BEHAVIORALLY ANCHORED RATING SCALES

Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS) is a relatively new technique which combines the graphic rating scale and critical incidents method. It
consists of predetermined critical areas of job performance or sets of behavioral statements describing important job performance qualities as good or bad
(for eg. the qualities like inter personal relationships, adaptability and reliability, job knowledge etc). These statements are developed from critical
incidents.

In this method, an employee’s actual job behaviour is judged against the desired behaviour by recording and comparing the behaviour with BARS.
Developing and practicing BARS requires expert knowledge.

BARS has been around for ages now, I have realised of its true potential over the
past year and I want to share how impactful it can be.

Some of its impacts are on

1) Selecting the right candidate using BARS as an Assessment criteria in a Behaviour

Event Based Interview
2) In Rating Competencies during performance Appraisals
3) In highlighting behaviours that need to develop/improve for a person to move to
the next level
4) To give a standardized/uniform way of measureing and nalysing competencies in
an organisation.

The following is an excerpt that I have taken from an article:

I am also attaching a example of a BARS chart.

INTRODUCTION:WHAT IS A BEHAVIOURALLY ANCHORED RATING SCALE?

The specific purpose of the Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale is to
use behavioural procedures to design an instrument that can identify
and measure the critical components that constitute effective
performance in an occupation. The instrument has been used to identify
performance competencies in such occupations as Nurses (Smith and
Kendall, 1963), store managers (Campbell, et. al., 1973), college
professors (Harrai and Zedeck, 1973) and for identifying the
professional and career development activities needed by teachers
(Erffmeyer and Martray, 198 . The instrument allows for researchers
to "capture performance in multidimensional, behaviour-specific terms"
(Anshel and Webb, 1989).

A scale is constructed by developing a series of critical anchors or

competencies that are perceived to represent effective performance in
an occupation. Each competency area is then defined as a series of
precise and specific indicators or dimensions. These indicators are
written as specific behaviours which can be observed, rather than
inferred. Each set of indicators is designed to represent the specific
skills associated with effective performance in the competency area.
As Smith and Kendall (1963) proclaim, the instrument is "rooted in and
referable to actual behaviours".

To ensure content validity a representative sample of the targeted

population or occupation is used to construct each rating scale
(Erffmeyer and Martray, 198 . Generally this procedure involves
selecting individuals because of their expertise in the area of
investigation. Individuals are split into groups and go through
identical processes to develop the scale. Behavioural anchors or
competencies are identified as well as the dimensions or indicators in
each competency area. Smith and Kendall (1963) maintain that these
procedures allow for an instrument to be developed in the language of
the
occupation that is being investigated, therefore increasing its face
validity. Once constructed, a rating scale is then administered to a
wider sample of the targeted occupational population. Respondents are
asked to indicate on a five point Likert scale their perception as to
how essential each competency area is to effective performance. Each

competency can be rated or each individual indicator (Campbell, 1973).

Erffmeyer and Martray (198 included another dimension to this step by
asking respondents to also indicate, on a five point scale, the level
of difficulty they experienced in developing each skill area.

After a scale has been administered it is then evaluated as to the

level of how essential the competencies and the indicators are
perceived to be. The criterion for inclusion on the final rating scale
of an indicator or competency is a mean essential ranking of greater
than or equal to 3.5 and a standard deviation of less than 1.2 (Smith
and Kendall, 1963).

THE USE OF BEHAVIOURALLY ANCHORED RATING SCALES

Behaviourally anchored rating scales (BARS) provides a procedure to

overcome some of the inherent weaknesses typically associated with
traditional rating scales.

Gay (1981, 12 generally suggests that rating scales have problems

with "halo effect" and "generosity error". "Halo effect" refers to the
situation where ratings are influenced by a raters' positive feeling
towards the person they are rating. "Generosity error" refers to the
situation in which a rater gives higher ratings than they otherwise
might. This generally occurs when a rater does not have enough
information to make an objective rating and as a result the ratee
benefits from any doubt that may exist, with a high rating (Gay, 1981).

Another problem associated with rating scales is when "trait type"

scales are used. Often the dimensions used in trait type scales are
ambiguous. This results in threats to the internal validity of the
instrument.

Smith and Kendall (1963) and Campbell (1973) argue that these problems
can be overcome through the use of Behaviourally Anchored Rating
Scales. The strength of these scales is in the level of precision and
specificity that occurs in the procedure for design and construction.
Firstly, identified items for rating are at all times defined in
specific behavioural terms. In addition, the scales measure
performance, rather than behavioural or effectiveness. Campbell et.
al. (1973) specify that performance is behaviour that occurs in a
specific context.

