Slightly off topic I know, but his eyes in this picture. I cannot but help thinking back to Stargate SG1, & think there is something about the Goa'uld in those the eyes.
Reminds me of CEO of the Damned except his brick wall is a Zune wall.
"Where are they going to go if they work up in Redmond? Nintendo? They are separated from the rest of the world if they work in Washington. It's not like there's a ton of other high tech companies that can slip into."
"Where are they going to go if they work up in Redmond? Nintendo? They are separated from the rest of the world if they work in Washington. It's not like there's a ton of other high tech companies that can slip into."
With Chief Executive Steve Ballmer set to retire and Microsoft undergoing major structural changes, employees at the software giant are said to be spooked, sparking concern that retaining current workers could be a challenge..
Facebook, Google, Amazon, Ebay, Zillow, Tableau, DocuSign, Expedia, probably a few dozen more big name companies, and a crap ton of consultancies all in the great Puget Sound.
Facebook, Google, Amazon, Ebay, Zillow, Tableau, DocuSign, Expedia, probably a few dozen more big name companies, and a crap ton of consultancies all in the great Puget Sound.
Stay away from Boeing. I don't want the blue screen of death to become the blue screen of OMG WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE.
Imagine what would happen if the company actually just folded over the next few years and left 1 billion or so PC users out on a limb. PC manufacturers would have to start resorting to using another OS. A lot of people would migrate to the Mac if that happened but it would be entertaining to see what replaced Windows as the OS of choice.
If MS folded, Bill and Steve could go back to producing vaporware like they were doing in the late '80s. Microsoft was the king of vaporware!!!
Either way... never believe a "reassurance" e-mail. The company only has their interest at heart, not you as an employee. Period.
Remember, you are not a person within a large company. To make it easy to cut you lose and duck walk you to the side door, you are a "Human Resource" in their eyes. You are "overhead" made to be controlled, if needed, a liability on the books that reduces profit, something to be outsourced if needed.
Merely a mushroom to be kept in the dark, fed reassuring horse shit, and canned when you're ripe.
If I understand Microsofts performance evaluations it probably goes something like this, employees are graded as follows and during a reorg the employees who may become concerned are the ones at the 2- and 3 levels because those are the ones that get let go first, all things being equal Level 1 Consistently exceeds results/metrics and expectations. Creates or takes advantage of important opportunities. Level 2+ Regularly exceeds most results/metrics and expectations. Job scope is greater relative to Category 2 or 2- performers. Level 2 This employee is fully qualified with sufficient depth of knowledge and breadth of experience to perform the job. Level 2- Meets results/metrics and expectations, however, may not be able handle some aspects of the job compared to the "benchmark." Level 3 Falls short meeting most results/metrics, and expectations. Generally about 10% of the employees fall into the level 1. 80% at level 2, and another 10% at level 3 so its easy to cut 10% deadwood out pretty quickly without very much loss.
This is relatively correct, but totally overlooks the review process at the conclusion of a project. One person needs to be ranked outstanding and one needs to be ranked at the bottom. The one at the bottom is likely to be let go. So, each day you go to work knowing that you are really competing with everyone on your team. So, instead of working together each person is trying to look good at your expense as well as everyone else's expense. The project results is less important then your own political life, so the project inches forward, each day you are employed another day, each day you gain or lose along with your team mates. At some point you realize you have been relegated to the "goat" of the group... You're the guy in the red shirt that is beamed down with Kirk and Scotty... you're toast... you've been written out of the script... friendzoned...
Slightly off topic I know, but his eyes in this picture. I cannot but help thinking back to Stargate SG1, & think there is something about the Goa'uld in those the eyes.
I can see that, but to me he has those crazy eyes like that run away bride Jennifer Wilbamks.
If I understand Microsofts performance evaluations it probably goes something like this, employees are graded as follows and during a reorg the employees who may become concerned are the ones at the 2- and 3 levels because those are the ones that get let go first, all things being equal Level 1 Consistently exceeds results/metrics and expectations. Creates or takes advantage of important opportunities. Level 2+ Regularly exceeds most results/metrics and expectations. Job scope is greater relative to Category 2 or 2- performers. Level 2 This employee is fully qualified with sufficient depth of knowledge and breadth of experience to perform the job. Level 2- Meets results/metrics and expectations, however, may not be able handle some aspects of the job compared to the "benchmark." Level 3 Falls short meeting most results/metrics, and expectations. Generally about 10% of the employees fall into the level 1. 80% at level 2, and another 10% at level 3 so its easy to cut 10% deadwood out pretty quickly without very much loss.
Yeah companies and HR are screw up on this whole topic. I worked for a start up back in the 90's (very successful one) and the company purposely went out an hire the best people and paid them very well. It grew to the level of about 1500 people in 5 yrs and they went out and hire a VP of HR since we were a "big company" now. The first thing this idiot did was make the management rank all the employees. Everyone was rank at the top of the scale as you would expect base on the hiring practice. The HR VP said that was not allow since some people had to be rank in bottom 10% to 20% which in turned meant they would not be eligible for raises, bonuses and stock options. Needless to say this did not fly too well especially when the founders found out, and considering they had a hand in hiring most of the employees. The founders put an end to it really quick and fired the VP of HR shortly afterwards.
