Forced Ranking: Good, Bad, or Both?

Page 5 of 6 THE ORGANIZATIONAL PERSPECTIVE ON FORCED RANKING Based on the qualitative interviews, major corporations and their executives have invested heavily in strategies to create a high-performing organization.  The use of employee appraisal systems has been a key mechanism for monitoring performance, and every study participant had used some form of appraisal system:  100% used an Employee Rating System 90% used Pay for Performance Models 70% used 360 Degree Feedback 60% used a Forced Ranking Distribution System In order to avoid some of the negative press associated with forced ranking systems, some organizations resorted to renaming the process, using ‘leadership evaluation’ and ‘development practice.’ The number one driver of implementing a forced ranking system is a change in executive management.  Two organizations interviewed indicated that they did not have a forced ranking system prior to the new leadership; now, the internal discussions are showing that forced ranking is inevitable.   A common concern expressed by interviewed organizations was not knowing whether the workforce would rise to the challenge and embrace the process.  Implementation of a forced ranking system also brought concerns of cultural issues and the erosion of teamwork.  What is interesting to note is that forced ranking systems seemed to be more acceptable at high tech, manufacturing, and financial service organizations rather than the public sector and retail sector.   << Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next > End >>