Microsoft FY10Q4 Results
FY10Q4 Microsoft earnings are upon us. So, what's been going on since last we met over the quarterly results?
- The KIN phone collapse put WP7's future in doubt. Would WP7 meet the same fate? Is it under the same level of mismanagement? Fortunately, some fairly positive takes on pre-release WP7 have been coming out ahead of earnings to shore up confidence and excitement.
- Market Cap - yes, Apple passed us by and there was an abundance of articles and postings questioning just how much longer Microsoft would have to endure Mr. Ballmer as CEO (hint: a long loooooong time).
- Itsy-bitsy-layoff-committees: targeted small layoffs to kick of FY11 team budgets. If they are that low key and only disclosed on some random bit of the blogosphere, do they really amount to much accountability on Microsoft's sake? Again, our contingency hiring is out of this world so it's not like we're saving a bunch of money - we just have folks on the payroll we can easily cut loose as needed.
What kind of questions might be / should be posed during the earnings call?
- Dates: firm dates for WP7 devices and Kinect and associated Kinect titles beyond the kind-of-interesting launch titles.
- Win7 + Office 2010: are the cash cows still, err, bringing home the bacon?
- Bing / Ad-center: is Bing on the upswing? Is Bing / Ad-Center doing anything more than eating the bacon that our cash cows bring home?
- Legal: it's been very quiet on the European Union front. Office 2010 was released without a single investigatory squeak, as far as I know. Is this all behind us for now? That would be great.
- WP7: application developers in the queue? We need to re-enforce the cool apps that we'll have ready when WP7 is launched. In a move that has totally delighted me, Microsoft is giving every employee the ability to write and deploy WP7 applications (and, what, ability to get a device at launch, too?) - wow! Now's the time to truly show off your stuff and write for WP7 and get your app out the door.
The glow of Windows 7 has dimmed and Office 2010 and the VS2010 eco-system need to pick up the steam as we head to WP7 and Kinect launch. Apple is rolling in the moolah being a content delivery channel and our story, other than some Xbox features, is still pretty fuzzy. For instance: Windows Media Center is one of those crown jewels we've let plop out of the crown and get kicked around the court. I love WMC but it seems to be a neglected feature, caught in the chop between E&D / Zune and Windows. After a phone, it's the next experience we should bring out some reference hardware for to easily DVR HD channels off the air and plug right into your HDMI system and watch it go.
My usual suspects for earnings discussion:
- Mr. Joe Wilcox over at Beta News
- Mr. Todd Bishop over at TechFlash's Microsoft Blog
- Mr. Joseph Tartakoff somewhere within paidContent.org.
(I'll update the post later if there are interesting developments from the earnings release.)
520 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 520 Newer› Newest»There is a saying:
Love is like life in a castle, those inside want to break out ....
.... for those outside they want to charged in.....
This is the love and hate about Microsoft Corp... :)
Life is like a box of chocolates.
Windows Chocolates 7 made in China or Taiwan.
You never know if you're going to get melamine or cyanuric acid or, both resulting in kidney stones.
The solution for Microsoft - as per a respected Wall Street Journal columnist :
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703977004575393062590446880.html
You'd need wsj account to read it. But in nutshell it says the recipie is to increase dividend hugely and consistently, and it will lead to discipline in capital spending.
Another entry on what MS should do - this is from the blog of an ex-Microsoftie who was laid off in may last year:
http://dondodge.typepad.com/the_next_big_thing/2010/07/msft-earnings-up-stock-down-what-do-investors-want.html
Yes, I got a 10% once from a clusterf**k of a manager (after several years of promotions and excellent reviews before him) and was able to transition to a new group, where (surprise!) I went back to getting great reviews.
You can get out of the 10% but it is not the easiest thing to do. Takes great performance and good managers.
Here is a thought experiment which I think proves why Ballmer is wrong more often than not.
Imagine Ballmer was in charge of Amazon and how would he handle Kindle competition with iPad.
I strongly believe he would have thought in terms of "decades of investment" pouring in billions. Contrast that to what Bezos is doing. Agreed Bezos might be working behind the scenes on some strategy but he seems saner than Ballmer -
http://techcrunch.com/2010/07/28/ipad-kindle/
- to the guy that started at L64. I've been a L64 for 4 years in EPG. I make $141k plus about 50 - 60% every year (got E/70 and E/20 consistently). I have about $300k worth of stock (current value anyway). I also have about $150k in retirement
Holy crap! Even after a decade of late nights and weeks.. several promotions.. do you realize you easily make over 3X what I do, not even counting the stock. I work 12 hour days six days a week plus holidays and RAS year after year. Still, I have to fight every year just to get 80 grand and get a basic cost of living adjustment!
My take with the current review system- it's all a reflection of personality and how well you are liked, not performance.
A lot of talented people just seem to get the shaft year after year so a few managers at the top of each group take all.
The only time an opportunity even opens up is when a lead moves up; and you agree to step away from being an IC that contributes and get sucked into the being-useless middle manager vortex.
It seems like Microsoft has become so afraid to make a "bad hire" they leave reqs opened for years and core product teams understaffed.
They have set the bar so high not even people that have successfully worked and done well at the company for decades qualify for their own jobs because they forgot the psuedo code for a binary search tree or got a bad manager.
Pretty stupid. Microsoft is definitely not too big to fail, and all these little mistakes add up over time.
Moonlighting policies have been amended recently, specifically to make room for WP7 app development. You own the WP7 app you develop, and you make the money on it - not Microsoft. This exception is only for WP7 app development.
WOW! MS legal is making an exception and letting us get paid for our evenings and weekends- because here again they see benefit to MS in this specific arrangement.
A recurring theme at Microsoft - it doesn't ever follow the rules. Please add employee compensation to that long list.
Does any group reward managers who have high WHI scores? HR and upper management always talk about the value of good management, but in my group, all of the 'best' managers by this measure end up in career holding patterns or worse, moved back to ICs or leaving the team.
The folks with the highest WHIs seem to have the best employee retention yet it never appears as if management cares about this.
Aren't they already paying you? Plus, they are waving the registration fee, and you get to make money on the apps you sell. I guess nothing is good enough for some people.
They are already paying for the full-time job.
If they want people to work outside of their product group on WP7 part-time, they should pay for that too. Those people could be working on their group's product to make it better or, spend time with their family.
You only get to keep the app if it isn't too successful.
"
I didn't always have this sympathy. Afterall I worked with some of you and wondered why MS didn't start layoffs until recently. My wife was just laid off too and she is bitter as hell. She could have written all the posts here damning MS, Ballmer, and all managers. She was a hard worker but didn't have the hero mentality that is vital in MS."
Exactly my situation too. Through all these years of subjective reviews, being in dark about what is going to happen next review and all the associated crapola - I started wondering why the hell did I get into s/w in first place. You put a lot of hours (definitely a lot more than 40 hrs) trying to get a better review - which you still may or maynot get; even if you get a good review score - the reward is mediocre at the best. I always thought of myself as one of the best in school life and started to think why I didnt go and become a doctor or a lawyer - where hours can be bad initially - but a consistent and commensurate reward starts flowing in after few years. Why I didnt realize before that 'contact with end customer' is vital if you are serious about making money or being indispensable to the company. As a s/w engineer you hardly have any contact with customer and hence you are easily expendable as well as replacable. S/W as a career is better than ringing items at walmart, but not that great as MS top brass wants you to think.
Well thanks MS and Ballmer for laying me off sometime back, I am on to new worlds which has nothing to do with s/w. Thanks for the severance package too - as it will help me a bit during the time I go to school.
Just wanted to speak out - in case anyone is thinking along these lines - career change is definitely possible if you want it.
