Debate Reaction Paper / for management class - Essay Example

Debate Reaction Paper: Is Forced Ranking an Effective Performance Management Approach? Main Points Presented The topic which is the subject of the debate is “Is Forced Ranking an Effective Performance Management Approach?” where Salwa Alharthy and Abdullah Aldosarry support this contention; while Youseef AlThwaiqib and Andrew Yoder are against it. The main points presented by both parties are summarized below:Main Points PresentedFor Forced RankingAgainst Forced RankingDescription of forced rankingEffectively presented by AlharthyBenefits of forced rankingIdentifies exemplary performers; leads to high moraleCons of forced rankingSelf-interest over teamwork; leads to discrimination and abuseRebuttal argumentsAddresses lack of performance; correlates with total return to shareholders; establishes well defined consequences (rewards and sanctions)Focus on firing; becoming less popular; presence of other better alternatives; performance should be based on merit and not quotasIt could therefore be deduced that appropriate points were presented by both sides to establish credibility as to the side they are arguing for or against.

The overview provided by Salwa was deemed effective since it presented a description of forced ranking and a counterargument indicating that without it, “the highest performing employees are forced to carry the load for the mediocre underachievers” (Alharthy 1.B) thereby focusing on its relevance. Concurrently, the points presented by Youseef likewise effectively opened new perspectives on reasons why forced ranking should not be supported to include the disadvantages that were noted (leads to an environment where self-interest overrides teamwork (Hill, 2012); and abuse (Rao, 2012)).

The second counterargument, though, presented by Youseef regarding forced ranking’s leading to perceived discrimination was not effectively established. The rebuttal arguments provided by both parties were both effectively presented and supported; though more explanations on Drew’s side could have strengthened and validated the arguments.Assessment of the Arguments From the main points that were presented, it was therefore evident that both teams provided effective arguments to support their respective assertions.

The group that support forced ranking supported their arguments with four identified citations; while the group that is against the argument supported them with six identified citations (but using Rao twice). Pros and cons of forced ranking were disclosed by team members, as needed. There were equal numbers of arguments for each category, with rebuttal disclosed by Abdullah being more in-depth with needed explanations appropriately provided. The rebuttal presented by Drew were likewise good but not duly supported by explanations or examples.

For instance, there were better alternatives noted in lieu of forced ranking but these were not appropriately enumerated or disclosed.Opinion as to Winning Debate Given the points that were presented, the manner or structure of presentation, the rebuttal arguments, citations, and explanations provided, one firmly believes that the team who should win for this debate is the team that argued for forced ranking, or Salwa Alharthy and Abdullah Aldosarry’s team. More credible and validated arguments were presented with the use of support from justifiable references.

More explanations were also indicated to assist in understanding why the arguments validly support their contentions.