Rank and yank have been considered to be the legitimate performance improvement tools of management CITATION Hil121 \l 1033 (Hill, 2012). The aspect of rank and yank is usually referred to as a forced ranking as it is a performance appraisal systems that was derogatory label because of its critics. The general intention of the forced ranking system is usually to improve the performance level of the predetermined operation by usually avoiding the lower or the bottom percentage basically ten percent of performers and consequently hiring the replacements that are considered to perform at the highest level possible in the organization CITATION Bas11 \l 1033 (Bashir, 2011). The aspect of ranking can be judged in diverse ways such as ranking according to efficiency, teamwork or even the contribution. In this case, the top performers may be rewarded with a hefty promotion or, even more, training so as to embrace productivity of the organization whereas the lower performers may be rewarded with a warning letter or even the termination letter in agreement with the predetermined level of performance.
Diverse organization has widely used the aspect of rank and yank or the forced ranking in the world, but some legal challenges have been made to defend the aspect of rank and yank. Forced ranking has remained to be the most controversial management practice or tool because it can results to a company paying a lot of money in compensation to the terminated employees such as the Ford company who implemented the aspect of forced ranking system but the company ended up paying approximately $10.5 billion as a results of the class action suits as charged that the rank and yank system had some desperate impact on the company employees CITATION Ovi13 \l 1033 (Ovide, 2013). It is considered that a possible disadvantage of the rank and yank management system is the increased competitiveness among the workers because, under the rank and yank management system, employees can become less focused on collaborative or common work as the employees may start focusing on their individual performances and do away with the overall organization success.
Yes, I think forced ranking is a good performance management system because it embraces the production as the managers want to reach the perceptible differentiation among the best performance of workers in the whole organization CITATION Roc14 \l 1033 (Rock, 2014). This method is vital because diverse organization do not want to have a company that has full excellent workers if the company is underperforming. The aspect of forced ranking embraces production because all the performance management system makes differences among the workers. The top workers usually enjoy diverse benefits as their bonuses are usually high; their determined careers are quick and ultimately enjoy increased salaries CITATION Ovi13 \l 1033 (Ovide, 2013). Rank and yank performance management system usually produces a healthy pressure among the employees as the workers have in mind that they have to increase their performance so as to enjoy and also develop their skills and knowledge further so as to continue staying at the top level.
Absolute performance judgments are wrong because the performance management system does not make clear how great or small the resultant difference between the workers because it only rates everybody as above average CITATION Bas11 \l 1033 (Bashir, 2011). The absolute performance judgments management system are wrong because it does not provide any absolute information concerning the diverse employees in the organization as other performance management system such as relative systems identify the resultant differences between the organizational workforce since the supervisors employ diverse evaluation standards.
As a manager, I would rely on the relative performance management system because it is an appraisal format that usually asks the supervisors to compare a predetermined employee performance to the performance of another diverse worker that are doing the same piece of work CITATION Roc14 \l 1033 (Rock, 2014). Relative performance management system is vital to the managers because the supervisors are able to determine those who underperform in each workstation since every worker is rated according to the task his or her workmates do.
Yes, I can devise an absolute rating system that would guarantee the aspect of differentiation among all the workers because as we understand, an absolute rating system is a performance appraisal format that usually asks the supervisors to make diverse judgments about a workers performance as based solely on the performance standards of the whole group CITATION Roc14 \l 1033 (Rock, 2014). In my devise, the absolute rating system should have diverse ranks such as it ranks each worker based on the performance of the workmate other that averaging everybody in general. The absolute rating system should be able to predict the correct incentive identification based on the successful relative judgment that yields the reverse pattern of performance CITATION Bas11 \l 1033 (Bashir, 2011).
BIBLIOGRAPHY Bashir, U. B. (2011). An investigation of the Forced Ranking System (FRS). Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 1581-1593.
Hill, A. (2012). Forced ranking is a relic of an HR tool. Financial Times.
Ovide, S. H. (2013). Microsoft abandons stack ranking of employees. Wall Street Journal. .
Rock, D. A. (2014). Kill your performance ratings. Strategy+ Business,.
Cite this page
Ethics Rank and Yank. (2021, Mar 01). Retrieved from https://proessays.net/essays/ethics-rank-and-yank
If you are the original author of this essay and no longer wish to have it published on the ProEssays website, please click below to request its removal: