Does anyone know where I can find sample evaluation forms using the BARS (Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale system?
From United States, Marshalltown
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
From United States, Marshalltown
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi,
I have just designed the company Probation Review Forms with rating scale for performance and competencies. BARS system for the Probation review and the Performance review systems is my next aim to enhance the forms.
I am with the HRD of a new hospital that's due to open this year. The hsopital is based in K Lumpur and owned by the national petroleum company, Petronas. For someof you who have been to K Lumpur, Malaysia, the same owner owns the famous Petronas Twin Towers or KLCC Twin Towers (world tallest bulding next to Taipei 101).
Thanks.
From Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I have just designed the company Probation Review Forms with rating scale for performance and competencies. BARS system for the Probation review and the Performance review systems is my next aim to enhance the forms.
I am with the HRD of a new hospital that's due to open this year. The hsopital is based in K Lumpur and owned by the national petroleum company, Petronas. For someof you who have been to K Lumpur, Malaysia, the same owner owns the famous Petronas Twin Towers or KLCC Twin Towers (world tallest bulding next to Taipei 101).
Thanks.
From Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hey Alwia,
I know that BARS method is some what difficult to develop and also that you should have a great in-depth knowledge of the job. I would very much appreciate if you could post a sample of this method which you have developed.
Regards,
Ashra
From Sri Lanka
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
4I know that BARS method is some what difficult to develop and also that you should have a great in-depth knowledge of the job. I would very much appreciate if you could post a sample of this method which you have developed.
Regards,
Ashra
From Sri Lanka
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Greetings,
Here is a website that can teach how to construct BARS
How to construct behaviorally anchored rating scales (BARS) for employee evaluations. | Labor & Employment > Human Resources & Personnel Management from AllBusiness.com <link updated to site home> ( Search On Cite | Search On Google )
From United Arab Emirates, Dubai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Here is a website that can teach how to construct BARS
How to construct behaviorally anchored rating scales (BARS) for employee evaluations. | Labor & Employment > Human Resources & Personnel Management from AllBusiness.com <link updated to site home> ( Search On Cite | Search On Google )
From United Arab Emirates, Dubai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear All,
BARS has been around for ages now. I have realized its true potential over the past year and I want to share how impactful it can be. Some of its impacts include:
1) Selecting the right candidate using BARS as an assessment criterion in a Behavior Event-Based Interview.
2) Rating competencies during performance appraisals.
3) Highlighting behaviors that need to develop/improve for a person to move to the next level.
4) Providing a standardized/uniform way of measuring and analyzing competencies in an organization.
The following is an excerpt that I have taken from an article:
"I am also attaching an example of a BARS chart."
INTRODUCTION: WHAT IS A BEHAVIORALLY ANCHORED RATING SCALE?
The specific purpose of the Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale is to use behavioral procedures to design an instrument that can identify and measure the critical components that constitute effective performance in an occupation. The instrument has been used to identify performance competencies in various occupations such as Nurses (Smith and Kendall, 1963), store managers (Campbell, et al., 1973), college professors (Harrai and Zedeck, 1973), and for identifying the professional and career development activities needed by teachers (Erffmeyer and Martray, 198). The instrument allows researchers to "capture performance in multidimensional, behavior-specific terms" (Anshel and Webb, 1989).
A scale is constructed by developing a series of critical anchors or competencies that are perceived to represent effective performance in an occupation. Each competency area is then defined as a series of precise and specific indicators or dimensions. These indicators are written as specific behaviors that can be observed, rather than inferred. Each set of indicators is designed to represent the specific skills associated with effective performance in the competency area. As Smith and Kendall (1963) proclaim, the instrument is "rooted in and referable to actual behaviors."
To ensure content validity, a representative sample of the targeted population or occupation is used to construct each rating scale (Erffmeyer and Martray, 198). Generally, this procedure involves selecting individuals because of their expertise in the area of investigation. Individuals are split into groups and go through identical processes to develop the scale. Behavioral anchors or competencies are identified, as well as the dimensions or indicators in each competency area. Smith and Kendall (1963) maintain that these procedures allow for an instrument to be developed in the language of the occupation being investigated, therefore increasing its face validity. Once constructed, a rating scale is then administered to a wider sample of the targeted occupational population. Respondents are asked to indicate on a five-point Likert scale their perception of how essential each competency area is to effective performance. Each competency can be rated, or each individual indicator (Campbell, 1973). Erffmeyer and Martray (198) included another dimension to this step by asking respondents to also indicate, on a five-point scale, the level of difficulty they experienced in developing each skill area.
