If you have a general perception that Project or Product Managers in software don't do anything, you've had shitty PMs. I was also once under this mistaken impression!
A good PM listens closely to what the user asks for and can then effectively organize the dev team around what the user actually needs, and can then prep the user's expectations so as to make them utterly delighted with what you bring them. Going from "I want..." to actual Specs is super valuable.
Ugh I miss that work.
Eh, that's more a product manager. Project managers manage the schedule and task breakdowns, ensuring the right people are informed, the right rocks are uncovered and there are no major surprises on the path to production.
PMs own the schedule, so of shit is miscalculated, it's generally on them, as accounting for unknown issues and developer overconfidence is part of the game
Only good thing about getting in this early is the bakery down the street has fresh baked goods. I figure I'll be a good team lead and get the people who have to come in early some donuts and croissants.
Only good thing about getting in this early is the bakery down the street has fresh baked goods. I figure I'll be a good team lead and get the people who have to come in early some donuts and croissants.
Or you get two less and then people will start trying to beat each other in for the tasty baked goods.
I am part of a big project here involving Medicare reporting. I worked solo, mostly on a smaller, tertiary thing. It had some schedule slip, but I got it out the door. Our PM has been trying to schedule a meeting with the directors and such of the various departments involved in the whole overarching project, and one of the topis is my product, and the schedule slip.
However, due to the schedules of the various players involved, the meeting has been pushed back probably 6 or 7 times.
At this point I believe the meeting is now more late than my product was.
Basically, it's a series of 10 things to be rated on, like attendance, teamwork, safety, housekeeping, production, etc., each with a score of 1-10. The highest score your supervisor may provide in any category is a 7; scores may be increased by management in the front office later during their review of the eval. My supervisor gave me full 7s across the board.
My final score was a 71.
2.5% raise, or $0.31/hour.
korodullin on
- The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse (2017, colorized)
Basically, it's a series of 10 things to be rated on, like attendance, teamwork, safety, housekeeping, production, etc., each with a score of 1-10. The highest score your supervisor may provide in any category is a 7; scores may be increased by management in the front office later during their review of the eval. My supervisor gave me full 7s across the board.
My final score was a 71.
2.5% raise, or $0.31/hour.
What the crap is that - you can only rate people at a C level, but people who have little exposure to them MAY decide to increase it above that? That's a good way to ensure no one ever scores more than a 70.
Basically, it's a series of 10 things to be rated on, like attendance, teamwork, safety, housekeeping, production, etc., each with a score of 1-10. The highest score your supervisor may provide in any category is a 7; scores may be increased by management in the front office later during their review of the eval. My supervisor gave me full 7s across the board.
My final score was a 71.
2.5% raise, or $0.31/hour.
What the crap is that - you can only rate people at a C level, but people who have little exposure to them MAY decide to increase it above that? That's a good way to ensure no one ever scores more than a 70.
Considering koro's company I'm sure that's the intent
DaimarA Million Feet Tall of AwesomeRegistered Userregular
That's as bad as an evaluation system I heard about at a firm some acquaintances worked at. From what I was told you had to make your employees fit a bell curve for their ratings scores, so most people were put in the middle of the road whether they belonged there or not because they had to put the senior managers in the top percentiles.
That's as bad as an evaluation system I heard about at a firm some acquaintances worked at. From what I was told you had to make your employees fit a bell curve for their ratings scores, so most people were put in the middle of the road whether they belonged there or not because they had to put the senior managers in the top percentiles.
That's pretty standard nowadays, thanks to Jack Welch and Microsoft. Stack ranking and bell curves, yo. Somebody's gotta be at the bottom.
My company is currently, I think, doing a completely black box annual review on me using a self-review "scorecard" from last September. You know, timely info and all...
That's as bad as an evaluation system I heard about at a firm some acquaintances worked at. From what I was told you had to make your employees fit a bell curve for their ratings scores, so most people were put in the middle of the road whether they belonged there or not because they had to put the senior managers in the top percentiles.
We get some pressure to have the average somewhere close to the mean, but if you have business results justification, you can absolutely rate your entire group highly. It's nice that it's all so metricized and you're under serious pressure not to play favorites and clearly communicate goals and results.
0
Options
Donovan PuppyfuckerA dagger in the dark isworth a thousand swords in the morningRegistered Userregular
Basically, it's a series of 10 things to be rated on, like attendance, teamwork, safety, housekeeping, production, etc., each with a score of 1-10. The highest score your supervisor may provide in any category is a 7; scores may be increased by management in the front office later during their review of the eval. My supervisor gave me full 7s across the board.
