Capital One’ Performance Management System

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is so archaic about it?

It’s a forced balancing/quota system. 10-15% “have to” fail.

That was discussed where I work many years ago. I believe GE used to follow that philosophy. To me that just means you’re saying you have incompetent hiring practices if 10% of your staff are worth firing every year.

Are 10% actually fired each year? Or no bonuses for them?

They won’t fire you on the spot. They’ll mess with your bonus and merit pay and place on PIPs and give you strong hints that things aren’t going to go well for you. There severance packages aren’t bad though. If they are nice and “abolish” your position, you can get 6-8 months severance. Othwrwise, it’s about half that. The good ‘ole boys (and girls) networks are alive and well there.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is so archaic about it?

It’s a forced balancing/quota system. 10-15% “have to” fail.

That was discussed where I work many years ago. I believe GE used to follow that philosophy. To me that just means you’re saying you have incompetent hiring practices if 10% of your staff are worth firing every year.

Yes, they follow the GE Jack Welsh philosophy.

I agree about the "incompetent hiring practices if 10% of your staff are worth firing every year"

I will add, the turnover in the IT department is huge, because of this policy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is so archaic about it?

It’s a forced balancing/quota system. 10-15% “have to” fail.

That was discussed where I work many years ago. I believe GE used to follow that philosophy. To me that just means you’re saying you have incompetent hiring practices if 10% of your staff are worth firing every year.

Yes, they follow the GE Jack Welsh philosophy.

I agree about the "incompetent hiring practices if 10% of your staff are worth firing every year"

I will add, the turnover in the IT department is huge, because of this policy.

They are going to have big problems with IT/Tech retention when Amazon lands in VA. Goofy office space and pop up Indian food stalls in the cafe’s aren’t gonna cut it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is so archaic about it?

It’s a forced balancing/quota system. 10-15% “have to” fail.

That was discussed where I work many years ago. I believe GE used to follow that philosophy. To me that just means you’re saying you have incompetent hiring practices if 10% of your staff are worth firing every year.

The other thing they’re famous for is promoting internal candidates with much fanfare and throwing a 12% raise at them. Meanwhile, if you had been brought in externally for that same position, you would have likely made $50k more in base salary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is so archaic about it?

It’s a forced balancing/quota system. 10-15% “have to” fail.

That was discussed where I work many years ago. I believe GE used to follow that philosophy. To me that just means you’re saying you have incompetent hiring practices if 10% of your staff are worth firing every year.

Yes, they follow the GE Jack Welsh philosophy.

I agree about the "incompetent hiring practices if 10% of your staff are worth firing every year"

I will add, the turnover in the IT department is huge, because of this policy.

They are going to have big problems with IT/Tech retention when Amazon lands in VA. Goofy office space and pop up Indian food stalls in the cafe’s aren’t gonna cut it.

I don’t know about that - amazon is a pretty horrible work life balance. Capital One is virtually retirement, many people I know go home at 3pm.

[Anonymous]

What’s the pay structure like for a Senior Manager position in Data Analytics ? And the interview process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What’s the pay structure like for a Senior Manager position in Data Analytics ? And the interview process.

It’s not exactly my group, but I’d imagine the pay is similar to BA family of jobs. I’d guess $120-$140 base and bonus of $25-$35 perhaps.

Interview very likely to be a case interview.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is so archaic about it?

It’s a forced balancing/quota system. 10-15% “have to” fail.

That was discussed where I work many years ago. I believe GE used to follow that philosophy. To me that just means you’re saying you have incompetent hiring practices if 10% of your staff are worth firing every year.

Most of the dotcom companies out in Silicon Valley adopt similar protocols.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is so archaic about it?

It’s a forced balancing/quota system. 10-15% “have to” fail.

That was discussed where I work many years ago. I believe GE used to follow that philosophy. To me that just means you’re saying you have incompetent hiring practices if 10% of your staff are worth firing every year.

Yes, they follow the GE Jack Welsh philosophy.

I agree about the "incompetent hiring practices if 10% of your staff are worth firing every year"

I will add, the turnover in the IT department is huge, because of this policy.

They are going to have big problems with IT/Tech retention when Amazon lands in VA. Goofy office space and pop up Indian food stalls in the cafe’s aren’t gonna cut it.

I don’t know about that - amazon is a pretty horrible work life balance. Capital One is virtually retirement, many people I know go home at 3pm.

Amazon has a terrible reputation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is so archaic about it?

It’s a forced balancing/quota system. 10-15% “have to” fail.

That was discussed where I work many years ago. I believe GE used to follow that philosophy. To me that just means you’re saying you have incompetent hiring practices if 10% of your staff are worth firing every year.

Are 10% actually fired each year? Or no bonuses for them?

In my company you were brought up for "retraining" and then heavily monitored. I quit after 8 months. I still got my bonuses as I was under contract. I agree it is a bizarre policy.
I was a high achiever too. I don't know why a company hassles high achievers. It seems counter productive. After I quite they had to bring on 3 people to replace me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is so archaic about it?

It’s a forced balancing/quota system. 10-15% “have to” fail.

That was discussed where I work many years ago. I believe GE used to follow that philosophy. To me that just means you’re saying you have incompetent hiring practices if 10% of your staff are worth firing every year.

Are 10% actually fired each year? Or no bonuses for them?

They won’t fire you on the spot. They’ll mess with your bonus and merit pay and place on PIPs and give you strong hints that things aren’t going to go well for you. There severance packages aren’t bad though. If they are nice and “abolish” your position, you can get 6-8 months severance. Othwrwise, it’s about half that. The good ‘ole boys (and girls) networks are alive and well there.

I did not work in the banking industry but the above is similar to what happened to me. I was brought up for "retraining." I was heavily monitored for 8 months. I quit after 8 months.
If I had had stronger good ol girl/boy connections with our VPs I don't think this would have happened to me.

I find it a bizarre business policy to implement.