Self-Evaluation:
Employees are sometimes asked to evaluate themselves. It seems logical that individuals would be the best judges of their own performance, particularly if supervisors cannot observe them on a regular basis. If employees are asked to evaluate themselves, they may respond by becoming more motivated and involved in the evaluation process.
Self-ratings tend to show more leniency error than supervisor ratings, although halo errors are lower.32 Self-evaluation have become popular as a part of the management by objective process, when the superior and the subordinate jointly evaluate goal attainment. Self-evaluation seems most appropriate when it is used as an employee development tool rather than to make administrative decisions.32 It may also serve as an important input into a supervisory appraisal. An employee’s self-appraisal may provide important of which the superior was not aware. The supervisor can then factor this information into his performance ratings of the employee

Peer Evaluation:
Peer or co-worker evaluations are more stable over time, are better able to distinguish effort from performance, and focus more on task-relevant abilities. One study has concluded that peer ratings may be the most accurate evaluations of employee performance.32 Peer evaluations can be particularly useful when supervisors do not have the opportunity to observe an individual’s performance, but fellow employees do.
Peers sometimes resist evaluating one another. An individual may not want to give a fellow employee a favourable evaluation for fear of looking inferior in comparison. On the other hand, an individual may not want to jeopardise a good working relationship by giving an unfavourable rating to a colleague. Friendship bias may lead an employee to rate his friends higher than other employees.
A survey of 218 industrial employees which had used a peer