My final score was a 71.
2.5% raise, or $0.31/hour.
What the crap is that - you can only rate people at a C level, but people who have little exposure to them MAY decide to increase it above that? That's a good way to ensure no one ever scores more than a 70.
I remember that same system applied at my college. Apparently one of the best professors (he was a great teacher and a great guy, his class was super interesting, etc....just all around an excellent class and an excellent professor) was given a "talking to" because the grades he gave us were "too high", and they wanted his grades to more reflect the generic bell curve. His tests weren't easy - it was clear that the grades were high because the students really enjoyed the class, paid attention, and did well.
Apparently that was unacceptable! Such a garbage thing to have to force onto people as a blanket-rule.
NightDragon on
+12
Options
Donovan PuppyfuckerA dagger in the dark isworth a thousand swords in the morningRegistered Userregular
Basically, it's a series of 10 things to be rated on, like attendance, teamwork, safety, housekeeping, production, etc., each with a score of 1-10. The highest score your supervisor may provide in any category is a 7; scores may be increased by management in the front office later during their review of the eval. My supervisor gave me full 7s across the board.
My final score was a 71.
2.5% raise, or $0.31/hour.
I remember when I got my old job working at a gold mine - the introductory "briefing" interview when I got on site involved informing me of their annual assessment criteria - 1 to 5, bad to good. 3 is average, 5 is going above and beyond all day every day for the good of the company, almost impossible to achieve. If you want a payrise? Better get yourself some 5's across the board, son.
I think that was the exact moment I leaned back in my chair, crossed my arms, and my face went totally blank...
0
Options
webguy20I spend too much time on the InternetRegistered Userregular
favorite system I used was a 1-5 system over like 10 catagories, where 3 was doing the job competently, and raises were based on that. If you got a 3 you got the base 3% raise, and above and beyond you got a higher percentage.
This was in a small business where people wore multiple hats, so going above and beyond was relatively easy to do if you were competent.
no one looks at it. it sits in a file somewhere. when i change managers it disappears. it affects nothing. pay increases are not related to it. it does not impact applying to new positions. i honestly dont know why they even do it.
yeah, im in a union.
0
Options
I ZimbraWorst song, played on ugliest guitarRegistered Userregular
favorite system I used was a 1-5 system over like 10 catagories, where 3 was doing the job competently, and raises were based on that. If you got a 3 you got the base 3% raise, and above and beyond you got a higher percentage.
This was in a small business where people wore multiple hats, so going above and beyond was relatively easy to do if you were competent.
This is more or less the system we have at my work, except it's incredibly difficult to get above a 3.
Basically, it's a series of 10 things to be rated on, like attendance, teamwork, safety, housekeeping, production, etc., each with a score of 1-10. The highest score your supervisor may provide in any category is a 7; scores may be increased by management in the front office later during their review of the eval. My supervisor gave me full 7s across the board.
My final score was a 71.
2.5% raise, or $0.31/hour.
I remember when I got my old job working at a gold mine - the introductory "briefing" interview when I got on site involved informing me of their annual assessment criteria - 1 to 5, bad to good. 3 is average, 5 is going above and beyond all day every day for the good of the company, almost impossible to achieve. If you want a payrise? Better get yourself some 5's across the board, son.
I think that was the exact moment I leaned back in my chair, crossed my arms, and my face went totally blank...
I remember when we bought a car, and the salesman mentioned we'd receive a survey afterward. It had a 1-10 scale, with 5+ being you had a good experience, but anything less than 9 was failing for the salesman.
I've seen that same 1-10 review system as well, if things aren't perfect across the board then the employee gets dinged. Which is dumb for many reasons.
We have a 5 tier review system at my job; the bottom tier isn't handed out often since it means the manager has to start 'corrective' action. The top tier is limited as to how many are given out because there's a bonus pool associated with it. For most managers there's a bunch of wasted formal process, and the one important piece of feedback is the performance tier. Promotions do assume good reviews, but after a certain point there's more to it than just reviews.
Oh, come and shake me 'till I'm dry
+1
Options
webguy20I spend too much time on the InternetRegistered Userregular
favorite system I used was a 1-5 system over like 10 catagories, where 3 was doing the job competently, and raises were based on that. If you got a 3 you got the base 3% raise, and above and beyond you got a higher percentage.
