tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post116347863942228869..comments2024-03-18T12:52:48.117-07:00Comments on Mini-Microsoft: Not-so-limited KimWho da'Punkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18205453956191063442noreply@blogger.comBlogger107125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-26259645416682216922011-10-20T18:32:50.940-07:002011-10-20T18:32:50.940-07:00It is interesting that I exceeded all of my commit...It is interesting that I exceeded all of my commitments, grew the business this past year and yet received the worse review possible. When I asked my manager about it he gave me all the subjective mumbo jumbo, but when pressed he admitted that he had to give some of us who made our commitments low ratings so that he could then give his friends who did not meet their commitments the higest ratings. Since this is a year when stock is being reduced and salaries increased, it has an extra devistating effect. Ity is time for another solid employee to move on.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-89563442784418018102011-04-22T02:01:41.243-07:002011-04-22T02:01:41.243-07:00Microsoft review system is malignant and it clearl...Microsoft review system is malignant and it clearly indicates that Microsoft is in Cancer ward. Microsoft review system purely promotes mediocrity by giving huge emphasis on 'how' the political element. <br />Innovation requires sme risk taking ability and who would take risk with such a rotten review system...no wonder Microsft is least innovative. If the political review system continues I give another 5 years to Microsft, after that it will become history and a case study for academic institution.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-1171737655416598262007-02-17T10:40:00.000-08:002007-02-17T10:40:00.000-08:00limited! just one more tool in the incompetent man...limited! just one more tool in the incompetent manager's toolbox. it's about politics man! <BR/><BR/>I got a limited 2. I'm not leaving. Haha. Spite you back. But I do want to live down to expectations now. Seems only right.<BR/>Oh, and guess what. Now they try to prevent you from accessing education benefits that could help you shake the limited label. So, what is it all about then? Leaves just one answer. Age discrimination.<BR/>If only you could wager on future court cases.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-1171736851450962302007-02-17T10:27:00.000-08:002007-02-17T10:27:00.000-08:00"The Kims are valued at Microsoft. To me adding th..."The Kims are valued at Microsoft. To me adding the second kind of "Limited" is precisely about reinforcing that point. I'm not sure why it is being interpreted exactly the opposite."<BR/><BR/>Duh. So "limited" is a good word? Once again, complete lack of backbone and leadership results in inept solutions to problems. <BR/>Yes this is age discrimination. Does MS think it will become the young and vibrant Google simply by slapping demeaning and demotivating labels on its knowledgeable employees. I think it's going to take more than that. <BR/>Employees and potential employees are not stupid. If this new limited too category doesn't speak volumes about microsoft commitment to loyal, delivering employees, nothing does!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-1169430887274053012007-01-21T17:54:00.000-08:002007-01-21T17:54:00.000-08:00I was just digging around for some info on HeadTra...I was just digging around for some info on HeadTrax when I ran across this "Kim" thread. I may have missed it but has no one read or heard of "the Peter Principle"? From Wiki: "It states that members of a hierarchical organization are eventually promoted to their highest level of competence, after which further promotion raises them to a level at which they may become incompetent. Such a level is called the employee's "level of incompetence", at which the employee has a dismal or no chance at all of being promoted any farther, thus achieving the ceiling of his career growth within a given organization."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-1167143050302317182006-12-26T06:24:00.000-08:002006-12-26T06:24:00.000-08:00I joined MS in 1993, just after the big curve and ...I joined MS in 1993, just after the big curve and worked for a solid 12 years of contribution. Throughout my career, choosing the right manager and the right peers made all the difference. <BR/><BR/>As part of a solid customer focused group (mid-career) I had glowing reviews, glowing salary increases and wonderful bonuses and options. They truly knew the value of the customer and the customer advocate.