1. Discuss the pros and cons of performance appraisal tools.

Answer:
I. Graphic Rating scales:
A scale that lists a number of traits and a range of performance for each that is used to
identify the score that best describes an employee’s level if performance for each trait.
Pros:
- Easier to use
-Quantitative in nature so can be used for compensation
-Time commitment is far less
Cons:
- Tendency of recency effect which can make the rating more skewed
-Not as useful for development purposes as critical incident method

II. Critical Incident method:

Appraisals are typically done once a year. Since they are done from memory, it can cause
recency bias. Hence to cut down this bias, critical incident method is used. Supervisors
keep a diary/ log of all the critical incidents (very positive/ very negative), or
exceptional events of performance to find deviations in performance standard.
Pros:
- Helps to overcome the recency effect since no need to rely on memory
-Helps to explain performance deficiency
-Helpful for development purposes
-It is a transparent method
Cons:
- It does not prove numerical results so it cannot be used for compensation
-Difficult to use
-Supervisor needs to give more effort to record the incidents
(iii) Behaviorally anchored rating scale:
A method that uses quantified scale with specific narrative examples of good and
poor performance. The scale consists of certain scores attached with descriptions of
critical incidents. The most negative critical incident is anchored at the bottom and most
positive at the top of the scale.
Pros:
- Clearer standards
- Clearer dimensions
 2. What is Critical Incident & how can it help improve performance?
Answer: Critical incident method or critical incident technique is a performance
appraisal tool in which analyses the behavior of employee in certain events in which
either he performed very well and the ones in which he could have done better. Critical
incident technique is used to collect data using a set of procedures. In critical incident
method the observer observes critical human behaviors, skills used, incidents that occur
on the job. It provides examples the supervisor can use to explain the person’s rating. It
makes the supervisor think about the subordinate’s appraisal all during the year so the
rating doesn’t just reflect the employee’s most recent performance.
In Critical incident method, the manager of the employee gives all the details of the
incident. This method is quite subjective in nature as compared to other methods which
may be very objective and would require just ratings out of 5/10 etc. It helps to define the
competencies and Knowledge, Skills, Abilities and other attributes (KSAO) required for
a task or set of tasks that entails a job. The observer not only looks at the hard skills used
but also the mental abilities that are required by the job incumbent.
3. Explain how you would use the alternation ranking method, the paired
comparison method, and the forced distribution method
Answer:
I. Alternation Ranking Method:
Ranking employees from best to worst on a trait or traits is another method for evaluating
employees. Since it is usually easier to distinguish between the worst and best employees
than to rank them, an alternation ranking method is most popular. First, list all
subordinates to be rated and then cross out the names of any not known well enough to
rank.

Then, on a form such as that in follows, indicate the employee who is the highest on the
characteristic being measured and also the one who is the lowest. Then choose the next
highest and the next lowest, alternating between highest and lowest until all the
employees to be rated have been ranked.
 II. Paired Comparison Method:
By this technique, each employee is compared every trait with all the other persons in
pairs one at a time. With this technique judgment is easier and simpler than with the
ordinary ranking method. The no. of times a person is compared to another is tallied on
paper. These no. s yield the rank no of each group.

To illustrate the method, let us say we have five employees: Ms. Arti, Ms. Maria, Ms.
Rita, Mr. Ram, and Mr. Kumar. We list their names on the left-hand side of the sheet. We
compare Arti with Maria on whatever criterion we have chosen, say, quality of work. If
we feel Arti is more valuable than Maria, we put a tally (in the given exhibit tally is
shown by ‘+’ and ‘-‘signs) beside Arti’s name. We then compare Arti with Rita, with
Ram, and with Kumar. The process is repeated for each individual.

The results are tabulated and ranks are assigned to each individual. The man with the
most tallies is the most valuable person, at least in the eyes of the rater; the man with no
tallies at all is regarded as the least valuable person. This method is not suitable for large
organizations.
 III. Forced Distribution Method:
This method was evolved by Joseph Tiffin. This system is used to eliminate or minimize
rater’s bias so that all personnel may not be placed extreme ends. Normally, the two
criteria used here for rating are the job performance and promotability. Further, a five -
point performance scale is used without any mention of descriptive statements. Workers
are placed between the two extremes of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ performance.

For instance, the workers of outstanding merit may be placed at the top 10% of the scale.
The rest may be placed at 20%-good, 40%-outstanding, 20%-fair and 10%-poor. To be
specific, the forced distribution method assumes that all top grade workers should go to
the highest 10%’ grade; 2.0% employees should go to the next highest grade and so on.

4. Explain in your own words how you would go about developing a

behaviorally anchored rating scale.

Answer: Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale (BARS) is a scale used to rate the
performance of employees. It is an appraisal mechanism that seeks to combine the
benefits of narratives, critical incidents and quantified ratings by anchoring a quantified
scale with specific narratives of performance ranging from good, satisfactory and poor
performance.
BARS is designed to bring the benefits of both quantitative and qualitative data to
employee appraisal process. It compares an individual’s performance against specific
examples of behavior that are tied to numerical ratings of 5 to 9. Behaviorally Anchored
Rating Scale (BARS) is usually represented as a vertical rating graph.
Developing a BARS typically requires five steps-
I. Write critical incidents (CIT)
Ask Jobholders or supervisors to describe behavior (critical incidents) that have a
significant impact on the performance.
 II. Develop performance dimensions
It involves grouping the behaviors in different dimension sets, then define each
dimension.
III. Reallocate incidents
To verify these groupings, have another team who also know the job
reallocate the original critical incidents to the cluster they think it fits best.
Retain a critical incident if most of this second team assigns it to the same
cluster as did the first.
IV. Scale the critical incidents
This second group then rates how effective or ineffectively these behaviors affect the
performance on a scale.
V. Develop a final instrument
About 7-8 of these dimensions are chosen as behavioral anchors which would then be
used across organization to evaluate.

- Provides feedback
- Maintains consistency
- Benefit of both rating and critical incidents
Cons: - Cost of development is high
- Not every job can use such a complex scale
-