Hacker News Reader

Comment by commandlinefan | Hacker News Reader

As long as I've been working (since around '92 or so), my varying employers have periodically insisted that we "set goals" some time around the beginning of the year, work toward those goals during the year, and then submit to evaluation against those goals at the end of the year. Every single year I've ever seen it tried, there were a set of initiatives that were perceived as being super important toward the beginning of the year, and everybody set goals around those. Then, around the middle of the year, those initiatives were scrapped, everybody pivoted to something else, and the goals that were set at the beginning of the year were meaningless. Every. Single. Time. The only thing that was more predictable than trying to set annual goals and have them remain relevant for an entire year being impossible was managements absolute inability to recognize and learn from this inevitability.

View on HN

My company, for the past 10 years, still requires this, and while I understand its nice to set goals... after a decade of working there, there's only so much "room for improvement" i can work on. I've slacked on certain areas of the job just to make up stuff "to work on" for my goals. It works to convince the higher ups who really couldn't care less about my goals, because they would rather find more ways to cut paychecks or lay off people for getting paid too much, so there's not a crazy lot of incentive to even take them seriously anymore.

> my varying employers have periodically insisted that we "set goals" some time around the beginning of the year

That's because their boss (or their boss's boss or whoever) is telling them to "get it done"/do that.

Seems like a lot of effort for the typical 3% raise most people get more often than not lol

If you work at a place for 10 years, is it really realistic to expect to get a $10k/yr+ raise every year? Goals or no goals.

>If you work at a place for 10 years, is it really realistic to expect to get a $10k/yr+ raise every year? Goals or no goals.

If you aren't getting a wage increase above the annual inflation rate each year then not only you're not getting a raise, you're actually getting paid less for the same work (or, rather, for even more work, as your responsibilities will increase with the seniority).

For 100K wage that's like getting a 7K raise atm.

> If you aren't getting a wage increase above the annual inflation rate each year then not only you're not getting a raise, you're actually getting paid less for the same work

You're not wrong but I don't think it's realistic to expect every single year your employer to give you a "1:1 with CPI" raise.

If anything, maybe 0% one year or 2 years and then maybe a 10-15% next year (if you worked on some really key deliverable projects where it can be justified).

Is that your experience?

I can't speak for the OP, but, in my career I've consistently ask for and received year raises a few percent above CPI. Twice I've been denied and found a new employeer. As the OP said, if you're not at minimum getting a CPI raise, you're doing the same work for less money, effectively a demotion.

For the last decade tech has been hiring like crazy and jump jobs has been easy. I can't speak for how that will change going forward, but it does concern me.

I got a 2% cut last year and a 4.5% cut the year before when considering inflation. Whee

> If you work at a place for 10 years, is it really realistic to expect to get a $10k/yr+ raise every year

Inflation is at 6.4 percent right now. If you made 100k that would take you up to six and a half just for treading water, if you make 200k then and get 10k you are being paid less than last year.

> Inflation is at 6.4 percent right now.

In my experience, whether inflation is 2% or 6% or 8%, your employer doesn't care. You have next to no leverage to demand a constant static cost-of-living-pegged-1:1-to-inflation raise.

yeah, if inflation is 8% and you don't get an 8% raise you effectively get a paycut. What are you going to do, strongarm your employer and demand they give you at least a "CPI trailing 12 months" raise every 12 months? not realistic in my opinion/experience

It depends. The best way to strongarm your employer is with another job offer. If you can't get another job offer, or if it's not a big bump up, that probably says that you're being paid competitively. But if you interview somewhere, it's pretty standard to say "I have a better offer, match it or I quit." Of course, you have to be willing to quit if they agree.

That's why you have to change jobs every few years. The real performance review happens in your next employers office.

I've kind of hit a cap. I've never made big "FAANG" total comp money (where you get like $160k/yr salary and $160k/yr stock grants additionally for being a top performer or whatever)

Anything over $160k/yr, I feel like you are subscribing yourself to be "the go to person" for everything and a lot is expected from you.

When companies hit a cap on what they can charge they start finding ways to cut corners and deliver less for the same money.

Because of stock market decline I made 50% less in 2022 than 2021 so inflation is the least of my concerns.

>That's because their boss (or their boss's boss or whoever) is telling them to "get it done"/do that.

More like it for HR/managers to justify their presense by "doing something"

The last few years I've had two managers simply check my goals as completed, regardless of results. They seemed as sick of the whole process as I was.

I think most line managers are sick of those processes. I had a manager once who explained to our team of 3 people how he had to fit us in a bell curve of performance and tie our bonuses and promotions to that.

Suffice it to say he started saying he was sorry but despite his efforts he could not convince the higher ups how stupid an idea that was.

This. As an IC my goals are pointless if they don't align with stuff that is already/is going to be funded. Say I make a goal of learning a different piece of the codebase that I find particularly interesting. Well there better be a bug or new feature involving that code for me to get started on, and it better be funded to a level such that I can take extra time to learn, because it was originally budgeted for the relevant SME, who's toes I'll probably have to gently step on just to get access to the work, let alone pass code review.

Needless to say that rarely happens, and even when it does there are often no available followup assignments in the same area to reinforce the knowledge, so you move on to something else and forget 80% of what you learned.

Exactly, every single time, the goals (in our company they are called Bold goals) are irrelevant after a quarter. The only time it mattered was in a company and that too for only 6 months, where we had monthly SMART goals. At the end of 6 months the whole process was scrapped :)

It's even worse, though. Setting concrete, achievable goals, and tying those to performance reviews creates perverse incentives. It encourages setting easy goals because you know you can achieve them, and it discourages emergent teamwork when it doesn't match your goals. Someone comes to you asking for help with something? Sorry, can't help, it's not part of the goals I set at the beginning of the year. Stretch project that will improve your skills and unlock a lot of value for your employer? Sorry, I might not succeed, best stick to the goals I've set that I know I can achieve.

I would also add a lot of years I got goals that I didn't agree w/ technical direction. For instance if I get goal to switch some system architecture to X but that's a bad idea and I document and provide evidence why that's a bad idea and it doesn't happen maybe I shouldn't be docked at the end of the year? If anything I should be rewarded but some higher up will be pissed I poo poo'd on their vision and suffer.

Same, even quarter to quarter goals are scrapped. Even professional development goals are often tied to what the company needs, and those need to be adjusted.

I don't know the solution, other than just have general expectations about assigned work and commitments as those commitments come up and change. Rather than having some performance conversation that's out of sync with actual project deliverables.

My employees insist on having these goals. They want them to use it as a leverage in salary negotiations.

All employees should be able, and applauded for doing so, to explain how they’ve not only met goals of a time, but been nimble enough to pivot to management whims.

Your relationship with employees is through salary, that’s it. Not the comfy chair, the firewall rules, pool table, or “agile” training… but salary.

Let them talk salary and you will find they provide healthier boundaries. (Your comment gave me no indication of your opinion, I was just adding.)

Exactly, they are for employees who want to make a case for promotion or management to make a case for layoffs and firing. Always give your self good ratings.

I agree. We set goals every year. There always some high-level conceptual things set levels above us. Half the time they don't even apply to our systems. They also have us set personal goals, which are basically meaningless.

Shiny object syndrome is universal

Reply on news.ycombinator.com