After a scale has been administered, it is then evaluated as to how essential the competencies and the indicators are perceived to be. The criterion for inclusion on the final rating scale of an indicator or competency is a mean essential ranking of greater than or equal to 3.5 and a standard deviation of less than 1.2 (Smith and Kendall, 1963).
THE USE OF BEHAVIORALLY ANCHORED RATING SCALES
Behaviorally anchored rating scales (BARS) provide a procedure to overcome some of the inherent weaknesses typically associated with traditional rating scales.
Gay (1981) generally suggests that rating scales have problems with the "halo effect" and "generosity error." "Halo effect" refers to the situation where ratings are influenced by a rater's positive feelings towards the person they are rating. "Generosity error" refers to the situation in which a rater gives higher ratings than they otherwise might. This generally occurs when a rater does not have enough information to make an objective rating, and as a result, the ratee benefits from any doubt that may exist, with a high rating (Gay, 1981).
Another problem associated with rating scales is when "trait type" scales are used. Often, the dimensions used in trait type scales are ambiguous. This results in threats to the internal validity of the instrument.
Smith and Kendall (1963) and Campbell (1973) argue that these problems can be overcome through the use of Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales. The strength of these scales is in the level of precision and specificity that occurs in the procedure for design and construction. Firstly, identified items for rating are at all times defined in specific behavioral terms. In addition, the scales measure performance, rather than behavior or effectiveness. Campbell et al. (1973) specify that performance is behavior that occurs in a specific context.
Effectiveness is also not measured with the scale. The reason being that effectiveness is influenced by too many variables out of the control of an individual. As Campbell et al. (1973) maintain:
"The crucial distinction between performance and effectiveness is that the latter does not refer to behavior directly but rather it is a function of additional factors not under the control of the individual."
THE PROCEDURES
In utilizing Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales, the following process needs to be undertaken:
1. Generation of expert panels. Two panels of "experts" who, due to their knowledge and experience in the area of study, are able to design an instrument to assess quality performance.
2. Designing a questionnaire based on a 5-point Likert scale of "competencies" required to measure performance.
3. Validating the instrument by sending the questionnaire to a wide sample.
4. Analyzing the results.
Advantages:
- These types of rating scales are particularly effective for assessing competencies, skills, and abilities.
- BARS rating scales are highly valid and job-related because important job requirements are covered.
- Objective benchmarks are provided against which observations can be rated, therefore, there is less rating error than when using other types of scales (e.g., numeric).
Cautions:
- BARS scales take some time and effort to create and usually cannot be used for job types other than those for which they were developed.
Developing a BARS Scale:
- Using subject matter experts, identify examples of job performance behaviors reflecting all different levels of effectiveness ranging from ineffective to superior for all the different parts of the job. These are key indicators only. It is not required to be an exhaustive list of every possible criterion. You may have already identified these behaviors when you conducted your job analysis to establish the qualifications and competencies. If so, use them here.
- Examples are then clustered by content and categories of job performance and ranked according to importance.
- Major, essential, or core criteria are distinguished from those that are minor or secondary within the group.
- Decide how many points will be awarded and how irrelevant or incorrect responses will be scored. A wrong answer should result in a failing grade.
- Assign marks that reflect the relative importance of the question and the competency being assessed.
- The scale may be multiplied by a factor to increase the overall weighting. For example, a 5-point scale is multiplied by a factor of 4 to increase the weight of the assessment to 20 points in the overall competition.
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
BARS has been around for ages now. I have realized its true potential over the past year and I want to share how impactful it can be. Some of its impacts include:
1) Selecting the right candidate using BARS as an assessment criterion in a Behavior Event-Based Interview.
2) Rating competencies during performance appraisals.
3) Highlighting behaviors that need to develop/improve for a person to move to the next level.
4) Providing a standardized/uniform way of measuring and analyzing competencies in an organization.
The following is an excerpt that I have taken from an article:
"I am also attaching an example of a BARS chart."
INTRODUCTION: WHAT IS A BEHAVIORALLY ANCHORED RATING SCALE?
The specific purpose of the Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale is to use behavioral procedures to design an instrument that can identify and measure the critical components that constitute effective performance in an occupation. The instrument has been used to identify performance competencies in various occupations such as Nurses (Smith and Kendall, 1963), store managers (Campbell, et al., 1973), college professors (Harrai and Zedeck, 1973), and for identifying the professional and career development activities needed by teachers (Erffmeyer and Martray, 198). The instrument allows researchers to "capture performance in multidimensional, behavior-specific terms" (Anshel and Webb, 1989).
A scale is constructed by developing a series of critical anchors or competencies that are perceived to represent effective performance in an occupation. Each competency area is then defined as a series of precise and specific indicators or dimensions. These indicators are written as specific behaviors that can be observed, rather than inferred. Each set of indicators is designed to represent the specific skills associated with effective performance in the competency area. As Smith and Kendall (1963) proclaim, the instrument is "rooted in and referable to actual behaviors."