This was in a small business where people wore multiple hats, so going above and beyond was relatively easy to do if you were competent.
This is more or less the system we have at my work, except it's incredibly difficult to get above a 3.
most people at my job got somewhere between 3.5 and 4.25. We had a few issues, but for the most part people were getting raises around the 5% and 7.5% range. Promotion pay raises were graded separately, so you could end up with a much higher amount depending.
Basically, it's a series of 10 things to be rated on, like attendance, teamwork, safety, housekeeping, production, etc., each with a score of 1-10. The highest score your supervisor may provide in any category is a 7; scores may be increased by management in the front office later during their review of the eval. My supervisor gave me full 7s across the board.
My final score was a 71.
2.5% raise, or $0.31/hour.
I remember when I got my old job working at a gold mine - the introductory "briefing" interview when I got on site involved informing me of their annual assessment criteria - 1 to 5, bad to good. 3 is average, 5 is going above and beyond all day every day for the good of the company, almost impossible to achieve. If you want a payrise? Better get yourself some 5's across the board, son.
I think that was the exact moment I leaned back in my chair, crossed my arms, and my face went totally blank...
I remember when we bought a car, and the salesman mentioned we'd receive a survey afterward. It had a 1-10 scale, with 5+ being you had a good experience, but anything less than 9 was failing for the salesman.
I'm reasonably certain I got two salespeople fired or at least a stern talking to due to my scores on the post-sale survey. The one guy was so pushy with "if there was anything about the sales experience that wasn't a 10 let me know and I'll do whatever it takes to get it there". Buddy, if you wanted 10s you shouldn't have been such a shitheel at the time, trying to make it up after the fact isn't the way to go.
My company does the whole nobody gets rated higher than meets expectations because they expect you to exceed expectations and yeah it's some bullshit.
My last one was basically "this person is amazing and should be promoted!"
then in the tick box
"meets expectations"
I got into very long arguments about this exact scenario before I gave up & stopped managing people.
My position was always that that system is ok, if you're baseline pay is the top end of the market, because then you're paying for that expectation. If you're paying market average, then grading like that just causes people to leave.
tomorrow we have a field trip. we're going bowling and playing laser tag
sometimes I have a really kick ass job
laser tag still exists?
why would it not?
I'm sure they are hard to keep open. When was the last time most people went to one? The one open in my town is also a bar and grill, and they do this crazy bumpercar basketball style game too.
and I wonder about my neighbors even though I don't have them
but they're listening to every word I say
tomorrow we have a field trip. we're going bowling and playing laser tag
sometimes I have a really kick ass job
laser tag still exists?
why would it not?
I'm sure they are hard to keep open. When was the last time most people went to one? The one open in my town is also a bar and grill, and they do this crazy bumpercar basketball style game too.
I've been there. It was a good time
0
Options
Lost Salientblink twiceif you'd like me to mercy kill youRegistered Userregular
Today I had a 1:1 with my boss for the first time in months and was able to express some of the things that had been on my mind. Also she told me I should absolutely buy and expense tickets to the upcoming DevOps conference. So that's dope.
"Sandra has a good solid anti-murderer vibe. My skin felt very secure and sufficiently attached to my body when I met her. Also my organs." HAIL SATAN
Posts
Eh, that's more a product manager. Project managers manage the schedule and task breakdowns, ensuring the right people are informed, the right rocks are uncovered and there are no major surprises on the path to production.
PMs own the schedule, so of shit is miscalculated, it's generally on them, as accounting for unknown issues and developer overconfidence is part of the game
The best team lead.
We have to rush it because as usual men weren't listening to my boss because she's a woman.
Then at the end of the day this happened:
Couldn't find it's mother duck so I'm waiting on a call back from the only Wild Life refuge in the state I could find last night.
Or you get two less and then people will start trying to beat each other in for the tasty baked goods.
That duck's got some good hair.
However, due to the schedules of the various players involved, the meeting has been pushed back probably 6 or 7 times.
At this point I believe the meeting is now more late than my product was.
Basically, it's a series of 10 things to be rated on, like attendance, teamwork, safety, housekeeping, production, etc., each with a score of 1-10. The highest score your supervisor may provide in any category is a 7; scores may be increased by management in the front office later during their review of the eval. My supervisor gave me full 7s across the board.
My final score was a 71.
