I have read within the last year or so that a trend in business is to rid of performance reviews. Any word on WF doing something like that? If I want to have a talk with my boss or if my boss wants to talk with me we know how to get in touch with one another. I have ridden the stage coach for nearly 10 years with no interest in moving up or out and I've always batted 500 in my reviews. Reviews which I have always seen as a waste of mine and my boss's time.
25 replies (most recent on top)
@psv+1aHb88Nb
If you hadn't said past employee, I would have though you were talking about a guy I work with now.
He is responsible for ferreting out manual processes and automating them within his LOB. Instead he says they are too hard to figure out an lets them slide.
And when someone else needs info about these things, guess who is the only person with documented information? Yeah this guy. He does not post his findings to SharePoint / Confluence, thus keeping it hidden. And when he is asked, he claims ignorance, EVEN TO THE PEOPLE WHO WORKED WITH HIM TO DOCUMENT IT!
So many people have complained to his manager and all that he seems to have done is put him on side projects with the least amount of visibility. He is insulting, condescending, obstructive, unhelpful, technically not adept, and all we are told to do is "just try and work with the guy"
People like this make NO adaptations, think the sun shines out of their a__, believe they have some magic formula that no one else deserves to see, outright refuse to assist anyone, and yet their managers and HR won't do a thing.
what's the secret to breaking this incompetence code?
@psv+1aHb88Nb That guy is a hero in my book. He should ask for triple his salary and walk if he doesn’t get it.
Nobody, and I mean NOBODY, hates performance reviews as much as HR staff does. Maybe someone at the top of HR thinks they are a good idea, but most of HR finds them to be a meaningless waste of time. WF moved the performance management process away from HR consultants to the compensation consultants, and dozens of compensation professionals left WF for that reason. Unfortunately, there seems to be some tie to regulatory compliance, so they are even more generic and useless than they used to be. If documentation is needed for poor performance, than can be done at any time through a PIP, so I don’t think that’s a key driver.
It won’t happen. The company needs the documentation for the regulators.
That's disturbing. @xvm+1aHb88Nb
Technology folks, especially developers, pretty much do what they want and get away with it. That goes for offshore and onshore, no difference. Things that 15-20 years ago would send people out with a box. But mediocrity is accepted now everywhere, not just WF.
@xvm+1aHb88Nb A less extreme story, but still it shocked me speechless. An long-timer in IT ran a lot of manual processes that should have been automated years ago. Over time, because no one really wanted to deal, he became the only employee with subject matter expertise on these processes/technical jobs. He was out of office for substantial periods of time, going to jazz festivals or whatever and running jobs remotely. Never seemed to run out of PTO. He had all the power, and no one dared cross him.
He was also verbally abusive to colleagues. Patronizing, insulting etc. on large calls. From time to time, he'd get so frustrated he'd just insult us, and hang up on us leaving us wondering what kind of crazy company we were working for. To date, I have never worked with anyone less professional.
Folks went to HR... crickets. One young female colleague went to their mutual boss, and was told just to not "take it personally. He just doesn't work well with women." I kid you not.
I think he eventually "retired". Maybe he was encouraged to do so, but he left in a very good place financially. No ramifications whatsoever.
Sums up so many issues at WF -- antiquated IT, lousy leadership/management, HR that only cares about protecting the company from lawsuits. Stuff raised on this site all the time.
I was recommended for promotion two years in a row and senior management who had no clue who I was or what I did ki---d it both times. That’s when I left because I knew I wasn’t going anywhere there. I was of a certain age too so I’m sure that had something to do with it.
@jqk. I changed areas of the bank for much the same reason after it happened two years in a row.
A changed ranking number by someone two levels removed who did not know me or anything about my work was the final straw for me. I landed at a much better and happier company, and it only took a couple weeks.
I don’t know if management is getting the results they want, but multiple other companies thought me and my advanced degree, experience and multiple certifications were worth more.
Buh bye WF, it was not fun. Good luck to those that stay, there are some very good people who deserve better than the current management team and seemingly endless painful b.s.
Regarding Post ID: @xvm+1aHb88Nb
WFC’s primary concern in EVERY SCENARIO is protecting the bank from a lawsuit. (Unless we are profiting from some fraud, I suppose.)
They are short-sighted though. In the scenario cited below, they were concerned about the offender suing for unfair termination. They did not think about protecting the women in the department, who could have filed a heck of a lawsuit. Then again, we are talking the same bank who allowed Jay Welker to “retire” with full benefits.
I hate them, especially since system does not allow a comment when acknowledged.
@xvm. Amazing this still happens in 2021 but we see how the id--ts act in Washington and elsewhere in the country the last few years so I guess I shouldn’t be surprised.
Snippet from Post ID: @ujx+1aHb88Nb
Absolutely correct and well said! Stacking/ranking employees with diverse talents and abilities is like trying to judge whether vanilla or chocolate or strawberry or mint or... or... or... is the best flavor...
"... And I am not for stacking/ranking employees. More HR dreamt-up hogwash. Part of a manager’s job is to put each employee where their individual strengths will allow them to shine. Not every employee is going to be good at everything.
