4 ms·

I was a manager at Amazon for teams of 5-15 engineers. The smallest percentage for "needs improvement" ratings I was expected to hit was 5%, the largest was 15

I was a manager at Amazon for teams of 5-15 engineers. The smallest percentage for "needs improvement" ratings I was expected to hit was 5%, the largest was 15%. Anyone who was needs improvement would be added to the "dev list", and many would enter into a pip. Eventually, Amazon added a system called Pivot that was designed to soften the need improvement process. It did seem to result in fewer pips. 70% of people who entered a pip failed and were terminated. Any manager with an employee who had two connective needs improvement ratings was themselves given a needs improvement. The expectation was clear - fire them or fix them within 6 months.

cperciva 4y ago
The smallest percentage for "needs improvement" ratings I was expected to hit was 5%, the largest was 15%. How do you do that if you're managing a team of 5? Any manager with an employee who had two connective needs improvement ratings was themselves given a needs improvement. Makes sense to me. A manager's #1 job should be to ensure that the people who report to them are able to work to the full extent of their capabilities; if you're not assisting employees who need improvement, you have no business being a manager.
- donavanm 4y ago
  > How do you do that if you're managing a team of 5? Law of large numbers at higher org levels, not individual teams. No one is hitting a specific 5% or 20% on a single team. Even at a sr manager scope with 25-50 people it's not going to be exact. But at a Director or VP, with 300-3,000, then you can see the performance target values come in to focus. Regardless theyre all targets and exceptions, with lots of explanation, do happen for good and ill.
  - mgrthrow 4y ago
    But your director has a mandate, and they will pass that down and force everyone to at least consider who on their team could be NI.
jmpman 4y ago
“Any manager with an employee who had two connective needs improvement ratings was themselves given a needs improvement.“ If your employee had year over year “needs improvement”, they would rate the manager as “needs improvement”? Why would a manager who has control over their employees have any incentive to keep an employee with “needs improvement”. It seems like the manager would be incentivized to do one of the following: 1. Ensure their “needs improvement” employee is dismissed. 2. Artificially rate their employee higher than “needs improvement” in the second year. The manager has control over the rating process. 3. Encourage their employee to transfer to another team. 4. Transfer to another team themselves. 5. Help improve their employee through coaching and feedback. Although #5 should be the preferred approach, it’s the one which requires change by the employee. 1-4 are completely under control of the manager.
- mgrthrow 4y ago
  I mean, you've called out what happened exactly. Managers got aggressive in firing folks, they dumped them to other teams, or they'd play rating roulette and give others a needs improvement ratings.

cperciva 4y ago

The smallest percentage for "needs improvement" ratings I was expected to hit was 5%, the largest was 15%. How do you do that if you're managing a team of 5? Any manager with an employee who had two connective needs improvement ratings was themselves given a needs improvement. Makes sense to me. A manager's #1 job should be to ensure that the people who report to them are able to work to the full extent of their capabilities; if you're not assisting employees who need improvement, you have no business being a manager.

donavanm 4y ago
> How do you do that if you're managing a team of 5? Law of large numbers at higher org levels, not individual teams. No one is hitting a specific 5% or 20% on a single team. Even at a sr manager scope with 25-50 people it's not going to be exact. But at a Director or VP, with 300-3,000, then you can see the performance target values come in to focus. Regardless theyre all targets and exceptions, with lots of explanation, do happen for good and ill.
- mgrthrow 4y ago
  But your director has a mandate, and they will pass that down and force everyone to at least consider who on their team could be NI.

jmpman 4y ago

“Any manager with an employee who had two connective needs improvement ratings was themselves given a needs improvement.“ If your employee had year over year “needs improvement”, they would rate the manager as “needs improvement”? Why would a manager who has control over their employees have any incentive to keep an employee with “needs improvement”. It seems like the manager would be incentivized to do one of the following: 1. Ensure their “needs improvement” employee is dismissed. 2. Artificially rate their employee higher than “needs improvement” in the second year. The manager has control over the rating process. 3. Encourage their employee to transfer to another team. 4. Transfer to another team themselves. 5. Help improve their employee through coaching and feedback. Although #5 should be the preferred approach, it’s the one which requires change by the employee. 1-4 are completely under control of the manager.

mgrthrow 4y ago
I mean, you've called out what happened exactly. Managers got aggressive in firing folks, they dumped them to other teams, or they'd play rating roulette and give others a needs improvement ratings.