Many employees believe that a good performance evaluation does not translate into more money or benefits. \({ }^{89}\) And many employees are unclear as to what "meets expectations" means. \({ }^{90}\) Some employees believe the annual performance evaluations are a means to protect companies from discrimination suits. Still others believe that they are used as a way to rid the company of the slackers. Mostly all employees have experience with higher-ups who are not aware of individual performance standards intervening in the evaluation process and altering a direct supervisor's evaluation. Employees despise "forced ranking" systems in which one-third of employees are rated high; another one-third are rated average; and the bottom one-third knows that they are on their way out the door. As Jared Sandberg of the Wall Street Journal puts it, the performance evaluation system in a company reveals more about the company than it does about those being evaluated. Performance evaluation systems and employee cynicism about them could be a function of ethics. There are some basic ethical values that could improve the evaluation process...........

 Discussion Questions
1. Why are managers less than truthful in performance evaluations?
2. Is "being nice" easier than offering candid evaluations?
3. What are some examples of ambiguous evaluation criteria?