Many guys said they did same performance but got lower IPF than previous year, which makes they feel unfair and unhappy. Someone commented the lower IPF is normal because of lower bonus budget. How does that comment make sense? The company factor 0.61 has already impacted the bonus budget, why is a lower IPF needed? If the budget is still very low, why didn’t they set a 0.41 company factor to save budget and still give a good IPF to engineer?
12 replies (most recent on top)
Honest question: but what is the point of the IPF even? Is it just there to minimize the clarity to employees? Because from management and up it’s all about the dollar figure allocated to their team and they back their way onto a particular IPF for an IC.
You obviously don’t understand budgets. The company score is company wide. The budget that supplies the funds for employee bonuses is different for each BU. The leaders of each BU then works on how they want to decide that money w/in their BU, so Directors get different amounts in their buckets, & they then pay number games with the IPF to figure out how to split that bucket amongst the team.
I can’t remember the last time I did a check-in. I wonder how much Cisco wastes on that software?
How 'connected' team space checkins are? Please start.
Haven't done one for years!
The IPF should be viewed as a relative marker within your team and not at the company level. FLMs get a budget dictated to them and the system even recommends an IPF percentage per employee based on previous scores, the managers regular performance updates AND how ‘connected’ and regular your teamspace checkins are (don’t get me started).
Managers can ignore this and start again BUT never to exceed the budget. If I think someone is worth 1.5 someone else has to get 0.7, if I think that 0.7 is worth more then the ‘high’ performer needs to be lower and the ‘on target’ employee gets sets to 1.
FLMs do the best they can with what is given to them. They are squeezed in this too
Apparently 1.0 is 'average'.
I find it hard to believe half the employees receive a score less than 1.0?
It sort of feels like most get between 1.1-1.3?
Hmmm…why are comments still talking about budget? If company factor 0.61 couldn’t make the bonus low enough, they can set the company factor as 0.41, 0.21. 0.00001, then engineers can get fair IPF
Your Director gets a cash and rsu budget. The way cash is allocated across a team is via IPF rating. Its not supposed to be peanut buttered. The true high performers are supposed to get higher IPF. But for ever 1.5 several people will have to get 1.0 or lower. Thats not exact math but should explain it. Also the lower the budget pool the lower the avg IPF.
IPF has nothing to do with your performance, it has everything to do with the bonus budget. they figure out how much to give you then do the math to come up with your IPF.
Lower bonus is due to wasting time on this board.
We all got conned. The cost of LRs is funded by the 39% cut on our bonuses this year. But fear not, the ELT is pocketing millions while Cisco is sinking like the Titanic.
if you did a good job in previous years, you've set the bar higher. so last years 150% may be this years 100-125%. thats how my manager explained it to me.
do i agree its fair? not really. but if thats how managers see it then thats probably why this happened to you