Seems like every lay off, the promise of thinning out the countless layers of managers is made. But they’re all still here doing whatever it is they do. It sure ain’t managing anything. Any guesses as to how many of these micromanaging lackeys will still be around after March?
11 replies (most recent on top)
Supervisors and managers are supposed to come in balanced for their group. Calibration between groups is all about winning a 1 or 2 rating from another group and often depends on which supervisor is favored by the manager. As a manager if you want to give your supervisor a 1 or 2 then you usually have to take it away from one of their reports unless you have a lot of supervisors reporting to you. This year you can get extra 1s and 2s by handing out 4s and 5s. In reality, it’s rigged. You know who is getting what from the beginning of the year. The best projects and exposure opportunities go to those folks.
@2iaj+17FdwV50... you are so full of sh!t and have no idea what you're talking about
The manager’s comment above is right on how ratings go. In my experience, its actually harder to be a 1 or a 2 when you become a manager. We don’t get to pick our ratings. Most managers are rated a 3 unless they have been designated a “high flyer” by upper management or sadly one who has become a favorite by constantly “brown nosing”. And we all know who they are! I actually sometimes feel sorry for them, definitely don’t want to be like them!
@5rqf+17FdwV50,
Supervisor must lobby for their people. It means rounding up, not down. In your example it means bringing one 1 rating and two 2 ratings. It is hard to give 125% to work knowing that supervisor does not do her/his part.
I'm sorry but that is simply not how ratings are done in my organization at COP. I am a current manager and I and each of my peers are required to balance our staff ratings according to HR guidelines: 10% 1, 25% 2, 65% 3, and no forced 4 or 5 ratings this year. We round down on numbers to allow for organizational balancing by upper management. I have 8 staff reporting to me so I had no 1 ratings, two 2 ratings, and six 3 ratings. During calibration, we discuss all staff in detail and jointly identify staff that can bubble up or down in ratings which is where the organizational balancing and management ratings are addressed. We do not rate ourselves. My rating is determined by my boss, their boss, and their leadership team during their calibration exercise. I have been a manager for several years and have always been rated a 3. Prior to that I was generally rated a 2 or 3 and occasionally a 1.
Never enough.
It’s all about your plus score.
Don’t forget manager wannabes. If you’re not on the manager track, you’re disposable. Nobody needs solid technical workers or critical thinkers. Just lots of PowerPoint experts and “leaders.”
The managers who want to go will hold up their hands for severance and be rewarded with 60 weeks or three years depending on their SGL. Those who want to remain will do so. The poor Concho managers will be eradicated if not immediately needed. The system has always been set up to protect and reward existing managers, either through stock, bonuses, options, or keeping their jobs. The rest of us are simply pawns to be sacrificed.
The reason why is that Managers and Directors give themselves the 1 and 2s. So Managers and Directors and supervisors are all 1's and 2's. Thats why is so hard for the working people to get a 1 or a 2. So when layoffs happen HR looks at ratings, A rating of 5 or 4 go first, then they start looking at the 3's which is about 80% of the company. The managers/directors/supervisors start lobbing for their people. Because if they dont have people then they will come under the layoff lens.
So One supervisor with 3 employees stays while a director with 2 supervisors stays and they layoff 2 or 3 in their departments to meet the numbers.
It really s—s but that is how it works..
They'll all be there unless they fall victim to Covid.