8 ms·

I futilely attempted to get reassigned to something close to field D (really, B, C, E, or F would have been just peachy) and that seemingly got me flagged as tr

I futilely attempted to get reassigned to something close to field D (really, B, C, E, or F would have been just peachy) and that seemingly got me flagged as trouble internally. "Meets Expectations" ranges from 3.0 to 3.4, and employees in this range have no idea where in that interval they landed, even the career effects of the numbers are dramatically different. 3.4 is above average, while 3.0 is fatal to transfer and promotion, even years later, but unlikely to get someone actually fired. There are several managers who've been caught using 3.0-3.1 to keep people captive but unaware of the fact that they've been internally blacklisted. It's disgusting but it happens. Whoever came up with the "innovation" of making review history part of a transfer packet (and that has nothing to do with Google; it pre-dates it) is a domestic terrorist and should get the same treatment that all the other terrorists get. It's a horrible system that eats companies from the inside. Enron's cultural decline (leading in macroscopic ethical lapses and bankruptcy) has been established to be a direct result of its globally-visible, mobility-destroying review system. Google's Perf is a play-for-play copy of Enron's PRC, but Google probably won't go the way of Enron for extrinsic reasons. A lot of Enron employees had nowhere to go (for geographical and specialty reasons) and had to make ethical compromises to beat PRC, whereas a lot Googlers leave for greener pastures when that happens.

