Forced distribution method

Under this method, the rater is asked to appraise the workers according to a preset distribution scale. The rater's bias is sought to be abolished here because employee are not placed at a lower or higher end of the scale. In general, the two criteria utilized here for rating are the job promo ability and performance. Furthermore, a five-point performance scale is utilized without any mention of descriptive statements. Employee is placed between the two limits of 'good' and 'bad' performances. For example, the employee of outstanding merit can be placed at the top 10 percent of the scale. The rest can be placed like -40% outstanding, 20% good, 20% fair and 10% poor. To be particular, the forced distribution method presumes that all of the top grade employee should go to the highest 10% grade; 20% workers should go to the next highest grade and so on.

In spite of job performance as the criterion, another equally significant factor in this method is promotability. Workers can be classified according to their promotional merits. The scale for this cause may consist of three points which name as quite likely promotional material, may/may not be promotional material & fairly unlikely promotional material.

One powerful positive point in favour of the forced distribution technique is that by forcing the distribution according to preset percentages, the difficulty of making use of different raters with different scales is ignored. Furthermore, this method is acceptable on the ground that it tends to remove rater bias. The restriction of using this method in salary administration, though, is that it may outcome in low productivity, low morale and high absenteeism. Workers who feel that they are productive, but searched themselves placed in a grade lower than expected feel exhibit and frustrated, over a period of time, unwillingness to work. Other methods of appraising performance include: Assessment Centre, Human Resource Accounting, Field Review, Group Appraisal, etc.