Behaviorally anchored rating scales (BARS) are scales used to rate performance.

BARS are normally presented vertically with scale points ranging from five to nine. It is an appraisal method that aims to combine the benefits of narratives, critical incidents, and quantified ratings by anchoring a quantified scale with specific narrative examples of good, moderate, and poor performance. BARS were developed in response to dissatisfaction with the subjectivity involved in using traditional rating scales such as the graphic rating scale. [2] A review of BARS concluded that the strength of this rating format may lie primarily in the performance dimensions which are gathered rather than the distinction between behavioral and numerical scale anchors Benefits of BARS BARS are rating scales that add behavioral scale anchors to traditional rating scales (e.g., graphic rating scales). In comparison to other rating scales, BARS are intended to facilitate more accurate ratings of the target person's behavior or performance. However, whereas the BARS is often regarded as a superior performance appraisal method, BARS may still suffer from unreliability, leniency biasand lack of discriminant validity between performance dimensions. BARS can be developed using data collected through the critical incident technique,[5] or through the use of comprehensive data about the tasks performed by a job incumbent, such as might be collected through a task analysis. In order to construct BARS, several basic steps, outlined below, are followed. 1. Examples of effective and ineffective behavior related to job are collected from people with knowledge of job using the critical incident technique. Alternatively, data may be collected through the careful examination of data from a recent task analysis. 2. These data are then converted into performance dimensions. To convert these data into performance dimensions, examples of behavior (such as critical incidents) are sorted into homogeneous groups using the Q-sort technique. Definitions for each group of behaviors are then written to define each grouping of behaviors as a performance dimension
3. A group of subject matter experts (SMEs) are asked to re-translate the behavioral examples

back into their respective performance dimensions. At this stage the behaviors for which there is not a high level of agreement (often 5075%) are discarded while the behaviors which were re-translated back into their resepctive performance dimensions with a high level of SME agreement are retained. The re-translation process helps to ensure that behaviors are readily identifiable with their respective performance dimensions.
4. The retained behaviors are then scaled by having SMEs rate the effectiveness of each

behavior. These ratings are usually done on a 5- to 9-point Likert-type scale.

behaviors with a higher standard deviation are discarded. This step helps to ensure SME agreement about the rating of each behavior.

6. Finally, behaviors for each performance dimensions, all meeting re-translation and criteria, will be used as scale anchors. Performance measurement is a process for collecting and reporting information regarding the performance of an individual, group or organizations. It can involve looking at process/strategies in place, as well as whether outcomes are in line with what was intended or should have been achieved. Feedback as a need for decision making Good performance is the criterion whereby an organization determines its capability to prevail. Performance measurement estimates the parameters under which programs, investments, and acquisitions are reaching the targeted results. However, a model for performance set faulty may depict a disadvantageous situation which does not support the organization nor the thriving to the set aims.

Performance Reference Model of the Federal Enterprise Architecture, 2005 All process of measuring performance requires the use of statistical modeling to determine results. A full scope copy of the performance of an organization can never be obtained, as generally some of the parameters cannot be measured directly but must be estimated via indirect observation and as a complete set of records never delivers an assessment without compression to key figures. The extended rationale for measuring performance

Fundamental purpose behind measures is to improve performance. Measures that are not directly connected to improving performance (like measures that are directed at communicating better with the public to build trust) are measures that are means to achieving that ultimate purpose (Behn 2003). Behn 2003 gives 8 reasons for adopting performance measurements: 1. To Evaluate how well a public agency is performing. To evaluate performance, managers need to determine what an agency is supposed to accomplish. (Kravchuk & Schack 1996). To formulate a clear, coherent mission, strategy, and objective. Then based on this information choose how you will measure those activities. (You first need to find out what are you looking for). Evaluation processes consist of two variables: organizational performance data and a benchmark that creates a framework for analyzing that data. For organizational information, focus on the outcomes of the agencys performance, but also including input/ environment/ process/ output- to have a comparative framework for analysis. It is helpful to ask 4 essential questions in determining organizational data: Outcomes should be directly related to the public purpose of the organization. Effectiveness Q: did they produce required results (determined by outcomes). Cost-effective: efficiency Q (outcome divided by input).

Impact Q: what value organisation provides.