Please check the internal video of Steve Ballmer's interview with Rachna patel. I really admire Steve's honest answers.
I'm a PC and Microsoft layoffs was my idea!
... as I said before, I intend to remail CEO until 2020!
I worked at Microsoft for 6 years. It was a great experience and I learned alot. I left to follow a totally different career, but most of my friends and network are still MSFT.
The dividend yield keeps alot of people from buying the stock; Microsoft leadership still sees the company as more of a growth company than a mature, dividend paying company.
Unfortunately for them, it is the latter.
When money managers and individual investors are looking at MSFT, the dividend yield works against it.
Most folks look for minimum of 2.5% yield and MSFT hovers around 1.8-2.0%.
Look at Kevin Turner's insightful comment about Wmware - even the guy mowing my lawn could have said something showing more ownership and leadership.
The guy doesnt seem to have any writing skills, ditto Lisa. Look at the second statement below in the Analyst meeting. Doesnt make any sense whatsover
On VMWare: Turner said Microsoft's beating VMWare with a better and less expensive virtualization offering. "We see this as a really tremendous growth opportunity for us."
"Clearly we the sweet spot we have for our company - the most profitable part of our company - is providing this IT as a service for our customers," he said.
While I appreciate this detailed poster's answer to the question many of us have, it does leave an issue unanswered: Can one recover or get a new job with a RECENT 10% on their record?
Original replier here. Yes, some 10% scores referenced were 3.0's under the old review system. And some were 2006+ new review system 10%'s. For obfuscatory reasons Mini posters may sometimes fudge details to make it more difficult to identify others or themselves, and to further obfuscate may not announce that fudging.
In my small sample set, 10%'s in 2008 and beyond have been more at-risk than those who received them in 2007 and before. I personally know no one with a 10% in 2008+ who has successfully moved to a new role at MS.
For example, consider the 2 or maybe 3 time E/20 I worked with. He landed on the wrong side of politics after a reorg and was 10%ed in 2009, laid off in 2010. A lower performer in his group who'd received a 10% and a PIP during 2007, his first year at MS, and had only appeared to reach the barely acceptable mark after 2 years, was kept on the team. The 2007 10%'s 2009 productivity was about 1/4 that of the 2009 10%, and the former had nowhere near the future potential of the laid off engineer in the view of many at the company outside his management chain. This is further demonstrated by multiple teams refusing in 2009-10 to work with the 2007 10% again, and multiple teams instead requesting the 2009 10% as a collaborator in 2009-10 because history had shown them who they could and could not rely on.
Important from a shareholder's perspective is that this indicates corporate staffing inefficiency. The only people who gained in that exercise were the manager who got to write off as "good attrition" the departure of a "10%" dev whose technical skills made him uneasy because they outshone the manager's skills, and perhaps that manager's manager who no longer needed to listen to the manager whining about that direct for any reason he could manufacture.
Someone taking an objective look at the team from a results standpoint and talking to its members would have selected the 2007 10% as the weak link in 2010 and evaluated the laid off dev as still in at least the top 30% of the team, and maybe even in the top 10% for future contribution potential, if the opinion of multiple principals outside the chain of command is given credence.
The review system was bad before, when 10% meant little to no stock and made it difficult to transfer to a role in which one's skills could be better utilized for the company's good. If a single 10% now means that you're gone in the next round or two, which seems to be how it's currently working, it's reached some level beyond toxic. It's overly simplified single-number-on-a-scorecard-is-all management run amok.
Microsoft seems to do almost anything to hold onto partner-level staff, out of a defensive concern about what might happen if these people went to the competition. Here's a flash of enlightenment for them. Times are a-changing. Flying under the radar seems to be the idea that 10 motivated intermediate/senior engineers who are actively doing dev work and who are still hungry to make their fortunes could hurt Microsoft more at a competitor than one "set for life" partner with a 15-year-old perspective on technology could. It's no longer true that people who leave MS invariably go on to found or work for an MS ISV or other type of partner, contributing directly or indirectly to the MS platform ecosystem, as historically happened to those who didn't leave IT entirely. 30% of those I know who were since 2009 laid off have moved to Mac or Linux, or the mobile equivalents of them.