2.5% raise, or $0.31/hour.
- The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse (2017, colorized)
What the crap is that - you can only rate people at a C level, but people who have little exposure to them MAY decide to increase it above that? That's a good way to ensure no one ever scores more than a 70.
Considering koro's company I'm sure that's the intent
That's pretty standard nowadays, thanks to Jack Welch and Microsoft. Stack ranking and bell curves, yo. Somebody's gotta be at the bottom.
My company is currently, I think, doing a completely black box annual review on me using a self-review "scorecard" from last September. You know, timely info and all...
We get some pressure to have the average somewhere close to the mean, but if you have business results justification, you can absolutely rate your entire group highly. It's nice that it's all so metricized and you're under serious pressure not to play favorites and clearly communicate goals and results.
Not a bug - working as intended.
Apparently that was unacceptable! Such a garbage thing to have to force onto people as a blanket-rule.
I remember when I got my old job working at a gold mine - the introductory "briefing" interview when I got on site involved informing me of their annual assessment criteria - 1 to 5, bad to good. 3 is average, 5 is going above and beyond all day every day for the good of the company, almost impossible to achieve. If you want a payrise? Better get yourself some 5's across the board, son.
I think that was the exact moment I leaned back in my chair, crossed my arms, and my face went totally blank...
This was in a small business where people wore multiple hats, so going above and beyond was relatively easy to do if you were competent.
Origin ID: Discgolfer27
Untappd ID: Discgolfer1981
no one looks at it. it sits in a file somewhere. when i change managers it disappears. it affects nothing. pay increases are not related to it. it does not impact applying to new positions. i honestly dont know why they even do it.
yeah, im in a union.
This is more or less the system we have at my work, except it's incredibly difficult to get above a 3.
I remember when we bought a car, and the salesman mentioned we'd receive a survey afterward. It had a 1-10 scale, with 5+ being you had a good experience, but anything less than 9 was failing for the salesman.
We have a 5 tier review system at my job; the bottom tier isn't handed out often since it means the manager has to start 'corrective' action. The top tier is limited as to how many are given out because there's a bonus pool associated with it. For most managers there's a bunch of wasted formal process, and the one important piece of feedback is the performance tier. Promotions do assume good reviews, but after a certain point there's more to it than just reviews.
most people at my job got somewhere between 3.5 and 4.25. We had a few issues, but for the most part people were getting raises around the 5% and 7.5% range. Promotion pay raises were graded separately, so you could end up with a much higher amount depending.
Origin ID: Discgolfer27
Untappd ID: Discgolfer1981
Tomorrow we're both off, so we're going to Kruger together. With hangovers, presumably.
sometimes I have a really kick ass job
My last one was basically "this person is amazing and should be promoted!"
then in the tick box
"meets expectations"
I'm reasonably certain I got two salespeople fired or at least a stern talking to due to my scores on the post-sale survey. The one guy was so pushy with "if there was anything about the sales experience that wasn't a 10 let me know and I'll do whatever it takes to get it there". Buddy, if you wanted 10s you shouldn't have been such a shitheel at the time, trying to make it up after the fact isn't the way to go.
That's exactly what I did and my boss was just "Yeah, I know."
laser tag still exists?
Laser tag is huge fun every once in a while.
but they're listening to every word I say
I got into very long arguments about this exact scenario before I gave up & stopped managing people.
My position was always that that system is ok, if you're baseline pay is the top end of the market, because then you're paying for that expectation. If you're paying market average, then grading like that just causes people to leave.
why would it not?
I'm sure they are hard to keep open. When was the last time most people went to one? The one open in my town is also a bar and grill, and they do this crazy bumpercar basketball style game too.
but they're listening to every word I say
I haven't seen one since the 90's. I just assumed they were all gone.
@Dead Legend
But I haven't actually worked as a manager in a warehouse.
Maybe I should get drunk and then apply for work.
http://www.fallout3nexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=16534
I've been there. It was a good time
Today I had a 1:1 with my boss for the first time in months and was able to express some of the things that had been on my mind. Also she told me I should absolutely buy and expense tickets to the upcoming DevOps conference. So that's dope.
"Sandra has a good solid anti-murderer vibe. My skin felt very secure and sufficiently attached to my body when I met her. Also my organs." HAIL SATAN
Doooo eeeet.
Managers have to come from somewhere. Better they rise up from the ranks of real world workers than be spawned from an MBA factory.