After years of using a performance appraisal system in which managers were forced to bell-curve their departments and assess a minimum proportion of their employees as under-performing, Microsoft has decided to eliminate the system, after years of discontent over the political competition that the system fostered(http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303460004579193951987616572).

In the case of a tech company requiring innovation of its employees, this type of appraisal system would create an atmosphere of fear not conducive to collaboration and creativity. Whereas such a system might be deemed acceptable to sales representatives, who work mostly individually on their own accounts, and where heavy competitive office politics would be seen as a positive driver of performance, in the case of technology development such a policy would destabilize employees and disincentivize teamwork. As well, managers would lose incentive to coach and develop their current employees, instead preparing to simply fire low performers instead.

This said, bell curving can be useful in many other environments. University grade bell curving creates consistency of marks, and the removal of low-performers reduces the resource strain on the institution. Bell curving of assembly line workers would ensure that slow workers are regularly removed and replaced by potentially younger, faster workers. A careful analysis of the impact of such a destabilizing human resource policy should be undertaken in each differing workplace.