Consider that many organizational structures are designed to get maximum benefit from most employees - and, almost by definition, most employees are average. HR

Consider that many organizational structures are designed to get maximum benefit from most employees - and, almost by definition, most employees are average. HR, for example, exists partly if not primarily to 1) identify those in the bottom fraction (whatever that fraction is) and make them harmless as painlessly as possible (this might mean getting them out the door or it might mean shunting to a position where the {harm, value, cost} equation works out adequately well; 2) identifying those in the middle and retaining them as cheaply as possible, possibly with non-financial incentives appealing to affiliation motives, sloganeering, etc.; and 3) to identify the crème-de-la-crème, the wolves, the going-places-and-will-rock-it-along-the-way, etc., and tailoring incentives, including compensation, for these. I'd go so far as to say that most managers (not all, and not the best ones, but most) will attempt to game HR into forcing their misfits into the bottom fraction (these could be potentially stellar performers who don't fit with the manager) and will attempt to convince everyone that they have stars when they don't, because it makes them look good. The managers and executives who want the top percentile players recognize that they have to fight HR to make the right things happen, because often HR, like all other organizations, is filled with average players who recognize those whose performance is below theirs and cannot fathom those whose performance is above - they see only the bared teeth, the feral eyes, and assume the wolf must be culled. They do not recognize its value. (Yeah, OK, this meandered a bit. Honestly, I'm too lazy to write it well, so I'm going for metaphorical effect. But you might know what I mean....)