From anon: IBM management told to mark down 10% staff and move them onto a PIP and GDP will only be given out only to top Performers
https://www.facebook.com/alliancemember/posts/pfbid016SyeGZTEosNobn7emz3UTsPMR2r1yVF4D4qXHb4uF7JRAqXNFEiLMuAVa8s3MrWl
True in Consulting. HR pushed back on Checkpoint and 9Box ratings and ordered them to be falsely lowered to mark people as low performers. Band 6 and 7 were targeted specifically. Lots of younger staff.
HR wants low performers for when forced PIPs start up after poor Q1 results.
And GDP for bands 6-9 was 1-2%.
Nothing new on this. You don’t even have to be a low performer to be put on a pip … you just have to be the older ones on the team that are more expensive to employee. You will be put on a pip for no reason, and given an objective that is impossible to meet. Then they can bump you with no severance and not call it an RA.
I left IBM for many reasons. The biggest is they took away my bonus program and my VP was a cheat. Now I am on social security and I got a 8.7% raise last year. It is great to be retired!!!
I suspect IBM would be able to slow hiring rather than have to RA to get to their 1.5% -3% number per quarter. Remember turnover within consulting is 10’s of thousands per year. THUS RA’s are most likely off the table unless IBM chooses to exit a business. PIP’s on the other hand are all performance based, and if your numbers are low (eg utilization, sales, achievements that are measurable), you may be at risk
I can confirm 1-2% budget for GDP to top
Performers
A company run by sh-t heads
The message I got on my division is similar(FLM here). Managers were asked to tag 10% of the employees as low performers, there is a Pip push going, so far the pushback has been that we have no evidence collected and no warnings were given to the employees. We were told to start following with the employees so the PIPs would happen by June if needed. There is GDP budget, the talk with my peers is that is enough to give 1.5% (year salary, do not miss the dot!) to all reports or give something significant to the top performers, but no pressure, so far, one way or the other (no word on skipping low performers)
I have not seen any GDP for the past 2-3 years... I don't think it was funded anyway.
In my recent half dozen years or so GDP has only been paid out to to top half percent or so. Nothing new.
Ah wait - last year there was no GDP whatsoever - so yeay for top half percent.