Buried in the recent communications email, there was a little point about the new year-end review system. It links to a recent post that states that the new year-end performance process will have three tiers:
1 for out-performers
2 for regular performance
3 for needs improvement
Employees will be categorized not just based on individual merit but based on a calibrated distribution across the organization aiming to designate around 20% of employees as 1s 70% as 2s and 10% as 3s.
This is a big red flag. For those who don't know, this type of performance ranking is known as a vitality curve, forced ranking or rank and yank. Here's the wiki page for it: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitality_curve
It's very controversial since it forces all employees to compete with each other and even if everyone does well, the lowest 10% will always be declared as requiring improvement and can be potentially PIPed or fired.
Why they would introduce such a system in a time of already high attrition I don't know. What I do know is that the main big companies to use it are places like Amazon, and while it remains controversial there, at least they pay employees enough to put up with it. But as a result, Amazon engineers are known to be very combative and work-obsessed. Other big tech companies like Microsoft have literally scrapped their version, since it forced them to sack good talent and artificially increased attrition. I'd encourage you to read the wiki article, it gives good examples of the problems with it.
All I can say is that if they want us to put up with this, they better increase compensation accordingly.