That is weird. They ask to rate not the person, but your feelings against the person. Yes, this very much simplifies manager's job - but remembering Kahneman's

That is weird. They ask to rate not the person, but your feelings against the person. Yes, this very much simplifies manager's job - but remembering Kahneman's Thinking Fast and Slow, people are notoriously skewed at measuring things through their feelings. A lot of personal factors, including levels of sugar in reviewer's blood, heavily affect this type of 'judgment'. I can see how Deloitte may be happy about spending less time on bullshit, and I applaud to that. I can also see how this new system is no different in consistency of the results compared to the previsions one - both are pure bullshit, so weighted random number generators work approximately the same when asked for 4 of 10 weighted random numbers. However, I really do not see this as progress. This is more of a regress - they see the problem, but they offer the solution that makes the managers slightly happier, and does nothing to precision or fairness of the system. What we need to do it stop blindly applying a sales-oriented performance rating system to engineers. We need specific set of quantified criteria for each group, and resulting rating should be calculated independently of the rater. We do not need more manager-oriented performance systems. We need to look at these systems form the point of the employee who is being rated.