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
tptacek 14y ago
WAT? Enron was a scam from the very highest levels of the corporation. Unless you're suggesting that Kenneth Lay got a 3.0 from his board of directors and reacted accordingly, this is a ridiculous comparison.
- dpritchett 14y ago
  Apologies in advance for the Gladwell link, but he's likely referring to Enron's "star system": http://www.gladwell.com/2002/2002_07_22_a_talent.htm http://www.gladwell.com/2002/2002_07_22_a_talent.htm
  - tptacek 14y ago
    I'm not disputing that there were silly McKinsey-ite management practices in place at Enron. I'm disputing the idea that those practices had anything to do with Enron's failure. The reason 'michaelochurch invoked Enron in his comment was to link Google with Enron, as if to imply that Google's internal management practices would eventually result in a similar comeuppance. That's an absurd connection to make.
    - deleted 14y ago
      [deleted]
    - michaelochurch 14y ago
      The reason 'michaelochurch invoked Enron in his comment was to link Google with Enron This is pretty much it. The companies have diametrically opposite reputations, so it arouses not a small chuckle that their performance review systems are almost identical. as if to imply that Google's internal management practices would eventually result in a similar comeuppance. Unlikely, for a variety of reasons. For one thing, Enron's executives were criminals. I think that Google's top guys are decent but unseasoned judges of character, which is how stuff like Perf gets through. Companies like Google have an unusually high rate of decent people getting the top jobs, but said decent people are generally terrible at telling when their underlings are lying to them (which, if you're high enough up, is almost always).
  - theorique 14y ago
    Why apologize for a Gladwell link?
    - engtech 14y ago
      Gladwell writes a lot of anecdotes which are then taken as pseudoscience, and unfortunately get repeated as science because of his popularity. http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2008/11/18.html http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2008/11/18.html > Michiko Kakutani reviews Malcolm Gladwell's latest book in the New York Times: “Much of what Mr. Gladwell has to say about superstars is little more than common sense: that talent alone is not enough to ensure success, that opportunity, hard work, timing and luck play important roles as well. The problem is that he then tries to extrapolate these observations into broader hypotheses about success. These hypotheses not only rely heavily on suggestion and innuendo, but they also pivot deceptively around various anecdotes and studies that are selective in the extreme: the reader has no idea how representative such examples are, or how reliable — or dated — any particular study might be.” > > This review captures what's been driving me crazy over the last year... an unbelievable proliferation of anecdotes disguised as science, self-professed experts writing about things they actually know nothing about, and amusing stories disguised as metaphors for how the world works. Whether it's Thomas Friedman, who, it seems, cannot go a whole week without inventing a new fruit-based metaphor explaining everything about the entire modern world, all based on some random jibberish he misunderstood from a taxi driver in Kuala Lumpur, or Malcolm Gladwell with his weak theories on tipping points, crazy incorrect theories on first impressions, or utterly lunatic theories on experts, it all becomes insanely popular simply because the stories are fun and interesting and everybody wants to hear a good story. Spare me.
- michaelochurch 14y ago
  It was actually Skilling, at least as much as Lay, who was responsible, but you're right that the corruption existed mostly at the executive levels. It's probably more likely that Enron's management practices were a symptom rather than a cause of moral depravity, but I tend to think of such things as self-perpetuating. PRC probably didn't do any cultural harm that wasn't already there, but it did no good.
illuminate 14y ago
"A lot of Enron employees had nowhere to go (for geographical and specialty reasons) and had to make ethical compromises" You're not seriously blaming Enron on your average grunt, are you?
- guelo 14y ago
  If you've heard the recording of the Enron traders joking about the California power crisis you know that some of those grunts were pretty unethical.
  - illuminate 14y ago
    No doubt. I'm was implying that the fraud was pervasive in all of the company's strata, that it was not the invention of your average low-level employee and manager.
- michaelochurch 14y ago
  No, of course not, but it wasn't only grunts who were subjected to PRC.
brown9-2 14y ago
Are you referring to Enron's stacked ranking practice? I don't think Google does anything approaching that.
- michaelochurch 14y ago
  At Google, "Perv" history is part of the transfer packet, which means that people with average political-success (sorry, I mean "performance") histories become immobile, creating a low-morale underclass that is good for mailing-list drama but bad for the company. It turns average employees and no-fault lack-of-fit cases into problem employees who have to be pushed out. It's disgusting, and people who believe this is okay shouldn't be allowed to make decisions that affect other people. Or drive. Or breathe. I know that practice is now typical in companies, but it's morally indefensible. Having "Don't Be Evil" as a motto is no excuse. I think Google is a great company in many ways and I have a lot of respect for the engineers I met there, but the people who designed "Perf" belong in jail for the billions of dollars of shareholder value that they torched for no good reason.
  - gadders 14y ago
    "Perv" history? They can see what you search for in incognito mode? :-O
    - joeblubaugh 14y ago
      Typo for "Perf" - or maybe you are making a joke I didn't get.
      - michaelochurch 14y ago
        Intentional typo. A lot of people call it Perv, as in perversion of justice.
        jrockway 14y ago
        A lot of people call it Perv This is the first time I've heard that term.
jerhewet 14y ago
> Enron's PRC Tried looking this up on Wikipedia, and I'm pretty sure you don't mean "People's Republic of China". Or any of the other disambiguations on the page I ended up on. So even though I'd like to read up on whatever it is you're talking about, I find myself without a clue.
- michaelochurch 14y ago
  Performance Review Committee. The inspiration for Google's Perf system. (Otherwise, the companies are very different, but they have very similar review systems.)
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

tptacek 14y ago

WAT? Enron was a scam from the very highest levels of the corporation. Unless you're suggesting that Kenneth Lay got a 3.0 from his board of directors and reacted accordingly, this is a ridiculous comparison.

