Everyone forgetting about Lisa Brummel and "stack ranking"?
That nearly ruined Microsoft...
https://www.seattletimes.com/business/microsoft-ditches-syst...
replies(6):
That nearly ruined Microsoft...
https://www.seattletimes.com/business/microsoft-ditches-syst...
that doesn't mean it's easy to implement, manage, or impossible to game, or that it plays nice wrt human factors, but to attack the core idea as essentially wrong is anti math, science, and rationality.
Microsoft always suffered from rewarding egotists and political animals over people who did actual work.
When you hire 12 baristas are they competing to make the most coffees or is their job to handle customer's orders? If their job isn't to compete with each other then don't stack rank them. Use other metrics like #of incorrect orders or w/e and decide what you think they should've done and if they did more than that give them a bonus. If they do less then maybe you need a new employee.
> Microsoft always suffered from rewarding egotists and political animals over people who did actual work.
That has nothing to do with grading on a curve. You can assign people to the top of a curve based on "egotist" criteria or based on "work". Nothing about a curve or stack ranking requires it to be based on "real work".
Both? Handling customer orders is how the sport is played, but at the same time they are competing for the most points (money) in that gameplay.
Because that's what is necessary in a market economy? If they don't put in effort to compete, the customer will find another team of baristas that will. It is not like it is hard to find another coffeeshop.
> you shouldn't have to arbitrarily put someone at the bottom of the curve
What is arbitrary about it? The reality is that more coffeeshops open than can actually be supported by coffee drinkers, so it is an economic necessity that some end up shuttering due to being at the "bottom of the curve".