<BR/><BR/>As soon as I moved back into a development focused team, that all changed. Unless you released code (regardless of the product improvements you were driving) the results were abysmal and you were leveled at a 3.0.<BR/><BR/>This was all prior to the Limited labels and as a solid Level 63 contributor at 3.5 and 3.0 reviews, the compensation was nothing more than a thank you, you're lucky to have a job these days...don't drink that Kool-Aid...there's plenty of work out here and MS has always been a great place to learn and grow...not blossom, in your career. <BR/>This was in spite of retaining a patent as a PM in my last two years and also making great changes in process improvements for our division. It was time to leave. <BR/><BR/>Well, victory is sweet, with experience of the caliber of a long career at MS, leaving was an immediate reward in compensation, at the end of my first year for my new company, I received a Christmas bonus of significance and the review cycle is due in March...what companies are giving Christmas bonuses?<BR/><BR/>All said, I appreciate the opportunities I had at MS, but the overall mindset that has enveloped management for the last 6 years has destroyed some great contributors that now work for the competition...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-1166059655943629402006-12-13T17:27:00.000-08:002006-12-13T17:27:00.000-08:00I joined Microsoft in 1982. I retired in 2000. I...I joined Microsoft in 1982. I retired in 2000. In between, it was a hell of a ride. Microsoft, when I started, was better than I ever could hav imagined a job could be. Microsoft, when I left, was hard to distinguish from the IBM we made fun of when I was working on OS/2. It sounds like things have continued downhill. If you're interested, you can read a letter I sent to Bill and Steve the day before I retired: http://peteandcarol.com/msft.htm. By the way, Windows Me was the product that cinched my decision to retire: I waqs intensely proud of every other product I worked on--but not Windows Me.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-1165013714645085872006-12-01T14:55:00.000-08:002006-12-01T14:55:00.000-08:00Wow! Being rated a 4.5 for 6 years in a row. Bei...Wow! Being rated a 4.5 for 6 years in a row. Being well respected inside my team and with my customers for the job I was doing. And my reward this year was you are "Limited". Why? Because you do not want to be a manager. Therefore, for your reward, we are not going to give you a bonus, no stock and forget about any training. But you did "Exceed" on your objectives for a seventh year, but we are only interested in "Managers want to be". However, thank you Microsoft for telling me I am limited because it made me get off the hamster wheel and realize there is life after Microsoft and that life is good. I guess Microsoft must be getting out the software industry and moving into a management consultant company since solid technical people are no longer wanted. After seven years I now have a better work/life balance, getting paid more, and doing what I love to do with no pressure to become a manager. Oh yeah that is because I no longer work for the "Only managers want to be" company. You know the company I am talking about, the one that use to be the biggest software maker in the world. Now it is the known as the biggest makers of poor managers. One day, Microsoft will realize not everyone should be a manager and they will still need strong technical people to write code.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-1164968834902140462006-12-01T02:27:00.000-08:002006-12-01T02:27:00.000-08:00The problem isn't the system, the problem is the s...The problem isn't the system, the problem is the system is being applied seemingly without much thought.<BR/><BR/>The problem with using a cookie-cutter HR approach and applying it to Microsoft is that our gene pool is very different. Most of the people I work with are far smarter, far more dedicated, and far more skilled than people I see at other similar companies, and since I work in customer-facing Services I see a lot of the industry outside our ivory tower. Yet our HR management still attempts to apply the standard corporate HR metrics to us - like the 10% 'fire', 55% 'achieving', 30% 'overachieving', 5% 'superstars' - that's perhaps normal for most organizations, but from our hiring practices alone, we don't fit that particular bell curve; from our pace and expectations, we certainly don't. Most of the 'performers' I work with at MS would be 'superstars' in most of the customer and partner organizations I work with.