Effectiveness is also not measured with the scale. The reason being
that effectiveness is influenced by too many variables out of the
control of an individual. As Campbell et. al. (1973, 15) maintain:

The crucial distinction between performance and effectiveness is that

the latter does not refer to behaviour directly but rather it is a
function of additional factors not under the control of the individual.

THE PROCEDURES
In utilising Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scales the following process
needs to be undertaken.

1.Generation of expert panels. Two panels of "experts" who due to

their knowledge and experience in the area of study, are able to design
an instrument to assess quality performance.
2.Designing a questionnaire based on a 5 point Likert scale of
"competencies" required to measure performance.
3.Validating the instrument by sending the questionnaire to a wide
sample.

4.Analysis of the results.

Advantages:

• These types of rating scales are particularly effective for assessing

competencies, skills and abilities.
• BARS rating scales are highly valid and job-related because important job
requirements are covered.
• Objective benchmarks are provided against which observations can be rated,
therefore, there is less rating error than when using other types of scales
(e.g. numeric).

Cautions:

• BARS scales take some time and effort to create and usually cannot be used
for job types other than those for which they were developed.

Developing a BARS Scale

• Using subject matter experts, identify examples of job performance

behaviours reflecting all different levels of effectiveness ranging from
ineffective to superior for all the different parts of the job. These are key
indicators only. It is not required to be an exhaustive list of every possible
criterion. You may have already identified these behaviours when you
conducted your job analysis to establish the qualifications and competencies.
If so, use them here.
• Examples are then clustered by content and categories of job performance
and ranked according to importance.
• Major, essential, or core criteria are distinguished from those that are minor
or secondary within the group.
• Tip: Focus on the extreme ends of each range (i.e. the 5 and the 0-1 points)
and describe them fully first OR focus on describing the "3 or 4 Point" passing
answer first, then add or subtract to define other answers.
 • Decide how many points will be awarded and how irrelevant or incorrect
responses will be scored. A wrong answer should result in a failing grade.
• Assign marks that reflect the relative importance of the question and the
competency being assessed.
• The scale may be multiplied by a factor to increase the overall weighting. For
example, a 5-point scale is multiplied by a factor of 4 to increase the weight
of the assessment to 20 points in the overall competition.

This sample BAR worksheet is used to assess a team leader on the leadership capability of “Monitoring Progress”. There are 9
common leadership capabilities, to find out what they are, click here

Capability Behavior Score

Needs constant reminders and follow up on assigned Score 1or 2

tasks

Often misses deadlines

Not aware of teams current performance

Team is not meeting performance targets

Is reliable and remains focused on the delivery of Score 3 or 4

delegated tasks

Follows through on personal commitments and

undertakings

Strives to complete work on or before deadlines

Renegotiates dates in advance, when required

Monitoring
Progress Monitors individual performance against agreed
performance expectations

Is reliable and keeps the team focused on the delivery of Score 5 or 6

outcomes

Monitors the teams progress and adjusts the plan to

ensure tasks are successfully completed

Maintains focus on the most important goals

Closes of discussions with action plans

Sets challenging stretch goals for self and team that Score 7 or 8
align with the business unit’s goals

Takes personal responsibility for achieving results, just

like an owner of the business

Consistently follows through to achieve agreed outcomes

Template by whatmakesagoodleader.com

To use this employee performance appraisal form you need to determine which set of behaviors best describes the person that
your are evaluating, and then assign a performance score.

The employee can clearly see what is expected for each performance rating.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS)

The behavioural Anchored Rating Scale method is normally used only for part of your employee perfromance evaluations, that
being the assessment of employee behaviour. For other performance criteria such as Judgement or decision making other methods
of appraisal are generally used.

As with the graphic rating scale, the behavioural anchored rating scale aims to assign a score to a range of performance criteria.
However, the BARS method focuses only on observable behaviour and provides examples of the observable behaviour for each
score. This makes it easier to have consistent rating across a large organisation.

For example when assessing a leader on their passion for people you may consider

Conducts one on one with each employee monthly, reschedules missed one on ones as a priority.
Score 7, 8 or 9
Actively seeks opportunities to give positive informal feedback to their employees

Has several touch points with each employee each day

Provides their employees with development opportunities

Seeks opportunities to share their good people with others in the business

Consults their team on decisions that effect them

Score 4, 5 or 6 Provides one on ones periodically to most employees

Provides occasional feedback tot heir employees

Communicated mostly to team in email

Talks to employees mostly about tasks, and sticks to own team

Score 1, 2 or 3 Arrives quietly and keeps to self

Provides little direction to their team

Communicates extensively in email

Tends to blame own employees for performance