Paywall. So my guess is because managers really have no idea how to measure performance and have biases that will influence that ranking outside of performance implications anyways.
Someone let me know how close I got. :)
Someone let me know how close I got. :)
> A number of line managers told me they gamed the system. They would put people who had just joined the team in the bottom bracket, because they were easier to sacrifice. Or, perversely, they tried to hang on to poor performers so they could put them at the bottom and protect everyone else.
You are correct though, we have no way to accurately measure knowledge work. I'm a broken record on this, all performance management is subjectivity masquerading as objectivity.
It's making work about work that doesn't make the org more effective and in fact is toxic. There are too many examples from the past 40 years across industries for anyone to claim ignorance.
tldr: First, it destroys intrinsic motivation. The requirement that the grading be done on a curve then produces losers where there are none. The employees game the system and this in turn destroys cooperation.