Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft does away with stack ranking

zdnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 159 posts

Re: Microsoft does away with stack ranking

#121

Post by Ensorceled »

dreamfactory wrote: post #79
YZF wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

360 isn't perfect but it's better than the alternative. You're basically saying that those who worked daily in close interaction with the 10x developer and had to work with the code that developer produced, had lower regard for his technical ability than a manager who presumably is further removed? You can't ignore the social aspect. A team with social frictions isn't going to work as well as a team that enjoys worki…

Makes me wonder if he wasn't a prolific tech debt producer who was seen by management to GTD.

No, but I know exactly what you mean. Years ago I was on a team where the "super star" was assigned all new work. The rest of us had to fix the bugs in their code.

At the finale, 5 people were doing nothing but fixing bugs in the "stars" previous projects. That's when senior management finally clued in to the problem and fired both the manager and the "super star".

Re: Microsoft does away with stack ranking

#122

Post by myg204 »

potatolicious wrote: post #38
DerpDerpDerp wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also opens the possibility of giving a team of all rockstars, if they're (as a team) performing highly, a bigger reward pool that can be split evenly between them. I seem to think it's much easier to convince them your awesome team producing awesome products (and taking in awesome money) should get extra money to spend than it is to convince people you shouldn't have to rank any of your employees lowly when they a…

I honestly don't even get why reward pools are such a big deal. I do work for you, I am owed compensation based on terms we've negotiated before I started working for you. From time to time these terms will come up for renegotiation. There is no need for compensation in excess of what we've negotiated. Sure, I am not one to turn down free money, but understand that this does not affect our normal compensation discuss…

> Discretionary bonuses are full of shit.

It's both a carrot and a stick for the company over the employee.

Re: Microsoft does away with stack ranking

#123

Post by Pxtl »

bskap wrote: post #80
Pxtl wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the outside as a developer, you can feel the effect of such a drama-driven system as Stack Rank. MS's obsession with perfect backwards compatibility means they can't make mistakes, because those mistakes are forever . So why embrace a process that seems to celebrate daring? A move-fast-and-break-things approach to projects? You'd think MS would be an analysis-paralysis company, because every MS product needs to…

From an inside perspective, stack ranking was actually hurting backwards compatibility. "I made this cool new feature" gets you a lot more recognition come review time than "I made sure that Sim City kept working in the new version of Windows". That's why no one really takes the time to fix things like the console host, preferring instead to write the fancy new PowerShell ISE.

Still, it felt like BC was always a priority at MS, even if things often slipped by... it just felt like they were trying to maintain backwards compatibility on so many APIs and products in cases where things really did need breaking fixes. But instead of breaking fixes, we get a Whole New Product that is totally better than the old one, but has its own learning curve and its own problems and none of those will get fixed either.

Also, the new powershell ISE is slick (reminds me of Python), but at the same time the near-total lack of integration between Powershell and Visual Studio is pretty surprising. I generally find Powershell a bit disappointing... it feels kind of messy next to C# or Python or plain command-line. I'd probably rather just have a C# REPL with good intellisense. I'm sure one exists.

Re: Microsoft does away with stack ranking

#124

Post by codeonfire »

jredwards wrote: post #58
Ensorceled wrote: post #34

One major thing I learned from 360 reviews is how bad developers are at judging each other or their manager. I've had employees on probation for lack of productivity judged as excellent by their peers because of their ability to socialize their "abilities". I had the best developer on my team (a 10x developer if ever there was one) get slammed on technical ability rankings because of his prickly personality. My VP an…

Likability is underrated. Someone who is easy to work with, improves workplace morale, and makes other developers feel comfortable at work is a valuable asset. Certainly, it shouldn't be a substitute for technical ability, but it can be a very significant complimentary attribute.

How would you feel about a team of only eminently likable people, none of whom could produce anything of value but all are very well liked, because this is the end game to rating likability.

