Research Proposal: Performance Appraisal or Forced Ranking?
Research Proposal: Performance Appraisal or Forced Ranking?
A review and recommendation of methodologies
Patricia Bosnyak
FLORIDA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ORGANIZATION BEHAVIOR AND MANAGEMENT
2/28/2011
PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SYSTEMS
1
ABSTRACT This document examines the differences between forced ranking and performance appraisal reviews, with the goal of recognizing the better of the two. The paper discusses possible method and design for research study, as well as whom the writer "thinks" would participate in the research study. It closes with ways the results might be analyzed and the expected outcomes.
PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SYSTEMS
2
INTRODUCTION Leaders can go about reviewing their employees in several different ways. Some are true believers in forced ranking while most others practice traditional performance appraisal reviews. Regardless of the preferred practice, this paper looks at both methodologies to decipher which one really is superior and has the greatest impact on the bottom line. It is the writers’ belief that performance appraisals are better, but she may find that forced ranking is the way to go.
BACKGROUND ON PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SYSTEMS The purpose of any performance evaluation system is to “provide information about work performance” to employees (Ivancevich, Konopaske, & Matteson, p. 180). Performance appraisals set out to inform an employee on their development, commend them on goals achieved or succeeded, and to discuss any areas for improvement. In essence, it is based upon how the individual did in comparison to the goals of the organization. Conversely, forced ranking compares individuals against one another, and ranks them from number 1 to last place. Big corporations, such as GE, Yahoo, American Airlines, Microsoft, Cisco Systems, Hewlett Packard, and Sun Microsystem, all utilize forced rankings. Dick Grote indicates that GE uses a 20/70/10 split, with the bottom 10 being terminated. In the same article,
A review and recommendation of methodologies
Patricia Bosnyak
FLORIDA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ORGANIZATION BEHAVIOR AND MANAGEMENT
2/28/2011
PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SYSTEMS
1
ABSTRACT This document examines the differences between forced ranking and performance appraisal reviews, with the goal of recognizing the better of the two. The paper discusses possible method and design for research study, as well as whom the writer "thinks" would participate in the research study. It closes with ways the results might be analyzed and the expected outcomes.
PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SYSTEMS
2
INTRODUCTION Leaders can go about reviewing their employees in several different ways. Some are true believers in forced ranking while most others practice traditional performance appraisal reviews. Regardless of the preferred practice, this paper looks at both methodologies to decipher which one really is superior and has the greatest impact on the bottom line. It is the writers’ belief that performance appraisals are better, but she may find that forced ranking is the way to go.
BACKGROUND ON PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SYSTEMS The purpose of any performance evaluation system is to “provide information about work performance” to employees (Ivancevich, Konopaske, & Matteson, p. 180). Performance appraisals set out to inform an employee on their development, commend them on goals achieved or succeeded, and to discuss any areas for improvement. In essence, it is based upon how the individual did in comparison to the goals of the organization. Conversely, forced ranking compares individuals against one another, and ranks them from number 1 to last place. Big corporations, such as GE, Yahoo, American Airlines, Microsoft, Cisco Systems, Hewlett Packard, and Sun Microsystem, all utilize forced rankings. Dick Grote indicates that GE uses a 20/70/10 split, with the bottom 10 being terminated. In the same article,
References: Donaldson, C. A. (2004). Performance Management: Forced Ranking. Retrieved February 16, 2011, from Menu of Interventions: http://edweb.sdsu.edu/people/arossett/pie/Interventions/forcedranking_1.htm Grote, D. (2002). Forced Ranking: Behind the Scenes. Across the Board, 40-45. Ivancevich, J. M., Konopaske, R., & Matteson, M. T. (2011). Organizational Behavior and Management (9th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. McGregor, J. (2006, January 9). The Struggle to Measure Performance. Retrieved February 16, 2011, from Bloomberg Businessweek: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_02/b3966060.htm Nickols, F. (2007). Performance Appraisal: Weighed and Found Wanting in the Balance. The Journal for Quality & Paricipation, 30(1), 13-16. Nickols, F. (2010, May 5). Performance Appraisals: A Final Criticism. Retrieved February 26, 2011, from Articles by Fred Nickols: http://www.nickols.us/afinalcriticism.pdf