zlacker

[parent] [thread] 5 comments
1. Delman+(OP)[view] [source] 2015-08-06 15:40:53
In general, performance reviews are great in theory, but fall down in application. Theoretically, a review is a time to talk about the great work you did, what you learned, and what your goals are. Your manage can respond will honest feedback and a merit increase.

The reality is reviews are a part of a process, and your rank in them depends in part on the quota set by HR. Most of the time, HR wants employees to fit within a bell curve for rankings. In some extreme examples, people's reviews were based on a predetermined track and not on actual performance.

Netflix's policy is just HR marketing. If all you do is keep your 4 and 5, then what makes those people 4 and 5 will start to become 2 and 3. It's a moving goalpost, and sounds like an effort to increase productivity without increasing compensation.

I may be jaded.

replies(2): >>ssharp+86 >>yuhong+Gk
2. ssharp+86[view] [source] 2015-08-06 16:29:41
>>Delman+(OP)
If you fire all the 1's, 2's, and 3's, you have to hire people to fill in those positions. And in one year, the whole group gets re-evaluated, including the new hires. I'd think it would take quite a few cycles before the people who were 4's and 5's became 2's and 3's, while maintaining their same levels of productivity.

I think GE was well known for doing a similar practice under Jack Welsch and they still had plenty of long-term employees. I don't think the system is particularly desirable though.

replies(1): >>plonh+97
◧◩
3. plonh+97[view] [source] [discussion] 2015-08-06 16:39:21
>>ssharp+86
Culling the bottom 10% is great when you measure accurately and you have 15% dead weight. But what about when those conditions are not met?
replies(1): >>kazina+Ig
◧◩◪
4. kazina+Ig[view] [source] [discussion] 2015-08-06 18:08:59
>>plonh+97
Legend has it that Vancouver's billionaire tycoon Jim Pattison ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Pattison

... used to have a policy in effect in his car dealerships that the worst producing salesman would be fired every month.

For instance, this is remarked upon in this National Post article:

http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=fb5f68f1-5946-4b46...

(search for word "salesman"). I think, no conditions were applied. Worst just meant not as many sales or as much revenue as the second worst salesman.

replies(1): >>sshine+tH
5. yuhong+Gk[view] [source] 2015-08-06 18:44:27
>>Delman+(OP)
Personally, I think the idea of turning "performance" into a number is just fundamentally flawed. Giving the same salary to an entire team is a better idea
◧◩◪◨
6. sshine+tH[view] [source] [discussion] 2015-08-06 22:43:04
>>kazina+Ig
Can you volunteer as tribute, though?
[go to top]