Meta Gives Thousands of Staff Subpar Reviews
wsj.com> Meta managers gave approximately 10% of employees ratings indicating they are underperforming, the people said. That proportion wasn’t unprecedented in the years before the pandemic.
In other words, Meta is conducting business as usual.
Some key facts, like the one you mentioned, aren’t visible if you don’t have a WSJ account.
It’s just a bait headline for a normal cycle. They even say it is just more people included in the 10% because of strong recent hiring increasing the total. What a weird article.
You mean some people in a company actually perform below the average of a company?
Good luck to all the future PIP/layoff recipients. If you are one of the employees who just got their first subpar review, I hope you know that it was unavoidable and a business decision to do so, that has nothing to do with your actual performance
nothing? My guess is they've changed the ratios. Maybe previously Zuck expected 10% to get subpar reviews, and now he's asked for 30%.
Well, according to the article we're discussing, your guess is wrong.
"approximately 10% of employees ratings indicating they are underperforming, the people said. That proportion wasn’t unprecedented in the years before the pandemic."
my guess wasn't about the raw percentages. But that they increased it. It's ridiculous to think that Meta gave bad ratings to their best people. They just pushed people downwards.
Yeah subpar reviews don’t mean more layoffs are coming. The article is just trying to reach. Even after they laid off they still have to grade on a curve.
I bet Marc is also giving himself a „meets most“ and putting himself on a pip. Since as we know „he takes the responsibility“ for what is happening…
giving them low perf scores before firing means you can’t do another round of mass layoffs since then it would be for cause and not a layoff
It's also a way to keep them on, but give them a lower salary increase.
Hopefully they unionise now.