How do supervisors hand out "exceeds expectations" in performance reviews?

[Anonymous]

As a manager of a big team at a company that caps the number of “exceeds/excelling,” I can report that everyone thinks they deserve the highest rating but the reality is very few actually do.

Very few employees have sufficient information to compare staff…but certain managers do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My company only provides three choices: exceeds expectations, meets expectations, and does not meet expectations. For a supervisor to assign an Exceeds Expectations to a direct report requires significant higher level management authorizations, many reports, and a lot of conversations.
That keeps the "expectation inflation" in check.

This is our company too. We reserve "exceeds expectations" for someone on the team that we're trying to promote. People who "meet expectations" still get their raise and full bonus, so "exceeds" is mainly for a big step up in title/pay and we use it judiciously. Both because we have to (needs a ton of meetings/approvals) and to save our team capital for when we need it.

Same here. The “good” ratings are actually phrased as “meets and sometimes exceeds” and “consistently exceeds”. The latter is basically “must promote”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Every place limits the %. Whether they formally do or don’t varies, but they do. And they should. If everyone is exceeding expectations then your expectations are too low.

The key thing to ask is what the differentiating factors are. It shouldn’t be a secret what expectations are.

I totally side this. Whats the point of performance review if everyone exceeds expectations ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Working hard does not equal exceeding expectations. There is an employee who reports to me who works hard and I appreciate her efforts. However, she makes lots of mistakes, inane thorough, and needs a lot of hand-holding. Is her performance and enough for me to let her go? No. But I’ve definitely considered it and in no way does she exceed my expectations.

This.

[Anonymous]

Exceeds expectations is so asinine of a measurement anyway. What does that even mean? Everyone should be meeting expectations and that should be enough. FFS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every place limits the %. Whether they formally do or don’t varies, but they do. And they should. If everyone is exceeding expectations then your expectations are too low.

The key thing to ask is what the differentiating factors are. It shouldn’t be a secret what expectations are.

I totally side this. Whats the point of performance review if everyone exceeds expectations ?

But what if a lot of people do exceed expectations?

[Anonymous]

A lot of times people dont want to promote so you get a mediocre rating. Or you get exceeds expectations when they are desperate to keep employees or they need to replace someone. Its not always really related to performance but more what the company wishes to do.

[Anonymous]

And a teacher exceeding expectations and no pay increase means nothing off their back. If exceeding expectations meant more pay it would be given out more freely.

[Anonymous]

How old are you, OP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Unpopular opinion from a long time manager. If you are doing your job, exactly as written, exactly 40 hours a week, you are meeting expectations.

This is not school where “getting all the answers right” = 100%. I am assuming you are equating A+ with a 100%.

In my organization 70% of people get a Meets. It’s like being graded in a curve. meets is a C but it’s also a modest raise and a small bonus.

Exceeds is Exceptional. Above and Beyond. It’s contributing new ideas, working independently, doing things without being asked, providing updates without being reminded, and generally EXCEEDING your scope, exceeding expectations, exceeding the output and quality of your peers. Exceeding is extra credit and that is why it earns extra bonus.

I don't disagree but the problem with that is that everyone has to be onboard or else the only thing that's really happening is that you're penalizing your own employees.

We have this issue at my government agency. In our agency "satisfactory" means "doing your job, exactly as written, 40 hours a week" whereas in most agencies "satisfactory" means "one bad day away from a PIP" and it really hurts people trying to transfer because they see someone with a "satisfactory" and assume they're not doing well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Many people on my team are upset about their subpar ratings. We feel we worked really hard and only received meets expectations. What is this process like behind the scenes?

We used to give out a lot of outstanding and EE ratings. This year we are told 70/20/10 (ME/EE/Outstanding) by new leadership.

[Anonymous]

At our organization, meets expectations means no bonus because you did only what you were already paid to do. So I consider meets expectations subpar when a bonus is reserved for those who get exceeds or outstanding.

[Anonymous]

Ratings don't matter. It's just a trick to make you work extra for a fake promise of higher pay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many people on my team are upset about their subpar ratings. We feel we worked really hard and only received meets expectations. What is this process like behind the scenes?

We used to give out a lot of outstanding and EE ratings. This year we are told 70/20/10 (ME/EE/Outstanding) by new leadership.

Wow, I wouldn't work for any high performing teams with that setup. Rather compete against idiots for that 10% excellence.

[Anonymous]

I review my direct reports and the ratings are not tied to promotion. My team gets allocated a budget for raises and the rating is used to determine how we divvy up the existing pool. So whether I rate everyone 5 vs 3 makes no difference. As long as the team level set, high performer is higher than a low performer, wether that’s 5 to 4 / 3.3 to 3, it should be a fair game: