Organization behavior
1. What is your opinion regarding forced ranking performance appraisals? Do they motivate employees? Explain.
I think that forced ranking performance appraisals dose not motivate employees. It would create a scenario that people only focus on competing, backstabbing each other and protecting their own prospects instead of encouraging employees to focus on innovation and collaboration. This would cause the lack of cooperation between group members. Companies may inevitably using forced ranking, firing someone who might go on to be a super star elsewhere or discouraging excellent performers by ranking them as mediocre simply to fill a quota. Replacing lower-rank employees each year can also be costly and can lower productivity in the early months of adoption.
The effectiveness of Forced ranking performance appraisal is dependent on the type of industry an individual is employed in. If an employee is in the sales or manufacturing industry, then Forced ranking may be effective because there is a clear output in terms of sales or quantity of outputs produced, thus employee needs to meet the target. For example, in marketing department, the force ranking might be a very effective way to rank an employee because they base on their sales. The higher sales would get the higher rank and also higher bonus.
However, in R& D industry, forced ranking would not work well because these industries thrive on innovation, which requires collaboration among different groups and potential unsuccessful attempts in coming up with new innovation. Therefore, by having force-ranking system, it will discourage collaboration and unnecessarily punish employees that are not fulfilling the goal, or may not have to motivation to try out different things for fear of failure and low ranking in performance appraisal. The use of force ranking in R&D industry may lead to demotivation and reduce in cooperation.
2. How would equity theory explain some employees’ negative reactions to forced
I think that forced ranking performance appraisals dose not motivate employees. It would create a scenario that people only focus on competing, backstabbing each other and protecting their own prospects instead of encouraging employees to focus on innovation and collaboration. This would cause the lack of cooperation between group members. Companies may inevitably using forced ranking, firing someone who might go on to be a super star elsewhere or discouraging excellent performers by ranking them as mediocre simply to fill a quota. Replacing lower-rank employees each year can also be costly and can lower productivity in the early months of adoption.
The effectiveness of Forced ranking performance appraisal is dependent on the type of industry an individual is employed in. If an employee is in the sales or manufacturing industry, then Forced ranking may be effective because there is a clear output in terms of sales or quantity of outputs produced, thus employee needs to meet the target. For example, in marketing department, the force ranking might be a very effective way to rank an employee because they base on their sales. The higher sales would get the higher rank and also higher bonus.
However, in R& D industry, forced ranking would not work well because these industries thrive on innovation, which requires collaboration among different groups and potential unsuccessful attempts in coming up with new innovation. Therefore, by having force-ranking system, it will discourage collaboration and unnecessarily punish employees that are not fulfilling the goal, or may not have to motivation to try out different things for fear of failure and low ranking in performance appraisal. The use of force ranking in R&D industry may lead to demotivation and reduce in cooperation.
2. How would equity theory explain some employees’ negative reactions to forced