PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

METHODS
 What to Evaluate?

Traits Measures
Are an assessment of what the employee is,
not what the employee actually does.
Behavior-based measures
Focus on what an employee does and what the
employee should do differently.
Results-based measures
Focus is on accomplishments or outcomes that
can be measured objectively. Problems occur
when results measures are difficult to obtain,
outside employee control, or ignore the means
by which the results were obtained.
 How to Evaluate?

Relative Assessment
Employees are measured against other
employees and ranked on their distance
from the next higher to the next lower
performing employee.
Absolute Measurement
Employees are all measured strictly by
absolute performance requirements or
standards of their jobs.
 Comparative
Ranking
Paired Comparison
Forced Distribution
Absolute
Critical Incident Appraisal
Narrative Essay
Checklist
Methods
Graphic Rating Scale (GRS)
Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales
(BARS)
Behavioral Observation Scales (BOS)
Forced Choice
Objectives
Management By Objectives (MBO)
 COMPARATIVE METHODS

Ranking

Alternation Ranking

Paired Comparison

Forced Distribution
Alternation ranking
 PAIRED COMPARISON:
For the trait Creativity

AHMAD JACK CHARLES MIKE CHRIS

AHMAD
+ + _ _
JACK
_ _ _ _
CHARLES
_ + + _
MIKE
+ + _ +
CHRIS
+ + + _
 Forced Distribution

30

25

20 Low
15 Low-avg
Avg
10
High-avg
5 High
0
Low Low- Avg High- High
avg avg
 FREE ESSAY

It is a narrative appraisal method and is

based on absolute standards

It describes an employee's actions rather

than indicating an actual rating

The intent is to allow the rater more

flexibility than other rating methods do.
 The Process

A job is broken up into various general

dimensions. Each dimension is followed by
some space where the rater has to write an
essay on that dimension
These essays concentrate on performance
strengths and weaknesses, identify
developmental needs and also suggest
courses of remedial action
These essays can either be composed alone or
in collaboration with the appraisee
 Narrative Forms

Final appraisals
are frequently
written in a
narrative form
Supervisor rates
employee by
describing the
behaviour related
to each factor
 CRITICAL INCIDENT METHOD

Critical incidents are behaviors that result in

good or poor job performance.
The rater records all such incidents and the
ratees involvement in it.
The rater plays the role of Observer rather
than Judge.

For eg.
I saw Mike closing the steam line valve at
the instant the pipeline burst. We could
save a lot of lives due to the above factor.
 CRITICALITY OF THE METHOD..

This forms the basis for developing a lot

of the other formats that are used for
performance assessment.
Checklist
GRS
BARS
BOS
Forced Choice Scales
 RECORDING CRITICAL INCIDENTS

Should be Specific
Focus on Observable behaviours that
have been exhibited on the job
Describe the Context in which the
behaviour occurred
Indicate the Consequences or
Outcomes of the behaviour
 GROUP TASK

1. Identify a JOB that every member of the group knows

well and which has a large component of observable
elements.
2. Identify at least five major dimensions of
performance for that job. You can use or adapt the
dimensions that are already provided or generate
your own.
3. Individually generate incidents for each dimension,
using the four categories that are provided.
4. Ensure that the incidents meet the four
characteristics that were discussed, and are actually
observable behaviors, and not inferred traits.
 GROUP TASK (contd.)

RETRANSLATE: Each person is to read out

an incident he/she has generated and the
others have to state which dimension and
which performance level that incident
belongs to.
For each incident mark the level of agreement
for both dimension and performance level.
Keep only those items where level of
agreement is more than 80%. The others need
to be discussed until there is some
agreement or else should be discarded.
 GROUP TASK (contd.)

ASSIGN EFFECTIVENESS VALUES: for all the

incidents that survive retranslation.
Take all the incidents that have remained and
individually assign an effectiveness value on
a 7 point scale. 1 = not acceptable & 7 =
excellent.
Discuss and keep only those incidents where
there is agreement on the effectiveness
values.
Try to have incidents that define the middle
and ends of each scale.
 CHECKLIST & WEIGHTED
CHECKLIST

This method requires the rater to select

statements or words that describe the
employees performance or characteristics.
Checklists consist of groups of statements
that pertain to a given job.
Raters check statements most representative
of the characteristics and performance of an
employee.
 STEPS IN CONSTRUCTION
Generate a large no. of behavioral statements
relevant to work
These should represent all levels of effectiveness
Rules to follow
Express only one thought per statement
Use understandable terminology
Eliminate double negatives
Express thoughts simply and clearly
A panel of experts judges how far each statement
represents effective or ineffective behaviour
Expert ratings summarized to identify those
statements consistently placed at some point on
the continuum
 RATINGS BY EXPERTS ON
BEHAVIORAL STATEMENTS
Highly Highly
Ineffective Effective

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 3 5 7
Statements

2 4 5 4 1 1

3 8 7

4 1 2 6 2 2 1 1
 STEPS IN CONSTRUCTION (contd.)

