4 ms·
Your statement would also only be true if people could genuinely identify low performers every single time without causing collateral damage, you are able to al
by mustuhfa 8y ago
Your statement would also only be true if people could genuinely identify low performers every single time without causing collateral damage, you are able to always ensure you hire people that are good and the company culture does not devolve into a empire building system and managers are not power hungry people looking out only for themselves. And this happens, it happened at many silicon valley companies (including one I worked for that is well known). Stack ranking does not work. It creates a culture that ends up embodying all of what I said above.
- setr 8y ago>if people could genuinely identify low performers every single time without causing collateral damage, I'm not sure about collateral damage, but that's what I meant by a solid metric. If the metric isn't worth shit, then you're probably not doing much better than random selection, and perhaps worse, selecting on a trait you didn't mean to, or didn't want. e.g. power-hungry. But if you believe in the metric, the strategy is sensible (and its probably safe to assume such managers do indeed believe in their metric). Probably the bigger problem is there's no strategy in place to test the metric