In the corporate world, annual appraisals are fraught with anticipation, stress, and, for many employees, a sense of unfairness. A widely adopted method during these evaluations is “curve fitting,” where employees are slotted into a bell-shaped distribution. This system, while seemingly objective, places a significant portion of the workforce in the middle — the so-called “3-raters” on a 5-point scale. These employees, who form the backbone of any organisation, often receive far less recognition than they deserve.
The 3-raters find themselves in an unenviable position. They are typically regarded as neither outstanding nor underperforming. While spared the remedial interventions reserved for the bottom two categories, they are rarely celebrated or groomed for leadership like their top-tier colleagues.
Instead, most organisations push their 3-raters to elevate their performance, aspiring to make them top raters. In light of the recent focus on employee well-being, it is essential to reconsider how organisations treat their 3-raters. The constant pressure to transform them into top performers, combined with the subtle exclusion from leadership opportunities and recognition, can negatively affect their morale and overall well-being.
Instead of pushing everyone to operate at maximum intensity — often leading to burnout —companies should recognise that it is not sustainable or desirable to have 100 per cent of the workforce as top performers.
Backbone of corporates
The top performers, those in the highest categories, are undoubtedly valuable. However, these high achievers often come with high maintenance needs. They seek constant growth, promotions, bonuses, and public recognition. If their ambitions are not fulfilled, they frequently move on, leaving a void that can be disruptive to the organisation.
In contrast, the 3-raters are the steady, dependable workers. They show up, put in the effort, and keep the organisational engine running smoothly. While they may not be as flamboyant, they execute the day-to-day operations that make the company functional. These employees embody consistency, reliability, and loyalty — traits that are vital to the success of any business.
A company where every employee is a top performer would likely be unmanageable. High achievers bring ambition, but they also bring friction. A business requires balance. It thrives on a mix of innovative leadership and operational stability. 3-raters provide that much-needed equilibrium.
It is important to clarify that this argument is not about equal rewards for everyone. The differential treatment between top and average performers is necessary to maintain motivation and drive growth. Top performers should be rewarded for their contributions to innovation and leadership.
However, the day-to-day humiliation of 3-raters needs to stop. The current practice of reserving exclusive training opportunities, dinners, and interactions with senior leaders only for top performers creates an unnecessary divide.
Steady performers
3-raters don’t need equal rewards, but they do deserve respect. The constant comparison between them and top performers often undermines their morale and creates an unhealthy work culture.
It’s time for companies to stop pushing 3-raters to chase a promotion they neither need nor desire and instead focus on developing their skills, making them feel valued, and recognising their steady contributions.
Companies must understand that 3-raters are not failing the organisation by staying where they are. Simple acts, such as acknowledging the hard work of 3-raters, involving them in important projects, or offering opportunities for professional development, can go a long way in boosting morale.
Many of these employees don’t seek the spotlight, but recognising their role and giving them opportunities to grow in place — without the pressure to climb the ladder — can improve engagement and retention.
Milind is Professor at MBM University, Jodhpur; Sharad works with a “Big 4” and is an executive PhD scholar at MDI Gurgaon. Views expressed are personal