I’m in ops, one of the more challenging roles in our BU. PSG in the realm of 22-23. Complete mixed bag of rankings: VC’s, EE and EM! Lol. I have no idea how to interpret these. As I said, our Team Lead roles responsibilities and pressure to perform is above and beyond those of similar PSG’s in ops and engineering. PMP ratings have lost their value. I’m going to post out for an HSE or job where it’s a similar PSG and I can put my phone down on weekends and after 5pm and still be paid the same.
8 replies (most recent on top)
@2lrk, Definitely your supervisor is not doing his/her job. If this most important requirement was set aside, it proves that your supervisor doesn’t have your back or will be sincere in helping you in your career. At the first opportunity, you should post out, unless you really enjoy your current job and you know the supervisor is looking to move on elsewhere.
Just make the PMP simple. You either do your job well almost consistently or you fall short or exceed. So the rating all employees can get is either a 1 for Exceeds Expectations,, 2 Meets Expectations, or 3 Needs Improvement. Who decides the rating you get? Just keep it simple, your rating will be determined by the average rating given to you by 3 people; your direct supervisor, the workgroup’s manager and a workgroup peer chosen anonymously at random by the ePMP system. The average score becomes your PMP rating of which 85% of the entire organization will be forced ranked into a “2” score and no more than 10% can get a “1”.
Sure, good idea, post an anonymous question to "supervisors" who are miserable enough to be reading a layoffs board instead of having the nads to ask them face to face. That should work.
Question for any supervisors on this board. My supervisor did not review my mid year nor my end of year rankings with me. We had a session for both but the ranks were later added to workday. The only time it was discussed was they asked me what I thought about mid year. Is this normal? I’m on 10+ years in salary and there has always been a sit down review.
The natural next step is to eliminate PMP completely and just let people work. Give everyone the same raise annually and a promotion every four years. Done.
The old system 1, 2+, 2, 2-, 3 was based on performance against your peers of the same PSG with strict maximums on the percent allowed in each category. The resulting rating automatically provided a salary adjustment based on your current CO and rating. Your supervisor would go into a larger meeting and defend his rating of you. At the end of the session the percentage of each rating for each PSG had to balance. The salary treatment is shared with you (at the appropriate time) with old and new CO.
The new system requires the supervisor to provide the rating without comparison to your peers. The rating is not related to a raise. The system provides a recommended range of salary treatment, but that recommended range does not take into consideration the budget available to your supervisor. Your CO is not communicated as part of the salary treatment.
The idea is that the performance review is supposed to clearly provide you with how you can improve.
I don’t like the new system for a number of reasons.
New evaluation system is like jigsaw puzzle pieces from four or five different puzzles. Management can put them together in any fashion they wish, that is, your evaluation is purely subjective, but they have these puzzle pieces that can tell any story they want. Worst evaluation system I have seen in my (many) years with the company.
Go for it. Good lick.