. Recency Bias

What is Recency Bias?

One of the most common types of bias, recency bias happens when managers or reviewers overemphasize the most current performance of an employee and fail to evaluate their work throughout the whole period under review.

It leads generally to distorted assessments where either the events or behaviors that are nearer to the time of revision outweigh the overall input made by the worker.

For instance, it could be that this mistake was committed by a person just before their appraisal or they achieved something great around then; even if such happenings were occasional, they might affect his/her final assessment disproportionately regardless of whether he/she consistently performed all year round.

Example of Recency Bias:

Consider a worker named Sarah who has been consistently performing excellently all through the year.

Nevertheless, two weeks prior to her performance review she failed to meet some important deadlines due to unforeseen circumstances beyond anyone’s control.

If during this performance review, Sarah’s manager only focuses on what went wrong recently without taking into account how well she has generally performed; then it becomes possible for Sarah to receive a lower score than deserved.

On the other hand, if somebody else had been underperforming but finished a successful project lately they might end up with a more favorable performance review.

How to Avoid Recency Bias:

Managers need to ensure they have complete records of employees’ performances over the entire evaluation period so as not to fall into the recency trap.

These can be achieved by having regular check-ins, documented feedback, and even use performance tracking tools.

When such assessments are carried out, those responsible must go through these records which will enable them to consider all rounded work done by employees rather than basing everything on the freshest incidents alone.

2. Leniency Bias

What is Leniency Bias?

Moving on to leniency bias! This type of bias happens whenever a manager or reviewer continuously provides higher ratings to employees regardless of whether they deserve it or not.

These types of bias often arise out of the need to maintain good relations, avoid conflicts, or by the reviewer simply being uncomfortable with giving negative feedback.

Though leniency bias may appear harmless at face value, its effects can be quite detrimental including unfair performance reviews; decreased drive among top performers as well as lack of accountability on the part of underperformers.

Leniency Bias Example:

Let’s take an example where a manager named John does performance evaluations for his team members.

In order to maintain team harmony and avoid confrontation, John tends to rate all his subordinates above average even when some have failed to achieve their goals.

Therefore, an exemplary employee like Emily who always exceeds expectations might receive similar ratings with another employee struggling just to meet minimum requirements thereby frustrating hardworking individuals who feel undervalued while making low achievers think that everything is fine.

How to Prevent Leniency Bias

To prevent these types of biases there should be structured objectives and performance metrics during appraisals. Managers need training on how best they can give constructive feedback which is honest as well as basing their assessments on specific and measurable standards of performance.

Organizations can have regular review calibration sessions where managers discuss and align their ratings with others so as to ensure uniformity across the board within an organization.

Also having various sources from which feedback is obtained such as peer reviews or 360-degree feedback will provide a more comprehensive view of the employees’ capabilities thus reducing chances of overrating individual employee competencies.

3. Halo and Horns Effect

What is the Halo and Horns Effect?

Another one of the most common types of bias in performance reviews is the Halo and Horns effect. The Halo and Horns effect refers to a cognitive bias in performance evaluations that causes one positive or negative trait about an employee to unduly influence their entire appraisal.

For instance, if a ‘halo effect’ sets in, the manager will allow a single outstanding employee strength to outshine all other qualities of the employee thereby leading to better reviews than they deserve.

Conversely, when there is a ‘horns effect’, one bad characteristic or occurrence like missing deadlines may overshadow all other strengths of an employee resulting in unfairly low ratings.

Example of Halo and Horns Effect

To understand this type of bias, let’s take a look at two employees. We will call them Alex and Jordan: Alex shows exceptional creativity consistently while falling behind on meeting deadlines or cooperating with colleagues towards common goals; his reviewer might give him a very good evaluation overall because they were impressed by this creativity only (Halo Effect).

On the other side of the coin, Jordan made a big error during some important project recently; if during performance review such mistake becomes focal point without considering wider context where he has been performing generally solidly then he could get much lower rating than deserved (Horns Effect).

How can we prevent Halo and Horns Effects?

Preventing halo-and-horns effects demands reviewers to ensure that all employees are evaluated fairly based on their entire job performances rather than just looking at a few areas where they excel or fail miserably.

One way organizations can achieve this is by breaking down performance appraisals into different aspects such as communication skills, problem-solving abilities, leadership skills, among others used for measuring whether staff meets set objectives within specified time frames.

4. The Law of Small Numbers Bias

What is The Law of Small Numbers Bias?

The Law of Small Numbers Bias refers to occasions when a manager or reviewer makes broad conclusions about an employee’s abilities or performance based on a small sample of observations.

When it comes to bias types in the workplace, the law of small numbers bias often results in wrong evaluations because it fails to take into account the wide range and intricacies of someone’s overall job performance, leading to decisions that do not represent what the person is really capable of.

Example of This Type of Bias

Imagine an employee, David, who is new to his role and has only had a few assignments. His manager observes that he struggled with one of the tasks and quickly concludes that David lacks the necessary skills for the job.

This conclusion is drawn from too small a sample of work and may not reflect David’s true potential or the progress he could make with more experience.

How to Prevent These Types of Biases

To prevent this bias managers should look at more data points when appraising performance. They might ask for feedback from different people, examine examples of work done over longer periods, and consider a wider review period.

While the optimal performance review frequency often changes for each organization, conducting regular check-in meetings and accumulating consistent data on the employee’s performance should help with these performance review biases.

5.  Idiosyncratic Rater Bias

What is Idiosyncratic Rater Bias?

Idiosyncratic Rater Bias is the instance of a manager’s personal quirks, preferences, or unique perceptions unduly influencing their evaluation of an employee’s performance.

