QPR 2010 / MIS 2011 Any Insight into Merit Increases?

[pretzel_man]

You are correct. I had to check. Regardless of the what the goals, abilities, competencies and actual results are, you can be rated a star or a loser. Hope it's not too late to start sucking up

Just to be clear.....

People here complained that the "objective" rating was not appropriate.

Now you are saying the "subjective" rating requires sucking up???

I think the new format is much improved. The subjective rating is connected to the rating areas.

You can see your strengths, weaknesses, blindspots.

Assuming you have a reasonable manager, the process seems good.

 

[FracusBrown]

Just to be clear.....

People here complained that the "objective" rating was not appropriate.

Now you are saying the "subjective" rating requires sucking up???

I think the new format is much improved. The subjective rating is connected to the rating areas.

You can see your strengths, weaknesses, blindspots.

Assuming you have a reasonable manager, the process seems good.

You know what they say about assumptions...

I don't know what the answer is. Every job is different and every evaluator has their own perspective on ratings. Clearly, if the rating it's based primarily or solely on the opinion of the evaluator, it can't hurt to be regarded favorably.

Egos are directly proportionate to the level. The higher they go the bigger they get. Being knowledgeable, skilled and effective can easily be overshadowed by a few disagreements with the all mighty ego.

Presenting opposing opinions and supporting facts to an egotistical person dong the rating would likely have negative repercussions. So yes, sucking up is a plus when ratings are subjective.

 

[pretzel_man]

You know what they say about assumptions...

I don't know what the answer is. Every job is different and every evaluator has their own perspective on ratings. Clearly, if the rating it's based primarily or solely on the opinion of the evaluator, it can't hurt to be regarded favorably.

Egos are directly proportionate to the level. The higher they go the bigger they get. Being knowledgeable, skilled and effective can easily be overshadowed by a few disagreements with the all mighty ego.

Presenting opposing opinions and supporting facts to an egotistical person dong the rating would likely have negative repercussions. So yes, sucking up is a plus when ratings are subjective.

The merit increase system is up and running. It is still subjective, like previous years.

QPR's are automatically brought in and the performance grade is automatically calculated just like the QPR system.

There are hints that raises should be matching QPR scores, but nothing enforcing it.

System seems better than in previous years. So far its okay.

 

[FracusBrown]

The merit increase system is up and running. It is still subjective, like previous years.

QPR's are automatically brought in and the performance grade is automatically calculated just like the QPR system.

There are hints that raises should be matching QPR scores, but nothing enforcing it.

System seems better than in previous years. So far its okay.

With all the hype, I expected something to change. After a week away from work, I think I'll try to return with an optimistic outlook.

What makes it better? Sounds like it's the same as last year.

 

[pretzel_man]

With all the hype, I expected something to change. After a week away from work, I think I'll try to return with an optimistic outlook.

What makes it better? Sounds like it's the same as last year.

Do you enter information in MIS?

No rating of people. It comes from QPR and the ratings are automatic. You can finally sort on fields. Made entering people's raises much easier.

Because the QPR ratings are direct from the manager, the QPR ratings match people meetings so people are slotted properly.

There are "guidelines" on the raises people should get based on their QPR ratings. The guidelines seem good. Of course, it also says that you must stay within the merit budget.

This year was easier to administer for me than previous years.

 

[FracusBrown]

There may be some minor changes in functionality. The allotment and dispersement of the funds remains unchanged. The evaluator enters the increase percentage at will from the alloted funds???

Currently QPR is utterly subjective, and then the pay is determined by another entirely subjective process. Not what was anticipated, but no more inferior than by means of the pathetic QPR course of action.

People meetings? The necessity seems to have vanished in the last round of consolidations. Secret now??? What would be decided??? Bands???

Bands are no secret and the pay for performance issue is lurking. Perhaps adjustments are in store for the upcoming period.

So far, QPR seems the same. My elements, bases and goals were approved long ago. Since they are significantly inconsistent what that of even my closest peers, it's gong to be somewhat difficult to use these for any consistent non-subjective ratings of rankings.

 

[pretzel_man]

There may be some minor changes in functionality. The allotment and dispersement of the funds remains unchanged. The evaluator enters the increase percentage at will from the alloted funds???

Currently QPR is utterly subjective, and then the pay is determined by another entirely subjective process. Not what was anticipated, but no more inferior than by means of the pathetic QPR course of action.

People meetings? The necessity seems to have vanished in the last round of consolidations. Secret now??? What would be decided??? Bands???

Bands are no secret and the pay for performance issue is lurking. Perhaps adjustments are in store for the upcoming period.

So far, QPR seems the same. My elements, bases and goals were approved long ago. Since they are significantly inconsistent what that of even my closest peers, it's gong to be somewhat difficult to use these for any consistent non-subjective ratings of rankings.

Look at what you are saying.... (at least what I am hearing)

You do not like the "objective" section of the QPR process. As you say, the elements and goals can be old and inconsistent......

Then you also do not like that the QPR process and MIS process does NOT use those "inconsistent" goals for your score. Are you aware that your QPR rating is NOT coming from those goals?

Your QPR score is 100% subjective based on a manager rating.

I like the current subjective rating much more. It makes the process better. It worked better for me personaly (I missed a goal), and better for my people.

I hear that you don't like the "objective" rating and don't like the "subjective" rating.

 

[FracusBrown]

Look at what you are saying.... (at least what I am hearing)

You do not like the "objective" section of the QPR process. As you say, the elements and goals can be old and inconsistent......

Then you also do not like that the QPR process and MIS process does NOT use those "inconsistent" goals for your score. Are you aware that your QPR rating is NOT coming from those goals?

Your QPR score is 100% subjective based on a manager rating.

I like the current subjective rating much more. It makes the process better. It worked better for me personaly (I missed a goal), and better for my people.

I hear that you don't like the "objective" rating and don't like the "subjective" rating.

For the record, I don't like the misleading, unclear and inconsistent use of QPR, MIS and career development.

 

[Popeye]

Look at what you are saying.... (at least what I am hearing)

You do not like the "objective" section of the QPR process. As you say, the elements and goals can be old and inconsistent......

Then you also do not like that the QPR process and MIS process does NOT use those "inconsistent" goals for your score. Are you aware that your QPR rating is NOT coming from those goals?

Your QPR score is 100% subjective based on a manager rating.

I like the current subjective rating much more. It makes the process better. It worked better for me personaly (I missed a goal), and better for my people.

I hear that you don't like the "objective" rating and don't like the "subjective" rating.

Suppose you're a completely inept manager. Hell knows we have plenty of 'em and they're not going anywhere. How would it work out for your people then?

 

[pretzel_man]

Suppose you're a completely inept manager. Hell knows we have plenty of 'em and they're not going anywhere. How would it work out for your people then?

It would work out poorly...

Suppose you have a reasonable manager. Hell knows that we also have plenty of them....

This process is better than the old one for that situation.