As with any Microsoft mis-step, this won't damage them irreparably in the short term. The current senior directors and so on will still have time to get their third homes on tropical islands. Over time, however, it could be a different story.
Windows phone 7 seems to be generations behind the iphone. Take a look at this demo of WP7:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XS0GYvgcrH0&feature=related
Notice how many times the demonstrator swipes the finger to get on to next screen and it does not respond. There is also one long freeze - almost requiring a reboot.
I liked some of the ideas - esp. the office hub idea - if that works well, it could be a big differentiator as well as advantage. But man - it has sloppy responsiveness as far as I can tell. At least I'm going to stick to my iphone for now.
Checkout Ballmer's interview today in cnn finance:
http://money.cnn.com/2010/07/29/technology/microsoft_analyst_meeting/index.htm
The following comment in article caught my eye:
Microsoft intends to throw enormous marketing muscle behind the new smartphone operating system, riding the success of its "I'm a PC" campaign with an "I'm a phone too!"
campaign.
The marketing director at MS who devised above needs to be fired. You think people are looking to buy a phone will buy because it's a pc? Wow. Does it take a rocket scientist to understand that this would be a killer of sales. Someone in wp7 division - please take note.
Here is a question for all the disgruntled ex-employees (please, don’t hide behind your stock in the company to show that you care): Would you rather spend time with a sunny, bright, and pleasant person or with a sulking, complaining, and brooding person.
Last year I was a 10%. I am expecting another and possibly final one this year. I am not an ex yet.
1. I am generally happy and pleasant to those around me - at work and at home.
2. I continue to keep quality high in the work I do for msft. Stupid, eh?
3. I am approached by others as an experienced team resource and respond enthusiastically. Why should my peers suffer when they are not the ones sitting in the room doing stack ranking?
4. I have offered compassion and encouragement to peers when they confided they were having a difficult time, alluding to and sometimes directly stating they had 10%'s. One by one they have left the company, most by choice, and the occasional escort out. Now I have slid into the slot opened up when they left. My group does not give 10% to newer hires. Most in my group are 2-3 year employees. Why would we hire someone and then give them a 10% within their first 3-4 years, especially as damaging it has become? With some exceptions, a new hire would get a 3.0.
5. I post here with my current experiences and what I saw before my time as a 10%.
6. I despair at my 10% situation. 10% have become a 2.5 - very low 3.0
7. You bet I am not and will not be encouraging others to come to work here. It will be a job for most, not a career no matter what you want to believe and what the company tells you.
I haven't seen anyone mention it so far, so I'll point out a counterpoint published in the NYT to Frank Shaw's "Microsoft is awesome" blog post. Basically, MSFT excels at delivering business and enterprise software but, with the possible exception of the Xbox, has failed miserably to connect with the consumer. Apple, on the other hand, is wired exactly the opposite way.
+1 for WMC uptake. Microsoft really needs either A) Microsoft branded DVR with Windows Embedded 7 / WMC of B) WMC ported to run on XBox 360 in conjunction with SiliconDust HDHomeRun/Prime external tuners. Given the newer, quieter XBox 360, I'd prefer option B.
You don't get it! Bing SDK, Photosynth are all there to do a better job, an AWESOME job. It is underrated, and under-used.
Of course, Bing is starting, and it is starting strong. Should be embraced not treated w/ disbelief and w/ excessive expectation. Bing need support specially from the Microsoft community. That was what I was comenting.
Bingmaps apps are amazing. Only a fool would not see that google is paying attention and responding to it.
GO BING!
Right. And you know what else needs to be embraced and not treated with excessive expectations? It is KIN!
