If Kyle is receiving positive reviews but has a conflict with his supervisor, which type of performance appraisal would be most beneficial?

A 360-degree appraisal would be the most beneficial in this situation because it involves gathering feedback from a variety of sources, including peers, subordinates, and superiors, rather than relying solely on the supervisor's perspective. This holistic approach allows for a more comprehensive evaluation of Kyle's performance, capturing both his positive contributions and the nuances of the conflict with his supervisor.

By including multiple viewpoints, a 360-degree appraisal can help identify any possible biases or blind spots in the supervisor's assessment. It can also facilitate open communication about the issues between Kyle and his supervisor and support a more constructive dialogue. This method promotes a balanced view of an employee's capabilities and can be particularly useful in resolving conflicts and enhancing team dynamics.

Other appraisal types may not offer the same breadth of feedback. For instance, a peer review appraisal would only involve Kyle's colleagues, potentially missing insights from his supervisor. A self-evaluation appraisal focuses solely on Kyle's own assessment, which might not adequately address the conflict. A management review appraisal typically involves a direct assessment from the supervisor, possibly perpetuating the existing conflict without additional perspectives.