Coming out of these management employee review calibration meetings makes me feel ashamed and disgusted. But I have no choice but to play along and fabricate reviews to please my senior executive.
22 replies (most recent on top)
Where is the moral courage of leaders to blow the whistle on this practice!! This behavior is patently UNETHICAL!! You don't track an employee for 3 qtrs as meets in coaching and 1x1 to then cut them to less than that in LESS than 1 qtr! This is kind of cr-p is why WF is under a asset cap!! No Flippin' ethics and sc--w everyone inside, outside, within reach of the banks slimy tentacles.
Wells Fargo if firing the Enterprise Complaint Management office ECMO because Wells Fargo found out that it was a mistake When the ECMO were hired without experience. Wells Fargo recognized that the ECMO did not bring the customer's complaints to satisfaction but in contrary The Enterprise Complaint Management Office placed borders between the customers and Wells Fargo and the ECMO aggravated the complaints to a degree where most of the complaints ended up in courts instead of ending in good terms. The ECMO failed to perform the customer service's duties and end up a heavy load on the Wells Fargo's shoulders and a waist of money and resources and gave Wells Fargo bad reputation and bad credibility as indicated in the 99% of the customer's complaints. The ECMO is a failure.
We don't need any employees who refer to groups of things as "buckets". They are all either exec hacks using mindless buzzwords or useless paper shufflers / box checkers. Ditto "user stories" and "high level overview".
Looks like mor-n-in-charge and his new head of tech old-crow together with her Goldman lieutenant are digging more aggressively using ratings. They are forcing “ bucketting” ratings. I think it is being done as a prep work for getting people out. BE was never a good news for tech. Am I incorrect?
HR management is pathetic. Where are the controls?
To the poster that wrote “ They are actively forcing management to sh-t on a certain % of their employees with inconsistently meets. ” no one is forcing you to do anything. They are appearing to force you. Stop making it easy for them and stand your ground.
To the OP: consider what is being asked. If it’s not true then stand your ground and make them change the rating and/or put it in writing you disagree and are only doing it because you are forced. That way if employee contests it HR will see. For you to do otherwise is unethical. However, be quite sure. I have managed at many firms and to find 10% that deserve lower than meets is not hard. To find 20% is hard.
Where there is smoke, there is fire. If our HR and management processes are shot through with this kind of sleaze, any progress we’ve made in cleaning up our sales practices can only be superficial and performative, not indicative of a deep-seated organizational commitment to ethics.
If we had this process documented, would it stand up to legal scrutiny?
How could it be justified?
I have been rotating the 2 ratings amongst my team. Had a team meeting years back and explained what was going on. Didn't really need to as they all knew. So each year someone gets a 2 and a smaller raise and bonus. They know that next year they will be at least a 3 and someone else takes the hit. I have 13 people reporting to me so have 2 rating low each year and my boss is happy. I'm retiring next year so told my boss I can take the 2 hit this year. It's the only thing I could do to keep my directs from undercutting each other.
"God, I love this board.
Reading id--t posts and seeing how many blindly upvote a troll.
Priceless."
^^ this guy lol. Calling people id--ts while demonstrating complete ignorance of what's actually going on. They are actively forcing management to sh-t on a certain % of their employees with inconsistently meets. This is not a troll. It's real.
What a great culture we're cultivating here.
I was asked to give ratings before I had put my comments. My boss did the calibration and brought a few down and asked me to make my comments match ratings he has given. I have until 1st week of Dec to do this. The whole process is a fraud.
Can confirm CIB manager’s comment. We were told to look at people as “meets plus” or “meets minus”. Meets plus gets meets, meets minus gets “inconsistently meets”.
CIB manager here … we are being told to look very hard at any of our marginal/on the fence “meets” ratings to lower them.
God, I love this board.
Reading id--t posts and seeing how many blindly upvote a troll.
Priceless.
It's a rebranding of forced stack ranking.
What's calibration?
A unions would stop this stupid calibration scheme.
Fu--k your calibrations
They need to "calibrate" the CEO out.
Some would argue that you shouldn’t even get much bonus just for clocking in (literally or figuratively) and doing a good job consistent with your level. I tend to agree with that in the abstract. The problem is we have a pattern of practice and entitlement on bonuses and then merit increases that year after year don’t track with inflation.
So I’m forced to steal printer paper to make ends meet.
What's truly ridiculous about the scenario is that the ratings do not matter to the company, in any way. Doesn't change the merit budget, so what difference does it make? Well, there's one, it's a useful tool for demoralizing the employees, which when imposed on 160k people will encourage some percentage to quit. And that's all Shart wants or cares about. That's why we are where we are. Some empty suit low level executive hack telling you how you should rate an employee that they have never met, never watched work, and have absolutely zero idea what their rating should be. In the grand scheme they don't really care themselves, but Shart told them to crush ratings, so that's what they do. It's a sick joke told by pathetic "leaders" whose own rating should be South of meets.