<BR/><BR/>I've always equated a technical organization's inherent health conversely with the strength of the HR department - if the HR department can override technical lead's decisions in hiring and firing and promotion, then the company is going down the tubes. Couple that with seemingly rewarded cronyism from mid-management (may my old manager, more concerned in covering himself with glory than the team achieving targets and all his crony mates rot in hell) and we are where we are.<BR/><BR/>...looking hard at the doorAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-1164844222040816862006-11-29T15:50:00.000-08:002006-11-29T15:50:00.000-08:00One thing you guys have to keep in mind is that th...One thing you guys have to keep in mind is that there once was an environment that was so bad because it was unstructured that HR had to some up with these harebrained schemes in the first place. If there wasn't curve ranking and all this you would still all be complaining about how all the suck-ups got all the bonuses and promotion. This system just makes the managers work harder to conceal the suck-ups.<BR/><BR/>I've never worked at a company nearly as big as MSFT, but the $6 billion one that was my last employer had a crappy review system also. I once got a $78 bonus and my boss kept the rest of the bonus allocation for himself. There were no peer or upward review channels. I had to fight them to remove that bad review from the record even after he got fired for being incompetent. I got a single COLA raise in 2 years even though I got a title improvement. Meanwhile my options were $6-10 underwater the entire time they were vested.<BR/><BR/>I understand it sucks everywhere but there's 2 takeaways you should learn:<BR/><BR/>1. Negotiate a salary that you'll be comfortable with for a few years. This is surprisingly easy.<BR/><BR/>2. Pretend that that your salary is your sole income source and plan accordingly. Yeah, someone else might get a bunch of stock but who cares? Relative deprivation is a false problem. If you're happy with what you're earning [see #1] you won't be all stressed out come review season.<BR/><BR/>I'm a proud Kim and I've spent the bulk of my career finding better and better Kim-friendly positions. Yeah, I know people who make more money than I do but I deliver on my promises and I get to go home at 5 and live a comfortable lifestyle.<BR/><BR/>Not being tweaked out about office politics frees up bandwidth to do better work as well. No matter what the "political climate" in your office if you do truly great work no one will care that you're only in the office for 7 hours a day or that you didn't suck up to your skip-level.<BR/><BR/>Relax! You'll live longer.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-1164828194703158782006-11-29T11:23:00.000-08:002006-11-29T11:23:00.000-08:00I find myself in the Limited 2 category also, but ...I find myself in the Limited 2 category also, but what is weird/passive-aggressive is how that happened. I am a 7+ year MS veteran who has contributed solidly over the years and steadily moved from L60 to L65. I got promoted to L65 in August last year (FY06) and when review time came up was fully expecting the rewards for bonus and stock to come in. (For those who don't know L65 and up get 2x bonus and a considerably higher stock award pool.) Imagine my surprise when my boss tells me that despite exceeding my commitments and getting a nice bonus(30%) and merit increase (6%) that my stock award was in the 400 range, fully 1K less than I received in each of the last two cycles. Shocked, I enquired further and was told that despite being promoted to L65 and exceeding all my goals and commitments HIS BOSS felt that I wasn't expected to be promoted beyond my current level and hence the Limited 2. (As a Manager it sure smacked of a forced curve to me.)<BR/><BR/>When I asked how for 7 plus years I could have been either a 4.0/A or 3.5/B and then suddenly be a Limited 2 he punted and told me to go ask HR. (Like that would happen/do any good.) <BR/><BR/>So, for me the situation is pretty clear. Despite kickin' ass and bringing in results year after year, and getting rewarded via 5 promotions, I am now consigned to the Limited 2 realm of no future and no desire to push for one here any longer.<BR/><BR/>Funny thing though, now that I no longer give a f!