The Confidence Gap No One Mentions in Performance Reviews

The process of conducting performance reviews is seen as an objective process, but the role of confidence in the process is not immediately obvious. Individuals are viewed as competent when they express confidence in themselves, as found by a study in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology by Ames and Kammrath (2004). This is true even when the contributions made by the individual are similar to those made by another. The process of conducting performance reviews creates a disconnect.

Exley and Kessler (2019) conducted a study, which was published by the National Bureau of Economic Research. It found that self-presentation can affect the outcome of an individual’s evaluation. The study identified that there is a significant correlation between an individual’s performance and their self-presentation, which can affect the outcome of their evaluations. It was identified in a study in Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes (Rudman, 1998) that some individuals who are expected to display modesty can be penalized for self-promotion.

Some employees may refrain from self-promotion, which can affect their evaluations. Managers often do not track an employee’s performance, and this can change the outcome of their evaluations. Individuals who frequently communicate about their performance are more likely to be remembered, which can affect their evaluations, as found by a study in Personnel Psychology (DeNisi & Williams, 1988).

The process of conducting the performance review itself also contributes to this gap. The role of subjective impressions is emphasized in the absence of well-defined standards, and confidence assumes the role of competence. The contributions of employees who do not define themselves in this way may be underappreciated. This does not necessarily mean that they have underperformed. Rather, it is a matter of presentation. The confidence gap in the process of conducting the performance review is not always obvious. However, it is consistently at work. It indicates how the evaluation system is based on results and how they are communicated in the workplace.