Got a 4? You just got fired from Microsoft

Microsoft, I think, will be looked back upon as a great example of stack ranking's failure or success. At GE, it is looked upon as a success. But GE's workforce is (mostly) not in the world of knowledge-workers. They're not expected to come up with great products that sell to the masses, for the most part.<p>I often wonder if Microsoft's inability to get great products to market in a timely fashion is due to stack ranking. They clearly have great people who work there, who can make great products. Even the Zune was a great product. They arrive on the market about 3 years too late, and then require iteration on top of it. Is this because people there optimize their careers for "their number", rather than what's truly best for the company? Only time will tell.

Nothing too new in the post, perhaps a little bit more jaded than how it is often explained.<p>The part I found most interesting was your opinion on the different roles at Microsoft (quoted below). As someone with some experience in the PM role, I found it especially interesting. I find the opinion you have described spectacularly oversimplified, specifically in that the goal is just to write software (something only developers are needed), instead of writing the /right/ software, and at the right time. It is interesting to examine the different roles and how they interact, i.e. how devs often think of PMs as meetings and overheads, whilst PMs sometimes think of devs simply as resources. Tests, of course, are often left out in their own world, just hacking on whatever, and fixing the builds :-)<p>--------- Did you notice I said “software developer” above? This advice is really targeted at people who are good at and love actually writing software. It somewhat applies to program managers, product managers, and so forth, but hey, we work in the SOFTWARE industry. The only clear-cut jobs are for those who actually write the shit. Everyone else just helps.

The friends I have who have gotten offers from Microsoft were all informed that Microsoft, as a matter of policy, pays 60% of the top market salary. Has that policy changed?

The system is really ugly in the sense there's a percentage of people that get each score and MUST be met each cycle.<p>20% people of each group will get a 4/5 regardless of their work done. Then the other 50% of the people that bust their butt off are told: Sorry! We can only tell 10 percent of the people they rock.

Dear Microsoft<p>You may have received a payment from me, likely for something X-Box related my kids have requested. On my payment, you will notice a number, from one to five. The breakdown for the numbers are as follows:<p>5: Wow, I really love your products! Each one is a groundbreaking example of "the road ahead." The design and execution are an example to the rest of us of what success looks like. Sadly MCSFT, you just didn't make the cut this year, but don't worry, only a few of your competitors ever get this number, i.e. Google and Apple.<p>4: Rock star! I couldn't make it through the day without one of your products. To be honest, you didn't really perform as a "4" this year, but work hard! I'm sure you can do it!<p>3: Thank you! My 2008 copy of Word still works great, and on the rare occasion I boot into Windows 7 I think, "Hey, this OS isn't so bad. I've used worse."<p>2: By "worse," I mean Vista. Yeah, it works, but honestly, I'm still a little put out by the whole experience. If you really put your heart and mind into it, I'm sure Win 8 will be the run-away success I know you've been working hard to achieve. But, don't screw this up, okay? People are watching.<p>1: Don't let the door hit you on the way out. Failure to actually deliver innovation, years of being a bully, and products known for their bugginess is no way to run a company. I might care more, but I don't. I'm too busy watching netflix on my iPhone.<p>I hope this helps. PS - I'm sorry, but thats not what I meant by "you're number one."

Wow hard to figure out if the post is sarcastic or mad or just a matter fact this is how it is. It seems like a sad place. :(

Somewhat off topic: what happened to Mini Microsoft? It seems like he/she was intercepted and lobotomized by Microsoft PR. The open threads with wonderful discussion (one of the best venues for talking across silos) habitually wither from neglect from Mini. What's the next best place?

9:00 PM? Is this what hard work is considered nowadays? Going home that late everyday? Geez, I'd rather be called lazy.

Stack ranking is nor for everyone. Its a bit like making a awesome but a very difficult dish. Its a kind of a dish which will taste horrible if don't get the ingredients right to the very pinch.<p>For stack ranking to work you will need awesome leaders at the top rung in the company. You will need to fight out politics, processes and eliminate bureaucracy. You will also need a fair measuring of performance. Without all of this you see managers awarding their yes-men(their pets and bootlickers basically) top ranks and the good guys will leaving the organization. Unfortunately its very easy to get into this mode, especially if you are a large company will several layers of management- this kind of things can run for years until irreversible damage is caused. The net result after years will be false or irrelevant numbers floating in the company, while the best talent has already left.<p>Even Jack Welch, mentions that stack ranking works best if everybody in the organization is stack ranked all the way up to the CEO. So that if some one cheats in the middle he will get ranked low under his manager and so on an so forth. This is very different to what happens in most big corporates. Managers are generally left immune to this process. The net result is they begin to form gangs of yes-men around them. Whoever refuses to be a part of it, slips out of favor of the manager and gets a bad ranking. Net result in mass is a disaster. Which is not apparent until very late.<p>So if you are company with a culture of politics, processes, nepotism, bureaucracy and biases. Stack ranking will not help, but rather destroy you.<p>I saw all this at a Mega Corp here in India. Needlessly to say that company today is struggling fallen far below from its original glory days.

How does this affect the "contract employees"? I'm guessing they don't get the bonuses, but do they get rated?<p>Microsoft still has a high rate of contractors (and I count some friends and relatives among this number), although less since they got in trouble from the federal government for not paying most types of benefits to contractors. [1]<p>1: <a href="http://archive.washtech.org/news/courts/display.php?ID_Content=381" rel="nofollow">http://archive.washtech.org/news/courts/display.php?ID_Conte...</a>

Level 64?

I wonder what the stack ranking in MSR (the pure research arm of Microsoft) looks like.

Ranking is designed to protect and benefit the people assigning the numbers. The numbers are meaningless and should be called political ranking. Its ok to work at one of these places short term if you need the cash, but have a plan to move on soon.

Stack-ranking is this idea that emerges when a bunch of bored, overpaid and underemployed people of marginal intellect (that's being generous) watch a terrorist attack on TV and decide, "It be funna' do that to, hurr hurr, a comph-uh-ny!". The caretaker who wipes the shit off their mirrors every morning reminds them that they have executive positions and can actually act out their childish fantasies, so they do.

I always found it amusing that Enron did stack ranking while at the same time cooking it's books. They were just doing it to be assholes.