Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I can see how it would be a good way to rid the company of dead wood, but depending on the employees are grouped, it can work very poorly. When it was first implemented in an organization I used to work for, group A already had almost all dead wood (when compared with the overall company) and group B had almost all stellar employees (when compared with the overall company). Some of group A will ended up "at or above the curve" for their group, while some of group B ended up "below the curve" for their. So some of group B got bonuses while some in group A ended up on "performance improvement plans". Poor implementation? I assume so. But it was painful and infuriating to watch. I was in group A and did not end up on a performance improvement plan, thankfully. But my blood still boiled - for myself AND my co-workers.


You may wish to edit your group A and B descriptions unless you meant you were dead-wood!

This sounds terrible either way, but why did one group end up significantly worse?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: