At my work, we were asked to rank each other anonymously.

[t0dd]

At my company, we were recently instructed to rank and rate each other in a confidential way. Even though there are multiple teams within the organization, even though there are people I've never even met or worked with, we were told to "do our best" and assign the best possible score we could to every individual.

A backlash ensued after we were told to do this. Some of us felt it would threaten the cohesion and family atmosphere we enjoy by encouraging gossip and dissent among us. Some of us equated the idea with a reality television show, imagining that the person ranked last would be made an example of and "voted off the island". Many of us were uncomfortable with the idea.

While I understand the usefulness of peer review when it comes to a company moving forward, I think it should be limited to constructive criticism. I know all of my coworkers work very hard and are intensely devoted to meeting the standards our customers expect of us. But there's a difference between constructive review and injecting unnecessary animosity into a group of people.

I know our responses would not just be used for improvement purposes. I'm sure there's a desire underneath it all to "weed out" those that are unfortunately ranked lower than others. And how fair is that? I don't like this cut-throat attitude. I cherish my colleagues and want them all to succeed.

Our company is doing very well, and this idea they proposed will only damage the loyalty and trust we share. It isn't hard to measure the quality of our output. If they want to create competition among us, they should provide incentives for doing that, not ask us to sell each other out because our superiors are unwilling to do the performance reviews for us. I might give everyone a 10 or provide some useful comments, but there is no way I'm ranking my friends. If they want to imitate reality television and transform our harmonious environment into a competitive, impersonal place where a set of anonymous reviews determines fate like the cast of Survivor around a fire, that's fine, but count me out of it.

[regnaD kciN]

1. A little more than a decade ago, after our software company had been acquired by Sierra...

...news came down of a new "personnel plan" designed by upper management: At the end of each year, the manager of the division was to rank every employee in order of value, fire the bottom 10%, and hire new people to replace them. Supposedly, this would, over time, "weed out" the "unfit" performers and improve the quality of the division's employees. The thing was, we were a very small company that had already gotten used to working in small teams, each complementing the other. Aside from two or three lead programmers that were generally acknowledged to be the top people at the company, everyone treated each other as equals (actually, those lead programmers did as well, even though we knew they were the best), and all worked to fill in each other's gaps for the good of the company. In short, a good-working team. You have no idea how much it changed the mood at the company to know that our job might depend, not only on our doing a good job, but on making sure that other employees were recognized as not being as good as us.

Fortunately, that plan never happened, mainly because our manager (the former owner of our earlier small company) told upper management what they could do with their plan. Unfortunately, he was fired within a year, and the entire division was shut down a year thereafter. :-(

And, not too long thereafter, all of Sierra was shut down by their new corporate owners.

Ah, the joys of American capitalism...

[donco]

5. Pass a note around saying everyone rate themselves. nt

[melm00se]

30. that's the GE/Jack Welch model

work to retain the top 10-20%, drill the bottom 10-20%, constantly "refreshing your hand". This is in addition to "voluntary" turnover.

[elehhhhna]

33. Enron bragged about using this brilliant technique.

[rwheeler31]

2. That is disgusting, they want you to fire people.

[MadMaddie]

3. This way it takes the responsibility off of the management team

see how that works? They can then say that the coworkers were the ones that ranked the employees.

This is just a cop out by management.

Another favorite thing these companies do is to hire outside HR consultants to come in and evaluate employees...etc....yea I got let go from a job because of that....That was a real good time!:mad:

[CherokeeDem]

20. I Do Some Outside HR Consulting....

and I had a company ask me to do just that; they wanted to downsize and needed an "unbiased" opinion of which employees were not performing up to expectations. I told them that I would be happy to review and revamp the employee evaluation process that their managers used for yearly reviews and counseling. I also would train their managers how to properly assess their staff but I was NOT going to select people for downsizing.

They did hire me to overhaul their evaluation process but I never recommended one employee for termination. You're right it a cop out by management and bad management is as much to blame for underachieving employees. Unfortunately, they have the power.

[2Design]

4. Rank and Yank implemented more than 25 years ago in corporate america

that is the same as what they are doing with teachers - you have to hope to be part of a loser department - with teachers they need the brightest students - no one wants the losers or clueless

[BlueJazz]

6. Everybody get together and give each other an "A" on every trait.

:)

[targetpractice]

7. Yet folks on DU love the anonymous "un-rec" feature.

It's a terrible idea if you want to foster teamwork and group cohesion.

I'm not surprised the anonymous ranking has caused at backlash at your employer... Just look at the amount of ill-will caused by the DU "un-rec" feature.

[ret5hd]

15. So you admit that somes livelihood derives from their posts on DU?

:rofl: what a crock.

[KittyWampus]

17. actually, the poster had a very, very valid point. The Unrec fosters incivility & pettiness

of a sort that your reply seems a good example.

[ret5hd]

19. My incivility is genuine and true, as is my ridicule.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Ikonoklast]

8. We were asked to do that...once.

The problem was, everyone despised management, so every ranking for everyone came back as stellar. Even people that were loathed by their co-workers got a fabulous review by their fellow employees.

