Having endured several such calibration sessions at FB/Meta I can also assure you that we are not even talking about 'large' numbers before there is a strong expectation that the ranking totals within an org will meet the predicted curve when it comes to the percentage at exceeds, meets, and meets most. I distinctly remember wasting more than 15 minutes of my life arguing with a skip level manager that someone who had course corrected and delivered solid work while digging themselves out of a PIP was at least a meets before eventually realizing this manager had a quota of meets most to fill and the person we were discussing was destined for that bucket just to make the numbers look as expected.
Re:Meta and Google are cutting staff
by dustingetz on Wednesday September 21, 2022 @07:18PM
(#32932905)
as a manager what do you say there to the report
Re:Meta and Google are cutting staff
by fn-mote on Wednesday September 21, 2022 @08:52PM
(#32933574)
Polish your resume, the guillotine is coming and there's nothing I can do to save you.
I tried for you, remember me when your next job is hiring managers.
Re:Meta and Google are cutting staff
by disgruntledphd2 on Thursday September 22, 2022 @04:06AM
(#32936056)
Or if you know a team is hiring internally then push them towards that.
Ideally you'd do this before calibration so the rating doesn't mess it up.
A team of 20 people may have no low performers. An org of 400 probably has a couple, at some point the law of large numbers does really start to apply, and you're no longer in competition with the people you're working with on the daily.
If one member of your two-pizza team is going to get fired each year, it makes sense to throw someone under the bus on the reg. If one member of your 100 person org is going to get fired each year, that strategy doesn't make sense.