IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/manrev/v75y2025i1d10.1007_s11301-023-00396-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What do we know about the forced distribution system: a systematic literature review and opportunities for future research

Author

Listed:
  • Aniek Wijayanti

    (Universitas Gadjah Mada
    Universitas Pembangunan Nasional Veteran Jakarta)

  • Mahfud Sholihin

    (Universitas Gadjah Mada)

  • Ertambang Nahartyo

    (Universitas Gadjah Mada)

  • Supriyadi

    (Universitas Gadjah Mada)

Abstract

This research aims to systematically review the forced distribution system (FDS) literature to provide an in-depth analysis of existing research and formulate future research directions. The review and analysis encompass the quality of the publications, the theories, methods, research settings, main research topics, research direction recommendations, and managerial implications. Articles were collected from the Scopus database, with no time period restrictions. Article selection was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) procedure. A total of 41 research articles published from 1960 to 2022 were obtained and reviewed. The review results indicate that the FDS literature places significant emphasis on the topic of ratee reactions. A noteworthy finding is that differentiation within FDS elicits positive reactions that enhance performance, but serious issues related to perceptions of injustice result in various counterproductive actions. Organizational justice concepts and theories are frequently used to explain the diversity of the reactions that emerge. The United States (US) is the most commonly chosen research setting due to the popularity of FDS in that country. Future FDS research directions are recommended to primarily focus on efforts to sustain performance improvements. Various managerial implications resulting from FDS are also discussed in this review.

