1? 1?
11 replies (most recent on top)
Cisco PLIF examples:
- 9 (point nine) - didn't meet expectation, need improvement. No stock/promo for you
-
05 (one point zero five)- solid year, met expectations, still room for improvement
promo/stock less likely than higher performers - 28 (one point two eight)- great year, exceeded expectations. Sr/critical talent may see stock/promo
- 5 and up (one point five and up) - exceptional year, top performers. With consistency, will see stock/promo.
Under a 1 is a lower performer. You get .9 or lower you better step it up or be looking because they are on to you. I doubt more than a handful other than executives are getting a 1.75 or above. I know of no IC getting above a 1.7 and no one ever at a 3.
Under a 1 is a lower performer. You get .9 or lower you better step it up or be looking because they are on to you.
When I was there with teams reporting into me I always added a "time in job/role" factor to IPFs as well. If we were rating folks and they were new to the team, I would expect IPFs to be closer to .9 than to 1.0 just because it's difficult (and unfair to everyone involved) to rate anyone higher until you get to know them and their work better. So people in a job/role for under 6 months would be in the .90 to high .9s, then, next cycle with a full view to performance, there were opportunities for people to be at and above 1.0 - the concept of distribution, in whatever individual rating system is in use at the time, is generally solid. Everyone can't be a star performer, just like a small few shouldn't dominate an entire team. It's all relative (if job expectations are clear for everyone in a particualr job/level). Sounds like (and not surprising) that there are still leaders there who use IPFs as 'friends and family', skewing the intent of the system. Leadership can be simple, with consistency and communication.
Keep in mind bonuses have a budget. If someone is above 1, somebody has to be under 1.
I managed to get target or modestly above for 20 year before taking the CEP.
I came to Cisco after 20 years in the disk drive industry. Came to the conclusion you only need so much money - putting in all those extra hours and weekends wasn’t worth it.
So at Cisco I made sure I was competent at my job, well above all the dumb–ses around me, but not too high that it threw of my work / life balance.
It's a Bell curve.
I got .8, ranked, aged 50, and got LR since I didn't want to play the game any more.
So just kiss up, sends lots of emails with directors/vp copied
LIE LIE LIE like others, and you can get away with it.
Ipf 1 is giving you target bonus (if cpf 1) and should therefore be considered an "average". But, it all depends on how you rank in your team that year and how well the team ranked, and how well the dept ranked... Etc. Aka how much budget did trickle down for your manager to divide.
0 to 1.05 ramen noodles and update resume
- 25 plus is continue str1pp3rs and blow
AFAIK , the IPF less than 0.9 is considered average. And if it's less than 0.8 , you can say its below average .
if you have IPF of 1 and 1+ its above average .
Moreover , IPF depends on budget allocated to the team.
At least 1.0 is expected.
If you are less than 1.0, you should be concerned. 0.9 may be acceptable middle of the road this year given funding.
- 0 - 1.15 is probably solid middle of the road, but understand folks are getting 1.25 - 1.75s out there.
My barometer is:
- 0 - ramen noodles and update my resume
- 25+ continue str—ers and blow
That should be "less than 1? 1?"