If you are told to underrate someone who earned better, how do you justify it to yourself? Does that ever sit wrong, or does it eventually become routine?
20 replies (most recent on top)
This all tracks. Last year I got a 4 despite easily being a 5, manager told me I got a five the prev year so he had to give to someone else who was due for promotion.
@1dv According to AI, Optum’s beloved technology, most corporations have moved away from using this curve due to a multitude of reasons including team morale. And yet here is Optum kneeling to the curve. You just can’t make this s t up. It is just an excuse.
I have been a corporate leader evaluating employees for 18 years across several orgs, not just this one and I can say they are all this way. Anyone - employee or leader - that still thinks common review ratings are a true feedback mechanism of employee performance, ranked against how well they could have performed, is playing the wrong game. It is merely a financial ranking tool for your team, and that is on a curve. HR lays it out for you by %. It’s clear math. X% can get a 5. Y% can get a 4, etc, etc. This isn’t a school system where we can give everyone that performed great an A. It may vary by leadership team, but if someone is getting promoted or a market adjustment, they also had to have the 5 to justify it, even if you wanted to give the 5 to different employee. You might have to decide that an employee got a 5 last year and since you are limited in the number of 5s you can give out, this year they get a 4 so you can give that 5 to another team member that also performed well. It’s more like filling pre calculated number of slots than it is evaluating how they performed. Oh, and the rankings are due before anyone completes their self evals so the only thing that helps with is with writing manager evals. There is no fighting the system, the system is going to win. You can advocate for your people but like other posters have said they’ll just knock them back down. It’s better to understand what game you’re ACTUALLY playing and play that game to get what you need for your team rather than some pointless moral argument about how everyone that performs great needs an honest numerical ranking.
Anytime I have been asked to downgrade my direct reports, I say that I absolutely will not. If my higher up does it, then I tell my direct report what I rated them, and that it was changed by leadership above me.
When you push back they do what they want and label you the manager as the problem. They all have their own biased opinions. They been talking about this every quarter in their level rating meetings.
@p1 I would look for a new job in that situation. Regardless of RTO.
@hz good advice but i have to into the office and no co-workers are at my site. the 3 levels directly above me, directors and vps, are in india.
It is a weird feeling to say the least. I have started being clear that we are being forced to rank on a curve and some people will get scores I didn’t give them.
I have also been clear that holding PTO is not smart, keep it close to zero, as I as a manager can and will approve them going negative if needed.
On the flip side I have not seen any of my direct reports face to face since they are all remote. You might like being remote but there are huge negatives of being just a name on a list. I personally feel safe-ish because I have intentionally built face to face relationships with leaders 2 or 3 levels up from me. It is really hard to do this and impossible to do remote.
This is going to be unpopular but remote work doesn’t work for 80% of people if you want a career and not a job.
@c8 yep, same. Told my DR what their rating was but that it was overridden.
My manager has favorites and seems to prefer working with male direct reports. It’s been apparent since the beginning, and I don’t think decisions about who to let go weigh heavily on my manager.
It’s called cognitive dissonance. Why else do you think everybody drinks and is sick?
This is just like in school when teachers were required to grade on a curve. It was wrong than as it is now. Managers are not encouraged to get the best out of all their employees, just a select few. Pretty sick and twisted. But welcome to Optum..
I refused to rate by quota, but my skip changed them afterwards.
I don't lie. I tell them exactly as it is. I rated them higher, but have been forced to downgrade it.
Transparency shows respect.
Thankfully the people I have reporting into me, know how the system works.
It’s in their job requirements. If they don’t do it, they will be fired and replaced by the next person who will do it with ease.
@OP you don’t justify it to yourself. If you did you’d be a bad manager. Good managers sulk over it and push back to their leadership who in return mark the manager as a trouble maker or not able to follow instructions and they are laid off or leave.
That is no different than any other fortune 500 company that lays off every quarter. It is part of the people manager job role and hiring managers ask if you are comfortable or experienced at letting people go.
I won’t do it and would die on that hill. Not that going to Compliance would help but boy would I leave a paper trail doing so. Clearly stating it is unethical and show the companies lack of integrity
I would not mind if I could or would be let go for that. Already have an exit plan and other options. Living with the feeling of “go ahead and try me” which is actually freeing.
It's either me or them, which means they are comfortable with what they are doing. Personally I would have left as my conscience would eat me alive.
That assumes managers at Optum have a conscience and actually care about their direct reports. I see no evidence of either. Typical cover your a-s and look out for #1 culture here. I hope it burns to the ground.