Rating Scales

Rating scales usually include graphic, weighted, and behaviorally anchored criteria. The graphic rating scale is the simplest and most commonly used. A list of performance variables is determined for the particular job such as attendance, production, and cooperation. For each performance variable, there is a listing of levels of performance ranging from exceptional to below normal. The individual merely circles the performance level that is believed to have been achieved. Scoring is done by simply adding the number values assigned to each performance level, from exceptional to below normal.

1.The graphic rating

The graphic rating scale is the same as the graphic rating scale, with the exception that the performance variables receive different weights depending upon their importance in performing the job. The rating procedures is the same except that each variable has a box in which the rate indicates with a 1,2,3 and so on, the relevant importance of that variable. scoring is achieved by multiplying these numbers times the value of the performance levels ranging from exceptional to below normal. How ever , the weighted graphic rating scale, although emphasizing the more important performance variables, suffers the same problems as the graphic rating scale. Rater subjectively is still present, as is the tendency to overrate present behaviour and group people within a narrow range.

2.Behavioral anchored rating scale BARS

A more sophisticated form of rating is the Behavioral Anchored Rating Scales, commonly referred to as BARS.BARS are graphic scales with the performance variables anchored in description of actual job bahaviour. For instance, BARS for a wage and salary administrator might range from“ maintains a current database „ to „fails to coordinate with appropriate committees. “BARS are constructed for each individual job category, and not for individual positions within these categories. The results are BARS that are broadly descriptive to cover the positions within job categories. The reasons for this are that constructing BARS is very time consuming ,very costly and very often needs to be updated .it is often not practical to do this first for each individual position .BARS appear to provide a workable system. It also has the advantage of using job categories which are closely reviewed from performance content. The anchors are job descriptive and should promote rate accuracy.

3.360 Degree or Multirater

This process allows employees to receive constructive and accurate rating feedback. The rating information is gathered from a questionnaire with approximately 100 items to obtain ratings. The questionnaire is usually completed by a work group of
around ten people. This work group includes the person being rated, the boss, several peers, and subordinates.

4. Ranking

Another appraisal method is ranking. Indivuals are evaluated from best to worst on some single performance criteria. This procedure may be changed by alternative ranking the best and worst, followed by the second best and second worst , until all individuals have been ranked. The result is rather simplistic evaluation that may be difficult to defend especially to defend as one reaches the middle of the group, when the best and worst designation differences may be extremely difficult to decide.

5. Paired Comparison

Paired comparisons require the rater to compare pairs of rates on performances which two individuals are compared at a time to determine which one is the better employee. Then, another two names are compared until every individual has been paired with every other individual. The final winning score would better individual having been chosen over the others. The paired comparison method is simple, but cumbersome to use. However when the number of employees to be ranked reaches 20,there would be 190 comparisons the result of which would dilute ones ability to make distinctions yet, This method does seem to reduce the central tendency, leniency strictness and halo errors.

6. Behavioral Checklist

Checklist appraisal are another appraisal method and are either basic, weighted or forced choice. The basic checklist development follows a procedure similar to BARS, in that a job analysis must be performed to come up with a job description. Then, several performances categories are indicated from which a wide range of favourable and unfavourable  bahaviours are created. These are then randomly assigned to the checklist representing an accurate statement of favourable and favourable job    performance. Randomness keeps the evaluator alert, because each behaviour must be carefully read and helps control tendency Although checklists are easy to use and score, they are time consuming and costly to construct. Such checklists tend to be abroad and to make them more job specific increases the cost. Also , basic checklists assign equal weight to each item ,ignoring any contribution differences of performance variables. However , the weighted checklist overcomes this problem.

The procedure to determine weighting of the checklist is quite simple. A list of performance variables is drawn up, and knowledge persons assign varying weights depending upon their judgements as to the relative value of each variable for job performance. At times, organization policies, such as concern for safety , will be reflected in higher weights.

