Stack Ranking

Question

Stack Ranking

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 77 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply

tj 83432 Newbie Points: 7 More actions · Answer 1

What is the purpose of any of these companies using Stack Ranking? We used it throughout my USAF career, but the driver was the service's "Up or Out" personnel management philosophy. Short of that, I see no reason for instituting such a program/policy.

Dalkeith Hall of Fame Points: 3688 More actions · Answer 2

Not convinced about this.

Probably only needed if the Manager needs to manage people in disciplines they know nothing about.

If you know your subject you can quickly figure out what someone is good at and focus their responsibilities on that. Additionally people learn and change overtime.

You have to make a judgement on people's ability all the time but I think if you want to be a manager that is respected that should be done from a position of knowledge and not one of ignorance.

Please never let me be managed by someone like this. I personally don't like managing people in disciplines I have no knowledge of.

cloudydatablog.net

thadeushuck Ten Centuries Points: 1367 More actions · Answer 3

I worked in a stack & rank system as a manager and it is frustrating. My team of DBA's did manage to break the curve quite frequently. I would be told I had to rank guys a 1 and I'd ignore it rank my entire team 4's and 5's. Yeah, I would be scream and yelled at but in the end my manger would end up just doing an adjustment down the line as he blobbed up team ratings into larger departmental ratings. The point I made every year was that the system was flawed and silly since why would I have anyone who was a 1, 2 or even a 3. My team was full of rock stars. That place ended up bringing in some failed hosting exec who believed there was magical properties in 20-50-30 or some equally crap spread that he actually life boated guys out off of.

I think it is important for a manager to rank his people and do life boat drills where you figure out the order of who you would keep or throw out if you had to. You have to understand your team's work, projects and areas of responsibuilty continuously as a manager so you can react to business needs. IT groups in many companies take a hit when sales don't meet expectations. Having a few open req's or phatom to be hired spots on an IT staff to cutt instead of live bodies is a necessity these days. If you are a manager, I have and would rank honestly, and if the executives higher up want to put it into a silly formula/spread/bell curve let them do it. Most likely they do not like the system either.

Dalkeith Hall of Fame Points: 3688 More actions · Answer 4

thadeushuck (7/20/2012)
I worked in a stack & rank system as a manager and it is frustrating. My team of DBA's did manage to break the curve quite frequently. I would be told I had to rank guys a 1 and I'd ignore it rank my entire team 4's and 5's. Yeah, I would be scream and yelled at but in the end my manger would end up just doing an adjustment down the line as he blobbed up team ratings into larger departmental ratings.

BS of the highest order

cloudydatablog.net

Eric M Russell SSC Guru Points: 125560 More actions · Answer 5

I can see how stack ranking would be a useful tool for a company who has a tight budget for pay raises and performance bonuses, or a company which is considering layoffs but not necessarily wanting to layoff based primarily on seniority (ie: keep the fresh new blood but drop some of the old dead wood).

"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho

patrick-1135833 Valued Member Points: 72 More actions · Answer 6

Yet another reason I will only work for a small company.

Your accomplishments are noticed and measurable. Screw up enough and you're out. Simple and effective.

Left the corporate world very early on in my career just as soon as I got a taste of just how ridiculous it is.

derek.colley SSCrazy Eights Points: 8040 More actions · Answer 7

The problem is, it's all relative and totally subjective. There's too many factors affecting the bell~~(end?)~~ curve, from how you and your job is perceived through to your social skills, professional importance / ability, and personality.

I've been managed like this before and had absolutely no time for it at all. Generally I hit and exceeded my objectives, co-operated and innovated, and never worried too much what other people thought about me.

I get at least one phone call a week offering me a job interview so I must be doing something right.

---

Note to developers:
CAST(SUBSTRING(CAST(FLOOR(NULLIF(ISNULL(COALESCE(1,NULL),NULL),NULL)) AS CHAR(1)),1,1) AS INT) == 1
So why complicate your code AND MAKE MY JOB HARDER??!:crazy:

Want to get the best help? Click here https://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/forum-etiquette-how-to-post-datacode-on-a-forum-to-get-the-best-help (Jeff Moden)
My blog: http://uksqldba.blogspot.com
Visit http://www.DerekColley.co.uk to find out more about me.

Steve Jones - SSC Editor SSC Guru Points: 736063 More actions · Answer 8

mtucker-732014 (7/19/2012)
Thats a crazy system!
If you did have a group of people to begin with that had people who were 1 and 2, after you had weeded them out you would then be forced to rank people who previously 3,4, or 5 downwards even if their performance improved

Yes. I had a great team of ten people. I ended up having to have a "2", and moved a guy from 3-2. Quite an embarrassing review (for me) and hard conversation to have.

Steve Jones - SSC Editor SSC Guru Points: 736063 More actions · Answer 9

tj 83432 (7/20/2012)
What is the purpose of any of these companies using Stack Ranking? We used it throughout my USAF career, but the driver was the service's "Up or Out" personnel management philosophy. Short of that, I see no reason for instituting such a program/policy.

It's a driver. It can work in medical schools, where people are competing to stay or rise to the top. If you get told you're a 3, you buckle down and work harder. Same for 2. Ultimately it's a dog-eat-dog system that doesn't breed teamwork.

