Microsoft's May 18th 2006 - a Big Turning Point (?)
Pre-Town Hall: Is May 18th a big turning point of a day? Is it my first big step into the sunset of blog obsolescence?
I'd love Microsoft to start its big internal defrag today, shrugging off the past of dysfunctional competitive reviews unattached to team success. I'd love Microsofties to stop focusing on succeeding by gaming the system and to start justly succeeding by producing great customer-focused results. I'd personally love to get back to just writing about making Microsoft smaller and efficient versus bemoaning trended 3.0s and The Curve and, oy, the injustice of it all.
I'd love our review and compensation system to be so straightforward and fair that it just fades into the background of everyday worklife.
There is risk. If the changes are as big as rumored in my building's hallways, there is great potential for a stunned backlash. You know, folks like to talk about change but don't like change when it happens. Employees also don't like having a bunch of unanswered questions. While it takes super leadership to rise up and push for the change, it takes extraordinary fantastic leadership to realize big change day-to-day from here forward. Each and everyone one of us, if we accept that the change is right, has to get behind it and ensure it's as good as it can be, and tweak and revise and adapt.
Fingers crossed...
Post-Town Hall:
It's a good start.
"Should have just done the towels and called it a day!" - Lisa Brummel, May 18th 2006.
You know, one moment of reflection: the circle is now complete. My second post to this blog was on July 6th, 2004. It was right after an impromptu employee meeting with Ballmer and Gates and as part of that, Mr. Ballmer justified the unfortunate recent benefit cuts, the main two points of ire being the towels and the ESPP revamp. Now, two years later, we're getting our towels back.
Has it always just been about the towels?
(Possible book title flashes through my mind.)
It's not like we're sweaty work-out animals always in need of a shower and fresh towel. No. What riled us was the bone-headed way the towel cut-back was handled, explained, and justified. It truly made us wonder just who are these people in charge and just who do they think they are leading? The towels became the symbol of poor leadership. That and the office-supply hide-and-seek.
Someone should send Ms. Brummel a golden towel award. I'd like my old ESPP back, too.
So, I'm going to skip over Ballmer's presentation along with the other presidents. I liked hearing from them and what's going on in the groups. I guess we'll next hear more at the Company Meeting. The star of the show, and I'd say of the entire company right now, was Lisa Brummel. If I had my old paper notebook, I'd be drawing little hearts around her name. Personally, I think she's a fantastic role model.
"I think some people will think it's fabulous, some people will think it's great, some people will be completely confused by it, and some people won't like it."
Peer-relative review ranking via fitting The Curve is gone. The trended 3.0 review score is gone. Your review rating is now an honest assessment based on what it is you should be doing and how well you did it. There are a lot of posts and comments here that, over time, are going to seem archaic. Good.
(Allow me to hang the disco ball, switch on the party lights, and put on some happy funk music...)
What's unclear and what time will reveal is that there still probably is Stack Ranking which feeds into a Compensation Curve. The poor manager with the review tool in front of them still has to figure out how to divvy up their merit increases. Either they make dictatorial decisions or stack ranks everyone. What's great, though, is they have the power to decide that, "Hey, everyone did great" and evenly spread out the budget vs. meeting a forced distribution.
Dixie's BBQ? Typhoon? Excellent! I will need that towel now that I have to work off all of those calories (or, wipe the sweat from my brow from a good dose of The Man sauce). The rest of the tools and the focusing on managers is a long-term investment sort-of-thing. We'll have to see how that goes and if there are issues, how they can be improved. I think there was a passive aggressive message to all managers: if you became a manager just to get promoted faster, we're going to find you and weed you out. It would have been nice for that to be clearer.
The one big thing missing out of all the rumors I heard was base-pay adjustment. The nicest biggest rumor was that we were going to be moving from 65 percentile based pay to 75 percentile based pay. That would have made incredible sense given the current competitive market and the salary compression people are dealing with. Salary compression hasn't been addressed at all. Maybe executive leadership is betting on another bubble burst?
Coming soon: we'll find out if we're on track for a cost-of-living-adjustment or not for the target merit budget.
And for you shareholders freaking out over the prospects of Microsoft blowing money on its employees: senior leadership made it clear that all of this was productivity based, and that they were expecting a great return on investment. Personally, I wouldn't have minded a mass-exodus from Microsoft of all the talented people because that indeed would have forced a Mini-Microsoft to be realized. These people are just doing their best to avoid that and to get excellent results in doing so.
So, going back to basics, does any of this get us closer to a Mini-Microsoft. Nope. A non-distracted Microsoft, perhaps, but some fundamental issues still remain with respect to us being so incredibly big that we still stumble over ourselves and suffer horrible, horrible waste in time and effort. I know Mr. Johnson is trying to make all the "<<fill in the blank>> Live" stuff seem like we're finally nimble and all that but it's one thing to throw the wonderful Sanaz and team up on the stage and exclaim, "Ooo, yeah, agility!" and another to make Windows, Office, Dynamics, and VS agile.
Lastly... what difference did this blog make? Would all of this had happened naturally once LisaB was in the house?
My feeling is that we were on our commute bike, but off the paved trail, going down a steep gravel path with potholes and horse apples (much like, say, the Tolt Pipeline trail). Some folks, rattling along the way, saw another smoother path and scooted over to that, leaving Microsoft. As of today, we're back on the smooth path. Ah! It's got some tight turns and we can't see what's around the corner, but it's a hell of a lot better.
