Nowadays, the companies are exposed to the number of the different systems that could be used for the evaluation of the employees’ performance and presenting of the final results of the surveys. The paper under consideration aims to reflect on the graphic rating scales as the methods for measuring employees’ dedication and efforts demonstrated in the workplace. The paper will discuss the advantage and disadvantages of the system as well as demonstrate the ways in which these scales can be employed in the organizations.
The graphic rating scales provide for the form of feedback or evaluation that is used by the human resources managers in the evaluations o the employees’ performance. The scales might specify a number of the points that are attributed to the particular style of the performance. As Brody notes, “the ”scores are often give without precise definitions, so that evaluators are ale to rate results based on their own subjective interpretations”. The scales assess the quality and quantity of the work, the judgments and the behaviors of the employees.
The advantages of the use of the graphic rating scales are numerous. Brody notes that the key advantage of the graphic rating scales refers to their simplicity and convenience. Indeed, they are associated with the overall simplicity of their developing and use. Moreover, the scales are easily perceived by the audiences to which they are demonstrated. Apart from that they are rather useful in the quantitative comparisons. Moreover, there is a number often-standardized scales that can be employed by the managers. Therefore, there is no need to waste the time and resources to elaborate the evaluations systems. The comparison criterions are frequently standardized so that the mistakes of the managers are almost impossible to happen. Additionally, the behaviors of the employees could be quantified easier in comparison with the other evaluations systems.
The rating scales are important during the presentations when there is a need to tie the data and the text that is audibly reproduced by the speaker. Furthermore, the use of the graphic rating scales is considered to be more objective and fair and the one that excludes the human factor and contributes to the development of the trust and transparency within the organization.
The graphic rating scales are also associated with a number of the disadvantages that should be reconsidered by the managers of the organization when they present the information to the employees, managers and stakeholders. First of all, the managers of the company should consider the size of the organization. The small-size companies are not recommended to use the graphic rating scales since the results will be different in every case o the every employee. Despite the overall effectiveness of the trainings or the education, the evaluation might still be too tough for the participants. Some of the employees might experience difficulties while screening their own personal agendas. The rating scales are the most efficient when the managers as well the employees have the common vision o the definitions of the more critical concepts which are included in the evaluation.
Another drawback refers to the perception of the graphic rating scales. Regardless of the labels that are portrayed on the rating scales, they still might be negatively perceived by the employees who, in its turn, might lead to the decreased performance rates and overall dissatisfaction. The evaluations and comments provided might be interpreted subjectively and therefore result in the various perceptions and consequences. The experts also stress that the graphic rating scales might be considered as the obstacles for the traditional feedback. The receiving of the certain rate, no matter positive or negative, ties the attention of the person to the particular number that disregards the following comments and evaluations. Therefore, it creates the blocking in a substantive give and take in regard to the employees’ work.
The graphic rating scales might distort the results of the evaluations. It is specifically the case when the scale is made out of the different rates, which are then united into the final grade. As a result, the high marks or scales in one of the section might masque the disastrous results in regard to the certain part of the work. The high mark got by the employee might even result in the halo effect without no obvious reason for that.
Apart from that, it should be stressed that the graphic rating scales are perfect tools for the identification of the excellent or poor performance. Therefore, it is totally ineffective in evaluations of the middle-range workers who demonstrate average yet satisfying results of their work. The graphic rating scales simply leave them out of the boat even though there is no obvious reason for that. Furthermore, regardless of the guidelines and precise numbers, the evaluators might still distort the results by overweighting employees’ recent behaviors in the performance reviews.
The application of the graphic rating scales depends largely on the characteristics of the company and the purposes of their use. Thus, in case the company is small or middle-sized the managers should better restrain from using this method since it is more convenient for reflecting the larger amount of data. Moreover, in case of the small companies a more personalized feedback is usually more effective than the impersonalized scale. At the same time, these scales are extremely useful during the presentations when there is a need to surprise the viewers. The scales actually reflect the performance of the employees and provide the general framework that is used in regard to the every employee of the company without exception.
Considering the numerical representation of the data that is used in the graphic rating scales, it should be stressed that their use should be accompanied by the feedback on the performance that is to be presented by the supervising manager of the employee. Such a feedback might also reveal the considerations behind evaluations of the employee and some explanations, the negative and positive aspects of the employee’s work. Such a combination of the evaluation systems might be convenient in terms of the perception since it will be suitable for the visuals and those who perceive the audibly reproduced information. Moreover, the graphic rating scales might also be combined with the ranking. As Lunenburg points, the ranking requires the rater to write the name of the best subordinate on the top of a list, then the name of the worst at the bottom and continue this sequential procedure until all subordinates are listed”.
In conclusion, the graphic rating scales are useful for the presentation as we’ll as for the ensuring of the fair and just procedures in the evaluations of the employees. Moreover, these scales are useful for the large companies when the managers have t reflect large quantities of data on the slides during the presentation. At the same time, these scales might distort the results of the evaluations and perceived differently by the employees. Moreover, they are useful for identifying the excellent and poor reformers. However, the system might not reflect the results of the middle-performance workers. In overall, it is suggested that the graphic rating scales might be employed preferably by the large companies or by the small and medium sized ones together with the other evaluation systems http will provide a more detailed feedback on the performance of the employees.