dpritchett 14y ago
Apologies in advance for the Gladwell link, but he's likely referring to Enron's "star system": http://www.gladwell.com/2002/2002_07_22_a_talent.htm http://www.gladwell.com/2002/2002_07_22_a_talent.htm
- tptacek 14y ago
  I'm not disputing that there were silly McKinsey-ite management practices in place at Enron. I'm disputing the idea that those practices had anything to do with Enron's failure. The reason 'michaelochurch invoked Enron in his comment was to link Google with Enron, as if to imply that Google's internal management practices would eventually result in a similar comeuppance. That's an absurd connection to make.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
  - michaelochurch 14y ago
    The reason 'michaelochurch invoked Enron in his comment was to link Google with Enron This is pretty much it. The companies have diametrically opposite reputations, so it arouses not a small chuckle that their performance review systems are almost identical. as if to imply that Google's internal management practices would eventually result in a similar comeuppance. Unlikely, for a variety of reasons. For one thing, Enron's executives were criminals. I think that Google's top guys are decent but unseasoned judges of character, which is how stuff like Perf gets through. Companies like Google have an unusually high rate of decent people getting the top jobs, but said decent people are generally terrible at telling when their underlings are lying to them (which, if you're high enough up, is almost always).
- theorique 14y ago
  Why apologize for a Gladwell link?
  - engtech 14y ago
    Gladwell writes a lot of anecdotes which are then taken as pseudoscience, and unfortunately get repeated as science because of his popularity. http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2008/11/18.html http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2008/11/18.html > Michiko Kakutani reviews Malcolm Gladwell's latest book in the New York Times: “Much of what Mr. Gladwell has to say about superstars is little more than common sense: that talent alone is not enough to ensure success, that opportunity, hard work, timing and luck play important roles as well. The problem is that he then tries to extrapolate these observations into broader hypotheses about success. These hypotheses not only rely heavily on suggestion and innuendo, but they also pivot deceptively around various anecdotes and studies that are selective in the extreme: the reader has no idea how representative such examples are, or how reliable — or dated — any particular study might be.” > > This review captures what's been driving me crazy over the last year... an unbelievable proliferation of anecdotes disguised as science, self-professed experts writing about things they actually know nothing about, and amusing stories disguised as metaphors for how the world works. Whether it's Thomas Friedman, who, it seems, cannot go a whole week without inventing a new fruit-based metaphor explaining everything about the entire modern world, all based on some random jibberish he misunderstood from a taxi driver in Kuala Lumpur, or Malcolm Gladwell with his weak theories on tipping points, crazy incorrect theories on first impressions, or utterly lunatic theories on experts, it all becomes insanely popular simply because the stories are fun and interesting and everybody wants to hear a good story. Spare me.
michaelochurch 14y ago
It was actually Skilling, at least as much as Lay, who was responsible, but you're right that the corruption existed mostly at the executive levels. It's probably more likely that Enron's management practices were a symptom rather than a cause of moral depravity, but I tend to think of such things as self-perpetuating. PRC probably didn't do any cultural harm that wasn't already there, but it did no good.

illuminate 14y ago

"A lot of Enron employees had nowhere to go (for geographical and specialty reasons) and had to make ethical compromises" You're not seriously blaming Enron on your average grunt, are you?

guelo 14y ago
If you've heard the recording of the Enron traders joking about the California power crisis you know that some of those grunts were pretty unethical.
- illuminate 14y ago
  No doubt. I'm was implying that the fraud was pervasive in all of the company's strata, that it was not the invention of your average low-level employee and manager.
michaelochurch 14y ago
No, of course not, but it wasn't only grunts who were subjected to PRC.

brown9-2 14y ago

Are you referring to Enron's stacked ranking practice? I don't think Google does anything approaching that.

michaelochurch 14y ago
At Google, "Perv" history is part of the transfer packet, which means that people with average political-success (sorry, I mean "performance") histories become immobile, creating a low-morale underclass that is good for mailing-list drama but bad for the company. It turns average employees and no-fault lack-of-fit cases into problem employees who have to be pushed out. It's disgusting, and people who believe this is okay shouldn't be allowed to make decisions that affect other people. Or drive. Or breathe. I know that practice is now typical in companies, but it's morally indefensible. Having "Don't Be Evil" as a motto is no excuse. I think Google is a great company in many ways and I have a lot of respect for the engineers I met there, but the people who designed "Perf" belong in jail for the billions of dollars of shareholder value that they torched for no good reason.
- gadders 14y ago
  "Perv" history? They can see what you search for in incognito mode? :-O
  - joeblubaugh 14y ago
    Typo for "Perf" - or maybe you are making a joke I didn't get.
    - michaelochurch 14y ago
      Intentional typo. A lot of people call it Perv, as in perversion of justice.
      - jrockway 14y ago
        A lot of people call it Perv This is the first time I've heard that term.

jerhewet 14y ago

> Enron's PRC Tried looking this up on Wikipedia, and I'm pretty sure you don't mean "People's Republic of China". Or any of the other disambiguations on the page I ended up on. So even though I'd like to read up on whatever it is you're talking about, I find myself without a clue.

michaelochurch 14y ago
Performance Review Committee. The inspiration for Google's Perf system. (Otherwise, the companies are very different, but they have very similar review systems.)
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]