On the basis of this, the most reliably

rated items are selected for use.
Items are selected so that every point on
the continuum is represented.
Items are randomized on the rating
format.
Weights are decided by discussion.
 GRAPHIC RATING SCALE (GRS)

In a Graphic Rating Scale, the rater assesses a

ratee on performance-related characteristics
and personality characteristics,

ie. factors like quantity of work, dependability,

job knowledge, cooperativeness, ability to lead,
interpersonal skills, etc. by using a rating
scale.
 Issues in constructing GRS

Selecting the characteristics to evaluate

Deciding the number of points on the scale
Scaling the characteristics
Providing descriptions for each criteria and
each point on the scale
 BEHAVIORALLY ANCHORED RATING SCALES
(BARS)

Developed by Patricia Cain Smith and Lorne

Kendall
A series of continuous graphic rating scales
arranged vertically
Behavioural descriptions exemplifying various
degrees of each dimensions serve as anchors
on the scale
Designed to allow superiors to be more
comfortable while giving feedback
 BARS Dimension:
Quality of Group Member
Input

5 Group member has read all agreed-upon

Effective
material
4 Group member has read some agreed-
upon material
Group member participates in discussions,
3
though not always prepared
Group member does little work and offers
2
no valuable ideas or feedback
Ineffective
1 Group member does not attend any meeting
 The Steps in BARS development

GENERATE CRITICAL INCIDENTS : Ask

persons who know the job (job holders,
supervisors) to describe specific illustrations
of effective and ineffective performance.

DEVELOP PERFORMANCE DIMENSIONS :

Have them cluster the incidents into a smaller
set of 5 or 10 performance dimensions, and
define each dimension.
 The Steps in BARS development (contd.)

REALLOCATE INCIDENTS : Another group of

people who also know the job then reallocate
the original critical incidents.
They get the cluster definitions and the critical
incidents in a jumbled manner
They reassign each incident to the cluster they think
it fits best.
A critical incident is retained if some percentage
(usually 50% to 80%) of this second group assigns it
to the same cluster as did the first group.
 The Steps in BARS development (contd.)

SCALE THE INCIDENTS : the second group

then rates the behavior described by the
incident as to how effectively or ineffectively
it represents performance on the dimension (
7- to 9-point scales are typical)
DEVELOP A FINAL INSTRUMENT : choose
about 6 or 7 of the incidents as the
dimensions behavioral anchors.
 Behavioral Observation Scale
(BOS)

Based on critical incidents

like BARS
Rating of frequency of critical incident
based on recollection of rater
Concentrates on critical behaviors that are
actually performed
Critical incident frequency ratings are
summed for an overall rating
 FORCED CHOICE SCALE

THE NEED
Despite the sophisticated methods of
new rating formats (e.g BARS), deliberate
distortion of ratings still remains. Such
distortion , undermine the purpose of the
appraisal system.
 What is the Forced Choice Method ?

A rating technique specially designed to

increase objectivity and to decrease biasing
factors in ratings.
It comprises of the use of statements that are
grouped into sets according to certain
statistical properties.
Rater is forced to select from each group of
statements a subset (usually 2) of those
statements that are most descriptive of each
ratee.
 For eg.

Aim of lesson is clearly presented

Repeats questions to whole class before
answering
Conducts class in orderly manner
At ease before class

Is patient with slow learners

Lectures with confidence
Keeps interest and attention of class
Acquaints class with lesson objective in
advance
 Forced-Choice Format

Items for forced-choice scales are arranged

according to two statistical properties of each
of the statement.

Favourability Index (FI)

Discriminability Index (DI)

 Discriminability Index DI
Favorability Index - FI

FI = Indicates the extent to which a statement

reflects the niceness, attractiveness, or social
desirability of the behaviour or characteristic it
describes.

DI = Reflects the extent to which a statement

describes a behaviour or a characteristic that
distinguishes superior employees from others.
 Forced Choice Scale

A tetrad of four statements is provided

In the tetrad all the 4 statements have equal
favourability
2 statements have significantly greater
discriminating power than the other 2.
 DI & FI
STATEMENT DI FI
At ease before class 0.53 2.35
Conducts class in orderly manner 1.20 2.22
Repeats questions to whole class before
0.57 2.29
answering

Aim of lesson is clearly presented 1.14 2.38

STATEMENT DI FI

Is patient with slow learners 1.15 2.82

Lectures with confidence 0.54 2.75

Keeps interest and attention of class 1.39 2.89

Acquaints class with lesson objective in
0.79 2.85
advance
 Advantages of the method

Difficulty in deliberately distorting ratings in

favour of or against particular individuals
because raters have no idea which
statements of each group will ultimately result
in higher (or lower) ratings.
Research has proved that ratings from this
method were a more valid measure of real
worth than ratings from other formats used
earlier.
 Why is it not popular among raters?

Raters prefer other methods as with this

method they cannot determine whether they
are rating their best people high or their worst
people low.
Inability to make an evaluation or a direct rating
can be frustrating to raters.
 MANAGEMENT BY OBJECTIVES

The use of Management By Objectives was

first widely advocated in the 1950s by the
noted management theorist Peter Drucker.

MBO methods of performance appraisal are

results-oriented i.e., they seek to measure
employee performance by examining the
extent to which predetermined work objectives
have been met.
 THE PROCESS
Determination of KPAs
Setting Objectives under each KPA
Observing and Documenting Performance
Periodic Review
Performance Analysis
Facilitating Factors Inhibiting Factors
Individual FI II
Reporting Officer FRO IRO
Org & Systems FOS IOS
Environment FE IE
Subordinate FS IS
Performance Rating
Performance Feedback & Further Goal Setting