Today I work at another big company and they use the same forces ranking system and it turns in to who can maligned the other manager's employee the most. The idea is to knock everyone else down so you do not have to go back and tell your team they are not getting raises or bonus because their peers ranked them lower than everyone else. Also companies use these ranking systems when layoffs happen. If it is an across the board layoff then the lower 10% get hit. But, what I have seen especially in company which are struggling like RIM or Motorola who were loaded with top talent at one time after they get rid of the bottom 10% the first time they begin to cut into the bone and brain matter since the keep cutting into the lower 10% as the move up the scale. Even if they meant to keep the top 10% to 20% they begin leaving on their own since they do not want to be around a place like that.
My personal belief is, once a competitive high tech company begins using these ranking systems and then half to lay people off it the beginning of the end. It happen to Apple back in the 90's and it was just luck steve came back and stop it all and turned it around. Steve recognized talent over someone's ability to fit into the normal of these employee ranking systems, Steve would get rid of the brown nosers who was only doing the right things to get ranked higher over the person who could care less what other thought but did great work.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by TogetherWeStand
Slightly off topic I know, but his eyes in this picture. I cannot but help thinking back to Stargate SG1, & think there is something about the Goa'uld in those the eyes.
Reminds me of CEO of the Damned except his brick wall is a Zune wall.
drblank
"Where are they going to go if they work up in Redmond? Nintendo? They are separated from the rest of the world if they work in Washington. It's not like there's a ton of other high tech companies that can slip into."
More than a few options.
Cray Inc. — supercomputers
Google
EMC Isilon — Computer storage
F5 Networks — networking
Vulcan Inc. — investment vehicle for Paul Allen
Arenanet — Guild Wars Franchise
Big Fish Games — Casual Games
Bungie Studios
PopCap — Casual Games
Valve - A computer software/video games developer
RAD Game Tools
Clearwire
Corbis — stock photography
Getty Images — stock photography
Griptonite Games
HTC Corporation -
InfoSpace -
Intellectual Ventures — patent assertion hedge fund
Coinstar, Inc. - Owner and operator of coin-exchanging kiosks found in supermarkets.
Concur Technologies - Offers online integrated travel and expense management for businesses.
ShareBuilder - An online broker allowing investors to automatically and regularly invest in stocks and ETFs, even in small amounts.
Sucker Punch Productions - Sony game developer
Synapse Product Development — new product development
Allrecipes.com — online recipe service and forum
Amazon.com — retail
Advertising Solutions — Seattle Video Marketing and Online Marketing Agency
BuddyTV — TV news, 2nd screen technology
Cheezburger — Operates many humor web blogs such as I Can Has Cheezburger? and FAIL Blog
Classmates.com — A social networking service
Drugstore.com — retail
efelle media — Seattle website design and online marketing company
eNotes.com — Educational resource service
ExtraHop Networks — Network Analysis appliance maker
findwell — online real estate brokerage
Groundspeak — operators of Geocaching.com
Lockerz — Social Networking; E-commerce; Entertainment
Moz — Search Engine Optimization
Onvia — government business intelligence portal
PictureFrameGuys.com — online retailer of custom picture frames
PayScale — global employee compensation database
Penny Arcade — Webcomic and online comedy empire
RealNetworks — software
Redfin — online real estate brokerage
Social Strata — software
Soundrangers — online sound effects and music
Smith.co — online digital agency
StealthyHosting.com — Colocation and Dedicated Servers
Tableau Software — data visualization
Thrift Books — retail
Utrip — online travel planning
Walk Score — online walkability index of major cities
WhitePages.com — online people search, reverse phone & address lookup, and business search
Zillow.com — real estate information service
A few computer jobs at that little Airplane plant too.
Sorry, not sure what you were replying / commenting on ...?
Ballmer was just the hatchet, for the Wizard/Puppet Master behind the curtain, Billy Boy. He never left, and he's picking the new CEO. Watch.....
drblank
"Where are they going to go if they work up in Redmond? Nintendo? They are separated from the rest of the world if they work in Washington. It's not like there's a ton of other high tech companies that can slip into."
Yeah, I thought I read a recent rumor that Xbox VP J Allard might come back because Don Mattrick has departed.
I think he's the man!
Screwmorph, you mean.
Nah. They have it under control.
http://scoopertino.com/that-was-fast-microsoft-announces-ceo-short-list/
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4machiavelli
More than a few options.
... quite a few ...
Yeah, "Intellectual Vultures" sounds about right
Facebook, Google, Amazon, Ebay, Zillow, Tableau, DocuSign, Expedia, probably a few dozen more big name companies, and a crap ton of consultancies all in the great Puget Sound.
