I know so many people who where exceeds or continually exceeds who are now rated as meets.
What’s up with that? Is it to reduce bonus dollars? In this another Chucky thing???
17 replies (most recent on top)
"Meets" is safe for midyear. They don't want to have to justify an "Exceeds" at midyear.
OP, actually all those folks who got exceeds for so long were really playing the buddy systems or their managers were absolutely worthless. You cannot be an exceeds for that long. If you move into a new role at best you can be a meets. There is no way you are knocking it out of the park in a new role and if you are then you should have your managers job.
It's the Wells Fargo sh-tshow in action. Thanks Charlie.
The rating means nothing. Managers are required to submit ratings based on the distribution curve. Some managers will rotate their staff's rating around so nobody gets sc--ws too bad. Some managers will play favoritism if you're not lucky.
But wait, then senior management at the department AU level will line up all the ratings from all the managers, and if the curve is out of whack, then they force the managers to change their ratings to whatever the curve needs to look like.
In the end, none of this means anything anymore.
It’s a joke. There are guys in my team that all they do is assign the two tickets my team gets a day which probably takes them 2 min and they are done for the day and get a meets or exceeds who knows.
As someone else said previously, fake negative performance reviews are just another example of unethical management agenda. Remember fake accounts scandal? How about the expose of fake black interviews?
That is not true, I just had 2 at midyear and had 3 for the last annual.
Every manager can only give 1 exceeds per team.
I experienced this as previously rated exceeds/consistently exceeds for 5 years and now meets with no changed in my performance, still outperforming my peers. First, my old department which had probably close to 3,000 people was given the death by 1,000 cuts approach and now is whittled down to roughly 500 after 2 years of bi-monthly layoffs. I was moved to new managers 3 different times and on my current team there's only 1 person I worked with before so the manager already had their own favorites before inheriting us. Second, with much lower headcount the bell curve has less allowances for exceeds so inevitably the lucky favorites are the only ones getting those ratings. If you're not the teacher's pet you're now competing with everyone else just to keep your head above water and earn a meets instead of being targeted for a lower rating.
Have any of you even bothered to find out the difference what the two rating mean? Doubt it. Just upset you didn’t get the rating you feel you should vs getting the one you earned and being concerned if you got enough valuation.
I typically get meets and got it again this year....hey the company thinks I'm doing enough I'm good with that.
And that probably means someone else moved from meets to exceeds
Same boat. Just going to keep my work pace on par with my new rating and keep waiting for my package.
It is part of fake review and intimidation campaign. Managers are being pressured to manufacture fake reviews to save money by reducing compensation and pushing people to quit which would avoid severance packages.
Like everything else HY does, it's an effort to drive attrition. Has nothing to do with budgets, because they aren't giving your group an extra penny even if everyone was a consistently exceeds. They want to demoralize high performers so they will quit. It costs them nothing to tolerate "excessive use" of high ratings, but that might boost morale a little bit. Can't have that.
Meets is the new Exceeds.
They weren’t working hard enough.
I heard that Dr. Burt received a Consistently Exceeds this year and a 1.2 million bonus. Great allocation of funds.