- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Stack ranking performance review blows up in Marissa Mayer's face at Yahoo
Posted on 2/4/16 at 3:39 pm
Posted on 2/4/16 at 3:39 pm
quote:
Around the time proponents of stack ranking like Microsoft and GE were ditching the system in favor of more employee-friendly management strategies, newly appointed Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer embraced the strategy with the unveiling of her quarterly performance-review (QPR) system.
Shortly after joining the company in 2012, she implemented the employee-performance-review process, which had managers score their employees and distribute them into "greatly exceeds," "exceeds," "achieves," "occasionally misses," and "misses" categories, with a target percentage of employees to be distributed into each.
Now, as Mayer comes under fire from investors over Yahoo's management and insufficient turnaround, Yahoo also has a lawsuit to contend with surrounding its controversial QPR system.
In the lawsuit filed on Monday, former Yahoo editor Gregory Anderson accuses Yahoo of implementing its performance-review system knowing that stack ranking had been criticized and rejected by larger employers because it was "subject to abuse, often resulted in claims of discrimination, and needed to be closely monitored in application and effect."
He says the rules implementing the QPR process were vaguely drawn, were communicated on a need-to-know basis, differed from department to department, and would change quarterly to achieve headcount-reduction targets.
Anderson further alleges that even if all employees on a team were performing well or at the same level, managers were required to place some of them in "occasionally misses" and "misses" buckets, resulting in good employees being let go.
LINK
She should have never left Google. Can't decide which one is worse - Mayer's last three years at Yahoo! or Léo Apotheker tenure at HP.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 3:44 pm to Street Hawk
Running a company into the ground apparently makes you a candidate for President of the United States. Sounds like Mayer's on the right track.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 3:44 pm to Street Hawk
I don't know what any of that means.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 3:46 pm to Street Hawk
quote:
She should have never left Google.
It is widely speculated that Mayer was fizzling out at Google when Yahoo picked her up.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 3:47 pm to Artie Rome
quote:
I don't know what any of that means.
It means that employee performance reviews weren't actually a review of the employees' performance, but rather a way to subjectively identify who got shite-canned.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 3:49 pm to GenesChin
I have to say, as an employee of GE, I would much prefer the old performance quadrant/stacked rank process. Now there are no ratings at all, and your performance review is a "conversation" with your manager.
It doesn't feel very satisfying at all.
It doesn't feel very satisfying at all.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 3:56 pm to SanFranTiger
You work for GE in SF? If so, what business unit may I ask?
Posted on 2/4/16 at 3:59 pm to Street Hawk
Yet she is worth $400M
Yahoo! was/is in a no-win sicheeation.
Yahoo! was/is in a no-win sicheeation.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 4:06 pm to idlewatcher
quote:
You work for GE in SF? If so, what business unit may I ask?
in San Ramon, GE Digital. Formerly known as GE Software.
we build this LINK
Posted on 2/4/16 at 4:08 pm to Street Hawk
My company evaluates employees using a similar system. Seems to work fine.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 4:14 pm to SanFranTiger
I'd like to connect with you about possible job openings at GE. Can you email me?
This post was edited on 2/4/16 at 4:37 pm
Posted on 2/4/16 at 4:19 pm to Street Hawk
At my previous employer I hated the quarterly review. Basically every quarter we had to evaluate ourselves 1-5 in several categories, and then sit down with our boss who also ranked us, and compare/defend our rankings. Based on the rankings, a formula was used for every annual to come up with whether you deserved a raise, and if so, how much.
Morale was low at the job and a lot of people just stopped filling out their reviews and accepted whatever our bosses told us. A lot of supervisors would pull the old "Nobody deserves a 5 because nobody's perfect, there's always something you could improve on, etc."
Morale was low at the job and a lot of people just stopped filling out their reviews and accepted whatever our bosses told us. A lot of supervisors would pull the old "Nobody deserves a 5 because nobody's perfect, there's always something you could improve on, etc."
Posted on 2/4/16 at 4:22 pm to efrad
quote:
Can you email me - euphemus@outlook.com
Done. Check yo mail
Posted on 2/4/16 at 4:25 pm to efrad
Quarterly reviews are ridiculous.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 4:34 pm to SanFranTiger
quote:
I have to say, as an employee of GE, I would much prefer the old performance quadrant/stacked rank process. Now there are no ratings at all, and your performance review is a "conversation" with your manager.
It doesn't feel very satisfying at all.
My boss/most of the department does quarterly "conversations" and yearly eval ratings. If you are surprised by your rating it is your own fault
Posted on 2/4/16 at 4:42 pm to GenesChin
quote:
My boss/most of the department does quarterly "conversations" and yearly eval ratings. If you are surprised by your rating it is your own fault
Correct. My point is that we don't even have ratings anymore.
With the quarterly conversations and yearly ratings, it felt much more rewarding and satisfying.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 4:52 pm to efrad
quote:
"Nobody deserves a 5 because nobody's perfect, there's always something you could improve on, etc."
That's the worst. Then why have a 5 on the damn review? I've had reviews where I'd hit and exceeded every goal, and still had some categories listed as "meets expectations." When I asked about it, the reply was "oh, I can't turn in a perfect review, they'd question it..." Well, let them question it then.
This post was edited on 2/4/16 at 4:53 pm
Posted on 2/4/16 at 6:11 pm to Tiger Ryno
quote:
She is a joke.
So how many hundred million are in her golden parachute for doing a crapay job? 'merica.
This post was edited on 2/4/16 at 7:23 pm
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News