"A non-toothache is a very pleasant thing." I like that saying. We're back to being able to focus on what's important, not being angst ridden over a busted review system. Yes, there's new angst in the interim but I have faith we can work through it, make good decisions, and network together to make the best decisions within this new model into best practices.
Looking back now: so many years... so many years people complained about trended review results, especially the dreaded trended 3.0, and you'd always hear, "There's nothing you can do. It's just how it is." So - eventually - I brought it up here as something I thought was fairly uncool, dysfunctional, and hampering our ability to get exceptional customer-focus, profit-making results let alone truly fire the people who needed to be moved on.
You don't need your 3.0 performers anymore to serve as a review foundation to prop up the rest of your team. Fire them!
And, well, the public complaining and dialogue that went on, along with potential candidates saying, "I don't want any of that crazy system!" added up. It got a very big ball rolling. The internal discussions of people getting a clear view into the smoky rooms of the stack rank and curve modeling helped a lot, too.
Thanks, Mr. Scoble, for your kind words (Scobleizer - Microsoft Geek Blogger » Missed big HR meeting (MyMicrosoft is now improved)).
Oh, and thanks Mini! These changes are due in no small part to you. Even if you don't get official props in the press releases.
Can one person change a huge company? Mini did. And we don't even know his name.
So, I'm going to make the claim that this blog, and all of those who participated in it and followed up on its contents, made a difference. If you agree, well, you can buy me a beer one day. And if you think there's a lot more work to do: the system is in play. All the cards have been thrown into the air. Get to work to make the new changes even better.
You: So what do you think? Good? bad? I'd love to hear some constructive thoughts. Maybe even just what questions you have at this point.
Mini-Microsoft Microsoft Compensation
305 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 1 – 200 of 305 Newer› Newest»I am shorting MSFT, screw the rules.
Here's my thought:
Whether the announced change is perceived as good or bad, it will not be relevant to the problems Microsoft is experiencing.
A bad policy can corrupt, but a better policy cannot un-corrupt. Once the fiefdoms are established, and the undesirable culture has set, it's too late to tweak the policy.
It's time for severe cleansing, aimed at breaking up undesirable alliances, clubs and club enablers.
Sadly, BillG is the biggest club enabler, so any cleansing falling short of firing Bill is not going to be effective.
I was reading the other posts about the SPSA grants. What strike me is the fact that was possible for the partners to get a "fair" set of objectives and be assessed against them. How come that we can not do the same for devs, test, pms? Wouldn't be easy? gone is the ranking and alike. If you meet your objectives you will receive that much. If you exceed them, x amount. I know sounds hard and maybe is impossible to do that, but my point is that then should be as hard to assess partners' work. I think that what pisses people the most is the unpredictability. You don't know if you will be rewarded when you do a good job. Some people chose not to risk not getting a bonus and float around average. Others take the risk, work like mad and sometime don't get rewarded. That's a morale killer. It should be clear and easy to assess when you do a good job. and your reward should be guaranteed. Pretty much like the partners' reward :)
So any system that doesn't include that fair assessment is bound to be played and/or dismissed by people.
Too many speculations at this point. Let's wait and see.
Bring it on.
Yes yes yes, today should be very interesting. I got the goods yesterday. In any case, I think the changes are good, they show that management is willing to (!) take a risk, but I think there will be some major growing pains to go through. It's going to require that people refocus on what they're supposed to be doing and then actually go do it.
I don't think the impact of this blog can be overstated. You've (we've) spoken and gosh-darnnit, they've listened.
It's a good first step and I really hope people don't make the company regret taking it.
Viva la towels!
I got my preview yesterday, and today should be very interesting.
The impact of this blog and the comments on it can't be overstated. You've (we've) spoken and they've actually listened.
The changes that will be rolled out today are good first steps, but there will be growing pains. People will have to step up to the plate and actually do something in order for them to work. I think the implementation for the first year or two (at least) could be a little bumpy.
But I firmly believe it's movement in the right direction, and I'm glad to see management taking a risk (!) here. Hopefully people understand that and don't make them regret it.
Either do the job or move on to anenvironment or company that works for you.
After reading this site for many months , the trouble is, you cant give up the salary and cant take the heat. So this is the result....
I just don't know how much the model will change. Last year I got screwed as an IC but my manager supposedly got a 4.5 for a product that was a cancelled and considered a failure.
I don't know how the model will change when managers take credit for things that are good and screw their ICs so that the manager looks good.
No matter what the model if your manager is out to make themselve look good then there is not much the IC can do. Except change teams.
I think there's a real problem in thinking that some broad-brush change to the overall compensation program is going to be more effective or solve the numerous current problems. First of all, I think many of the latter are failures of strategy not just failures of execution. Second, MSFT has massively different business units these days, with massively different challenges, and having a one-size fits all compensation system - while attractive logistically - doesn't seem to be a good fit for the underlying business needs. I'm also very concerned that any changes on the 18th are going to translate into more money spent on compensation overall because somehow I doubt management plans on giving up any of their share. If that's the case, and this money is additive and again disconnected from bottom-line performance, then shareholders are going to rightly be pissed off. Somehow, MSFT needs to find something that provides the shareholder-aligned incentives that options did w/o the negatives. Grants aren't it. They're expensive to the company and have value regardless of the performance of the company/stock. Perhap a variation of the profit-sharing programs that have been used successfully in other companies would be something to consider and might help reward better overall cooperation, but management is going to have a real problem selling shareholders on yet another change to comp system to "better align" employees with their needs after positioning the grants at that supposed vehicle.
