Started early in the year when apparently, they switched to quarterly check-ins. I got "on-target" for all. With the understanding that there was an "above-target" level as well as "below target".
The rating system seemed kinda arbitrary but I just thought w/e I'll take it.
What I'm wondering is if anyone knows how these ratings translate into PPF (%)? Or have those details been yet to be announced?
3 replies (most recent on top)
We're being given direction in ET, that no one is at 100, 95 or 105, preferably with a wider spread than that. Leadership is clueless with statements like it's an only a few hundred dollars, what's the big deal. Fairly sure the folks that do their job and keep the ship running are going to start looking when they get dinged and then leadership will be back on the tow hall in a couple of months playing down the exodus of skilled labor leaving for reasons we don't understand
I don’t know for sure if there’s a direct translation, but maybe this will help. Think about the ratings as numbers instead of words, e.g. 70, 90, or 110. Add your four ratings together then divide by 4. That’s your PPF.
The goal is to shift the bell curve for everyone from a baseline of 100% PPF to a baseline of something like 90% PPF to “save” 10% “cost” across the company…
Are you new? You know performance reviews are bs. It’s all a popularity contest and brown nosing session