There was no way that management was going to make the hired help responsible for doing their dirty work.

If they didn't know who their stars were, and who was the deadwood, then as management they weren't doing a very good job, and we weren't about to do it for them.



They never bothered to do it again.



Not that there wasn't any collusion on our part, mind you.

[Hekate]

9. I suggest you "anonymously and confidentially" submit a copy of this post to those yahoos...

... who thought this up. When you work someplace where "It isn't hard to measure the quality of our output," then that should be the criteria that management uses, not this half-assed sociogram.

It makes me wonder if they hired an outside consulting agency to come up with ideas for improvement and that this is the latest buzz, now that "team building exercises" have run their course.

WWDD? -- What would Dilbert do?

Hekate

[CoffeeCat]

10. I wouldn't do it...

This is disgusting.

It fosters disharmony and distrust among employees.

Everyone should get together and agree to draw smiley face cartoons and other doodles and on their papers--and
not do any ranking.

Although, knowing corporate America---they've probably somehow coded each individual survey and know who filled
out what survey.

How ever you chose to play this--the company for which you work, sucks raw eggs.

[onehandle]

11. Oh, man. I used to work for a global company that instituted this. It did not last. nt

[justabob]

12. I can't imagine that in an "real job" setting

I worked in a corporate restaurant and every month the waiter ratings went out to the entire waitstaff, the kitchen manager, dining room manager(s) and barstaff... rate 1-5 in five categories - attitude, sidework/run food, reliability, etc. No one ever got fired because of ratings, but it did effect the schedule and stations you got. I loved it as a waiter, but I can't see how any kind of system like that would work in an office/professional setting where everyone's responsiblities are so varied. It worked pretty well with a pool of 50+ waiters rating each other because we all had the same duties.

[snagglepuss]

13. Gawd corporations have pathetically stupid people in charge.

The first thing that comes to my mind is that the best performers might well be targetted by others who don't want the bar set so high. I think someone might one to mention that possibility to the dimwits in management.

In so many ways it is an utterly stupid idea. As if there weren't enough stress in the workplace already.


I hope it works out and they re-consider.

[MercutioATC]

14. How did you participate?

Since it's anonymous, I would have submitted a blank questionnaire with "Screw You" written on it and encouraged everybody else to do the same....but I've never been a good team player.

[t0dd]

16. We turn in reviews tomorrow. That sounds like a good idea :) nt

[MercutioATC]

18. It's a tough job market. Maybe leave out the "screw you".

Occasionally, discretion really is the better part of valor.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

35. Better yet -- just mark everybody with the highest rank, and maybe scribble...

..."I highly value all my coworkers."

[flyarm]

21. I hope everyone ranked everyone else as high as permitted!!

that way it negates that kind of bullshit tactic!

[Mithreal]

23. My last workplace was doing well at the time too

claimed they did this for distributing bonuses. Not only were there unexpected consequences but we were decimated, more than a tenth of us were given opportunity to resign.

There is a lots of cheap labor out there and we all have to compete with people who will work for much less or so I am told by both political parties.

[Hannah Bell]

24. good for you. wish more people would do the same. those wedges

are multiple & ubiquitous in the workplace & seems like some people delight in things like rating their colleagues (not to mention ratting them out & worse... :>) like they'd get brownie points for it or something. like they personally owned the shop.

[JDPriestly]

25. Is this similar to what they did at Enron?

I vaguely remember that Enron had some similar peer rating system. If someone saw the movie on Enron, maybe they can explain it better than I can.

This is positively sick.

[Lochloosa]

26. Are the people that came up with this BS on the list?

If they are rate them at the bottom then rate everyone else at the top.

If they are not on the list. Add your own.

[Joanne98]

27. They're trying to bring competition down to the worker level. It's a trick!

What they're really doing is a "divide and conquer" scheme.

Corporations are EVIL!

[varelse]

28. The backlash proves one thing

You are all intelligent, compassionate, and honorable people - in other words, you're a team most managers would give their eye teeth to have.

What a shame for your clueless management that they don't get that. :(

[Obamanaut]

29. On the grading form that is submitted, do not put a name on it. The

evaluator and evaluatee will both be anonymous, and the requirement to evaluate will be met.

Get everyone on board with this.

[TwilightGardener]

31. I underwent peer review as a nurse, at one hospital I worked at.

My prior management reviews were all very good. My peer review was...mixed, with one anonymous coworker bitching that one of my patients' rooms wasn't cleaned or straightened to his/her standards ONE morning, and another questioned my professional judgment on one case. None of these coworkers had ever said anything to my face. Boy, did my morale drop--and I kept trying to figure out who said this about me. It's very, very hard NOT to take it personally, especially when you think that you're friends with these people. Peer review is a bad idea for a lot of reasons. I think it should be up to management to assess employees.

[Javaman]

32. Since it's supposed to be "anonymous", just give everyone and excellent review.

And tell everyone else to do the same thing.

It would instantly nullify the results.

[eppur_se_muova]

36. And anyone who doesn't accept the results is "just being negative". nt

:P

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

34. That NEVER ends well. Been there, done that. -nt