Make sure your kids and all your relatives have it. Make sure that is their only phone even if they hate your for life.
GO KIN!
GO KIN!
Nick Eaton from the Seattle P.I. reported that Steve Ballmer, at Microsoft's Financial Analyst Meeting,:
a) assured analysts that the stock price is important to him.
b) said "This is Job 1 around here. Nobody is sleeping at the switch." referring to Windows 7 tablets.
Ballmer also said Microsoft's tablets will run Windows 7 and not Windows Phone 7's operating system.
He's relying on Intel's 'Oak Trail' processor to reduce power requirements.
HP is still planning on offering a Windows 7 tablet to the enterprise market.
Ballmer says Microsoft at work to rival iPad
Update 2:38 p.m. PDT: In the question-and-answer session, talk again turned to tablets and Ballmer tried to be a little more clear on the plan, which he said will center around Windows 7 as opposed to Windows Phone and Intel rather than ARM processors, at least for the near term.
"We're coming," he said. "We're coming full guns. The operating system is called Windows."
He reiterated something he said earlier, which was that Microsoft won't allow hardware to be the limiting factor in its plans, saying that the company will design hardware where it needs to in order to have competitive products. "We will embrace what we need to embrace over time," he said.
As for timing, Ballmer said he wouldn't say if the devices would come really, really soon or pretty soon, but said, "It ain't a long time from now."
Microsoft Plans Intel 'Oak Trail'-Based Tablets
Ballmer said Microsoft will work with hardware partners to produce a range of tablets in time for the 2010 holiday season. Beyond that, he said the company would leverage its longstanding relationship with Intel to deliver slates based on the chipmaker's low voltage "Oak Trail" processor in early 2011.
Oak Trail promises longer battery life, lower power consumption, and cooler temperatures for portable devices.
Ballmer has previously disclosed that Microsoft is working on tablets with a broad spectrum of OEMs. The company's partners in the market include Asus, Dell, Samsung, Toshiba, Sony, Lenovo, and Fujitsu. HP has scrapped plans for a Windows 7-based tablet for the consumer market, in light of its $1.2 billion buyout of WebOS developer Palm earlier this year.
But an HP official confirmed this week that the company still plans to offer a Windows 7 tablet for the enterprise market.
I saw the rank&rif system create insane amounts of ill will at CA (formerly Computer Associates) and I am sad to see a very similar pattern now at Microsoft. At some point things got so bad for CA that it had to hire consultants to learn how to fire people in a way that they wouldn't end up hating their guts *and causing real damage* to CA from their subsequent jobs. Yes, a rif'ed Microsoft employee telling friends not to buy Windows is not going to make much of a difference but I wouldn't be surprised if someone rif'ed these days ends up working in the next "Microsoft killer" project and having a decent amount of success. I have been fortunate in my own scores, no 10s or 70 Lows but that doesn't keep me from noticing the backstabbing, "diversity challenged" management and simply incompetent calibrations going on around me. Don't get confused, even if you believe that a majority of rif'ed 10 percenters deserved it, and only a small amount are "mistakes", that's all it may take for some serious damage to happen. On the other hand, underestimating the value of goodwill has been a problem for our current "leadership" for quite a while, I shouldn't be surprised...
We hired someone in our group who got a 10% as a result of a late-cycle re-org, then was a part of the RIF. The loop went well, so we got VP approval. Now he's a top performer.
Maybe not the normal case, but it does happen.
Craig Mundie was just sitting on the stage during FAM qna. Not a single question came to his way. Does not look like investors are interested in his team work.
Why am I getting the impression that the accountants and lawyers seem to be taking over the running of Microsoft. Creativity and thought leadership cannot be substituted with debit/credit transactions but thats precisely what seems to be happening here.
This is the kind of video a bad mobile phone inspires:
Nokia N97: The Truth
If you're looking for a better place to work, you can cross Nokia off your list.