I was at Microsoft for well over 10 years, leaving last year. Having been involved in numerous large scale planning discussions over the years I would be quite surprised (and pleasantly so) if there is any teeth in the announcement today. In the past, an initiative may start out as innovative and revolutionary, but after a few GMs or VPs add their input, along with a other overlay groups, the final result is a thin shell of the original proposed set of changes. I can recite numerous examples - Comp 2000, Comp 2001, the review "Commitments" initiatives, etc. Let's hope for the best this afternoon.
I can attest "folks like to talk about change but don't like change when it happens" - Blg 1-6 were polled last year about Cafe 4. People proclaimed "We want change!" Now that Cafe 4 has been remodelled whole teams are boycotting because they liked the original better.
It's like people that complain that they are starving because they have no bread while they carry a ham under their arm as they complain. JM2C - I'm anxious about this meeting as well.
Each and everyone one of us ... tweak and revise and adapt.
As usual, the only adaptation happening will be folks learning the new game and playing it to the hilt. You know, like after the last big change, do you work as hard from August to February as you do the other six months of the year?
Although getting an "excellent" is going to be measureably difficult and well-rewarded, there will be plenty of folks who figure out how to cruise through the years with "satisfactory" ... making a dream of a mini Microsoft even less real.
Image a review system with no curve and just the following grades:
basically review grades are to let people know how they performed (and without the bagage of past review systems where 3.0 meant you met requirements but not really)
9-10 tremendously exceeded commitments
7-8 exceeded commitments
6 meet commitments
4-5 did not meet commitments
2-3 did not meet commitments and significantly underperformed
1 close the door behind you please.
This is coming at a crucial time for me. I'm a long-time Microsoft veteran who has an extremely competitive job offer from Apple that I have to accept or reject by 5:00 today. My mind is 99% made up that I'm leaving (doing my bit to slim down Microsoft), but moving my family is a major pain so I'm holding out some slim hope that something said today will change my mind and reenergize my zeal for Microsoft.
Kevin. Johnson. Rocks.
Steve - couldn't you use some time with the family or whatever it is we're saying Allchin is doing when he get's fired officially?
We need to self-host?
Ok, Kevin, to do that, we need:
* new hardware that can run the software
* a help desk that will support it
* some accountability in the people who build it / own building it
: )
New MS Company Meeting Drinking Game:
Every time Jeff Raikes says "KJ", drink!
Raikes just lost the audience. He's yapping way too much.
Has anyone noticed how much k J and ballmer sound and present alike?
And was anyone else really scared to hear the CEO of a multibillion $ company say he doesn't understand what make s a stock price go up or down?
About5 minutes to go as of this writing before the real reason For the talk...
Just more blah, blah, blah....
Desired change:
Fire Gates, Ballmer & Allchin, the folks that lie like rugs.
Your review score is no longer curved, but your compensation (merit, bonus, stock) will remain on a curve that is determined by managers. What is most important to the group? Review score or compensation?
Premise: The curve has not gone away. It has simply been hidden, and attached more closely to the things that matter (stock).
2nd premise: "transparency" only applies to the process, not how it will be applied.
3rd premise: Flexibility at the divisional level in how rewards are doled out, will only serve to solidify fiefdoms.
Santa came early, Jeremy.
You've been a good boy,
have a towel.
Pretty good talk by LisaB so far. The best news all: The Towels are Back!
Lisa Brummel. What can I say?
I think I'm in love.
You rock.
Listening to Lisa right now: "People love this company, but the employee experience isn’t quite what people want it to be". An encouraging start. Good news that the bell curve has been retired. Let's hope the new scale of "Exceeded" "Achieved" "Under-performed" doesn't become a new bell curve. Overall it really annoys me that it took a public blog and a whole pile of lobbying to get the company to recognise the employee pain. Let's hope Lisa's plans really amount to positive change when it gets implemented - and not bastardised by local implementation.
wow - towels. No more eondering where we'll be spending all the money the analysts are wondering about. Glad about the end of the curve though.
My immediate reaction is that the changes are good. 2.5 - 5.0 is gone. There seems to have been some serious thought about compensation. There's a drive for excellence in management. We'll learn how it works in August, but I'm optimistic. (Posted from field sales office in Wash, DC).
I'm hearing some bits and pieces as it goes on around me. I honestly can't yet form an opinion about what I'm hearing until I can sit down and read a full list of the complete changes and the impact of each. One thing I just heard was an emphasis on stock, which displease me. I really don't believe in our stock at this point and would rather have case rewards. I understand why management wants to give us stock, but I personally don't want it. It doesn't benefit me, it's not worth much and I have little faith it's going to rebound any time soon to become worth much to me.
Steve? Meet reality.
Reality? Meet Steve.
Now that you two have met, Steve, don't you think you should turn the reigns over to Kevin Johnson sooner than 3 years from now?