Steve Jones - SSC Editor SSC Guru Points: 736063 More actions · Answer 10

derek.colley (7/20/2012)
The problem is, it's all relative and totally subjective. There's too many factors affecting the bell~~(end?)~~ curve, from how you and your job is perceived through to your social skills, professional importance / ability, and personality.

Yep, it's crazy.

sjm SSC Journeyman Points: 79 More actions · Answer 11

I worked for many years under such a rating system. One of the big problems is the size of the sample used. Each group (DBAs, Analysts, Programmers, etc) even though they might only be 20 people in a 35,000 employee company, was required to fit into that curve. This meant that even though all twenty people would be 5s or at least 4s from a corporate point of view, some of them were classified as 4s, 3s, 2s and even 1s. Of course the 1s were counseled or done away with and the 2s and 3s were penalized in their annual salary reviews. Yet the corporation was really proud of the way it enforced continous improvement by using this technique.

OCTom SSChampion Points: 11785 More actions · Answer 12

This is similar to what Jack Welch (was GE's boss) uses. He claims that there is always the bottom 20% that need to be fired each year; regardless of how good they are. He believes that weeding those out at the bottom fosters everyone else to work harder and smarter to not be in the bottom 20%.

I have seen this in action at a large company (not GE) and it fosters only politics amongst the staff. They won't try to do more work or better work. They will try to play up to the management and get on their good side. Whomever is the best at that will be ranked at the top.

Speaking of Microsoft... USA Today reports today thay Microsoft reported a loss for the 2nd quarter. It is their first loss as a public company.

hakim.ali SSCarpal Tunnel Points: 4239 More actions · Answer 13

I first heard of the stack ranking system in MBA school, on a case study. I believe it was Jack Welch, famous CEO of GE, that pioneered the system in the 1980s. Every year, he would fire the "bottom" 10% of his staff and reward the "top" 20% of his staff. It worked wonders for GE at the time, because the company was riddled with inefficient bureaucracy and was suffering from management bloat. Imitators all over the country thought this was an excellent idea and started aping it without considering whether it belonged in their environment or not.

To echo previous comments, this might have been effective in one situation with a broad range of competencies, but after you have done it once and weeded out the non-performers, I don't see any value in continuing to do this. I, for one, would immediately start looking for a way out if my company started doing this. It does not accomplish anything, destroys morale, and makes you constantly scared. I would guess it probably also leads to a workplace where you are trying to impress your managers far more than you are trying to get work done (no they are not the same thing), by increasing your visibility etc.

The best work comes from a relaxed mind. By stack ranking, you almost guarantee shoddy work. Nuff said.

Hakim Ali
www.sqlzen.com

Eric M Russell SSC Guru Points: 125560 More actions · Answer 14

hakim.ali (7/20/2012)
I first heard of the stack ranking system in MBA school, on a case study. I believe it was Jack Welch, famous CEO of GE, that pioneered the system in the 1980s. Every year, he would fire the "bottom" 10% of his staff and reward the "top" 20% of his staff. It worked wonders for GE at the time, because the company was riddled with inefficient bureaucracy and was suffering from management bloat. Imitators all over the country thought this was an excellent idea and started aping it without considering whether it belonged in their environment or not.
To echo previous comments, this might have been effective in one situation with a broad range of competencies, but after you have done it once and weeded out the non-performers, I don't see any value in continuing to do this. I, for one, would immediately start looking for a way out if my company started doing this. It does not accomplish anything, destroys morale, and makes you constantly scared. I would guess it probably also leads to a workplace where you are trying to impress your managers far more than you are trying to get work done (no they are not the same thing), by increasing your visibility etc.
The best work comes from a relaxed mind. By stack ranking, you almost guarantee shoddy work. Nuff said.

The ancient Roman military had a form of punishment called "decimation" which they used on units who retreated from battle without orders or failed to perform in some way. They would execute every 10th man, sometimes by lining them up and tapping every 10th man on the shoulder.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimation_(Roman_army)

"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho

Mike Dougherty-384281 SSCrazy Points: 2794 More actions · Answer 15

It seems everyone is agreed that it's a flawed system. Considering the audience here is comprised of DBA and developers, I'm surprised there haven't been more improved-system suggestions. Sure it would be great if managers we always close enough to their team to have a clue about who really did work - but from a process/engineering perspective we must admit that the non-technical managers aren't likely to have this ability. I'd rather a flawed system of metrics with a too-simplistic measurement than no measurement at all; that leads to favoritism and is open to social exploit of human nature. Tech "nerds" historically don't spend much attention to building those so-called soft skills.

If managers generally understood the 20% displaced workers out the bottom of one company might be in the top 20% at their own company then the job-change might not be as threatening. It's when the housecleaning leaves competent people unemployed that an injustice is perpetrated "by the numbers"

So what parameters are missing from this overly-simplistic stack ranking system? If you were to implement a system of metrics for your (or larger) company that could be implemented dispassionately across multiple departments, what measures would you take and where would you place them in numeric formula? If you use KLOC for developers, how do you measure accountants? (I hope nobody is still using KLOC for anything other than contrived measurement examples)