Which method assesses an employee's performance by using feedback from both the supervisor and other familiar sources?

The correct answer is multi-source assessments, also known as 360-degree feedback. This method provides a comprehensive view of an employee's performance by collecting feedback from various sources, including supervisors, peers, subordinates, and sometimes even clients. The strength of this approach lies in its ability to capture diverse perspectives, allowing for a more rounded evaluation of an employee's skills, abilities, and behavior in the workplace.

Feedback from multiple sources minimizes biases that can arise when evaluations are based solely on a single individual's perspective, such as that of a supervisor. This holistic view can lead to more accurate performance appraisals, better identification of strengths and areas for improvement, and ultimately foster personal and professional development for employees.

The other methods listed do not offer the same breadth of feedback as multi-source assessments. Self-assessment relies on employees evaluating their own performance, which can be subjective and may overlook external perspectives. Peer evaluations provide insight from colleagues but do not include input from supervisors or other stakeholders. Job analysis, on the other hand, involves evaluating the tasks, responsibilities, and requirements of a position rather than assessing individual performance. Thus, multi-source assessments stand out as the method that gathers comprehensive feedback to accurately assess an employee's performance.