Where to start. The curve is still there, but now features fewer little checkmarks, making it easier on managers to simply dump you in a category. You have less say in your manager's performance. Stock awards ensure the teacher's pets get richer. But we get towels, EyeVars (or however she pronounced Ivars) and dry cleaning. Sorry, but this meeting was "The Thud Heard 'Round Redmond".
I'm no longer an employee, but I watched the webcast.
Enough to make the stock go up $32B? No way.
Enough to bring back old >3.0 employees? No chance.
Enough to stop hemmorhaging good employees? Maybe.
All good news. There will definitly be an ROI.
LisaB did well; I was pleasantly surprised!
At last somebody heard us and the curve is over! Thank you Lisa. Tomorrow I will come to work much more happier.
Hooray Lisa!!!!!!!
Its interesting how Microsoft needs a competitor in order to do good things. For example:
- Netscape breeds IE
- IE lags until Mozilla
- Apple breeds Windows
- Windows lags until Linux
- The dot com boom breeds happy MS employees
- Employee happiness lags until Google
Now we are responding to employee defections thanks to google, et al. Without a competitor, MS is not at its best
OK, so here is a comment. I was in some of the early focus groups who reviewed some of these changes and it appears that they didn't listen to the feedback at all (see below). Originally this was supposed to be rolled out on May 10th and with an email from SteveB directly followed by a town hall. Oh well. I thought today's meeting had good and bad points. First off, let me say that the first hour was a total waste of time. How many times do we have to hear this rah rah. WE WORK HERE ALREADY. We already know these things, and if we don't it's because we don't care. Some of the execu-speak gets so weary. Too many to point out, but here's one lowlight. Kevin Johnson talking about how the ad business is a big market and so we'll go after it and how "a rising tide lifts all ships". WHAT?!?!?! A rising tide won't rise a ship that has all this ballast and is anchored to the sea bed. Plus, aren't we MICROSOFT can't we control the tides? So I was disappointed that we had to sit through that to get to the second hour.
Now to the changes...
- Performance Management
The one silver lining. We're all glad that the stack rank went away. LAR is gone, even better. I do see risk here that within Gestapo style groups that an informal curve will either still exist or resurface and Lisa left the door open for that by saying that leaders would be given guidance on how to apply their numbers. I personally don't see any issues with everyone in a group getting a 3 (the new top) and a manager sitting down with them and telling them there will be an even split making everyone's portion smaller. That's the breaks, and people will understand that. So this was the one positive thing.
- Compensation
Dismal. NO mention of raising a COLA bar or of increasing our 65th percentile. This has got to be hard on recruiting. We are just NOT competitive in base pay. House prices, cost of gas, food everything is going up and not everyone can hold their breath for that once a year bump (such as it is). Now for that once a year bump, this is even worse. So they raise the pool of stock. Making our toilet paper stock go from 1-ply to 2-ply. Well, the "target" award didn't seem to change and if you look at that curve, the new and the old look the same. A little 5% line extends out to the right...I'm sure for the upper echelons and political management hacks.
- Career Development
Not much to say here. CSPs are cool, greater management of your career, but could lead to level bloat. Overall I'm neutral on this one.
- Management
NO mention here of identifying and growing new management. And the allusion to weeding out bad managers had simply to do with the fact that they would now have one number for a rating and can be judged accordingly, but c'mon. No, I have no faith in current leadership, we need a refresh, and there was no talk about combing the ranks for that refresh
- Enhanced Workplace
Only a couple interesting things here. But all of this screamed two things "be on campus" and "stay in the office". With all the space problems, I would have thought that we would be embracing more telecommuting, flex work and stuff like that. But no, they're making it more interesting to work later, stay on campus and NOT giving incentives for those that have the ethic to work from home, etc. The list of services may be interesting to some, or some to some, but not to all and I think 90% are a big yawn. I say...just give me the money (see also compensation).
Overall...not pleased. Couple rays of hope, but our leaders suck. Steve's apology for the stock price was anemic as well. And then in the next hour to turn around and tell everyone they're giving us more of that garbage stock and calling THAT compensation...IT'S NOT ENOUGH.
wow - cannot believe the curve is going to be gone.
this is really a big positive step
deming would be proud
Actually I was wondering something, Mini...are you going to immediately leak the entire new plan that was announced...or just let us discuss it without you posting the specifics?
After all it's one thing to post details of a system you don't like as an agent for change...but now we have something that is (presumably) more to your liking. Are you going to "reward" this by leaking it immediately?
I think it is awesome. I took part in the focus groups for the announcement a few weeks ago, and I've been hopefully waiting for the announced changes. the original date was 10 may, so waiting another week was killer ;)
Symantec sues Microsoft.
If volume management, system recovery and virus protection are removed from Vista, perhaps it can ship sooner?
OK, so really, is there anything that is making me regret that I left? From what I'm hearing from friends, I shoulda stayed so I could get my drycleaning done on campus...
Yeah, that's what he said. I think he was jerking my chain. Even 'they' cannot be that cynical.
So far, from what I hear, my max salary increase would still be less than what I'm making now since I left. If I paid for ALL the services they're 'adding', I'd still have money left
But how could I live without on campus dry-cleaning service?
