#ratingsystem

Engineers rolling up to a Supv who rolls up to a Sr Mgr who also has engineers as direct reports. If leaders get one “5” to hand out, who does it go to? Does the Supervisor even get a shot at giving them to their direct reports, or will Sr Mgr get one and hog it for themselves?

Store managers, District Leaders, and Regional Directors, please remember this:

When a dedicated, loyal, hardworking employee gets the same "3" rating (and same cr-ppy raise) as a slacker employee who skates by doing bare minimum nothing, all motivation for hard work is lost when said dedicated employee realizes that hard work is no longer rewarded. STOP lumping everyone together as average and start viewing everyone individually. Every team has those people who go above and beyond and do more than others. They deserve to be rated 4 or 5, not cut down to 3 because everything needs to "balance out". Fight for your people, because that's what a good leader does.

Does anyone know how bonus amounts are decided? Is it true managers are told how many people must receive a certain rating. For example; on a team with 10 people there can be no more than 2 people rated at “Exceeds” and there must be at least 2 people to receive “Inconsistently Meets”.

Take it from me....JUST go to work each day (virtually that is) and "come home." Meet metrics and percentages. DON'T do what I did. I went above and beyond for the SNP department. I did all the stretch assignments....SME.....instructed the new hire classes....did the precepting. I pretty much did my manager's job (but that is another story to tell.) I STILL got a 3. Do not let it break your spirit like it did mine. Leadership DOESN'T care and you shouldn't either. I got confirmation from management that if you do your job and meet your numbers, you will get a 3 each year. Don't be a fool like I was.

I had my annual performance review yesterday morning.
I had 6 goals last year.
I got a 4 on 5 of them and a 5 on 1 of them.
I got a 3 overall and thus no raise and my bonus was greatly reduced from what I would have gotten had I gotten a 4 overall.
Make it make sense!

With the ongoing game of moving the goal posts every year to deny nearly everyone who earned an exceeds rating from ever getting one, in the spirit of the Olympics, I say “Go for the Bronze “ in 2026 - there is simply no incentive to do more and if they really want to RIF you, that will likely happen regardless of your performance. In the end you will at least have prioritized your life balance and not fallen for yet another false promise.

3 Rating = 0%
4 Rating = 1%
5 Rating = 2%

sounding like new system going to be used sc--w people over

What do you think? Better system than ExxonMobil?

Outstanding (~20%): 200% individual multiplier, for "outsized impact" above expectations
Excellent (~70%): 115% individual multiplier, described as the "high-performance culture baseline"
Needs improvement (~7%): 50% individual multiplier, for employees with performance gaps who are expected to improve
Not Meeting Expectations (~3%): 0% individual multiplier, for those who "do not meet" Meta's standards
Additionally, Meta says it's introducing a new Meta Award, a 300% individual multiplier for a small number of top performers who deliver "truly exceptional impact."

what is the difference - which is worst in ranking.

NI. - needs improvement.
IM - inconsistent meets.
NM - not meets.

• band 4+ individual contributors: add a personalized leadership goal aligned to at least one leadership competency (great, we have to provide leadership without the pay or title)

• starting with the 2026 year-end review, all employees will receive a 4-point performance rating, building on the band 6+ approach used in 2025 (no way could this be used as a "rank and yank" method to target workers for termination)

Great things ahead for those not lucky enough to get the VRP!

Share your info, let’s review

CL, rating, hike, salary, experience with the company

How are they lining up discover employee reviews and C1 if the rating systems are different?

Supervisors in CTC have been told that under no account should they ever give 2x EE. If they want to they need approval from JK

How's that for motivation?

It is that time of year to do an honest and open assessment as to the ratings on BNY’s level of toxicity on a personal experience.

There are 15 fair and honest evaluation questions. Answer each one with a level of:

0- non toxic
1- lower to somewhat toxic
2- typically and often toxic
3- profoundly and reliably toxic

Total the values and come up with your score.

Here are the test questions:

1.) Abusive leadership and management

2.) Peer to peer bullying and gossip

3.) Generally unpleasant and unattractive workplace. Monotonous with dull lighting and unclean facilities

4.) Any kind of harrassment or childish rulings

5.) Reinforced stereotypes and discrimination. May include pictures, photos and phrases indicating unreal, acted or imaginary scenes to support a false narrative

6.) Ongoing Feelings of fright or job insecurity with ‘Monday morning dread’ syndrome

7.) Culture of disrespect and humiliation

8.) Lack of resource support and safety

9.) Hostile or hazing interpersonal relations

10.) Neglect, ignored input. Feelings of exclusion and isolation

11.) Unhealthy boundaries. Worktime occupies home life time. Even in thoughts.

12.) Aggressive and unsafe boundaries. Manipulative behavior.

13.) Public scoldings and private apologies by a manager. Any embarrassing unprofessional tactics used purposely for control

14.) Workplace violence

15.) Open lying or dishonesty and fear of retribution if reported on. No support from
HR or employee relations.

End score results:
0-13 non toxic benign workplace
14-21 low toxic and manageable workplace.
22-29 moderate toxicity with minor injury
30-35 Highly toxic with direct personal injury
36-45 Profoundly toxic with lasting personal damage

How is the "new & improved" rating process going for my fellow managers? Nothing like robbing Peter to pay Paul. How is this not a process filled with managers playing favorites? It is the most subjective process ever, and the end result will be a demotivated team after finding out their coworkers got a portion of their raise.

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

Any leaders who can confirm a rumor? I heard that there is a requirement that at a certain level (team, department, or other) where a % of associates must be given a 1 rating. No other info and hoping it’s just a rumor. Looking for someone with more info.

This new rating system of forcing 20% below meet is this new?.
I am thinking it started with this era of new HR leader Bei.

I hope this is not some communist mentality of always causing anxiety among their workers.

Does anyone know how the ratings work? Like what correlates to 1-5? Performing, achieving?

Received my get out of jail card this week and I'm over the top delighted. Over the last 10 years, this place has become so toxic, it's sickening. Pay for performance is a joke. Senior managers, who don't know the staff or what they do, are forcing lower ratings to get their 25% (used to be 10). If you don't have enough, they force more. Bonus amounts, given by direct managers, are changed by higher ups. It's unethical but don't bother reporting it. HR works for them, not us.
Save as much money as you can. Print all your employment records. Use their training portal to take resume building classes (after your AI training to replace yourselfof course). Go into the office, stay all day, and keep your head down. I wish you all the best of luck.

I hear that Q3 progress check-ins managers are given a strict guidelines not to exceed 4.0 rating . I hear people getting rating from 3.1 . If this is the case then the people are near the axe for cut ? It doesn’t give a good vibe given how situations have been and now this

Our annual reviews has been corrupted into a system of favoritism.Ratings and promotions are no longer based on contribution but on connections—both personal networks and , more importantly , the networks of managers who push cases through on the strength of goodwill rather than merit.
This has turned AR's into a negotiation of influence , not an evaluation of performance.Technical expertise , and tangible results are consistently sidelined , while visibility and relationships dictate ratings and promotions.
Replace current calibration practices with a transparent framework grounded in measurable outcomes , 360-degree evaluation, and objective criteria.

So Ford is doing it again. Multi-year top achievers getting rated 1's, lowest ratings because they are shy of 30 year mark and LL4's and 5's need scapegoats. Targeting, harassing, when is this company ever going to learn? These people have a tremendous amount of knowledge and you p$ss it away. How many times do you have to be sued? I smell harassment lawsuits and the papers are going to have a field day. You reap what you sow. 15 years there. Day I retired was the happiest day of my life.