Performance reviews are full of conscious and unconscious biases. There is no way to eliminate that. If WFC would just allow managers the time and energy to run their departments and manage their teams on a daily basis, instead of putting the emphasis on two 30-minute sit-downs per year, the organization would be much stronger for it. ..."
True story:
We had a male in our department who many of the women had complained to the male manager about FOR YEARS. We are talking groping females, pats on bottoms, po-n found on and in his desk, inappropriate unwanted flirty comments, dirty jokes, adjusting himself in front of us, coming up close behind women and whispering in their ears. On top of all that, his work performance was poor. Our male manager always said that he documented and reported every complaint to HR. (Not sure about that, really.) . He said that HR always said there was no proof other than what “the girls” were saying and HR needed documentation that we weren’t unfairly ganging up on him.
Finally, the man physically hit a gal in the department right in front of everyone including the manager. STILL, no kidding, male manager argued with the department’s HR rep through the evening about firing the offender. Word of the as----t made its way to security. Next day, the Head of Security walked in to the manager’s office, and had to tell our HR rep on the phone that “physical contact” is a non-negotiable terminating event. They eventually emerged and the guards walked him out. Word was, after the event, that the department’s HR rep was “newer” and had never escalated the case.
Wells Fargo has the largest Human Resources group, DEI, social programs, offshore and highly paid permanent consultants. Wells Fargo HR people dont care about we want jobs to support families, children, and seniors. Wells Fargo HR corporate elites push performance reviews, PIP, ranking, race affirmative action because they have found profitable situations of keeping their rich positions. Wells Fargo HR corporate elites management are all a power grab, control employees and ruin employee chances. All people hate them.
Post ID: @zpo+1aHb88Nb from Post ID: @kjv+1aHb88Nb
I do agree with some of your post.
I don’t think we have that many underperforming employees. Nothing that a good manager and some coaching/training/engagement on my part can’t usually help. The problem at WFC is that leadership has the managers so busy with managing the work, managing the data, attending endless get-nothing-done meetings, trying to fix daily problems with the systems, managing whatever competitive goals someone upstairs dreams up etc. Most managers don’t have the time or inclination to perform their most important job which is to manage their people. WFC puts an emphasis on managing the work, not the people.
And then, as you say: if you do have a seriously underperforming problem employee - HR makes it nearly impossible to fire them, so no manager wants to go through all that pain and headache. Believe me - I have wasted HOURS on hold and on the phone with HR trying to meet whatever their endless requirements are and it’s ridiculous. And that’s why the rotten apples stay. Everyone suffers for it.
Next problem is, as I said: you can have a GREAT TEAM who knocks it out of the park every day. And yet it is impossible to get them the raises/bonuses they have earned, depending on your LOB. Back office: I feel for those people.
And I am not for stacking/ranking employees. More HR dreamt-up hogwash. Part of a manager’s job is to put each employee where their individual strengths will allow them to shine. Not every employee is going to be good at everything.
Performance reviews are full of conscious and unconscious biases. There is no way to eliminate that. If WFC would just allow managers the time and energy to run their departments and manage their teams on a daily basis, instead of putting the emphasis on two 30-minute sit-downs per year, the organization would be much stronger for it.
Reviews are a way to formalize bad performance, which needs to be very formalized and long lasting for HR to go along with firing someone for being inept. Honestly, a lot of the downsizing we are doing now wouldn't even be required if we could more easily unload underperforming employees without 3759250 pages of documents, 163849 perf conversations, an act of Congress and a partridge in a pear tree. HR is so concerned about lawsuits that we are basically forced to keep bad employees for a very long period of time before we can unload them, nevermind the damage/risk that causes. Get rid of people that can't do their job and we'd be in a much better place. That's one thing new / hip companies are better at, no doubt. I'm guessing if you work at Google and you're completely incompetent, you probably don't last more than a week. Here? Probably a year plus, longer if you know how to do juuust enough to show you've 'improved' from time to time.
So yeah, the 'need' for reviews is just a symptom. The insurance on retaining underperformers is the underlying problem.
Performance Reviews are the most useless waste of time in Corporate America. Twice per year, managers have to stop everything they’re doing to try to come up with a different way to say the same thing they have said on every other previous review. Then stop production, stop projects, stop problem-solving, stop customer service, etc to meet with each employee and pretend like this is a valuable process.
On top of that, we then have to find a way to explain that even though an employee does an excellent job every day, they are only going to get a 2% increase. The entire process is broken from start to finish. Employees don’t like them. Managers don’t like them.
HR Departments continue to promote performance reviews in order to justify their own existence. To me, they reflect how useless HR really is.
Agree with @gjb+1aHb88Nb.
Wells also is using forced ranking - something that just started in 2020. This is a great tool to incent employees to leave. Why would they stop?
I mean with all the spans and layers I don’t see the real need for such reviews. Am I really going to get promoted? Not likely.
We are 20 years behind in tech, so you can see the correlation
The only people who love Performing Reviews are HR Departments.
Agree with below, can’t imagine WF being on the leading edge of something life that. Wells is all about process and busywork.
Yeah, I don't think you're in luck here. As ineffective as they are, most older companies will keep performance reviews for decades to come.