[IPAC-List] Performance Appraisal Likert Scales

[keith.poole at phoenix.gov]

Can't help with the literature, but going back about 10 years, we had a 1 
through 6 rating that we abandoned for our current "Overall Met/Not Met" 
system (in which we can rate individual goals and duties as Met or Needs 
Improvement, but in the end at the top of the form you boil it all down to 
either an Overall Met or Overall Not Met.)  The Overall Met is what grants 
merit increases, and the increases are pre-determined flat step increases 
for all non-manager employees. 

I'm told that as an organization we go through phases of wanting scales 
and then not wanting them (or dickering over 1-3 or 1-5 or 1-6 etc).  The 
rationale for abandoning the scales at the time was that it didn't matter 
if you were a 3, 4, 5 or 6, you got the same merit increase, and it helped 
us avoid endless arguments with employees that said they should be a 5 
instead of a 4.  And of course we had the issue where the Police Dept had 
a culture of almost always giving 5's and 6's, and some depts had the 
philosophy of "no one ever gets a 6", so when the "never a 6" dept hired a 
Police person they were kind of in shock.   Basically mgt thought that the 
value of the appraisal was the feedback and conversation and narrative 
about strengths and areas needing improvement, not haggling over a number.

Keith Poole
Personnel Supervisor
City of Phoenix Personnel Dept
Employment Services
(602) 262-7140
keith.poole at phoenix.gov



"Jason Bowling" <jbowling at ssvec.com> 
Sent by: ipac-list-bounces at ipacweb.org
05/28/2009 08:40 AM

To
<IPAC-List at ipacweb.org>
cc

Subject
[IPAC-List] Performance Appraisal Likert Scales






Hello all,

 

Does anyone know of research into Performance Appraisal Scales? Is there
an ideal/industry standard scale size?

 

Currently we use a 3-point scale (does not meet, meets, and exceeds
expectations). This short scale is great for inter-rater reliability,
but it seems to me, it sacrifices capturing the variability in
performance. Only in extreme situations do we see folks departing from
the default "Meets expectations."

 

Beyond just rating the performance of individuals, I would like to
assess the predictive validity of our hiring processes. Without much
variation, PA scores are practically orthogonal to all selection
measurements we use.

 

This is just one aspect of our PA system I am evaluating, but I cannot
find literature on the topic. 

 

Regards,

 

 

Jason Bowling, PHR

Human Resources Manager

S.S.V.E.C

Ofc: 520.515.3480

Cel: 520.220.6563

 

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This e-mail and any attachments are confidential
and may be protected by legal privilege. If you are not the intended
recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of
this e-mail or any attachment is prohibited. If you have received this
e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by returning it to the
sender and delete this copy from your system. Thank you for your
cooperation.

 

_______________________________________________________
IPAC-List
IPAC-List at ipacweb.org
http://www.ipacweb.org/mailman/listinfo/ipac-list