Thursday, June 30, 2005

"Keep the dream alive" spam

I believe a lot of employess like me received an email (or SPAM?) today from a group called DREAM (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dreamsft/) talking about the some of the abusive practices in the performance review process. I really wonder where they got all the employee's emails? I don't think it is an insider job and if it was, it is very bad.

My take on these claims is that there is some truth (not the whole truth) to it and it is not entirely baseless. Not a day goes by without me wondering about why the entire process is so secretive. I have my concerns about the review process and want some openness and fairness. If the performance review process is objective, why such a secrecy? I go even farther and suggest the following:
  • Make the performance ratings public. What is wrong with knowing who performed better and why they are better? Maybe someone could learn a thing or two by following the super performer.
  • Make the employee's commitents public. I would be very happy to learn about what everyone plans to achieve and see if I could colloborate with others. Otherwise, there is guaranteed to be duplication of efforts.
  • Banish the stack ranking. It is a subjective process mostly and is not a documented process by HR. Since there is no guidence from HR about this (which is crucial to your rating), either formalize the process or make it transparent

UPDATE: After this mail got sent out, I asked one of the manager in my team on what he thought. To my surprise, he thought stack ranking is the way to go and even mentioned that holding one before the employee gets a chance to write a review and make his case is perfectly alright!!!!!!!

Here is the e-mail that got sent out to many employees:

From: A DREAM [mailto:dreamsft07@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2005 10:27 AMTo: keep_his_dream_alive@yahoo.comSubject: Your rating, salary, and bonus may have all been decided by the time you read this email ...

Make your performance review count – stop stack ranking abuse!

That’s right - your review rating, salary, and bonus may have already been decided by the time you read this email. How? Through a process known as stack ranking, your managers may have already met and decided it before ever reading your performance review. Without objective performance data and feedback, your managers rely on gut instincts to decide your fate. Unfortunately, these instincts are often wrong and highly subjective. After stack rankings have been established, review ratings, salary, bonus, and stock grants are assigned accordingly. Even though stack rankings can have the single most impact on determining an employee’s rating and compensation, the process is not documented in the employee handbook, nor are employees allowed to know their stack ranking or appeal them.

If stack rankings are so unfair and subjective, why do managers continue to rely on them? For one, it is a very convenient way for managers to bypass the performance review process and determine the all important numbers in a short meeting. No waiting for employees to write their reviews, read them, provide comments, and talk to them to make sure they are in mutual agreement. Instead, managers simply assign employee a rank and see how they fair with the rest of the team. In cases of disagreement, higher ranking managers, who may have no knowledge of your performance, have veto power and can favor the employees they like best. Keep in mind each 4.0/4.5 rating requires a 2.5 to balance out the curve even if the difference in performance is negligible. One employee is given lavish rewards while the other gets nothing but a warning that their job is in jeopardy. All this without the inconvenience of having to read the employee’s performance review to ascertain if their performance is unacceptable.

The other reason stack rankings are popular is the fact that they are remarkably effective in maintaining the status quo. Minorities groups are significantly underrepresented in the ranks of management at Microsoft. By allowing managers to make performance management decisions based primarily on personal preference and not actual documented performance, managers will tend to favor those who they are most familiar and comfortable with. Since there are far fewer minority managers participating in stack ranking meetings they are out voted than their Caucasian peers, This unfortunately makes stack ranking an effective self perpetuating method for preserving a status quo imbalance that ultimately denies minority employees with equal pay and promotional opportunity in the company.

So what can you do to stop stack ranking abuse? Plenty:
· Talk to your manager and find out if and how they use stack ranking. Don’t take “no” or “that’s confidential” as an answer. If stack ranking is used, ask when they are done. In most cases they are done weeks before performance reviews are turned in so that managers can submit numbers to HR on schedule. If so, tell your manager that you consider this practice unfair and insist that they adhere to Microsoft’s performance management policy by using performance reviews as the basis for making decisions. Also find out your rank and if you can appeal it.
· Write to your business unit VP and the VP of HR and tell them you want stack ranking abuse to halted once and for all. Tell them that the stack ranking process cannot be secretive and must be standardized across the company and documented in the employee handbook. Also, stack rankings, if used, must be done following the completion of employee performance reviews and not before so that managers have access to the most objective and current information on individual employee performance.
· If you receive a poor performance review or are denied a promotion that you deserve as a result of stack ranking, don’t accept it – fight it. If your manager is not willing to do anything about it, you can file a complaint directly with the HR Employee Relations Investigation Team. Better yet, if you believe there are possible grounds for discrimination against you, contact state or federal agencies such as the WA State Human Rights Commission or EEOC who can ensure your civil rights are protected.

This message is brought to you by DREAM, employees for Diversity & Racial Equality At Microsoft. If you would like more information on stack ranking abuse or any other topics related to protecting civil rights, diversity, and fighting discrimination at Microsoft, please visit our web site at
http://www.groups.yahoo.com/groups/dreamsft

Sunday, June 26, 2005

...Nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation

That is what the Fifth amendment says and it is fair enough. But the U.S supreme court's ruling last week expanded the power of government to grab land for private projects just blew my mind away! For example, now it is possible for the city to take your land (and of course pay the compensation) to build a shopping mall instead just because it might produce jobs and tax revenues.

This just leads the way for the people with money/power to force people out of their homes easily since any commercial development will ofcourse produce jobs/revenues. As Justice Sandra Day O'Connor warned in her dissent in this decision: "Nothing is to prevent the state from replacing any Motel 6 with a Ritz-Carlton, any home with a shopping mall, or any farm with a factory."

The government and the consitution is there to protect the minorities and the powerless. But these rulings simply expand the powers of the powerful and this is not what the framers intended.

Wednesday, June 01, 2005

The Downing street memo

Check it out at http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/

America is considered one of the most advanced and open societies. But I am constantly amazed by the amount of censorship that happens (either by whitehouse or self-sensored due to business interests) in the press. The press covers things what it wants to cover without the consideration for the people's need to know which is why there was no watergate after the original watergate. These days the press has become more of a mouth piece for whitehouse in U.S which is why I rely on BBC and other foreign press for the information. http://news.google.com/ is my new friend since it brings news from multiple sources.

I am not sure how many people know of the book series Censored 2005 : The Top 25 Censored Stories (Censored) published every year by Sonoma state university on stories that never made it to the public because of the censorship. I read the 2004 release and couldn't believe that I am living in an open society!

As for the authenticity of the memo, I don't care. From the beginning, I had the strong belief that this war was the war of choice than the war of necessity. So this is nothing new to me.