Ballmer reworked the analyst meeting this year but as of this morning it doesn't seem to have paid off. The stock's down 2.2% as opposed to a 0.2% drop in the overall market.
http://www.businessinsider.com/microsoft-is-trashing-us-for-not-eating-enough-crow-about-bings-market-share-gains-so-well-eat-a-bit-more-crow-2010-7<<
Whats funny about that post is that most of the people commenting are not buying Blodgets argument. They're calling him out on his BS. It's ironic that the only people buying it are in this comments section
The June 2010 Comscore results show that Google is at 62.6%, Yahoo at 18.9% and MSFT properties at 12.7%. On raw scores MS realized a .6% increase in a month. However both MS and Yahoo scores are exaggerated as they are gaming the system using contextual searches that inflate their score. Consequently Comscore is changing their calculations to compensate.
When the false searches are removed, MS gained just 0.2%. So like it or not, Blodgett is correct when he says MS is spending big to gain share. However he is incorrect in the cost per one percent of search share. MS "invests" (aka loses) $250million per month in the online business. Looking at the real 0.2% gain in June, 1% share would cost $1250million, or 2 and a half times Blodget's estimate of $500mill. To eliminate the potential for monthly fluctuation, consider the run rate for the whole of 2010 to date, where Bing has gained 1.5% share from 10.7 to 12.2, at a cost of $1.5billion. So those data suggest that one percent of search share costs MS $1billion. At that pace, level pegging with Google (i.e. MS’ having 31.3% share) will cost between $19 and 24 billion … and take over 6 years. Is it just me, or is this a fool’s errand? Where the hell is the Board, where is the accountability for this idiocy? All this information is publically available and it is pretty simple math. Maybe a team of HiPos should be formed to analyze? ;-)
Next, there is the question of monetizing search. Google is good at that, MS is not.
What about the Yahoo deal, I hear you ask. Isn't that strategic to grow share? Maybe, but more likely the deal was done to stop Yahoo collapsing, leaving Google with 85% share. Also to buy time to do something different so arguably a good move.
Meanwhile in mobile search, Google's share is 98.29%. As PCs diminish in importance, in this space MS is nowhere, another shameful demonstration of SteveB’s “leadership”.
http://techcrunch.com/2010/07/29/google-mobile-search-market-share/
Whats funny about that post is that most of the people commenting are not buying Blodgets argument. They're calling him out on his BS. It's ironic that the only people buying it are in this comments section
The June 2010 Comscore results show that Google is at 62.6%, Yahoo at 18.9% and MSFT properties at 12.7%. On raw scores MS realized a .6% increase in a month. However both MS and Yahoo scores are exaggerated as they are gaming the system using contextual searches that inflate their score. Consequently Comscore is changing their calculations to compensate.
When the false searches are removed, MS gained just 0.2%. So like it or not, Blodgett is correct when he says MS is spending big to gain share. However he is incorrect in the cost per one percent of search share. MS "invests" (aka loses) $250million per month in the online business. Looking at the real 0.2% gain in June, 1% share would cost $1250million, or 2 and a half times Blodget's estimate of $500mill. To eliminate the potential for monthly fluctuation, consider the run rate for the whole of 2010 to date, where Bing has gained 1.5% share from 10.7 to 12.2, at a cost of $1.5billion. So those data suggest that one percent of search share costs MS $1billion. At that pace, level pegging with Google (i.e. MS’ having 31.3% share) will cost between $19 and 24 billion … and take over 6 years. Is it just me, or is this a fool’s errand? Where the hell is the Board, where is the accountability for this idiocy? All this information is publically available and it is pretty simple math. Maybe a team of HiPos should be formed to analyze? ;-)
Next, there is the question of monetizing search. Google is good at that, MS is not.
What about the Yahoo deal, I hear you ask. Isn't that strategic to grow share? Maybe, but more likely the deal was done to stop Yahoo collapsing, leaving Google with 85% share. Also to buy time to do something different so arguably a good move.
