HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

Q1: What type of evaluation process would you say is being used in this case? Describe the
elements to support your position?

Answer:
Rank and Yank evaluation process is being used because the concern that the performance
management process is being less effective because managers are inflating employee ratings has
led 15 percent of all large organization to adjust their performance management process to what
is frequently called rank and yank. Here's how it works. Senior managers of every department
have to compulsorily rank employees in a 20:70:10 ratios. While the top 20 per cent are the high
fliers who must be retained at all costs, the middle 70 per cent are the standard performers who
are critical to the company's operational success and should get handsome rewards. At the
bottom is a 10 per cent band of under-performers who are asked to leave. This exercise must be
followed every year.
For example:
Even if a manager finds that all employees in his department have performed above par, he has to
still follow the 20:70:10 ratios so that 10 per cent of the total staff can be asked to quit. A growing
number of organizations, including the likes of Ford, Microsoft and Conoco, have adopted
performance appraisal models in which best-to-worst ranking methods are used to identify poor
performers, who are then given a period of time to improve. If they fail, they must leave. The
departure is often sweetened with a severance package, but if the poor performer refuses to exit
gracefully, they face the possibility of termination without compensation. The strategy is known as
"rank and yank".

Q02: What effect, if any do you believe rank and yank evaluation systems have on managers? Do
you see these effects as positive or negative? Defend your position?

Answer:
The text mentions the potential negative of such programs several times. The process is
stressful for both employees and their managers. Since employees tend to perceive this
approach as punitive, we can assume that many will be resistant or fearful of the
process. This puts pressure on the manager to help employees maintain motivation.
One can also assume that, at times, managers might be forces to release employees who
are solid performers merely because they were in the bottom 10% of a high-performing group.

Q03: What role does such a system have in distorting performance appraisals?

Answer:
Mangers may avoid giving lower marks to people they want to retain to avoid the impact of
a “$” rating. Employees fearing their jobs are at stake might become more competitive.
This is likely to diminish team-orientated work and possibly encourage unethical

1
HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
behaviors as employees try to make themselves look better. One could imagine that some
employees would even attempt to sabotage peers.