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
18 replies (most recent on top)
@h6+1k582x3vf @en+1k582x3vf @gq+1k582x3vf
Layoffs should start from these so called manager of managers and middle managers who are just messengers of management and take high pays for this and exploit their directs!
Meta did that a while back where they asked these managers to move to IC roles or just simply asked them to leave and here at SAP we are fixated with multiple levels of management and everybody wants to be a manager despite knowing nothing about people management skills, full of attitude and ego heads.
Don‘t spread rumors. Trust the board.
@h6 perceived attitude - what a joke… I once worked 20 years ago for an imbecile who lowered ratings based on “meeting zest”… buffoonery is eternal.
Nothing new, corporate manipulation, You work very hard and you never exceed, Managers are aware of lay offs, therefore if a manager thinks you can be on the lay off list for some reason he is not satisfied with your work he will intentional put you at lower rating.
Most will be at 3, few will be at 4, because managers know there is no budget for promotion.
Same old story at SAP. keep the labor costs low. Few get promoted, hence people move on and some come back.
@h6 many managers will blindly follow guidance!
As a manager of managers, I can confirm this is only GUIDANCE not strict policy! Everyone who is given an exceed must be followed by written evidence and supportive of the arguments from other manager's.
In my team, 10% of the team cannot consistently exceeds, and there will always be the 10% who do not meet, regardless if they do the same work and receive the same feedback! This is then dependent on the persons attitude or perceived attitude!
@gq Exactly!
People should stop spreading rumors on this site.
@en same here.. also a manager. Definitely not true.
Also: how would that even be legal?
How should this work? Some email that says dont use more than 4.0 rating?
Sorry, FUD, understandably, but still FUD.
Not true. I‘m a manager just did this and can guarantee it’s not true
@b4+1k582x3vf Same thing happened with me in my Q3 SAP Talk. I had 3 managers changed in 1 year and they didn't do a proper handover and in the end the last development manager just randomly asked some people and came up with an average of 3 rating. Didn't gave any evidence and examples and didn't even explained it to me, he just put it in the system on SF. I received good peer feedback but it was ignored altogether.
The whole system is rigged and made to suit the employees who can wipe the @$$e$ of their managers with their tongues and the rest will fall under annual 1-2% teeth cleaning plaque removal exercise!!!
@cb what's so funny to me is that I've heard that this new process is supposed to 'protect us' from mercurial managers - that's why they did it. haha.
This is not true. I had rated myself at 3, and it was increased to 4 by my manager.
So- what you say is simply anecdotal, and not systematic
I am a manager and this statement is inaccurate. Please do not spread any gossip as we were not told to do so
I (sufferer from impostor, which makes this self-evaluation stuff horrible) was told that in our team no one is below 3.
4 goals, 2 of which came from L1 where everyone gets a 3.
I managed to give myself a 4 on one where I really thought I did a very good job ans a 3 on the other.
My boss gave me a 4 on both.
It should not be like that, but right now we depend 100% on having a good manager. I am grateful for mine and feel sorry for the many colleagues I know who suffer from bad ones.
Likewise here. Got lowered to less than 4. My manager works 24x7 and is at whoever above in the chain we are dealing with beck and call. Nothing below this commitment will please the manager or is seen even as slightly above expectations...
same for me my manager lowered my evaluation to be under 4...citing having exceeds is not possible pretty much.
In Signavio, engineering development managers were already asked to address this during a monthly team lead call. This sheds light on why 27 out of 32 development managers lack an engineering background, having instead experience in areas like retail, DEI coaching, non-profits, travel, and tourism, among others. They are so anxious about their job security that they will comply with whatever their superiors request. There are whispers that failure to comply could result in a poor performance rating, making it easier to dismiss underqualified development managers. During the Q3 check-in, some underperformers were already informed that they need to either start a fellowship or seek another position. While there will be no layoffs at Signavio in 2025, many are expected to be let go around March 2026. This information will likely coincide with the Q4 financial results due to this year's disappointing performance. The list of those being let go will primarily include non-Europeans, Muslim migrants who are neither Syrians nor Egyptians, Scrum Masters, QA Engineers, Engineers earning more than their colleagues in SAP, some designers, and a handful of development managers.
Source: I’m an engineer who was told this by my development manager in confidence.
I exceeded my targets this year so gave myself two four stars and a three star. My manager has now said what I'm achieving is what's expected and lowered them all to three stars. I presume they've been told to do this so they can give us 2 to 3% raise in March regardless of performance.