Take a closer look at the new performance scale. There are now two “underperforming” categories, but only one over-performing category. The “Leading” category is now the average.
Don’t be fooled by the naming-scheme for the second category; “Contributing”. The last bullet point metric is “lesser performance impact compared to peers”, a.k.a. underperforming.
I’m sure the EC is congratulating themselves on how much money they will save in future employee bonus payouts.
I've been here almost 10 years and have a team of 6. In MANY of the last several years, my entire team has performed extremely well. However, I have had to give out average (ie. 3's) to people who really deserve 4's. In our current system, "3" means you're doing your job well; "4" means you went above and beyond.
The new rating system forces a split between underperforming (don't split hairs with me. it literally says something to the effect of "contributions are less than peers.") and "leading." It's an even number instead of 1-5. It is absolutely designed to force managers to make this decision between bad/good for each employee and if past history is any guide, I'll be forced to downrank some of my team unfairly in order to fit some messed up statistic curve y'all are trying to hit.
The EC has joined the chat…
For those who come here and are not bitter and disgruntled workers, the new scale says it's for next year. That means it has nothing to do with this year's midyear.
And since they did not show any VC ranges, anyone posting here that it will save money is lying. If they were actual insiders instead of angry workers, they would know it's not true.
Anyone who actually performs well (not just thinks they do because they keep busy doing the exact same things in the same exact ways they did in 2004), will be happy to finally get recognized. The people who skirted by and still got overpaid in the past will be on this site complaining.
Yeah @1hcl+1uAHHjqV good luck getting a "Leading" score. There will be pressure for each department to hit a certain curve of data. If you consistently have gotten 3's, get ready for 2's.
Is this taking effect for the bonuses paid in March 2025??? Kind of bullsh-t since we had mid year reviews already on old rating system.
: @1hcl+1uAHHjqV That’s exactly what they want you to think.
Good lord. This doesn’t even make sense. There’s always been 2 underperforming categories (1 and 2). I personally like it. I would rather be told I’m Leading than given a score of a 3 which always sounds like you’re just an average Joe while you were ki-ling yourself to do your job.