Best-practice Q: evaluating internal operations (compare core process performance to most effective and efficient process in the industry). As in order for organization to evaluate performance its requires standards (benchmark) to compare its actual performance against past performance/ from performance of similar agencies/ industry standard/political expectations. 2. To Control How can managers ensure their subordinates are doing the right thing. Today managers do not control their workforce mechanically (measurement of time-andmotion for control as during Taylor) However managers still use measures to control, while allowing some space for freedom in the workforce. (Robert Kaplan & David Norton) Business has control bias. Because traditional measurement system sprung from finance function, the system has a control bias. Organisations create measurement systems that specify particular actions they want executefor branch employess to take a particular ways to execute what they want- branch to spend money. Then they want to measure to see whether the employees have in fact taken those actions. Need to measure input by individual into organisation and process. Officials need to

measure behavior of individuals then compare this performance with requirements to check who has and has not complied. Often such requirements are described only as guidelines. Do not be fooled. These guidelines are really requirements and those requirements are designed to control. The measurement of compliance with these requirements is the mechanism of control. 3. To Budget Budgets are crude tools in improving performance. Poor performance not always may change after applying budgets cuts as a disciplinary action. Sometimes budgets increase could be the answer to improving performance. Like purchasing better technology because the current ones are outdated and harm operational processes. So for decisions highly influenced by circumstance, you need measures to better understand the situation. At the macro level, elected officials deciding which purpose of government actions are primary or secondary. Political priorities drive macro budgetory choices. Once elected officials have established macro political priorities, those responsible for micro decisions may seek to invest their limited allocation of resources in the most cost-effective units and activities. In allocating budgets, managers, in response to macro budget allocations (driven by political objectives), determine allocations at the micro level by using measures of efficiency of various activities, which programs or organisations are more efficient at achieving the political objectives. Why spend limited funds on programs that do not guarantee exceptional performance? Efficiency is determined by observing performance- output and outcome achieved considering number of people involved in the process (productivity per person) and cost-data (capturing direct cost as well as indirect) 4. To Motivate Giving people significant goals to achieve and then use performance measures- including interim targets- to focus peoples thinking and work, and to provide periodic sense of accomplishment. Performance targets may also encourage creativity in developing better ways to achieve the goal (Behn) Thus measure to motivate improvements may also motivate learning. Almost-real-time output (faster, the better) compared with production targets. Quick response required to provide fast feed-back so workforce could improve and adapt. Also it is able to provide how workforce currently performing. Primary aim behind the measures should be output, managers can not motivate people to affect something over which they have little or no influence. Once an agencys leaders have motivated significant improvements using output targets, they can create some outcomes targets.

output- focuses on improving internal process. outcome- motivate people to look outside the agency (to seek way to collaborate with individuals & organisations may affect the outcome produced by the agency)

5. To Celebrate Organisations need to commemorate their accomplishments- such ritual tie their people together, give them a sense of their individual and collective relevance. More over, by achieving specific goals, people gain sense of personal accomplishment and selfworth (Locke & Latham 1984). Links from measurement to celebration to improvement is indirect, because it has to work through one of the likes- motivation, learning... Celebration helps to improve performance because it brings attention to the agency, and thus promotes its competence- it attracts resources. Dedicated people who want to work for successful agency. Potential collaborators. Learning-sharing between people about their accomplishments and how they achieved it. Significant performance targets that provide sense of personal and collective accomplishement. Targets could ones used to motivate. In order for celebration to be a success and benefits to be a reality managers need to ensure that celebration creates motivation and thus improvements. By leading the celebration. 6. To Promote How can public managers convince political superiors, legislators, stakeholders, journalists, and citizens that their agency is doing a good job. (National Academy of Public Administrations center for improving government performance- NAPA 1999) performance measures can be used to: validate success; justifing additional resources; earn customers, stakeholder, and staff loyalty by showing results; and win recognition inside and outside the organisation. Indirectly promote, competence and value of goverement in general. To convince citizens their agency is doing good, managers need easily understood measures of those aspects of performance about which many citizens personally care. (National Academy of Public Administration-NAPA in its study of early performancemeasurement plans under the government performance and results Act) most plans recognized the need to communicate performance evaluation results to higher level officials, but did not show clear recognition that the form and level of data for these needs would be different than that for operating managers. Different needs: Department head/ Executive

Office of President/ Congress. NAPA suggested for those needs to be more explicitly defined- (Kaplan & Nortan 1994) stress that different customers have different concerns(1992). 7. To Learn Learning is involved with some process, of analysis information provided from evaluating corporate performance (identifying what works and what does not). By analysing that information, corporation able to learn resons behind its poor or good performance.