Lisa, you failed
Steve, you failed
Bill who? what happened to your company?
post town-hall comment:
Overall, I'd give it a big "underachieving".
Color me impressed. As an employee new enough to have not gone through a real Annual Review (I missed the cutoff for the Summer 2005 one by a week), this won't be a huge change for me. However, eliminating the stack ranking is a huge relief, as my group has been 1) very profitable, 2) rocketing up in visibility, and 3) full of top-notch performers, myself included. It will be nice if we can all be aptly rewarded for the fruits of our labor without pitting us against one another come review time.
Plus, towels are back! I might start biking to work again. :)
Lots of big talk, lots of words today and VP's patting themselves on their backs after the meeting. Is today the turning point? How will the bad managers of yesterday get magically transformed into supper managers over night. They won't!!! How will managment mistakes stop happening. They wont!!! How will the markets see all this extra expenditure on us with little or no financial return. Hmmmm I dont think they will understand. More money spent, no extra value.
I would like this to be the turning point but my useless manager is still useless tonight and making everyones life as bad as he can.
WTF? So now my personal rating isn't graded on a curve but my compensation IS? Who cares about the personal rating then?
wow! Lisa for CEO
The most impressive senior executive I saw on stage today was clearly Lisa Brummel.
Overall, I think this is a great start. The changes in the review model alone are significant and should initiate meaningful change through the chain. If we all commit to the change, this could rock pretty frickin' hard.
Kick Some Ass Microsoft!
Can't wait to see your take on Lisa's speech.
I thought it was great. Even if you don't like the benefits themselves, you have to admit that it shows she's listening and actually DOING something about it.
So what do I think? On balance, I think LisaB has exceeded expectations (or, to use the correct phrase, she's overachieved). The changes were everything I wanted and more.
She eliminated the curve. She expanded the workplace services. She made managers more accountable and the commitment process seemingly easier. Just about the only thing she didn't do was to announce a reduction in the ranks of managers but who is to say that the new process won't force that to happen anyway? And, as far as most of us are concerned, the real test of accountability will come next year after Vista and Office 2007 have shipped and we've seen the market response.
But judging from the applause she got, it appears that the overwhelming majority of her initiatives hit the sweet spot.
Yeah! TOWEL TO THE PEOPLE :)
We are an easy bunch to please - towels in the locker room and office supplies on every floor got the biggest applause.
As a manager, I am relieved that I can have a group of top performers and treat them as such. I no longer have to feel like I'm sacrificing one of them to the Gods of the Curve every 6 months....
>LAR is gone, even better.
Uh, nothing prevents a hiring manager from asking you directly for your review score history. It happened to me recently.
How is the percentage breakdown of great/ok/underperforming any different from the "curve" that we have today? I can't believe they thought they could sneak that past us without us noticing.
Here's my take on the breakdowns:
Exceeding - 5.0/4.5
Meeting - 4.0/3.5/3.0
Unsatisfactory - 2.5
So this means only the top two scores get the great rewards. The majority of the "not a curve" fall into the "meeting expectations" criteria. So if you think it was hard for a 3.0 performer to hear that they were just barely doing their job, try giving the same message to your 4.0 performers!!
I can MAYBE see 4.0 moving into the top category, but I think there are too many 4.0 performers to put in the small percentage they have allocated for this.
A lot of people here have complained that there's not enough of a reward to get them to work hard for the 4.5. At least those folks were thrown a bone today. But if the breakdown is as I listed above, there's really no incentive for people to work much beyond the bare minimum requirements of their job, since unless they reach superstar (or super-suckup) status, they're going to get rewarded the same. THAT stinks.
They talked a bunch about managers. Instead of having a manager score and an employee score, they only have one score. Well, you really only had one score before, too, but the form will be different so I guess they're calling this a big change. As a manager, you will still be judged on your managing skills. There are no extra bonuses (well...none that were discussed anyway) for being on the management track. Unless you are a super fantastic manager who is going to really exceed expectations on this point, then the ONLY thing the manager commitment can do for you is bring you down. This is as lame as the current system.
I find some of the new services they're going to be offering somewhat interesting. I doubt that I'll take advantage of many of them though, as it appears that they are nowhere near my building (apparently the people who work in 26/27 don't work on any important projects). But kudos to them for trying something new. Interesting how buildings 34-36 seem to get ALL of the benefits, instead of spreading it around campus more. Hmmm...I wonder if there are any important managers living in those buildings...
I don't get the big deal about the freaking towels. It's gotta be a very small percentage of people that really care about this. It won't have a significant impact on the # of people that bike to work. And nobody is working those crazy all nighters anymore, so they won't need towels. Guess this is for the MS homeless population.
It was great to hear where the employees rated on Bill's list of priorities. I don't agree with all of the Steve bashing that's been going on here lately, but that guy really needs to learn when to shut his fucking mouth.
The biggest disappointment was that there would not be an increase in the bonus budget for next FY. That really says it all when it comes to the talk today - lots of TALK and lots of change, but nothing that will really help our bottom line.
-------------
For the people bitching about needing hardware to self host, the minimum requirements for Vista were just posted today. If you don't have an 800MHz CPU or better, then you're already due for an upgrade. Think the minimum requirements are laughable? Make sure that feedback gets to the Vista team! So even if you can't self host, you can still provide this sort of valuable feedback.
