Do they rank people in the same band against each other? Does that then determine promotion or compensation or both (and in what way?)
Thank you!
7 replies (most recent on top)
In talent planning, groups in the same band are compared and contrasted by the managers in order to defend the rating and stack rank the group. Exceeds employees are always important to rank, because the top ranked are evaluated for promotion or succession. Depending on where you work, meets are also ranked, because the bottom ranked are considered first for elimination. This debate among managers can get quite testy when they are forced to defend their employees. Employees that do not provide their managers with ammunition for this defense aren't helping themselves.
Quotas/guidelines are important for exceeds (20%), your manager will have to fight hard to get more than his/her quota from his/her peer group in one-up talent planning sessions. Quotas for does-not-meet are only important for groups that are actively eliminating positions. If your group is not looking to eliminate positions, only truly bad performers will be placed here, as DNM usually required follow up actions that are a pain in the butt to manage.
My experience with bonuses in a group with a lot of good people is that ratings don't make a big deal. My manager tried to consistently spread bonuses out, so as not to lose people. It probably depends on the manager, however.
First of all, promotion in the current environment? LOL! Having a job is as close as you will get to that....
Regarding earlier responses - "bubbled up" means getting reviewed up the food chain. If the overall rating distribution for a broader line of business is skewed too positively it will need to be changed.
Band 4 gets a lot of attention because it contains higher salaries and bonuses than bands 5, 6, 7 etc. As you get older, more experienced and more expensive you also become more vulnerable when heads go on the chopping block. A manager who can cut a senior person and save money gets brownie points for making "tough" decisions. The decisions may in fact be stupid and short sighted, but with nearly no institutional memory and a completely short term focus no one at BAC cares.
The What rating is the money rating. The How cannot really help you, but it can hurt you and provide a convenient excuse to eliminate you on the downside. If you are really good at the What you would have to be a toxic jerk of world class proportions to get a bad How rating. In a sense you would also have to be stupid by not properly gaming the 360 review (choose your raters wisely, and exchange favors on that as needed).
Quote: As a manager I had to rank by band, and it was a formula, 20/70/10, and it keeps getting bubbled up and redone at every level. Particular interest at the band 4 level
What do you mean bubbled up? would that mean 15/70/15 (15% gets an exceeds or does it mean 15% get promoted?)
What is the interest at the B4 level? For the last few years, I know there has been concentration on reducing band 4s- is this what you mean?
As a manager I had to rank by band, and it was a formula, 20/70/10, and it keeps getting bubbled up and redone at every level. Particular interest at the band 4 level
Thank you for the informative response. In which category do you have to get an exceeds for a promotion? Both?
We havent had to rank people other than the very few being put up for an exceeds. Those we rank incase we get push back on the # of exceeds - i.e. we had 5 and someone says we get 3. Promotions in our group are submitted by managers and supporting reasons discussed. Comp has always been separate. Nothing has ever been formulaic like you ranked in the top 20% so your increase is 4%, ranked in middle so no incraese, etc. I'm sure every group is different but we have always looked at promotions based upon the quality and quantity of work being produced vs the level and expectations for someone in that role. Im not in tech or ops so ymmv
"Promotion" do you work at BOA? There is no such thing in this climate