Suggested Citation

  • Aniek Wijayanti & Mahfud Sholihin & Ertambang Nahartyo & Supriyadi, 2025. "What do we know about the forced distribution system: a systematic literature review and opportunities for future research," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 75(1), pages 747-788, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:manrev:v:75:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1007_s11301-023-00396-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s11301-023-00396-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11301-023-00396-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11301-023-00396-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Canice Prendergast, 1999. "The Provision of Incentives in Firms," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 37(1), pages 7-63, March.
    2. Stephanie J. Thomason & Amy Brownlee & Amy Beekman Harris & Hemant Rustogi, 2018. "Forced distribution systems and attracting top talent," International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 67(7), pages 1171-1191, September.
    3. Soni Agrawal, 2022. "Trends in Performance Management System: A Study of Indian Service Provider Companies," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 23(2), pages 479-492, April.
    4. Selvarajan, T.T. & Singh, Barjinder & Solansky, Stephanie, 2018. "Performance appraisal fairness, leader member exchange and motivation to improve performance: A study of US and Mexican employees," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 142-154.
    5. Rachana Chattopadhayay & Anil Kumar Ghosh, 2012. "Performance appraisal based on a forced distribution system: its drawbacks and remedies," International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 61(8), pages 881-896, October.
    6. Priya Nair Rajeev, 2012. "Impact of forced ranking evaluation of performance on ethical choices: a study of proximal and distal mediators," International Journal of Business Governance and Ethics, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 7(1), pages 37-62.
    7. Rachana Chattopadhayay & Anil Kumar Ghosh, 2012. "Performance appraisal based on a forced distribution system: its drawbacks and remedies," International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 61(8), pages 881-896, October.
    8. Won Kwak & Suk Choi, 2015. "Effect of rating discrepancy on turnover intention and leader-member exchange," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 801-824, September.
    9. Rachana Chattopadhyay, 2019. "Impact of Forced Distribution System of Performance Evaluation on Organizational Citizenship Behaviour," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 20(3), pages 826-837, June.
    10. Hana Huang Johnson & Elizabeth E. Umphress, 2019. "To Help My Supervisor: Identification, Moral Identity, and Unethical Pro-supervisor Behavior," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 159(2), pages 519-534, October.
    11. Stewart, Susan M & Gruys, Melissa L & Storm, Maria, 2010. "Forced distribution performance evaluation systems: Advantages, disadvantages and keys to implementation," Journal of Management & Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(1), pages 168-179, March.
    12. Puspita Ghaniy Anggraini & Mahfud Sholihin, 2023. "What do we know about managerial ability? A systematic literature review," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 73(1), pages 1-30, February.
    13. Tran Huy Phuong, 2018. "Perceived justice in performance appraisal among Vietnamese employees: antecedents and consequences," International Journal of Business Excellence, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 15(2), pages 209-221.
    14. Chenhall, Robert H., 2003. "Management control systems design within its organizational context: findings from contingency-based research and directions for the future," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(2-3), pages 127-168.
    15. Loberg, Linda & Nüesch, Stephan & Foege, Johann Nils, 2021. "Forced distribution rating systems and team collaboration," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 18-35.
    16. Croson, Rachel & Fatas, Enrique & Neugebauer, Tibor & Morales, Antonio J., 2015. "Excludability: A laboratory study on forced ranking in team production," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 13-26.
    17. Anna Maria Mouza & Dimitra Souchamvali, 2016. "Effect of Greece’s New Reforms and Unplanned Organizational Changes on the Stress Levels of Primary School Teachers," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 128(3), pages 981-994, September.
    18. Eddy Cardinaels & Christoph Feichter, 2021. "Forced Rating Systems from Employee and Supervisor Perspectives," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(5), pages 1573-1607, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Li, Yelin & Reichert, Bernhard E. & Woods, Alex, 2024. "The interactive effects of performance evaluation leniency and performance measurement precision on employee effort and performance," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    2. Sebastian Goebel & Barbara Weißenberger, 2016. "The Dark Side of Tight Financial Control: Causes and Remedies of Dysfunctional Employee Behaviors," Schmalenbach Business Review, Springer;Schmalenbach-Gesellschaft, vol. 17(1), pages 69-101, April.
    3. Christoph Feichter & Isabella Grabner, 2020. "Empirische Forschung zu Management Control – Ein Überblick und neue Trends [Empirical Management Control Reserach—An Overview and Future Directions]," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 72(2), pages 149-181, June.
    4. Manthei, Kathrin & Sliwka, Dirk & Vogelsang, Timo, 2021. "Information Provision, Incentives, and Attention: A Field Experiment on Facilitating and Influencing Managers' Decisions," IZA Discussion Papers 14199, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    5. B. William Demeré & Karen L. Sedatole & Alexander Woods, 2019. "The Role of Calibration Committees in Subjective Performance Evaluation Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(4), pages 1562-1585, April.
    6. Loberg, Linda & Nüesch, Stephan & Foege, Johann Nils, 2021. "Forced distribution rating systems and team collaboration," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 18-35.
    7. Wang, Laura W. & Yin, Huaxiang, 2023. "The effects of emotion-understanding ability and tournament incentives on supervisors’ propensity to acquire subordinate-type information to use in control decisions," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    8. Paolo Perego & Frank Hartmann, 2009. "Aligning Performance Measurement Systems With Strategy: The Case of Environmental Strategy," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 45(4), pages 397-428, December.
    9. Eddy Cardinaels & Christoph Feichter, 2021. "Forced Rating Systems from Employee and Supervisor Perspectives," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(5), pages 1573-1607, December.
    10. repec:dau:papers:123456789/10775 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Giat, Yahel & Subramanian, Ajay, 2013. "Dynamic contracting under imperfect public information and asymmetric beliefs," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 2833-2861.
    12. Ghosh, Suman, 2007. "Job mobility and careers in firms," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 603-621, June.
    13. McCausland, David & Pouliakas, Konstantinos & Theodossiou, Ioannis, 2005. "Some are Punished and Some are Rewarded: A Study of the Impact of Performance Pay on Job Satisfaction," MPRA Paper 14243, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Blanco, Mariana & Dalton, Patricio S. & Vargas, Juan F., 2013. "Does the Unemployment Benefit Institution affect the Productivity of Workers? Evidence from a Field Experiment," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 178, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    15. Francesco Amodio & Miguel A. Martinez-Carrasco, 2023. "Workplace Incentives and Organizational Learning," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 41(2), pages 453-478.
    16. Pierre Koning & J. Vyrastekova & S. Onderstal, 2006. "Team incentives in public organisations; an experimental study," CPB Discussion Paper 60, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    17. Julien Jacob & Eve-Angéline Lambert & Mathieu Lefebvre & Sarah Driessche, 2023. "Information disclosure under liability: an experiment on public bads," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 61(1), pages 155-197, July.
    18. Josse Delfgaauw & Robert Dur, 2008. "Incentives and Workers' Motivation in the Public Sector," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(525), pages 171-191, January.
    19. Emmanuel Dechenaux & Dan Kovenock & Roman Sheremeta, 2015. "A survey of experimental research on contests, all-pay auctions and tournaments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(4), pages 609-669, December.
    20. Robert Dur & Jan Tichem, 2015. "Altruism and Relational Incentives in the Workplace," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(3), pages 485-500, September.
    21. Nick Zubanov & W.S. Siebert, 2009. "Management economics in a large UK retailer," CPB Discussion Paper 125, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Forced distribution system; Ranking system; Rank and yank; Relative performance appraisal; Systematic literature review;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M12 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Personnel Management; Executives; Executive Compensation
    • M41 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Accounting
    • M52 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Personnel Economics - - - Compensation and Compensation Methods and Their Effects

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:manrev:v:75:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1007_s11301-023-00396-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.