Answered You can hire a professional tutor to get the answer.
Need an argumentative essay on Siebel Forced-Ranking System. Needs to be 4 pages. Please no plagiarism.Download file to see previous pages... In a sense, force ranking is a more truthful way of implem
Need an argumentative essay on Siebel Forced-Ranking System. Needs to be 4 pages. Please no plagiarism.Download file to see previous pages...
In a sense, force ranking is a more truthful way of implementing performance management. Managers are forced to differentiate talent and the process of forced ranking also forces managers to spot and champion talent.
Since the forced-ranking system requires that criteria for ranking need to be set first and foremost, the system also provides information that conventional performance appraisal systems cannot. The deliberations among managers in determining criteria help them define and understand what are important for success of the organization. Subsequently, knowing the criteria that managers use to appraise performance increases the probability that employees will adjust their behavior in order to succeed.
A forced-ranking system can also provide an independent verification of performance appraisal data. Significant variations in the talent data provided by the performance appraisal system and the data provided by the forced ranking process should be worth delving into.
Better performing employees may be motivated by a forced-ranking system because they feel appreciated and not treated in the same way as underperformers. In terms of teamwork and collaboration, forced-ranking may also have a positive effect, because those who do not want to cooperate with the team or in a collaborative effort are eliminated.
Organizations implementing forced-ranking may be attractive to high-quality job applicants who would see such a system as one where their contributions would be recognized and rewarded and would therefore be eager to work for the organization, thereby improving the overall quality of the applicant pool.
Company investors may view a forced ranking system as management's commitment to accountability and to operations efficiency.
May be unfair to people performing at an acceptable level, with attendant legal repercussions in terms of human rights.
May create an unhealthy star-cult culture.
It may not possible to continually improve the overall potential of a workforce by removing the bottom dwellers and replacing them with better employees. As standards are raised, it would be more difficult to find applicants to replace those that have been removed.
A job applicant who is aware that an employer uses a forced ranking system may feel that such a culture would be stressful or risky, and not consider the organization, causing the loss of high-potential applicants.
Shareholders might not agree with a forced ranking system because of potential lawsuits or other negative consequences. Some companies using forced ranking have become embroiled in discrimination lawsuits brought by employees upset over dismissal or lower pay (Levinson, 2003).