Meanwhile in mobile search, Google's share is 98.29%. As PCs diminish in importance, in this space MS is nowhere, another shameful demonstration of SteveB’s “leadership”.
http://techcrunch.com/2010/07/29/google-mobile-search-market-share/
This blog is pathetic. To be fair it is mostly due to the comments and not the posts. I see a bunch of bitter comments about all the things that are wrong with Microsoft. When someone writes a comment about how they, as an employee care about the company or believe in the company, they get trashed. May I suggest that if you have nothing better to do but complain and trash your fellow employees, who actually want to do good or even great things then take a look in the mirror. You may have had some or many bad experiences at MS. If you can't except that there are people who want to fix those issues, then you are part of the problem. You either need to come up with your own ideas to change things or leave the company. Your bickering and public bashing doesn't help anyone.
Review time is here. And it appears that "notify to interview" is essentially dead, at least in the Windows division. You guys remember how it used to be called "permission to interview"? Everyone on mini praised LisaB for changing it to notify-only.
Well now you're basically screwed if you think you can take your promotion this season and immediately interview for another team. And without a promo, good luck. Unofficial guidance to managers is to do everything possible to prevent this.
Very disappointing and short-sighted.
Mini, I hope you do another review post soon.
3. Security. Don't laugh. By moving all app development to .NET, and implementing a high fence around the sandbox, I'm guessing that WP7 will be the most secure phone which runs installable applications. Once iPhone Conficker arrives, this will become important.
High fence sandbox is critical, which the iPhone has always had. After that I have no idea how .NET helps you. Maybe it eliminates some buffer overruns in an app, but if the app is not allowed to access any files or personal data anyway then who cares? BTW, I think you will be waiting a LONG time to see Conficker on the iPhone, if it ever happens...
http://www.betanews.com/article/What-is-Microsofts-strategy-for-slates-and-tablets-exactly/1280512076
Balmer says:
"We're coming full guns. The operating system is called Windows. No...there's... let me be unambiguous. A new Windows Phone for screen sizes that, let me just say, are, you know, sort of bigger than three or four inches ...the answer is Windows Phone. We are in the game. We're all in the game today with Intel architecture machines. We've got improvements coming from Intel. We're driving forward. We're unambiguous about that. Now, where we'll go and what's going to matter --I said also in my remarks that in no way will we allow hardware to be the impediment. We will embrace what we need to embrace over time in terms of hardware evolution."
"But you say to me, 'Are we going to see slate?' Yes. What processor are they going to have? They are going to have an Intel architecture processor at least in any foreseeable future. Are they going to run Windows? Yeah. Will it be tuned? Yes! And we are going to sell like crazy. We are going to market like crazy. We have devices that will run more applications, that have as much content, that have anything you want on the planet. And we have an ecosystem of developers that know how to write applications for that thing. Believe me, as I think everybody knows, you can buy two PCs for the price of one iPad -- two netbooks today for the price of one iPad. So, people are sitting there over-celebrating bomb costs and blah, blah, blah. We and Intel can get our job done, and know how to make money."
Can someone explain what he is saying? Is he saying the slate is going to run Windows, or is it going to run Windows Phone? If it is going to run Windows Phone, doesn't it run on ARM and not Intel? The journalist implies he means Windows, not Windows Phone. But it didn't sound like that from reading Balmer's transcript.
