What if an independent 3rd party administered the ranking system?
All persons treated equal.
Judged solely on performance.
No identification of Sponsored.
No labels on HiPo.
No reference to previous rank.
No reference to age/YEE.
All KO input anonymous.
No intimidation.
No EM management in room influencing.
Wouldn’t this be better?
Ranking cannot be neutral.
Job postings not allowed.
HiPos must be given highest ranking and must be given leadership positions for which they are far under qualified.
This is how EM Executives make sure Chosen persons are promoted swiftly instead of qualified persons.
Two times I have heard Friday m Supervisors that they were instructed to put females at the top spot of their rank list that gets submitted to HR prior to ranking meeting.
The HR person receiving the list is unaware of the threats that shaped all inputs received in the compilation of each list. HR then assembles a grand starting list with s-xism and racism built into it from all the pre-intimidation.
On another note, I have noticed that our recruiters will interview 30 students, 2 female and 28 male. If 4 offer made, that is 2 females and 2 males. Basically the 28 males are competing for 2 slots and are just lucky there were not 4 females getting interviewed.
Like XOMs hiring practices right? Say you go to a hiring event to hire 4 people. But are sternly told to only recommend for hire candidates in this order. Top diversity Female. Top female. Top diverse applicant. Top Diverse Male. Top Male. BUT your top 4 candidates: 3 are male and 1 diverse female. If you don’t buck the system, you are already passing on the most qualified candidate(s) for 2 of your recommendations! If you don’t think this same line of thinking goes into determining rank throughout CL group meetings, you are out to lunch. Look around, see which people actually know what they are doing vs the people who were PIP’d or “regrettable separations”. Meritocracy lol. Not even close.
KO input is only valuable if written by a VP or higher. My boss told me that, after forbidding me for the past year to attend any meeting with a VP.
PS. Even great feedback from VPs is cancelled out by the employee being RE. RE guarantees that RG points will be subtracted every year.
If the system was independently administered by a neutral entity, KO feedback anonymous, YEE not shown, Potential not a factor, the outcome would be extremely different.
EM is a company of processes and procedures with the idea that anyone in a given position can succeed. The outcome of a process is supposed to be repeatable no matter who administers it.
OP seems to be highlighting the fact that the ranking process is not neutral and repeatable, but highly dependent on who is administering it, with built in politics, favoritism, s-xism, and racism.
Have you ever seen KO input? It is across the board almost without exception total garbage. People put zero time, energy, or thought into it leaving the supervisor to have to decide.
It would be better, but they don’t really care about improving the process and making it fair and transparent. There is ample scientific evidence that our PDS process stifles collaboration and incentives back stabbing. For my entire career, employees have voiced their opinion and fought for changes, but it falls on deaf ears. The truth is this process works for the chosen few and they see no absolutely no reason to change anything.
Every process in EM must adhere to auditable high standards except ranking.
I have personally seen manipulation based on politics, favoritism, s-xism, and racism.
These factors forbidden in every other EM process but built into ranking.
Someone suggested that HR was supposed to be the “independent” administrator of ranking system.
HR is not independent.
HR is political and bias, just a tool used by management.
I reported an issue to my HR manager then an executive called my Supervisor instructing him to threaten me so that I would withdraw my valid complaint.
OP seems to be suggesting a system change completely free of politics and manipulation.
That will never happen at EM.
The ranking system at EM is absolutely and completely controlled by Senior Management to move chosen individuals up the ladder at lightning speed to their HiPo mapped positions.
Eliminating the politics and manipulation and having the top of rank list based on performance would stop all those HiPos from climbing the ladder at warp speed.
Just think if the best performers started outpacing the sponsored chosen HiPo people? Chaos.
The system is the problem. You can’t champion innovation and collaboration and have a forced ranking performance system in place. It doesn’t work. Relative ranking ki--s true collaboration and engagement. It keeps us finger pointing at each other and the company…look at this board…and not outwardly focused on competition and innovation.
First one's to go would be the powerpoint jockee HiPo's and clueless middle management.
Bring in the Bob's!
Drawing straws would be the fairest way at this point
I think it has to be managed by the company, internally. Not a fan of being judged without context by someone unfamiliar with my work.
The PA system needs transparency. In my ideal case, I'd suggest:
Salary treatment and bonuses made public for all CLs.
Make the KO feedback completely transparent (all comments available to the employee).
Employees allowed to attend their own portion of PA review sessions with management. Might be stressful, but WYSIWYG.
Thoughts or critiques?
This is a really stupid idea. If you can’t operate within the system, and understand that the system is “relative performance” then you need to resign
“What if an independent 3rd party administered the ranking system?”
If you get to a point in your relationship with your employer where a question like this comes up, move on.
I have no idea what some of you are thinking to be suggesting this kind of stuff.
Seriously, get real.
What a stupid idea.
We ain't living on Mars, yet, OP.
That is supposed to be the role that HR plays. Using a 3rd party is exactly why we have this new PA process. It was supposed to be a way to make the process better and more transparent, however, the economy collapse turned it into a way to reduce headcount.
Maybe an MSP can do this out of the BTC!