Instead of evaluating the employees performance against predetermined and objective metrics and performance criteria, the reviewer takes their own strengths and weaknesses as the basis of the evaluation and conducts the review accordingly.

Example of These Types of Biases in Performance Reviews

Suppose a manager, Karen, has a particular dislike for employees who work remotely because she values in-office presence.

Despite an employee, Tom, excelling in his remote work, Karen gives him a lower rating because his work style does not align with her personal preference.

Karen’s performance review bias results in a review that is more reflective of Karen’s individual views rather than Tom’s actual performance.

How to Prevent This Bias Type

While awareness training can be offered up as the solution to all different types of biases, idiosyncratic rater bias is an example where a self-evaluation really needs to be conducted by the reviewer.

Training programs that encourage self-awareness and the recognition of personal biases can also help reviewers struggling with idiosyncratic rater biases to focus on job-related performance rather than their own preferences and strengths.

6. Similar-to-Me Bias

What is Similar-to-Me Bias?

Similar-to-Me Bias is the situation in which a reviewer favors employees who are similar to them in terms of background, interest, personality or work style.

This bias may result in unfair performance reviews where individuals who resemble their manager most receive better ratings not necessarily due to better results but because of perceived likeness.

An Example of This Bias Type:

For instance; Susan is an avid golf player and she has two employees under her; one shares this hobby while the other does not.

If both employees perform equally well then Susan may rate the one who shares the same interests with her a bit higher simply because of personal attachment which creates an unfair advantage.

Dealing with Similar-to-Me Bias:

To prevent such bias it is important to encourage managers’ attention on criteria and outcomes related to performance.

Using a diverse group of reviewers or incorporating peer feedback can help ensure that evaluations are made based on objective criteria related to how someone has performed rather than personal connections.

7. Centrality Bias

What is Centrality Bias?

Out of all the types of biases in performance appraisals, centrality bias just might be the most innocent option. Centrality bias takes place when a reviewer, regardless of employee performance, gives middle-of-the-pack grades to everyone.

Centrality bias in performance reviews often arises from a desire to avoid conflict or the discomfort of giving extreme ratings, leading to an inaccurate representation of employees’ capabilities and contributions.

This type of bias can also stem from a misguided desire to simply “protect the perfect score because there is always room for growth”.

As a result of this performance review bias, high performers may not receive the recognition they deserve, and underperformers might not get the feedback they need to improve.

An Example of This Bias Type:

For instance, John tends to rate all his staff around average during performance evaluations. He has been giving “average” grades to Lisa every year even though she always surpasses her targets without fail unlike other members of staff who barely meet the minimum requirements needed. 

This takes away Lisa’s opportunity as a stand-out employee to simply stand out!

Dealing with These Types of Biases:

The best way to deal with this form of bias in performance reviews is to have well-defined criteria when you are measuring high performance.

While many intangibles go into an employee’s performance evaluation that does rely on the reviewer’s judgment, an employee should be able to set themselves apart from the group simply through their accomplishments and overall performance against those metrics.

In our article “How to prepare for mid-year reviews?” we’ve discussed the process of setting up a review process that is fair and measurable at length.

8. Attribution Bias

What is Attribution Bias?

Attribution bias refers to occasions where a reviewer attributes an employee’s successes and failures to internal or external factors based on their preconceived notions instead of objective evaluations.

These types of biases can result in an employee’s accomplishments being attributed to luck or other factors, instead of the employee themselves.

An Example of This Bias Type:

Consider a manager, Tom, who believes that one of his employees, Emma, is not very skilled. When Emma successfully completes a challenging project, Tom attributes her success to the support she received from her team, rather than recognizing her effort and skills.

Conversely, when another employee, Steve, fails to meet a deadline, Tom blames it on Steve’s lack of ability, ignoring external factors like unexpected workload increases. This bias distorts the true assessment of both employees’ performances.

Dealing with These Types of Biases:

Attribution bias in an organization can be emblematic of larger issues within your team, specifically a lack of trust between managers and direct reports.

Encouraging managers to examine the broader context of successes and failures can help them avoid jumping to biased conclusions.

9. Confirmation Bias

What is Confirmation Bias?

Confirmation bias refers to situations where a reviewer is eager to accept views and opinions that only confirm their initial observations and opinions about an employee.

An Example of This Bias Type:

A manager who has made their mind up about an employee from day one, believing that they are disorganized, will only focus on instances where certain reports are late or any hiccups have occurred in the organization. They will however overlook any instances that are contrary to their assumptions.

Dealing with These Types of Biases:

Regularly reviewing performance data and obtaining feedback from multiple sources can provide a more balanced perspective. Encouraging managers to reflect on their assumptions and actively look for information that may contradict their biases can lead to a more accurate and fair evaluation process.

10. Gender Bias

What is Gender Bias?

Gender bias in the workplace is an incredibly complex and nuanced issue and its discussion has sadly gained more and more relevancy in recent times.

Gender bias by definition refers to an employee’s evaluation being influenced by the reviewer’s perceptions or stereotypes related to gender.

Gender bias can manifest in various ways, such as assuming men are more competent in leadership roles or that women are more nurturing and therefore better suited for support roles.

An Example of This Bias Type:

Consider a scenario where a female employee consistently leads her team to achieve their goals, but her assertiveness is viewed negatively by her manager, who perceives her as being “too aggressive” for a woman. Meanwhile, a male colleague exhibiting the same behavior is praised for his leadership skills.

Dealing with These Types of Biases:

Gender bias at an unconscious level can be approached with awareness and sensitivity training, with the assumption that the biased “means well”.

That being said, outdated notions surrounding gender roles have no place in the modern workplace so this is a type of bias that has to be dealt with swiftly.