@# about Microsoft and realize that my future lies elsewhere, I am relaxed. I still come in and do my job most days, take lots of long lunches and usually leave the office early. My contribution matches Microsoft's expectation of my ability now, and I can honestly say for the first time that I have achieved a real work-life balance. <BR/><BR/>Stranger still, despite sharing everyone's opinion of HR and their ineptness and culpability in making Microsoft a truly mediocre company, I feel somehow indebted to LisaB and her minions for finally letting me see the light. <BR/><BR/>Today I will be solidly compensated for doing basically nothing, and together with a bunch of other employees that LisaB and HR alienated will be lounging around having yet another latte while we explore outside opportunities, brush up our resumes and build out our network of job contacts.<BR/><BR/><BR/>- Limited 2 and Lovin' it!! <BR/><BR/>(PS - heck, I could maybe stretch this out for two or three years like so many of our Leadership Team does - but alas I have too much integrity to do that.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-1164781478013400432006-11-28T22:24:00.000-08:002006-11-28T22:24:00.000-08:00This is frickin' ridiculous. I left MS right after...This is frickin' ridiculous. I left MS right after being told by my Director that I was performing way above level, that I absolutely should be promoted but that he couldn't because there was a long line of people that were due before me and he could only promote a couple people a year...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-1164677674666610882006-11-27T17:34:00.000-08:002006-11-27T17:34:00.000-08:00I work for a very large corporation that's famous ...I work for a very large corporation that's famous for the quality of the leaders it produces. What outsiders don't realize is that this corp spends so much effort "finding and cultivating the A's" that the B's realize they shouldn't invest too much of themselves in their jobs. Even if they put in a Herculean effort, their boss, a much younger recent graduate of a Leadership training program, will get the credit and rewards. And in 18-24 months, they'll have a new boss, and it will happen again. True, you get a steady supply of leaders, with a varied background, and long list of successes, but you alienate the people who hold the company together. MS sounds like it's well on the path we blazed - you too can be known as a great company to be <B>from</B>.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-1164507749898079212006-11-25T18:22:00.000-08:002006-11-25T18:22:00.000-08:00>One impression I've gotten loud and clear, is tha...>One impression I've gotten loud and clear, is that we should NEVER hire a middle-manager from Microsoft<BR/><BR/>Dude, since you're obviously kind of dim, I'll be nice and spell it out for you: you shouldn't hire a middle manager or VP from <B>any</B> megacorp. Once the professional bean counters take over from the techies and then start bringing in their other bean counter friends, it's game over, man.<BR/><BR/>Lots of luck with your company.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-1164483601857793412006-11-25T11:40:00.000-08:002006-11-25T11:40:00.000-08:00HR is literally getting Microsoft down. They are c...HR is literally getting Microsoft down. They are conducting experiments with very talented and qualified people, and that is simply something unacceptable. The thing is far worse than “take away the towels” and then “bring back the towels”.<BR/><BR/>Mini-Microsoft brought up the idea of a “Microsoft Academy”. But the fact is that for such idea to succeed we need to first review: Is every current employee a “Microsoft hire”? Have you ever heard of “recruiter friends” or “someone indicated by a high-level employee” interviewing over and over until they get a position? Have you ever seen people appearing from nowhere in your project near shipping time in “key positions”, and then leaving when problems start to appear.<BR/><BR/>The reason people like Kim cannot get promoted is far away from the person’s performance. As a Dev Lead for several years, I can tell you how many times I had to literally shout to people that we cannot make “adjustments during the calibration” just to please people that would be upset with their reviews. It must be, as much as possible, an objective evaluation of performance, considering the levels. But then you can only fight so much if you have an outstanding employee at level 60, and someone else has this really more than limited employee at level 62 and that person has been there stuck without a good review for 3 years. Most leads at Microsoft simply refuse to admit that it is better to lose that person and have an open position than to continue having such person in the team. So, their point-of-view is: we should promote an already limited person at level 62 to the next level, just to keep them happy. And obviously, that promotion is done at the cost of someone that deserves it not getting it.