" I know SWG in RTP had 1400 layoffs. I don't know who much we will have, but I'm expecting to get fired." - IBM LAYOFFS (Star: wages, restaurants)

[Native NC]

Actually performance mgmt is a speciality of mine professionally and I am extremely familiar with this PBC system in great detail. This year only select managers were asking to give feedback when in reality, the highly advertised and promoted system is to afford a 360. It's documented too so for those RA'd and able to access that copy, the door is open for recourse.

Document, document, and document more.

Once again, you cannot ask employees to complete their action plan within a PBC, report their progress against it, then not completely reference the 360. It's real simple. Don't do anything if you want no accountability as mzd did, don't play the game.

This RA is being driven by a few criteria:

1 - those close to retirement and eligible for the more robust former pension plan

2 - those band 8 and above

3 - those who don't agree with the current abuse in the system, or who dare to question management

4 - a few true non-performers

[mzd]

Native NC: when you mention the "360", are you referring to IBM's review system? The 360 was indeed used in the mid-90s, but I don't know any IBM division which still used it after 1999/2000 or so, at least in the RTP area.

[lovetheduns]

Honestly-- the post that another person had made about rankings against others, percentage of higher grades available,etc--- Don't delude yourselves into thinking that this does not happen at many other companies. I know even my current employer does that as did my previous employer.

[amcjap]

mine too...

[Native NC]

Originally Posted by mzd

Native NC: when you mention the "360", are you referring to IBM's review system? The 360 was indeed used in the mid-90s, but I don't know any IBM division which still used it after 1999/2000 or so, at least in the RTP area.

IF you have direct reports they can be asked to participate in your review; you should have peers reviewing; management also reviews.

It isn't a full 360 for every employee, not all have direct reports. Increasingly however, now peers are being eliminated from this process. To qualify any performance management system or methodology you 'must' standardize the review process and document it. Per division and unit, it should be standardized and clearly documented. For example, you cannot use peer reviews as part of the process for any given employee one year, then eliminate those the next, without documenting those changes with qualifications that apply to all being reviewed similarly within that unit. Those variances are what create the litigious aspect.

Hope that answers your question.

[Native NC]

Originally Posted by lovetheduns

Honestly-- the post that another person had made about rankings against others, percentage of higher grades available,etc--- Don't delude yourselves into thinking that this does not happen at many other companies. I know even my current employer does that as did my previous employer.

Is your employer past or current one of the largest US companies with a significant and increasing global presence?

[crifever]

Originally Posted by Native NC

Is your employer past or current one of the largest US companies with a significant and increasing global presence?

Cisco, Microsoft and GE all use similar performance evaluation methods.

[Native NC]

Cisco employs a very progressive performance management system and standards, that one won't float.

I don't have personal knowledge of MS's or GE's but obviously you have worked for all three?

Not one of those three tries to escape reporting reductions in force either.

Apples and oranges.

[joey2000]

Originally Posted by dansdrive

Maybe if we don't spend it all on roads and bridges we can use some of it to add a Toll booths to Rt 540 or buy some more snow plows and salt trucks.

You're kidding I hope-?

Roads (and road signs) so screwed up here I'd rather they spend it on stepping up progress on building new (or expanding existing) roads - and maybe a little more on cleaning up the roads or areas would be nice. In fact I'm only semi-serious but I'd love to see them install mini-cameras around the interstates and catch (and heavily fine) litterbugs....I can't believe how literally trashy the interstates are or how many losers treat them like their own personal trashcan.

[joey2000]

Originally Posted by Native NC

I would agree with some of your comments but would state that being non-technical even as a consultant in transformation deals, is no longer acceptable. IBM has too many formerly offshore techies now being promoted into management who have no management skills and value only deeply technical skills. Time will expose those gaps.

? I don't follow. Are you saying IBM is now favoring more mgt skills or tech skills?

Seems to me the answer should be neither, necessarily...ie if IBM has too many formerly offshore techies now being promoted into management who have no management skills (man this all but describes IBM India to a tee), then they should value mgt skills...unless you're saying they should leave the people with tech skills in tech jobs and hire/promote/maintain people with more mgt skills in mgt positions. (gee there's an idea eh)