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
– Narrative Essay
– Checklist
– Graphic Rating Scale (GRS)
– Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales
(BARS)
– Behavioral Observation Scales (BOS)
– Forced Choice
• Objectives
– Management By Objectives (MBO)
Appraisal
Methods
COMPARATIVE METHODS
 Ranking
 Alternation Ranking
 Paired Comparison
 Forced Distribution
Alternation ranking
PAIRED COMPARISON:
For the trait “Creativity”
AHMAD
AHMAD
JACK
CHARLES
MIKE
CHRIS
+
+
_
_
_
_
_
+
_
JACK
_
CHARLES
_
+
MIKE
+
+
_
CHRIS
+
+
+
+
_
Forced Distribution
30
25
20
Low
Low-avg
Avg
High-avg
High
15
10
5
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
ratee‟s 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.
2.
3.
4.
Identify a JOB that every member of the group knows
well and which has a large component of observable
elements.
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.
Individually generate incidents for each dimension,
using the four categories that are provided.
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
Ineffective
1
Statements
1
Highly
Effective
2
3
4
3
5
7
4
5
2
5
6
7
4
1
1
3
4
1
2
6
2
2
1
8
9
8
7
1
10
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
Effective
5
4
Ineffective
Group member has read all agreed-upon
material
Group member has read some agreedupon material
3
Group member participates in discussions,
though not always prepared
2
Group member does little work and offers
no valuable ideas or feedback
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
dimension‟s 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
answering
0.57
2.29
Aim of lesson is clearly presented
1.14
2.38
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
advance
0.79
2.85
STATEMENT
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
Individual
FI
Reporting Officer
FRO
Org & Systems
FOS
Environment
FE
Subordinate
FS
Inhibiting Factors
II
IRO
IOS
IE
IS
 Performance Rating
 Performance Feedback & Further Goal Setting