Bell curve is used for performance management.
The logic is, as per the bell-curve rule, you got to classify certain number of emplyees forcefully under some defined rules.
This is forced distribution, and that is one of the drawback of this theory because you are forcefully by classifying an employee as outstanding or unsatifactory, underestimating his potential, usually this kind of model is nowadays used in companies which are into restructuring, business process reengineering, and into cutting down their workforce for cost advantages etc.
The merit of the bell curve performance appraisal system is that it seeks to normalize ratings. This is based upon the assumption that all random data sets will be distributed in such a fashion. The intent is to rectify an overly skewed outcome that may have been unduly influenced by factors not pertaining to the actual performance that was being measured. In application, at least in academia, it appears that it is primarily used to inflate grades in order to mask the poor performance of students.
Many argue that this system is far more equitable as it prodcues an outcome "as it should be" rather than relying on the raw data itself.
for more details on the bell curve.. u can click the below hyperlink which belongs to citehr itself.
https://www.citehr.com/46150-ppt-bel...#axzz16Hlfe8Ba
thanks.
From India, Pune
The logic is, as per the bell-curve rule, you got to classify certain number of emplyees forcefully under some defined rules.
This is forced distribution, and that is one of the drawback of this theory because you are forcefully by classifying an employee as outstanding or unsatifactory, underestimating his potential, usually this kind of model is nowadays used in companies which are into restructuring, business process reengineering, and into cutting down their workforce for cost advantages etc.
The merit of the bell curve performance appraisal system is that it seeks to normalize ratings. This is based upon the assumption that all random data sets will be distributed in such a fashion. The intent is to rectify an overly skewed outcome that may have been unduly influenced by factors not pertaining to the actual performance that was being measured. In application, at least in academia, it appears that it is primarily used to inflate grades in order to mask the poor performance of students.
Many argue that this system is far more equitable as it prodcues an outcome "as it should be" rather than relying on the raw data itself.
for more details on the bell curve.. u can click the below hyperlink which belongs to citehr itself.
https://www.citehr.com/46150-ppt-bel...#axzz16Hlfe8Ba
thanks.
From India, Pune
Dear Simhan!
Thanks very much, I am sorry, I feel so bad that I haven't check the bottom and post the foolish question. Any how once again Thank you very much. I feel this is the best site I ever encountered.
Best Regards.
From Pakistan
Thanks very much, I am sorry, I feel so bad that I haven't check the bottom and post the foolish question. Any how once again Thank you very much. I feel this is the best site I ever encountered.
Best Regards.
From Pakistan
Hi Dhananjay,
Forced ranking is a controversial workforce management tool that uses intense yearly evaluations to identify a company's best and worst performing employees, using person-to-person comparisons. In theory, each ranking will improve the quality of the workforce. Managers rank their subordinates into 5 categories:
Rating % distributions
Far Exceeding Expectation 15%
Exceeding Expectation 20%
Met Expectation 40%
Met Some Expectaton 20%
Did Not Met Expectation 5%
The top 20 percent are the "A" players, the people who will lead the future of the company. They're given raises, stock options, and training. The middle 70 percent are the "B" players, steady-eddies who are given smaller raises and encouraged to improve. The bottom 10 percent are the "C" players, who contribute the least and may be meeting expectations but are simply "good" on a team of "greats." And rest populations given no raises or bonuses and are either offered training, asked if they'd be happier elsewhere, or fired.
Dinesh Negi
Human Resources
Forced ranking is a controversial workforce management tool that uses intense yearly evaluations to identify a company's best and worst performing employees, using person-to-person comparisons. In theory, each ranking will improve the quality of the workforce. Managers rank their subordinates into 5 categories:
Rating % distributions
Far Exceeding Expectation 15%
Exceeding Expectation 20%
Met Expectation 40%
Met Some Expectaton 20%
Did Not Met Expectation 5%
The top 20 percent are the "A" players, the people who will lead the future of the company. They're given raises, stock options, and training. The middle 70 percent are the "B" players, steady-eddies who are given smaller raises and encouraged to improve. The bottom 10 percent are the "C" players, who contribute the least and may be meeting expectations but are simply "good" on a team of "greats." And rest populations given no raises or bonuses and are either offered training, asked if they'd be happier elsewhere, or fired.
Dinesh Negi
Human Resources
Community Support and Knowledge-base on business, career and organisational prospects and issues - Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query, download formats and be part of a fostered community of professionals.
Create bell curve in XL.doc
Bell Curve.xls
Bell Curve Appraisal.pdf