Fred neatly sums up the debate about ranking.
Successful companies (e.g., H-P, LL Bean, etc.) have performance
appraisal systems and rank their employees.
Therefore, performance appraisal systems are (good/okay/necessary/
desirable).
I would say that a good manager, willing to learn, motivated to help
others learn, and motivated to help the company succeed, is the only
ingredient necessary. Many systems will provide an adequate platform for
rating. I have used bits and pieces of many. Rating and ranking to me
are merely tools to help me understand something about someone who works
for me.
If even the best of tools becomes more than tool and process, but instead
becomes an end in itself, then it is not performing its task. On the
other hand, an average tool, in the hands of the right person will serve.
Going back to what Fred says above, companies really do depend on good
performance from their employees. The task then is to understand what
'good performance' really is, and how to help raise that standard
regularly.
--Rol Fessenden
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>