This case examines the methods used to evaluate and review employees and the impact these methods have on productivity and morale. It focuses on “forced ranking” as an evaluation tool and provides examples where companies such as GE, Yahoo and American Airlines are trying to adopt more flexible systems. From this case we conclude that the evaluation process, regardless of what name is given to it, is a difficult task for both the employer and the employee. It is obviously imperative that the employer identifies and deserves the best results to encourage consistent performance levels. However, at the same time it is a sensitive topic when dealing with the lowest level of the ranking structure. These people can become disgruntled, feel discriminated against, and even retaliate by getting lower grades through lower productivity, quality, and increased absenteeism. What we find out from this case about employee performance reviews is that, as Libby Sartain says, “there is no magic process.” (Ivancevich, 2011) In my time as a Marine Corps member, a performance evaluation grading model similar to that of forced grading was used for advancement. My last pay grade in the Navy was E-5, so that means I was ranked with other E-5 personnel in my specific direction. As a radiology technologist I fell under the same directorate as lab techs, surgical technicians, pharmacy technicians and so, of course, each directorate can have your E-5 in administrative roles such as secretarial work, etc. Naval Medical Center San Diego is a very large hospital with a number of E-5 personnel under each directorate. Take just radiology techs for example, my last evaluation included over 30 E-5 radiology techs. The rating system includes performance traits in the center of the sheet, information about each individual's inputs and outputs. I would seek to create a work environment that includes interesting work, challenging work, and innovation, along with monetary and non-monetary compensation. The opportunity for employees to accept more responsibilities and receive compensation for accepting those responsibilities would motivate better production. I would motivate employees to excel in the areas in which they are competent and to work to become stronger in those in which they demonstrate weakness. Works Cited Olympics 1, AIG 0: Why Forced Positioning is a Bad Idea Bregman, P. Harvard Business Review. February 17, 2010http://blogs.hbr.org/bregman/2010/02/olympics-1-aig-0-why-forced-ra.htmlIvancevich, J.M., Konopaske, R., & Matteson, MT (2011) Organizational Behavior and management (9th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw–Hill International Edition.