Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS):
The problem of judgmental performance evalu¬ation inherent in the traditional methods of performance evaluation led to some organisations to go for objective evaluation by developing a technique known as “Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS)” around 1960s. BARS are descriptions of various degrees of behaviour with regard to a specific performance dimension.
It combines the benefits of narratives, critical incidents, and quan¬tified ratings by anchoring a quantified scale with specific behavioural examples of good or poor performance. The proponents of BARS claim that it offers better and more equitable appraisals than do the other techniques of performance appraisal we discussed so far.
Developing BARS typically involves five steps:
1. Generating Critical Incidents:
Critical incidents (or say, behaviours) are those which are essential for the performance of the job effectively Persons who are knowledgeable of the job in question (jobholders and/or supervisors) are asked to describe specific critical incidents of effective and ineffective performance. These critical incidents may be described in a few short sentences or phrases using the terminology.
2. Developing Performance Dimensions:
The critical incidents are then clustered into a smaller set of performance dimensions, usually five to ten. Each cluster, or say, dimension is then defined.
3. Reallocating Incidents:
Various critical incidents are reallocated dimensions by another group of people who also know the job in question. Various critical incidents so reallocated to original dimensions are clustered into various categories, with each cluster showing similar critical incidents. Those critical incidents are retained which meet 50 to 80% of agreement with the cluster as classified in step 2.
4. Scaling Incidents:
The same second group as in step 3 rates the behaviour described in each incident in terms of effectiveness or ineffectiveness on the appropriate dimension by using seven to nine points scale. Then, average effectiveness ratings for each incident are determined to decide which incidents will be included in the final anchored scales.
5. Developing Final BARS Instrument:
A subset of the incidents (usually six or seven per cluster) is used as a behavioural anchor for the final performance dimensions. Finally, a BARS instru¬ment with vertical scales is drawn to be used for performance appraisal, as in Figure 27-5.
How BARS is developed can be exemplified with an example of grocery checkout clerks working in a large grocery chain.
A number of critical incidents involved in checking out of grocery can be clustered into seven performance dimensions:
1. Knowledge and Judgment
2. Conscientiousness
3. Skill in Human Relations
4. Skill in Operation of Register
5. Skill in Bagging
6. Organisational Ability of Check stand Work
7. Skill in Monetary Transactions
8. Observational Ability