<BR/><BR/>What should really be done: not only get rid of that IC but also of the lead than wants to reward incompetence. But how many managers you know that will really dig into the facts and do that? What is HR doing? They have all the data, and could easily identify such situations. But what to expect from the people wasting their time thinking about towels?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-1164437606760125982006-11-24T22:53:00.000-08:002006-11-24T22:53:00.000-08:00Hey guys,I'm a founder of a company that has very ...Hey guys,<BR/>I'm a founder of a company that has very good prospects for rapid growth, and I read mini's blog on a regular basis for examples of pitfalls to avoid.<BR/><BR/>One impression I've gotten loud and clear, is that we should NEVER hire a middle-manager from Microsoft, and that if we hire a Microsoft VP, then we might as well just detonate a tac nuke in our lobby and save ourselves the agony.<BR/><BR/>If I meet any candidate who I REALLY hate, I'll suggest that he or she go work for Microsoft.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-1164435912047948912006-11-24T22:25:00.000-08:002006-11-24T22:25:00.000-08:00What the HELL does HR have to do with promotions?T...What the HELL does HR have to do with promotions?<BR/>Their function is to collect resumes and do the payroll. When they presume to act as a policy-setting organization, then it's time to fire the lot of them, and outsource their legitimate functions to PayChex and a bunch of free-lance headhunters.<BR/><BR/>You want to get the deadwood out of Microsoft? What's the headcount in the HR department?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-1164267966012378632006-11-22T23:46:00.000-08:002006-11-22T23:46:00.000-08:00And need we remind you that PM/DEV/SDET does not c...<I>And need we remind you that PM/DEV/SDET does not comprise the entire set of employees at MSFT?</I><BR/><BR/>Well, they're the only ones that really *matter*, right? The rest of us are just overpaid admins, who do jobs ANYONE could do.<BR/><BR/>/sarcasm<BR/><BR/>Got a ways to go myself towards that 100k+ figure. Options got me very little, stock is giving me even less. And I'm not a PM/DEV/SDET. And I'm a Kim.<BR/><BR/>Seems I'm "fit to contract," though, even though I'm not MS full-time material, and never should have been hired in the first place. Except that I was. Almost 7 years ago.<BR/><BR/>Whatever. I've decided I am going back to contracting, so I can get the hell away from stupid curves, demoralizing review systems, and unpaid overtime. They want me to work more than 40 hours, they're going to pay dearly for it. ('Course, as a contractor, I'll make more money, and then tack on the agency fee and they're already paying dearly. But I'm not vindictive. Mostly.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-1164159227823006722006-11-21T17:33:00.000-08:002006-11-21T17:33:00.000-08:00"It would shock me if the average salary for a PM/..."It would shock me if the average salary for a PM/DEV/SDET at MS wasn't in the $100k+ range (especially including bonuses, benefits, etc). That's not exactly chump change folks."<BR/><BR/>And need we remind you that PM/DEV/SDET does not comprise the entire set of employees at MSFT?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-1164143435948148462006-11-21T13:10:00.000-08:002006-11-21T13:10:00.000-08:00My use of the word "salary" was incorrect in my pr...My use of the word "salary" was incorrect in my previous comment. It should have been "compensation".<BR/><BR/>Maybe $100k is too high of an average. I guess it depends on when you started at MS, your stock awards and how they've built over the last couple of years, and whether or not you are a strong performer. I'm by no means trying to insinuate the previous commentor isn't a strong performer, but this definitely plays a major role in my group.<BR/><BR/>I've been around since the days when a promo meant a 13-20% raise (the golden years). I've been around during the lean times (last few years), and I can tell you that if you're at the top of your game, and you're making a strong contribution, you will get strong rewards in the division I'm in.<BR/><BR/>If this isn't happening for someone else out there, either:<BR/>a. You aren't as good as you think you are. FIND OUT WHY! Grab the competency worksheet for the level above you from the HR site, fill it out, and then review it with your manager. You'll find it very enlightening, and will help you focus on the key areas for growth.<BR/>b. You are a rockstar, but group is either full of politicos, your manager stinks, or the team as a whole is mediocre (it's shocking to me how often a strong performer is under-rewarded on a mediocre team - you'd think it would be the opposite).