Re: Microsoft does away with stack ranking

#126

Post by Brakenshire »

sib wrote: post #61
alkonaut wrote: post #36

I wasn't aware that US companies ranked employees and used rankings when purging the workforce (when I think about it it's a pretty obvious idea). In countries with stronger labour laws "underperformance" basically isn't a reason to fire someone. The employer is responsible for the employees performance (training etc.). This can be frustrating in the software business when just a few really poor performers can really…

"In countries with stronger labour laws..." Interesting. I would refer to those as countries with "weaker" or "perverse" employment laws...

Can we drop the manipulation of language? Strong is obviously equivalent to strict, the meaning is clear-cut. It's not difficult to use these words and disagree with the principle they describe.

Re: Microsoft does away with stack ranking

#127

Post by RogerL »

ethomson wrote: post #25
r00fus wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't it the case the stacked ranking exacerbated the backstabbing issue? I see this move overall as a positive one for Microsoft - without removing the perverse rewards to screw over your teammates and other teams, the actual cultural fix can't take place. I think the culture will shift soon - Microsoft, for more than a decade, had no real competitors. They made more money each year whether they executed (see Win2k)…

My point was that no, I don't think stack ranking provides a greater impetus to backstabbing your coworkers than this sort of vague compensation model. In fact, I think a continuous model may lead to more backstabbing than exists now. Currently, I go into a bucket - let's say I'm a two, for instance - and all the twos get the same compensation. Can I backstab somebody so that I get a two and they get a three? Maybe.…

In the world outside of stack ranking, you aren't winning/losing against your peers, you are being paid what you are worth. Backstabbing somebody else does not change your worth, it just makes them less valuable than you. So your salary does not change, theirs just goes down.

Far more importantly, I have spent my 25 year career in non-stack ranked companies, and I have never seen the behavior you describe. Yet just about everyone at stack ranked companies report back stabbing behavior. I think empiricism wins over speculation.

Re: Microsoft does away with stack ranking

#128

Post by VodkaInferno »

nikatwork wrote: post #63
jasonculbertson wrote: post #57

I saw the downfall of stack ranking immediately after a company I worked at was acquired by Microsoft. The workplace changed within a month from one focused on teamwork and support to Lord of the Flies. When the only way you can succeed is by being "better" then someone else you are forced to step upon others. I believe that this is also the effect of working for a public company with a stock that hasn't moved in pri…

Seen the same - work turned into a Survivor gameshow. Instead of concentrating on the product, everyone formed alliances and ganged up on the less-liked people. Everybody was so focused on politics nobody cared about the product anymore. Then the product died. I still don't think our MBA execs learned a damn thing from the whole fiasco, I'm sure they're somewhere else getting paid big bucks to run some other poor tea…

I've seen this a few times at MSFT. Except that the product didn't really die because nobody wanted to take responsibility for the actual killing. And every now and then there would be a re-org, the former exec would "move on" to his next atrocity and a "recycled" exec would go in front of the team and declare his passion for the product and that this time it will be different.

Re: Microsoft does away with stack ranking

#129

Post by leen »

nness wrote: post #91
alkonaut wrote: post #36

I wasn't aware that US companies ranked employees and used rankings when purging the workforce (when I think about it it's a pretty obvious idea). In countries with stronger labour laws "underperformance" basically isn't a reason to fire someone. The employer is responsible for the employees performance (training etc.). This can be frustrating in the software business when just a few really poor performers can really…

What countries are those?

I can't really comment on other countries, but at least in Germany you have a (pretty) difficult time trying to fire somebody for 'under-performing' as long as the person doesn't mess up unrelated things (like repeated misbehavior, e.g. feigning illness, theft, sexual harassment, ..) or your company isn't doing all that well from an economic point of view.

Re: Microsoft does away with stack ranking

#130

Post by pagefault »

mathattack wrote: post #111
pagefault wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Part of the new program is an explicit focus on frequent feedback. If anything, there ought to be fewer surprises than the current once (twice-ish with midyear discussions) a year feedback. The risk going forward is that without being forced to a distribution, wishy-washy managers will trend towards the middle. High achievers will be under-compensated, and under-achievers will be overcompensated. The budget hasn't ch…

My experience is that wishy washy managers make everyone top rated, therefore nobody is really top rated.

If everyone gets top rated, then the budget gets applied, everyone gets middling awards. Same result as rating everyone middling in the first place.
Post reply on HN