Do our VPs go through mid-year feedback as well? I hope their peers give genuine feedback about some of them being so highly incompetent. We have few in GT that don't even know how to speak, forget knowing anything about Technology. How do they even get hired? Speaks so much about our ELT hiring them in the first place.
12 replies (most recent on top)
if you think CFEs matter, they don't. your rating was decided long before the process started by how people "feel" about you. if someone doesn't like you, your manager isn't going to risk that relationship by giving you a higher rating.
and if you think your feedback is anonymous, ask anyone who was honest, none of them ever were allowed to stay. going to ER is su----e
LoL...damn id--ts we VPs are in charge, and don't care of what you think. Get ready for the layoff train...choo choo. Especially if your white!
The performance process changes every year, has been largely useless for promoting or providing constructive change to peers or managers. There are no repercussions for slackers or folks that do nothing the entire year, managers that do zero managing, and no channel to properly reward or promote high performers.
Nike savvy folks between director to VP level simply overlook performance and innovators, and are more prone to elevate or hire their pals especially externally to bolster their position. It is how it has always been. It's easier to surround yourself with friends and maintain the status quo when you're raking in the E band and up compensation, with little to no oversight.
So TLDR - nah VP feedback or whatever feedback is a moot process.
One word: cronyism
https://www.wordnik.com/words/cronyism
Similar to you @iou, not a SD tho. Never been asked about my VP, any "honest" feedback about my mgr results in "retaliation" (yelling, being sidelined, but can't prove) and my SD and VP have such huge egos that they can't recognize that they're part of the problem. And going to ER only makes it worse.
Ironic that it's Matter of Respect training time too.. didn't used to be this way, culture comes from the top and the culture of fear under JD is real..
Yes. I've been asked to provide feedback on my VP.
How exceptionally important it is for a middle manager to be liked and approved by their team/ manager, VPs should be held to the same standards (how we rate ICs and managers). Let there be a petition. I’ll sign it.
Mid-years are a joke. Just get a couple of friends as references to fill out the stupid survey and you barely get any negative remarks.
Lots of VPs are absolute sh-t and should be fired. Just fu---n around with their offsites throwing money around on anything and don’t understand a single thing about tech and throw around terms like AI and ML or some bullsh-t like it’s going to do everything for us.
@iou+1qWiV7jN Under RAT, the system was rigged. It wasn't just the VPs who came from Kohls. The Sr. Directors and Directors also came from Kohls, and they just collected feedback from each other. If you had a Kohls manager and came from Kohls yourself, you were golden. The manager would just ignore any negative feedback if they received it about someone they brought in. Better yet, they wouldn't collect anything in the first place and said they collected it "verbally" and gave glowing reviews without anything to back it up. I witnessed all this first-hand. The Kohls people didn't even see anything wrong about it, since they were benefiting from the sham. Crooked to the core!
When you have this system in place, how are you going to get rid of them without completely cleaning house?
In my years at Nike as an SD I have only once been asked to give feedback on my VP bosses. Boggles my mind and reminds me that all that BS about great leadership is just that - BS. No direct feedback loops. An engagement survey that is vague enough for VPs to assume the feedback on Sr Leadership is about someone else. Couldn’t possibly be them. My current VP is the worst I’ve ever had, and has countless ER investigations to prove it, had the audacity to announce that the ppl must be talking about her directs or the SLT because her org adores her. Absolutely delusional.
No one tracks attrition by leader or anything else about leadership performance so there is both no accountability for the worst leaders and no credit to the best. No wonder the RAT and his cronies lasted so long.
Looking forward to the employee survey this year
They should only get reviewed by those under thrm rather than peers.