There's a thing (infinitely) better than the helpdesk to support Vista. It's a distribution list that almost the entire Vista team is on. You should be able to get pretty quick turnaround to the questions you have. I really don't know why you think these folks aren't accountable. Try sending mail to the Vista DL's or filing a bug. Unless you bug is a complete waste of time, you'll hear back from them.
I'm quite new so I wasn't even expecting this.
Nice to see "the curve" is gone but the other new curve seems exactly the same, but now there are 2 things.
Will raises/levels be based on the non-curve since rewards are on the new curve?
What the heck do you mean "the curve is gone"? Sure, it's gone from the primary ranking system, but it means *nothing* since it's been decoupled from bonuses, where there quite explicitly still is a quota.
Want to know if you got a "3.0"? Look at your bonus.
Curve gone - Great!
Cafe' open longer - Great!
Ballmer - BORING!
To actually have a career profile is cool. Something to track what you know and what you want to learn. That will help in getting internal transfers. I know more than what my level shows, so hopefully this will open doors in changing groups or positions.
Regardless of pay increases, at least now on your reviews, you know that your manager can be honest about your performance, and not making up shit just to justify a score that was assigned to you.
Now, if the management in my team will actually reward performance fairly is the big question.
I think LisaB has pulled off an incredible feat here and I think we, as employees, need to work with these guys instead of whining.
Just look back at the old posts on this blog and see the number of problems they've gone and tried to fix (and have probably succeeded at with these sweeping changes).
They're trying to fix it - we need to give them a chance. Whining and looking for conspiracy theories doesn't help. The negativism doesn't help.
- A L60 who stood and applauded along with the others once LisaB was done
Here's a question I sent in that went ignored at the meeting today:
Steve - since becoming CEO, the value of MSFT stock has declined over 35%. Why are you still the CEO when similar sustained performace by any IC would have resulted in multiple 2.5 review scores.
Did anybody else read that for someone that "Exceeds" expectations, they have to perform at 2 levels above their own, and "Met expectations" requires one to perform at 1 one level above their own? I'm not sure if this is all that much better than stack rank.
I mean, if I'm able to perform at 1-2 levels above my current level, why not just PROMOTE me!
So let's see. The net result of our activities today. More spending on Microsoft employees, coupled with more spending on equipment and facilities and wattage to the new datacenters so we can beat Google. And all we REALLY get, in a take-home sense, is more stock? The stock is going DOWN, not up.
I feel cheated. This company has lost me. This is not the answer I wanted. There are some that are in feel-good mode; I am not one of those.
I did not work last week. I was thinking...(From meeting)
Well, this is honest! I always knew they do not think when they work. And if they drop working, stocks will definitely turn higher.
Microsoft PM here.
Initially, I was puzzled by the near-even split of the "Yeah!" and "thanks for nothing" posts.
But after a minute, it became more clear. Nobody, not even Mini, put forward a specific list of demands (I'd hate to call them requirements) for making this place better.
So when the results rolled in, there was no frame of reference to evaluate them.
Overall, it looks like a big load of nothing: the towels are back, the staplers are back, the curve is still there for compensation, but it's now hidden from the review results, so minorities cannot claim discrimination as easily.
The bloat is still there, the lack of accountability hasn't changed, the majority of employees are still doubled up doing WTT busy work.
The company is still doomed. The best scenario we hoped was to get closer to Microsoft of 1995; alas, this past milestone seems to be unattainable.
Hey Mini: if you want to build a small, nimble Microsoft, you are going to have to start small, anew. Somehow I don't think you can teach an old overweight gorilla a new dance (or, it turns out, even an old dance it used to know).
I am largely disappointed. As many have stated, the Curve for Performance Review is gone, but the Contribution Ranking is actually more strict that the old Bell Curve. I am disappointed about this change getting rid of the Lifetime Review Score. I am 8.5 Year Employee with nearly a 4.0 Lifetime Average. Proof of my consistent performance (not playing the game) of exceeding commitments (set by my managers no me - so I am not sandbagging) is gone and all I have to show for it is a boatload of underwater Options and Stock Grants.
The only way our stock price will reach $38 is if we reverse split. And that is if we are lucky.
I saw the show today. My reaction is that this is just putting lipstick on a pig. There is stack ranking still it is called something else: contribution ranking.
The culture is just as corrupt as ever. The middle managers are just going play the same game.
LisaB just said what people wanted to hear.
The review curve lives on.
Some said it above and I'll say it right here - the curve didn't go away. There is still a merit, bonus and stock budget for every group. There is a curve applied to how this gets doled out. At least no longer will manager's be forced to conjur up some BS to justify why you got a 3.0 in the your review -- "Johnny, a 3.0 is *excellent*, it means you met your job requirements! Here's a 0% merit increase, 4% bonus and a D stock rating. Excellent work!"
We have walked thru that charade many times every review period. Now it'll just be a new script, but same play. The Curve lives on...
Nevertheless, I view this as a step in the right direction.
Oh my, how underwhelming the whole thing seems to have been today! And it's not even about the towel manipulators who are so active on this thread--unless one is so [...] to think of towels as the substance of MSFT; It's about the lack of momentum towards real change at MSFT.
I look forward to more mature(d) comments on this meeting: what it was and what it could have been.
