IntroductionPerformance management systems are effective when they are based on jointly defined objectives and driven by an organization's business strategy. The use of competency models based on business strategy is strongly associated with organizational effectiveness. When they generate salary increases and bonuses, they are better executed. Leadership and ownership by senior management are often lacking, but essential to the success of performance management systems; there is much less ownership by HR. Other keys to effectiveness include training managers to perform evaluations, holding them accountable for the quality of their evaluations, and using measures of how results are achieved (Lawler III, Benson, McDermott, 2012 ). Although this statement turns out to be largely correct, there is some inconsistency with the authors' assertion. Within every organization there must be a driving force that is committed not only to the organization but also to its administrative process. Human resources are that driving force and among all the other functions they facilitate, one of the most important obligations is to the employees themselves through their performance appraisal system. Information collected from performance measurement is typically used for compensation, performance improvement or management (e.g. personnel decision-making), and documentation purposes. Performance data is often used for staffing decisions (e.g. promotion, transfer, termination, layoffs), and this is where the entire PM system can fall under the scrutiny of the courts. PA is also used for training needs analysis, employee development, and program research and evaluation (e.g., research validation of selection methods) (Bernardin, 2011). Like any system in place, it must...... middle of paper ....../ceo.usc.edu/working_paper/what_makes_performance_apprais.htmlLipman, V. (2012). The advantages and disadvantages of forced rankings: a manager's point of view. Forbes. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/victorlipman/2012/07/19/the-pros-and-cons-of-forced-rankings-a-managers-perspective/Lloyd, K. (2009). Behind BARS: Evaluating employees with behaviorally anchored rating scales. For DummiesRetrieved from http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/behind-bars-evaluating-employees-with-behaviorally.htmlOberg, W. (1972). Make performance evaluation relevant. Ziponperf. Retrieved from http://www.zigonperf.com/resources/pmnews/pas-relevant.html Schneider, RJ, Goff, M., Anderson, S. and Borman, WC (2003), Computerized adaptive rating scales for measuring managerial performance. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 11: 237-246. do I: 10.1111/1468-2389.00247