>>1112649
How else you are gonna evaluate the performance of different departments? Can't grade truck drivers on writing skills.

Eerily similar to parent-teacher conferences in grade school ...

>>1112649
Idk man thier are various flavors of this bullshit ranging from "avg is great u ah gud boy" to "we are going to rate you on a scale of 1-5, and even though 3 is 'average' 4 is "above average' and 5 is "outstanding" we are going to punish you for anything less than a 5 in the 30 different competencies we rate you on"

The one I have now is ok, but so fucking complex it takes a PHD to understand.

>>1112939
OMB|V|||

3


Also, cocaine.

Keeping wages down.

the easy solution here is to not give a shit and refuse to underperform
stay quiet, keep your head down, and just take the piddly 1-3% raises until you have enough years of experience to move up to the next position

>>1113822
overperform*

>>1112649
We have Objectives and Core Competencies (rated 1 to 5).
If you achieve the Objectives, you get your bonus (it's 3-tiered), and these cannot be part of your day to day work.
The Core Competencies is your day to day work and your salary increase depends on it; if you rate yourself high, you need to back yourself up with examples.

I keep an "Achievements" file on my desktop and record everything from big successes to tiny victories throughout the year, and post it on the system after I give myself big ol' 5s in each competency.
Then wear down my boss and only sign off the final version when she agrees with me.

From what I've heard only 4% of the staff are allowed to be "top performers" because that's all the money in the bonus pot, but I am so pushy I make sure I get max each year.

>>1114133
Ha-ha what a cuck. Just work for a small software company where every employee matters and can contribute in a meaningful way without it getting overlooked. What a massive waste of time and money.