MSFT in (high) teens, anybody?
How many of us are remote FTE's? Towels in Redmond mean nothing to me. More than that, I'm unconvinced that removing the appearance of a curve is going to incent good employees to work harder, or the best employees to stay.
I'm tracking for a 4.0, shooting for a 4.5 this year. What's my incentive now? If I'm already going to hit the new top tier then why work harder?
Jury's still out on this one. We need to see what our bank statements look like come 9/15 to really decide how effective these changes are. Unless my stock goes up by a factor of *10*, it's not inducement enough to stay if I'm given a better offer elsewhere.
Mini:
I keep hearing MS is not competitive. What *would* be a competitive starting salary for someone fresh out of college (BS in CS, MS in CS, PhD in CS) in Redmond?
All I see is complaints but this new system doesn't seem *as* bad. There is no perfect. It might be easier to change groups if your performance is always good. It might make it harder for the top performers to move though. Who wants to be forced to choose between them for all that stock?
Today, I have heard a lot about how star performers will be compensated, but there was no mention of how poor performers will be "taken-care-of". I know that that topic is not a morale booster, but it is still just as important.
The interesting thing about how your compenstation is now tied to a new curve is...it's always been like that. There's always been a "stock rating" that everyone is assigned. HR never published it, and you never knew about it. This "new" curve is the same stock rating, only now you know about it. I'm willing to give it a chance, and Kudos to Lisa for paying attention.
Good comments - rarely unreasonable IMHO, both good and bad.
On the constructive side, I hope to be 'top talent', so life will be good! Too bad for the other 80% of you Microsoft employees (ok, I'm being a bit sarcastic)
More constructively, it will take a long time to evaluate these changes. Unfortunatley for management, Internet time is now 'blog time', so real-time reactions are a reality.
The additioanl missing bits (beyond what's already been said) that disappointed me:
- retirement enhancements - 100% of Microsoft employees will retire someday, though maybe only 50% are old enough to worry about it now. But the other half of us are not helped by the new plans.
- insights into what motivates techies - we had the usual rah-rah speeches, and hope of better buildings (hopefully), but I fear they missed a wonderful opportunity due to lack of fundamental understanding. Not everyone is movtivated by the same things that motivate managers (a surprise to mgmt, not doubt), or by what motivates generic workers (call center staff, for example)
- the marketing aspect of this push was weaker than I expected. Nice web site, good video production values, mostly top quality rah-rah speeches. But no swag, no maxi-microsoft blog, no token grant of $1000 cash per employee, etc. It's a revenue-neutral solution that should please shareholders (including us) that thus obviously requires more selling to employees
I was actually pleased when I heard Lisa speak...plus I think MSFT is taking some steps in the right direction.
I'm seeing alot of negative comments on this post...compared to the other places I've worked (and being unemployed twice starting in 2001 thanks to the dot.bomb), MS is a pretty great place to be. We all have it pretty good, IMHO.
Overall I think today's announcements are good for MSFT. I hope management realized how counter-productive the stack ranking system was.
I have to say that slimeball from Walmart (Kevin Turner) was lying through his teeth. He spent most of his career at a company that is notorious for mistreating its employees. Today he had the gall to say "People are the greatest asset of any company." But what he actually must be thinking is -"I wish software development was easier. So I could hire some illegal mexicans and pay them minimum wage with no health benefits".
Another discrepancy I noted. KJ said "IDC says PC shipments are projected to grow 8-9% next year". Slimeball from Walmart said "IDC projects PC shipments will grow 12% next year". ???
And BTW, thanks to Google for increasing the value of good software engineers as a whole.
Nothing has changed. The curve has been given a new name, made worse, and then hidden behind compensation. Thanks Lisa. Can I give you an "Unsatisfactory"? The people who thinks this is great because of the "towels" and "staplers" are stupid and blind. The fact that they originally took the office supplies away is retarded. The guy who decided that should be fired at the town hall meeting today. Maybe that'll make that 2.5 hours long meeting more worthwhile. Sometimes I feel like I work in Dilbert world... now I know I do. 4.0 performers are no longer distiguished from 3.0 performers. I have heard several super stars who heard about the changes and posted their resume on Monster. Good job in keeping the lower 30% and running out our top 30%! The new plans have just establish Microsoft as a mediocre company with mediocre people. Bye bye stock price.
I'll reserve my judgement for a little bit. One change I'd like to see is the removal of the dreaded approval for interviews.
If you want to keep managers straight the only power they should have over your transfer to another group is the timing subject to a limit. Then we'll see who is really valued at review time. I hope that is the next thing LisaB takes on. If everybody in a group wants to vote with their feet then the manager should be held accountable.
Oh she did say the word accountability in her speech but not loudly and clearly enough. If Steve is serious abut winning the next frontier he should really get to work on fixing the culture of cronyism.
Can one person change a huge company? Mini did. And we don't even know his name.
What a crock of shit this is becoming. MS ran with the anti-curve sentiment because they found a way to benefit from it. If they hadn't found a way to frame it all, Mini would not have received the attention and the license to continue. She would have been crushed. Mini, it's time to reveal who you are and why you didn't get stomped. If we know that story and it is legit, then, yeah, you're a hero and MSFT, while still spinning, seems to have made some bit of legitmate effort. But until we know that, it's impossible to see you and this site as nothing but build up to the spin.
