•  
  •  
 

Abstract

This study examines how peer evaluation functions in global virtual teams, a setting that reflects the collaborative demands of contemporary international business education. The authors tested whether peer evaluation subscales, total peer-report score, and various indicators of team diversity predict team performance, assessed by instructors in a sample of 2,012 students from 445 X-Culture teams. The variables that were good predictors of team performance included the quality of team communication, work ethic, technical competence, generation of ideas, peer engagement, and peer writing skills. Less predictive of performance were leadership and effort ratings. In addition, students' self-ratings (i.e., peer ratings) were, at least in part, consistently higher than instructor ratings, creating a fairness issue if professors use peer rating to assign grades.

Furthermore, gender composition influenced performance outcomes and evaluation characteristics, building on previous findings. Few studies have directly compared peer evaluations and instructor evaluations in large international teams or examined the role of demographic composition in the validity of peer evaluations and instructor evaluations in cross-border collaborative contexts.

These results illustrate the strengths and weaknesses of peer review: peers assess and capture forms of collaboration educators cannot discern, but people must structure, calibrate, and monitor peer assessment to ensure fairness. Peers assess to aid accountability, to give students feedback literacy, and to prepare students for evaluative processes in workplaces around the world with appropriate criteria and instructor support. Future researchers should explore the role of culture and longitudinal patterns in the accuracy of peer-assessment results.

Download

Share

COinS