SQL Clone
SQLServerCentral is supported by Redgate
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 
 


Competition or Cooperation


Competition or Cooperation

Author
Message
Steve Jones
Steve Jones
SSC Guru
SSC Guru (62K reputation)SSC Guru (62K reputation)SSC Guru (62K reputation)SSC Guru (62K reputation)SSC Guru (62K reputation)SSC Guru (62K reputation)SSC Guru (62K reputation)SSC Guru (62K reputation)

Group: Administrators
Points: 62010 Visits: 19101
I'm not sure it's fair, though I'm not sure how much fairness I want in business. We don't have a lot here, with plenty of poor decisions by managers because they have their own inherent prejudices/attractions/etc.

I think this model can work in sales because we do have sales people falling down and you want to get rid of them, and reward the high achievers. however, when you get a good sales force, do you still want to get rid of the worst one? You might end up with an even worse salesperson.

I don't like this system, but I especially don't like it in technology, accounting, probably a few other areas.

Follow me on Twitter: @way0utwest
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
My Blog: www.voiceofthedba.com
chris 24158
chris 24158
Grasshopper
Grasshopper (14 reputation)Grasshopper (14 reputation)Grasshopper (14 reputation)Grasshopper (14 reputation)Grasshopper (14 reputation)Grasshopper (14 reputation)Grasshopper (14 reputation)Grasshopper (14 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 14 Visits: 226
The article failed in that it set up the conflict, but didn't resolve: so, Steve, how did you rank your employees? Did you unfairly assign a 2?
Nevyn
Nevyn
SSCommitted
SSCommitted (1.5K reputation)SSCommitted (1.5K reputation)SSCommitted (1.5K reputation)SSCommitted (1.5K reputation)SSCommitted (1.5K reputation)SSCommitted (1.5K reputation)SSCommitted (1.5K reputation)SSCommitted (1.5K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 1508 Visits: 3149
The best way I have seen this applied was at a call centre (had to right the scripts for it).

It worked better because it was a giant sample size of employees (making it more likely that their abilities were normally distributed), their performance did not depend on one another, and evaluation was done with actual metrics.

But I have seen similar theory applied to 'teams' as small as 2, with zero metrics beyond manager opinion. And when it is used like that it is basically a straight-jacket that is both unfair and has unintended consequences.

And what it truly reflects is leadership not trusting their managers to make honest assessments of performance.
David.Poole
David.Poole
SSCertifiable
SSCertifiable (7.5K reputation)SSCertifiable (7.5K reputation)SSCertifiable (7.5K reputation)SSCertifiable (7.5K reputation)SSCertifiable (7.5K reputation)SSCertifiable (7.5K reputation)SSCertifiable (7.5K reputation)SSCertifiable (7.5K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 7492 Visits: 3282
It's entirely artificial to make an HR department think what they do is a science rather than art.

How do you boil down complex behavioural and performance characteristics into a single digit?
If someone gets the maximum grade then how can you measure an improvement in their performance?
If someone gets the next point down how do you quantify what they need to do to get the maximum grade if that grade is officially unobtainable?

I'd much prefer my manager to say "these are the objectives I need you to complete for the next quarter/6 months, let me know if there are any blockers and I will let you know if the objectives become obsolete".

For me the annual review process is where two adults are forced together in a mutually embarrassing situation where both could be doing something more productive and all to maintain the polite fiction that an annual review process is anything but retro-fitting a justification to a fait accompli in the annual pay review.

LinkedIn Profile

Newbie on www.simple-talk.com
arnipetursson
arnipetursson
Mr or Mrs. 500
Mr or Mrs. 500 (527 reputation)Mr or Mrs. 500 (527 reputation)Mr or Mrs. 500 (527 reputation)Mr or Mrs. 500 (527 reputation)Mr or Mrs. 500 (527 reputation)Mr or Mrs. 500 (527 reputation)Mr or Mrs. 500 (527 reputation)Mr or Mrs. 500 (527 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 527 Visits: 1019
David.Poole (12/4/2013)

For me the annual review process is where two adults are forced together in a mutually embarrassing situation where both could be doing something more productive and all to maintain the polite fiction that an annual review process is anything but retro-fitting a justification to a fait accompli in the annual pay review.

+1
Steve Jones
Steve Jones
SSC Guru
SSC Guru (62K reputation)SSC Guru (62K reputation)SSC Guru (62K reputation)SSC Guru (62K reputation)SSC Guru (62K reputation)SSC Guru (62K reputation)SSC Guru (62K reputation)SSC Guru (62K reputation)

Group: Administrators
Points: 62010 Visits: 19101
chris 24158 (12/4/2013)
The article failed in that it set up the conflict, but didn't resolve: so, Steve, how did you rank your employees? Did you unfairly assign a 2?