Ding Dong the Stack is Dead
I'm surprised nobody in the audience laughed when SteveB asked us to have faith in the stock price for the N-th time. I sure did. Still, I was at least pleased by his encouragement to study competing products in order to understand the market and improve our own.
Interesting that there was no change in base compensation; I'd think that that would be an key part of retaining and attracting talented folks or at least stopping the hemorrhage. Adjustment in bonus structure is interesting, but, if you remember and understood the diagram, that is going directly at the top performers. The rest of us common oiks will see only slightly more than before.
Most of the other bennies were flash and glitter; I don't give a rats patootie about office supplies, towels, cafeterias, etc.
When I first heard about this, I thought that it might have been enough to keep me from leaving a few months ago, but the more I think about it, the more I realize the curve is not gone, stack ranks aren't gone, not at all, they're still there, just not in the review score, in the part that matters, the compensation.
The second commenter asked why you can't get objective goals for review. Why not indeed? One of the reasons I left was I felt adrift. The things I did the first 5 years to get great reviews only got me 3.0 my last 2, even though my last review said the quality of my work was super, it was't the "superstar" quality that was expected, so I received a 3.0. At that moment, sitting in my managers office, I did two things, I decided to leave MS and then promptly lied and said it was my heartfelt desire to stay and figure out how to be that little bit extra super next time.
Now, I have objective goals for everything. No stack rank. Plus, I've moved over to the sales side of the technical world, not the dev and support side. It's a whole new and different dig and I love it.
Sometimes I miss MS horribly. I don't hate MS, it was just time for us to be apart.
So, having said all of that, this might be a sincere step in the right direction, but if I had to guess, I bet minor changes are made and the review game is still played, only now, you will actually see your stack rank in stock grant and bonus numbers. If you follow the rules and never ever share that data with anyone, you won't know what management really thought of you, only by breaking the rules can you figure where in the stack you are.
I got wind today that a MASSIVE Windows RIF is in the works. It's real folks. Hundreds and hundreds of jobs. The good news is that other parts of MS will be able to absorb it. But if you want your pick of what's out there, beat the rush and don't wait for review time.
"...Oh, and thanks Mini! These changes are due in no small part to you. Even if you don't get official props in the press releases.
Can one person change a huge company? Mini did. And we don't even know his name."
Not since deep throat have so many people tried to identify the mysterious person. Maybe you can reveal yourself in the book "Has it always just been about the towels?" I am pre-ordering a copy on Amazon. Keep up the good work Mini!
No curve is good (and to bozos saying there is still a curve, go read mymicrosoft in detail first).
There is a curve for stock awards, and is identified by name (ranking). There is no curve for salary increases and bonus. This is a *good* thing. Also, the ranking for awards happens with yoru peers. Level 59s in a group. 60s, 61s and 62s in a group. 63s and 64s in a group. That is also a GOOD thing! A 59 isn't penalized because she works in a team with a bunch of 66s.
Finally, life for managers (me being one) is a bit easier. I dont have to tell someone they got a 3.0 because they were 3.49, instead of 3.5 (so they got curved down). I dont have to tell someone even though he worked his butt off, three other people with no work-life balance worked harder so he wont get a 4.0. Now I can talk to people about THEIR performance based on THEIR committments and THEIR level. How can that be a bad thing?
Overall, it's rock solid. I love this company!
So Bill Gates would rather play bridge with a 75 year old than show up at a Company meeting after his company's stock has fallen off a cliff in the last few weeks (not that will stop him from selling). Just about says it all about what has gone on at this Company in the last few years ....
Microsoft will never get it as long as they keep saying "People are the greatest asset of any company." They need to realize that the people don't BELONG to Microsoft, that they can leave at any time, and they should really compensate them accordingly.
I wasn't impressed with the leadership today -- not even Lisa. I should state that in a disappointment range, Lisa was the least disappointing of them all. I'm struggling to make ends meet in this town where a "decent house" (not townhome) can't be purchased for less than about $450,000, but the salaries for a L60 don't fit in the normal qualifying ratios for a loan. Then they come out and state that some small percentage of people will get more stock awards that will be fully vested in 5 years. Big deal. In 5 years, that stock will still be sitting at the low $20s if we are lucky (without a split).
I hate to complain without a solution, so here is mine. Create a new organization and bring effective people over, one at a time. Keep it small and tight. Only bring people over that can continue to perform well -- when they stop performing well, put them back in the old company. Compensate the new organization at a 85-percentile range or higher with great bonuses. Give them a reason to try harder. As long as they are cranking out good products that are making money, keep increasing the product breadth of the company and invite new productive employees over.
This would give employees in the "standard" company something to shoot for and give them reason to keep performing once in the new company.
Personally, I'm tired of work-life balance people ruining the company. There is nothing wrong with having a life outside of Microsoft, but the people (particularly the women in the company) who continue to moan about work-life being important are typically the ones who don't get anything done. In my organization, every woman manager I know is constantly calling in sick, "working from home" (with nothing to show for it when they return to the office), stuck in traffic, or otherwise engaged. It's time to hire the people that LOVE what they do and show up to do it. If you want work life balance, apply to Blockbuster Video or Safeway. You'll keep regular hours at least.