An absolute scale of ranks for each discipline, and some clarity on what types of performance result in increases or decreases in that scale. AFAIK Google uses this now, and many traditional or government software companies use this (e.g. Software Engineer III, Systems Engineer IV, etc).
At review time, get all of the group in a room, including the manager, and vote on who should leave. Because in a toxic environment, people are discussing that privately anyway, so let's be open and transparent.
The person voted isn't necessarily made to leave. It's an opportunity for them to focus on improving themselves personally, possibly in a program.
> At review time, get all of the group in a room, including the manager, and vote on who should leave. Because in a toxic environment, people are discussing that privately anyway, so let's be open and transparent.
This a genius idea. That way you push the liability of discrimination from the company to the employees at an individual level. It's like mob rule but for companies.
> The person voted isn't necessarily made to leave. It's an opportunity for them to focus on improving themselves personally, possibly in a program.
I can't begin to imagine how awkward it would be to be voted off the island and stick around anyway.
The only way to get team cohesion is positive-sum priorities. If I spend more time helping you improve long-term and less time delivering on my own responsibilities, that needs to improve my next evaluation, otherwise I'm pretty much compelled to stop doing it.
No, I suppose it doesn't. But neither does secret stack ranking. I once asked exactly where I was on the stack, and was told that's proprietary information.