7. Forced choice

The forced choice appraisal techniques are rating method that requires the rater to make choices among descriptive sentences. The forced choice checklists is a time consuming method because it requires the development of a set of sentences ranging
from the high level of performance for variables such effort ,to the lowest level of acceptance performance. If an accurate set of sentences is developed, then the result may be a reduction of rater error, particularly central tendecy .One technique often
used to keep the raters alert is using a combination of positive and negative sentences for each job variable. Raters are not given the screening format , so they unable to intentionally give high or low ratings.

8. Forced Distribution

Another method of appraisal is forced distribution, which presents the rater with a limited number of categories and require and require a designate portion of ratees for each category. This technique is relatively simple and inexpensive. Employees are
divided into set categories, such, as the highest rated individuals for a particular variable quality, attendance, etc. This highest category must include 5 percent of all the employees being rated, the above average category must include the next 15 percent, the average category must include next 60 percent, and so on. One problem with forced distribution is that the group being evaluated may exceed or not meet the designated percentage category, thereby diluting the validity of the category.
As with other forced techniques ,rater errors such as central tendency and to be reduced; however the forced distribution maz cause ill feelings among raters and ratees because the method is so objective.

Implementing performance management
A business may have the latest performance management systems, but it will fail unless it is implemented or put into action correctly. Front line supervisors may not understand the goal of the system and are confused by the objectives .Is the aim of the system to help employees meet the company’s expectations which will further their job security , Or is the system designed to have a record that will inhibit employees from suing the company

Actually, performance management is a mixture of both. It is not one or the other. The following suggests some aspects of implementing a performance management system. Setting Expectations. Employers must provide employees with clear instructions of what the company expects of them. It would be unfair not to do this and then terminate employees. Not only is it unfair, in adversal proceedings (courts, arbitrators, or commissions one of the first questions asked is“….. did the employees fail to meet in terms of conduct, performance, or behaviour“ Employers who reply the employee should have known will usually receive the
reply “,You should have told them.“ Big trouble!

Notification of Not Making the Grade. An employee discharged is unfair if the employee has not been told previously that ones job is on the line.This notifies employees they are not making the grades so they can make the suggested changes to preserve their job.
When employees know their records reflect their shortcomings, they are less likely to sue, which would place their personal records into the public record.

Nonpunitive discipline. Many supervisors are reluctant to punish their children, let alone a dulit employees. Most will not use discipline, even if the employer requires it. Nonpunitive discipline can be used and many believe it generates more effective results . Employers have the right to be treated like adults and should and should be counseled on their job shortcomings in a direct and nonpunitive manner.

Deficiences, Not causes. When employers try to address the real cause of a workplace problem such as emotional , medical ,or personal, there is a real risk of lawsuits. The reason is when you do so you are actually considering the employee as having a disabling condition which is against the law. Focus only on what takes place at the workplace. Do not inquire nor spectaculates as to what may be the“ real“

Avoid Intent. When employees do not meet the company expectations, it does not mean they are bad and do not care. Stay out of the trap of analyzing the employees thoughts. you cannot prove an employee doesn’t care, but you can prove missed deadlines and defective work. If you focus on subjective intent, you allow the employee to divert attention away from the real issue of objectives deficient work behaviour.

Avoid Delay. If one must discipline employees ,do not delay. The longer time elapses, the more rigid our view of the employee becomes. Employees should have a chance to improve, not be judged prematurely. By acting quickly, you reduce the possibility the employee will raise protected complaint such as harassment or disability.
Other aspects of implementing performance management , which requires attention, is providing employees the opportunity to defend themselves. There are usually two side to every work incident. Employees should have a reasonable opportunity to improve. Any discipline should be progressive with reasonable time between each stop. The business should make good use of the introductry periods of 30 to 90 days at the beginning of employment to document employees work problems. If the new employees will not work out, now is the time for discharge. It is only fair to the particular employees so they can invest their time and effort in a more suitable job. All disharges should be the some for similar situations. Double standards and favoritism will cause legal problems later as comparisons are made. Always provide an appeals procedure such as per review because although companies try to be fair , errors will occur.

(Visited 82 times, 1 visits today)
Share this:

Written by