Organizational Behavior (Case 5.1) In my opinion forced ranking performance appraisals are fairly ineffective. Even though they do give managers a reference point to access strengths within groups it can a hinder morale and long-term profitability. Forced performance rankings can be easy identified through Equity Theory. This theory explains how people perceive how they are treated in social exchanges, in particular forced ranking performance appraisals. Rankings can cause employees to feel as if they themselves were inaccurately measured. They might also compare themselves with others in effect having spiteful feelings towards fellow employees. The employees might think that inputs such as skills, experience, learning, or age, sex, and race might be perceived by managers as hindering factors of production. Lastly, outcomes such as pay and fringe benefits can be hard to assess because an employee could be right on the margin of a ranking and be below a satisfactory level of quality. These rankings only motivate employees to beat out each other but no work as a group when needed to complete a task. In result, some employees might withhold pertinent information from another in hopes that they will receive more credit or that the next employee will receive negative feedback. I would motivate employees to perform well by group or cohort performance compensation packages. If an entire group does well they will collectively receive bonuses. Also I would motivate employees to do better by giving the top performers more responsibilities and chances to take calculated risks without heavy penalties. If top performers are given greater levels of responsibilities they will want to prove to management that they deserve to be at the position that they are. This will also encourage the lower performers to aspire to be on a level that is above and beyond mediocrity. In my opinion this will create a healthy since of competition within the work place. Lastly, if employees are...