Got into some discussions with directors who shared their conversations with VPs.
Got a feeling that there will be a much higher focus on impact than on activities for performance reviews. Likely going back to 1-5 instead of 1-3s, and a higher share of „not meeting expectations“ is going to be enforced. It’s not going to get easier, I guess.
Without tariffs, how are we going to compete against foreigners?
Yeah several leaders don’t have 1:1. Even if they have, they do not want to hear problem but only solutions in simple words to be carried upwards. Several R&D leaders are this way. One way it is good to have high expectation placed on these VPs as they have been running these years without understanding problems.
Billy Boy appears to be a poor man's James McNerney. While Jimbo had the perceived aura as a GE legend (in his own mind) when he joined 3M over 24 years ago, BB seemed to be forced into retirement at his last job, despite alienating employees (35 percent approval rating) but making WS happy for a few years.
BBs "hat trick" of demotivators are pure (failed) GE tactics.
Somewhere McNerney is smiling
In the end it is not about your performance. The EPR process was and is not fair. You can do an exceptional job, but if your portfolio is not a priority, you will most likely meet expectations.
It is not based on your personal performance
This is happening. Much higher accountability and visibility, if you are not meeting it becomes a performance based conversation (as it should). I’ve heard of people whose managers do not even have 1:1s with them, how are they getting feedback? Get rid of these types of leaders.