Yes. Sad to say. After much arguing with my boss (the director) and a debate with the VP, I was ultimately told that this was a subjective, relative ranking. Someone was below the others, and whoever that was deserved a lower ranking.

I gave one person the 2, had a conversation about why, and then awarded him the same bonus as the 3s. He was weaker than others, but it was slight and somewhat nitpicky.

I ended up resigning a few months later, and listed this as one of my reasons.

Follow me on Twitter: @way0utwest
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
My Blog: www.voiceofthedba.com
chris 24158
chris 24158
Grasshopper
Grasshopper (14 reputation)Grasshopper (14 reputation)Grasshopper (14 reputation)Grasshopper (14 reputation)Grasshopper (14 reputation)Grasshopper (14 reputation)Grasshopper (14 reputation)Grasshopper (14 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 14 Visits: 226
Thanks Steve. I agree, stack ranking is idiotic for high-performing teams and only serves to drive away talent.
Matt Miller (4)
Matt Miller (4)
SSChampion
SSChampion (12K reputation)SSChampion (12K reputation)SSChampion (12K reputation)SSChampion (12K reputation)SSChampion (12K reputation)SSChampion (12K reputation)SSChampion (12K reputation)SSChampion (12K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 12157 Visits: 18572
Perhaps it's me but the primary flaw I noticed is that this is an attempt to use a de facto individual ranking system to measure performance in a team setting. You need to match the metrics/measurements to what it is you're trying to reward; as in - if you truly want to encourage positive teamwork, adding a dimension that measure performance of teams you participate in should be part of your review. You're essentially trying to rank apples by how much they taste like oranges.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your lack of planning does not constitute an emergency on my part...unless you're my manager...or a director and above...or a really loud-spoken end-user..All right - what was my emergency again?
Jim P.
Jim P.
SSC Eights!
SSC Eights! (899 reputation)SSC Eights! (899 reputation)SSC Eights! (899 reputation)SSC Eights! (899 reputation)SSC Eights! (899 reputation)SSC Eights! (899 reputation)SSC Eights! (899 reputation)SSC Eights! (899 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 899 Visits: 2215
Matt Miller (#4) (12/4/2013)
Perhaps it's me but the primary flaw I noticed is that this is an attempt to use a de facto individual ranking system to measure performance in a team setting. You need to match the metrics/measurements to what it is you're trying to reward; as in - if you truly want to encourage positive teamwork, adding a dimension that measure performance of teams you participate in should be part of your review. You're essentially trying to rank apples by how much they taste like oranges.


We just went through our reviews in the Sept/Oct time frame. The 1's were below average and are probably going to be shown the door. But the the management style dictated that less than 1% get a 3. The 2's were the expected norm meaning you do your job to at least average if not at a 100% level.

It is not great, but it seems at least somewhat fair.

In addition most rating systems are setup to groom people to be a personnel managers in the future. I told them when I was hired that I can deal with managing project teams, doing training on <SW/HW/systems> for junior staff but don't want to mange people on a permanent basis. I don't like wetware, I like tech. The review system, as usual, emphasizes managing people.

So I always look at any rating system as a joke.



----------------
Jim P.

A little bit of this and a little byte of that can cause bloatware.
Eric M Russell
Eric M Russell
SSChampion
SSChampion (12K reputation)SSChampion (12K reputation)SSChampion (12K reputation)SSChampion (12K reputation)SSChampion (12K reputation)SSChampion (12K reputation)SSChampion (12K reputation)SSChampion (12K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 12122 Visits: 10634
I have heard that the most talented people tried to ensure they weren't working on the same team with other talented people, just to ensure they would continue to be highly ranked.

I can see how stack ranking would be disruptive, but often times disruption can be good thing. It actually makes sense to disperse a cluster of talented people who just delivered a successful project so that they move on to become team leaders on new projects with less experienced members.


"The universe is complicated and for the most part beyond your control, but your life is only as complicated as you choose it to be."
Go


Permissions

You can't post new topics.
You can't post topic replies.
You can't post new polls.
You can't post replies to polls.
You can't edit your own topics.
You can't delete your own topics.
You can't edit other topics.
You can't delete other topics.
You can't edit your own posts.
You can't edit other posts.
You can't delete your own posts.
You can't delete other posts.
You can't post events.
You can't edit your own events.
You can't edit other events.
You can't delete your own events.
You can't delete other events.
You can't send private messages.
You can't send emails.
You can read topics.
You can't vote in polls.
You can't upload attachments.
You can download attachments.
You can't post HTML code.
You can't edit HTML code.
You can't post IFCode.
You can't post JavaScript.
You can post emoticons.
You can't post or upload images.

Select a forum

































































































































































SQLServerCentral


Search