<BR/><BR/>If B, get out! Find a new job. Rekindle your excitement. At the end of the day, if you don't love your job, you'll never be more than average at it. If you need new technology, go find it. If you need a new perspective, switch roles.<BR/><BR/>Whew. I'm done now...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-1164132714354838832006-11-21T10:11:00.000-08:002006-11-21T10:11:00.000-08:00"I've been here a while"That likely explains it. C..."I've been here a while"<BR/><BR/>That likely explains it. Company wide, hires made after 2004 have received sweet offers that comfortably put them over the 100k mark after including bonus and stock.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-1164090769313557172006-11-20T22:32:00.000-08:002006-11-20T22:32:00.000-08:00It would shock me if the average salary for a PM/D...<I>It would shock me if the average salary for a PM/DEV/SDET at MS wasn't <B>in the $100k+ range</B> (especially including bonuses, benefits, etc). That's not exactly chump change folks.</I><BR/><BR/>Holy #*&$!, what division do you work in? I'm tens of thousands away from that, even after significant bonuses, and I've been here a while.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-1164083898716571092006-11-20T20:38:00.000-08:002006-11-20T20:38:00.000-08:00From a prior comment:"I thrive on my work but at t...From a prior comment:<BR/>"I thrive on my work but at times its difficult to like this company. I despise how this company treats its employees"<BR/><BR/>This comment is indicative of a number of comments made in this thread (and others). I'm definitely on the same page as a lot of people on this site with my desire to make more money and be better rewarded, but let's take a minute and get a little perspective:<BR/><BR/>Microsoft isn't running a sweatshop. It doesn't have 100s of employess making $2/day. People aren't forced to work here.<BR/><BR/>It would shock me if the average salary for a PM/DEV/SDET at MS wasn't in the $100k+ range (especially including bonuses, benefits, etc). That's not exactly chump change folks.<BR/><BR/>Does Microsoft pay competitively? Meh - depends on the company.<BR/><BR/>Could the money & benefits be better?<BR/>Of course! More money and more benefits are, by nature, better.<BR/><BR/>Could the review model be improved?<BR/>Certainly. There are a lot of crappy situations at MS. However, I haven't seen a thread on how this is at other companies. Are we better, worse, or the same? It doesn't excuse it, but it would add some perspective.<BR/><BR/>Anyway, the point of my mini-rant is to see if I can get people to focus on how we can improve as managers and as a company, rather than complaining about the amount of cash in your paycheck and the "bad" conditions you have to endure as a Microsoft employee...<BR/><BR/>That said, if you do in fact work in a Microsoft-run sweatshop in Redmond, by all means get the heck out! There are a lot of jobs, both inside and outside Microsoft, that will make you happier.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-1164076975638368372006-11-20T18:42:00.000-08:002006-11-20T18:42:00.000-08:00I agree with the previous poster that noted that p...I agree with the previous poster that noted that policies that seem designed (or have the effect) of pushing out older workers are very troubling and most likely ILLEGAL. As a 10-year MS veteran, I continue to be amazed and saddened at the HR policies and practices of this company (in more ways than I can go into here). Our first wave of legal issues came from antitrust. Then patents. I predict the third wave will be HR class actions (women, URM, older workers). I thought LisaB would try to do the right thing. Now I'm not so sure.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-1164061942105732922006-11-20T14:32:00.000-08:002006-11-20T14:32:00.000-08:00The Kims are valued at Microsoft. To me adding the...<I>The Kims are valued at Microsoft. To me adding the second kind of "Limited" is precisely about reinforcing that point. I'm not sure why it is being interpreted exactly the opposite.</I><BR/><BR/>Well now, Adam, that would place you in the "Clueless II" category, which was added by HR to describe people who have reached the limit of their potential cluefulness but are not, in fact, totally without a clue. It does, unfortunately, only have the same rewards as the regular Clueless category, a dunce cap made of blue paper, but rest assured that you are still a valued member of MS.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com