4 ms·
> The system is not inherently good or bad, as long as all parties are aware of it. There's a lot of problems with stack ranking, not least that it discourages
by PhasmaFelis 9y ago
> The system is not inherently good or bad, as long as all parties are aware of it.
There's a lot of problems with stack ranking, not least that it discourages cooperation and encourages direct or indirect sabotage (e.g. declining to hire new prospects who you suspect might be better than you). Wikipedia discusses many of the issues: https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Vitality_curve https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Vitality_curve
- TuringNYC 9y agoThere is another problem with stack ranking -- I saw this at a previous employer: some people are hired into "4s and 5s" from the onset. I heard some hiring managers upset that they would have to force rank their hand-selected elite team into 1-5 ranks, and upset at the situation, they purposefully hired weak workers with the intention of slotting them into 4 and 5 ranks. Their argument was (i dont agree): - these weak workers wouldnt otherwise have a job - these weak workers get an extra year of employment they "dont deserve" - the strong team members get the 1,2,3 ranks they deserve - the hiring manager is "forced" to do this All that said, seems incredibly unfair to hire people directly into the chopping block without the expectation set from the start.
- sjg007 9y agoIt’s an oxymoron.. ‘we only hire the best and stack rank the rest’.
- kurusii 9y agoWow, that sounds awful. It's a losing situation all around, between the company not getting what it intended (firing the pre-existing dead weight, and getting rid of scapegoats) and, of course, the employees who are duped into joining just to be fired later. Which companies do this?