Stay away from Boeing. I don't want the blue screen of death to become the blue screen of OMG WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
Yeah it doesn't sound like a very good system:
http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2013/08/microsoft_ceo_steve_ballmer_retires_a_firsthand_account_of_the_company_s.html
Imagine what would happen if the company actually just folded over the next few years and left 1 billion or so PC users out on a limb. PC manufacturers would have to start resorting to using another OS. A lot of people would migrate to the Mac if that happened but it would be entertaining to see what replaced Windows as the OS of choice.
If MS folded, Bill and Steve could go back to producing vaporware like they were doing in the late '80s. Microsoft was the king of vaporware!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by HawkBlade
Either way... never believe a "reassurance" e-mail. The company only has their interest at heart, not you as an employee. Period.Remember, you are not a person within a large company. To make it easy to cut you lose and duck walk you to the side door, you are a "Human Resource" in their eyes. You are "overhead" made to be controlled, if needed, a liability on the books that reduces profit, something to be outsourced if needed.
Merely a mushroom to be kept in the dark, fed reassuring horse shit, and canned when you're ripe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul94544
If I understand Microsofts performance evaluations it probably goes something like this, employees are graded as follows and during a reorg the employees who may become concerned are the ones at the 2- and 3 levels because those are the ones that get let go first, all things being equal Level 1 Consistently exceeds results/metrics and expectations. Creates or takes advantage of important opportunities. Level 2+ Regularly exceeds most results/metrics and expectations. Job scope is greater relative to Category 2 or 2- performers. Level 2 This employee is fully qualified with sufficient depth of knowledge and breadth of experience to perform the job. Level 2- Meets results/metrics and expectations, however, may not be able handle some aspects of the job compared to the "benchmark." Level 3 Falls short meeting most results/metrics, and expectations. Generally about 10% of the employees fall into the level 1. 80% at level 2, and another 10% at level 3 so its easy to cut 10% deadwood out pretty quickly without very much loss.
This is relatively correct, but totally overlooks the review process at the conclusion of a project. One person needs to be ranked outstanding and one needs to be ranked at the bottom. The one at the bottom is likely to be let go. So, each day you go to work knowing that you are really competing with everyone on your team. So, instead of working together each person is trying to look good at your expense as well as everyone else's expense. The project results is less important then your own political life, so the project inches forward, each day you are employed another day, each day you gain or lose along with your team mates. At some point you realize you have been relegated to the "goat" of the group... You're the guy in the red shirt that is beamed down with Kirk and Scotty... you're toast... you've been written out of the script... friendzoned...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul94544
If I understand Microsofts performance evaluations it probably goes something like this, employees are graded as follows and during a reorg the employees who may become concerned are the ones at the 2- and 3 levels because those are the ones that get let go first, all things being equal Level 1 Consistently exceeds results/metrics and expectations. Creates or takes advantage of important opportunities. Level 2+ Regularly exceeds most results/metrics and expectations. Job scope is greater relative to Category 2 or 2- performers. Level 2 This employee is fully qualified with sufficient depth of knowledge and breadth of experience to perform the job. Level 2- Meets results/metrics and expectations, however, may not be able handle some aspects of the job compared to the "benchmark." Level 3 Falls short meeting most results/metrics, and expectations. Generally about 10% of the employees fall into the level 1. 80% at level 2, and another 10% at level 3 so its easy to cut 10% deadwood out pretty quickly without very much loss.
Yeah companies and HR are screw up on this whole topic. I worked for a start up back in the 90's (very successful one) and the company purposely went out an hire the best people and paid them very well. It grew to the level of about 1500 people in 5 yrs and they went out and hire a VP of HR since we were a "big company" now. The first thing this idiot did was make the management rank all the employees. Everyone was rank at the top of the scale as you would expect base on the hiring practice. The HR VP said that was not allow since some people had to be rank in bottom 10% to 20% which in turned meant they would not be eligible for raises, bonuses and stock options. Needless to say this did not fly too well especially when the founders found out, and considering they had a hand in hiring most of the employees. The founders put an end to it really quick and fired the VP of HR shortly afterwards.
Today I work at another big company and they use the same forces ranking system and it turns in to who can maligned the other manager's employee the most. The idea is to knock everyone else down so you do not have to go back and tell your team they are not getting raises or bonus because their peers ranked them lower than everyone else. Also companies use these ranking systems when layoffs happen. If it is an across the board layoff then the lower 10% get hit. But, what I have seen especially in company which are struggling like RIM or Motorola who were loaded with top talent at one time after they get rid of the bottom 10% the first time they begin to cut into the bone and brain matter since the keep cutting into the lower 10% as the move up the scale. Even if they meant to keep the top 10% to 20% they begin leaving on their own since they do not want to be around a place like that.
My personal belief is, once a competitive high tech company begins using these ranking systems and then half to lay people off it the beginning of the end. It happen to Apple back in the 90's and it was just luck steve came back and stop it all and turned it around. Steve recognized talent over someone's ability to fit into the normal of these employee ranking systems, Steve would get rid of the brown nosers who was only doing the right things to get ranked higher over the person who could care less what other thought but did great work.
How true. Like it can get any worse.