Establish clear, behavior-based rubrics, train raters to avoid bias, use 360-degree feedback, apply BARS, anonymize reviews, hold calibration meetings, require evidence, rate separate competencies, have regular check-ins, and add review system bias reminders for objective evaluations.
What Proven Strategies Effectively Reduce Halo Bias During Performance Reviews?
AdminEstablish clear, behavior-based rubrics, train raters to avoid bias, use 360-degree feedback, apply BARS, anonymize reviews, hold calibration meetings, require evidence, rate separate competencies, have regular check-ins, and add review system bias reminders for objective evaluations.
Empowered by Artificial Intelligence and the women in tech community.
Like this article?
Reducing Affinity and Halo Bias
Interested in sharing your knowledge ?
Learn more about how to contribute.
Sponsor this category.
Structured Evaluation Criteria
Establish clear, behavior-based rubrics for each competency or performance metric. This limits the influence of overall impressions and ensures that feedback is anchored in observable actions relevant to job expectations.
Rater Training Programs
Provide training for reviewers to recognize and mitigate unconscious biases, including the halo effect. Role-playing, scenario analysis, and bias-awareness workshops help reviewers become more objective and vigilant.
Multiple Raters and Peer Feedback
Incorporate feedback from several sources—peers, subordinates, and other supervisors—through 360-degree reviews. Diverse perspectives dilute any single reviewer’s bias and produce a more balanced evaluation.
Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales BARS
Use BARS, which describe specific behaviors associated with different performance levels for each competency. This method anchors judgments in objective evidence rather than subjective impressions.
Blind Review Processes
When possible, anonymize parts of the review—such as removing names and unrelated achievements—to focus attention on each specific competency or result, minimizing the transfer of positive impressions.
Regular Calibration Meetings
Facilitate meetings where managers and HR jointly review sample evaluations to ensure consistency and challenge outlier ratings. Discussing discrepancies highlights possible bias and standardizes expectations.
Pre-Defined Examples and Evidence Requirements
Require that each rating be backed by concrete examples or documented evidence. This practice forces reviewers to justify their ratings with facts rather than overall feelings about the employee.
Separate Evaluation Categories
Ensure the performance review form breaks down assessments into multiple distinct areas (e.g., technical skills, teamwork, communication), with independent ratings for each. This compartmentalization prevents one strength from coloring the entire evaluation.
Frequent Check-ins and Continuous Feedback
Implement regular, informal feedback sessions throughout the year. This documentation offers a richer, more objective basis for annual reviews, reducing the impact of a single recent positive event overshadowing all other areas.
Reminders and Nudges in Review Systems
Embed prompts or system alerts within digital review tools reminding evaluators to check for biases like the halo effect before submitting reviews. These nudges reinforce awareness and foster a more reflective evaluation process.
What else to take into account
This section is for sharing any additional examples, stories, or insights that do not fit into previous sections. Is there anything else you'd like to add?