Inconsistently exceeds is a thing?
11 replies (most recent on top)
COO will be like that, except much closer to zero exceeds / consistently exceeds with a stupid amount of justification required and constant challenging from every level by people who have never even met the employee let along observed their work. FSP.
Not true.
The obvious. -
It’s important to make sure you can reasonably predict the mid year and year end assessments. That will provide a level of safety…
Sometimes I wonder if the system is rigged. I mean, some corrupt executives might have override control to do whatever they desire to do for/against their employees.
Their system “requires” managers to place a certain amount of their people in each category. My manager let know know how it works for her and I’ll post a simplified version below:
1 = Did not meet
2 = Inconsistently meets
3 = Meets
4 = Inconsistently exceeds
5 = Exceeds
100 people in the group
4 managers
25 people under each manager
Only 25 employees per group are allowed to be designated as 5’s and 4’s. The rest are designated 1, 2 or 3.
The group head doesn’t care how it’s done, they just want the numbers back so you essentially have the better positioned/political managers giving 5’s, 4’s and 3’s to their people and the less vocal managers get tacked with giving their folks the 1’s, 2’s and a few 3’s 4’s and 5’s. You could have had an objectively great year where you “””deserve””” (NOTICE THE QUOTATIONS) a 4 or even 5 but you’re given a 3 because your manager wasn’t able to make the case as well as the other managers.
I’ve been given a 2, 3, 4 and 5 and the only difference was the years I received 4 and 5 the pay bumps were nicer and the group head seemed to like me more lmao.
Wells has always been a clown show so don’t worry about what these id--ts are going to do. I’ve witnessed peers who were carrying entire teams workloads by themselves get thrown out only to be replaced by id--ts who manage to be even lazier than I am.
Considering 37% of the bank was below meets at mid year, that may be somewhat difficult 🤷🏼
Yes
No way. With the bell curve, there will always be 1s and 2s. Unless they want to go all Jack Welch, I don't see it. They'd rather lay off people because they're in the wrong city
I wish, but sadly not true.
Only fired, no severance.
Charlie's trying to be Neutron Jack