The performance management approach that uses job performance evaluations to identify a company's best, average, and worst performing employees, using person-to-person comparisons, is known as "forced ranking".
<h3>What is forced ranking?</h3>
The contentious practice of "forced ranking," which grades employees against one another rather than against performance standards, is very popular in corporate America.
The problem with forced ranking are-
- This can lead to a lack of motivation and disengagement among employees as well as unneeded internal competition that can harm collaboration, creativity, and innovation and divert attention from market competition.
- Although contentious, forced ranking systems are legal. Employers who choose to take action based on those rankings, however, run a number of legal dangers.
The forced rankings beneficial from an employee perspective, here are reasons-
- This system teaches a manager how to assess employees objectively with the right management training.
- When the management system needs to be improved or formalised, forced rankings are advantageous.
- An essential component of business is analysing trends and developments.
To know more about example of forced ranking, here
brainly.com/question/6626507
#SPJ4
Answer: Trained incapacity
Explanation: In simple words, it refers to the idea that after gaining a certain kind of education, skill or experience etc. the level of thinking of an individual cannot go beyond a certain limit.
In the given case, the manager was the upper level employee and was not habitual to the work that was performed by the workers in the restaurant.
Therefore this position in the workplace limited his skills of performing only the managerial work.
Hence from the above we can conclude that the above case depicts trained incapacity.
Answer:
The correct answer is $79,000 and $37,000.
Explanation:
According to the scenario, the given data are as follows:
Net income = $116,000
Doug's Salary = $52,000
Receive an interest = 10%
So, the amount to be shared equally = [$116,000 - $52,000 - ( 10% × $220,000) - ( 10% × $320,000)] ÷ 2
= $5,000
So, Doug share = $52,000 + ( 10% × $220,000) + $5,000
= $79,000
Kayla share = (10% × $320,000) + $5,000 = $37,000
Answer:
102.99 hours needed
Explanation:
Zu = K (U^n)
Zu= estimation of tower which is for 8
U= number of tower which is 8
n= log0.94/log2
The answer is a voidable contract