To ensure content validity, a representative sample of the targeted population or occupation is used to construct each rating scale (Erffmeyer and Martray, 198). Generally, this procedure involves selecting individuals because of their expertise in the area of investigation. Individuals are split into groups and go through identical processes to develop the scale. Behavioral anchors or competencies are identified, as well as the dimensions or indicators in each competency area. Smith and Kendall (1963) maintain that these procedures allow for an instrument to be developed in the language of the occupation being investigated, therefore increasing its face validity. Once constructed, a rating scale is then administered to a wider sample of the targeted occupational population. Respondents are asked to indicate on a five-point Likert scale their perception of how essential each competency area is to effective performance. Each competency can be rated, or each individual indicator (Campbell, 1973). Erffmeyer and Martray (198) included another dimension to this step by asking respondents to also indicate, on a five-point scale, the level of difficulty they experienced in developing each skill area.
After a scale has been administered, it is then evaluated as to how essential the competencies and the indicators are perceived to be. The criterion for inclusion on the final rating scale of an indicator or competency is a mean essential ranking of greater than or equal to 3.5 and a standard deviation of less than 1.2 (Smith and Kendall, 1963).
THE USE OF BEHAVIORALLY ANCHORED RATING SCALES
Behaviorally anchored rating scales (BARS) provide a procedure to overcome some of the inherent weaknesses typically associated with traditional rating scales.
Gay (1981) generally suggests that rating scales have problems with the "halo effect" and "generosity error." "Halo effect" refers to the situation where ratings are influenced by a rater's positive feelings towards the person they are rating. "Generosity error" refers to the situation in which a rater gives higher ratings than they otherwise might. This generally occurs when a rater does not have enough information to make an objective rating, and as a result, the ratee benefits from any doubt that may exist, with a high rating (Gay, 1981).
Another problem associated with rating scales is when "trait type" scales are used. Often, the dimensions used in trait type scales are ambiguous. This results in threats to the internal validity of the instrument.
Smith and Kendall (1963) and Campbell (1973) argue that these problems can be overcome through the use of Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales. The strength of these scales is in the level of precision and specificity that occurs in the procedure for design and construction. Firstly, identified items for rating are at all times defined in specific behavioral terms. In addition, the scales measure performance, rather than behavior or effectiveness. Campbell et al. (1973) specify that performance is behavior that occurs in a specific context.
Effectiveness is also not measured with the scale. The reason being that effectiveness is influenced by too many variables out of the control of an individual. As Campbell et al. (1973) maintain:
"The crucial distinction between performance and effectiveness is that the latter does not refer to behavior directly but rather it is a function of additional factors not under the control of the individual."
THE PROCEDURES
In utilizing Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales, the following process needs to be undertaken:
1. Generation of expert panels. Two panels of "experts" who, due to their knowledge and experience in the area of study, are able to design an instrument to assess quality performance.
2. Designing a questionnaire based on a 5-point Likert scale of "competencies" required to measure performance.
3. Validating the instrument by sending the questionnaire to a wide sample.
4. Analyzing the results.
Advantages:
- These types of rating scales are particularly effective for assessing competencies, skills, and abilities.
- BARS rating scales are highly valid and job-related because important job requirements are covered.
- Objective benchmarks are provided against which observations can be rated, therefore, there is less rating error than when using other types of scales (e.g., numeric).
Cautions:
- BARS scales take some time and effort to create and usually cannot be used for job types other than those for which they were developed.
Developing a BARS Scale:
- Using subject matter experts, identify examples of job performance behaviors reflecting all different levels of effectiveness ranging from ineffective to superior for all the different parts of the job. These are key indicators only. It is not required to be an exhaustive list of every possible criterion. You may have already identified these behaviors when you conducted your job analysis to establish the qualifications and competencies. If so, use them here.
- Examples are then clustered by content and categories of job performance and ranked according to importance.
- Major, essential, or core criteria are distinguished from those that are minor or secondary within the group.
- Decide how many points will be awarded and how irrelevant or incorrect responses will be scored. A wrong answer should result in a failing grade.
- Assign marks that reflect the relative importance of the question and the competency being assessed.
- The scale may be multiplied by a factor to increase the overall weighting. For example, a 5-point scale is multiplied by a factor of 4 to increase the weight of the assessment to 20 points in the overall competition.
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Looking for something specific? - Join & Be Part Of Our Community and get connected with the right people who can help. Our AI-powered platform provides real-time fact-checking, peer-reviewed insights, and a vast historical knowledge base to support your search.