Behaviorally anchored rating scales

Behaviorally anchored rating scales

1. Definition of behaviorally anchored rating scales (BARS):

• This method used to describe a performance rating that focused on specific behaviors or sets as indicators of effective or ineffective performance.
• It is a combination of the rating scale and critical incident techniques of employee performance evaluation.

2. Classification of behaviorally anchored rating scales:

• Behavioral observation scales
• Behavioral expectations scales
• Numerically anchored rating scales

3. Rating scales

Each behavior can rate at one of 7 scales as follows (you can set scales depend on your requirements)
• Extremely poor (1 points)
• Poor (2 points)
• Below average (3 points)
• Average (4 points)
• Above average (5 points)
• Good (6 points)
• Extremely good (7 points)

4. Advantages and disadvantages of behaviorally anchored rating scales:

• This method are very useful and exactly.
• It is very difficult to develop this method because you need to identify what is “good level” etc.

5. Related documents

Performance appraisal methods

Developing BARS

BARS could be developed using data collected with the critical incident technique, or by using comprehensive data concerning the tasks carried out with a job incumbent, for example may be collected via a task analysis. To be able to construct BARS, several fundamental steps, layed out below, are adopted.

1.Good examples of effective and ineffective behavior associated with job are collected from individuals with understanding of job while using critical incident technique. Alternatively, data might be collected with the careful study of data from the recent task analysis.

2.These data are changed into performance dimensions. To transform these data into performance dimensions, good examples of behavior (for example critical occurrences) are sorted into homogeneous groups while using Q-sort technique. Definitions for every number of actions are written to define each grouping of actions like a performance dimension

3.Several subject material experts (SMEs) are requested to re-translate the behavior good examples back to their particular performance dimensions. At this time the actions that there’s not an advanced of agreement (frequently 50-75%) are thrown away as the actions that have been re-converted back to their particular performance dimensions with an advanced of SME agreement are maintained. The re-translation process makes sure that actions are readily identifiable using their particular performance dimensions.

4.The maintained actions are scaly by getting SMEs rate the potency of each behavior. These rankings are often done on the 5- to 9-point Likert-type scale.

5.Actions having a low standard deviation (for good examples, under 1.50) are maintained while actions having a greater standard deviation are thrown away. This task helps you to ensure SME agreement concerning the rating of every behavior.

6.Finally, actions for every performance dimensions, all meeting re-translation and criteria, will be utilized for scale anchors.

Author: Davi Ngo,



Leave a Reply