I had an A/10 two years ago after working for a total jerk boss. He had never managed people before, and when things went wrong, he blamed me, after giving me a strong midyear. Fortunately, I had already left for a different team, and my new managers figured out that the 10 was total bull. I scored an E/20 last year and got a promo. I had a really strong midyear and all indications are I’m on track to another strong annual. So yes, I more than recovered, but the key was getting out of my team. Of course, if I hadn’t left in June when they were doing calibrations, I almost certainly wouldn’t have gotten a 10. So a word to MS newbies: do NOT change teams between Midyear and annual! Do it in Q1 or Q2 – or you are asking to be turned into “good attrition” by your old management chain. PS – HR is no help. I talked to them about my options for getting the review changed, which they said were basically nil. I considered pushing it, but was advised by a friendly level 67 who had been around awhile that appealing would only succeed in getting me labeled as a “problem.” So I moved on. Really, I think being happy and successful at MS comes down to being in a good management chain, which I’m in now.
I think most folks @ MS have forgotten what a consumer looks like. Go to msn.com and look at a home page. That is a consumer.
That pretty home page on Bing. Consumers love that. They cry tears of joy over it. It makes them happy when so much of the web is a dismal pit of despair.
Win7 and WP7 are not products for that person. They are great products for enterprises, but not consumers. You know what my friends complain about? They complain about the two toolbars that have appeared in IE, or the five nagging popups they have to get through before checking their email. And WTF? What does that thing in the corner keep telling me I have a virus?
It's like everyone is living in a fairy mound. The great thing about getting cut from the company is you get to go OUTSIDE and see the real world.
When your friends call you and go to lunch, you realize you can go that week and not say, "I'd love to, but I have to do it after MGB"
You get a bit perspective and you dare to hope for a better world.
Maybe all Microsoft has to do is pretend to be laid off for a month. Experience the real world for a bit.
Whether Microsoft owns what you do on your own time with your own resources depends on where Microsoft employs you. In California, for example, such restrictive ownership clauses, along with various non-competitive clauses, are not enforcible.
Microsoft is doing better than any company in the world! How?
Well, if you take our per capita derivative per share on cost and divide it by the average diposited per annum gain in triannual positions in euros we look very good!
Great article:
Ballmer (and Microsoft) still doesn't get the iPad
http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2010/07/ballmer-and-microsoft-still-doesnt-get-the-ipad.ars
Anyone has work with skip level or HR to fight and correct un-true evaluation by supervisor before agreeing or signing annual review?
Whats funny about that post is that most of the people commenting are not buying Blodgets argument. They're calling him out on his BS. It's ironic that the only people buying it are in this comments section
The June 2010 Comscore results show that Google is at 62.6%, Yahoo at 18.9% and MSFT properties at 12.7%. On raw scores MS realized a .6% increase in a month. However both MS and Yahoo scores are exaggerated as they are gaming the system using contextual searches that inflate their score. Consequently Comscore is changing their calculations to compensate.
When the false searches are removed, MS gained just 0.2%. So like it or not, Blodgett is correct when he says MS is spending big to gain share. However he is incorrect in the cost per one percent of search share. MS "invests" (aka loses) $250million per month in the online business. Looking at the real 0.2% gain in June, 1% share would cost $1250million, or 2 and a half times Blodget's estimate of $500mill. To eliminate the potential for monthly fluctuation, consider the run rate for the whole of 2010 to date, where Bing has gained 1.5% share from 10.7 to 12.2, at a cost of $1.5billion. So those data suggest that one percent of search share costs MS $1billion. At that pace, level pegging with Google (i.e. MS’ having 31.3% share) will cost between $19 and 24 billion … and take over 6 years. Is it just me, or is this a fool’s errand? Where the hell is the Board, where is the accountability for this idiocy? All this information is publically available and it is pretty simple math. Maybe a team of HiPos should be formed to analyze? ;-)
Next, there is the question of monetizing search. Google is good at that, MS is not.
What about the Yahoo deal, I hear you ask. Isn't that strategic to grow share? Maybe, but more likely the deal was done to stop Yahoo collapsing, leaving Google with 85% share. Also to buy time to do something different so arguably a good move.
Meanwhile in mobile search, Google's share is 98.29%. As PCs diminish in importance, in this space MS is nowhere, another shameful demonstration of SteveB’s “leadership”.
http://techcrunch.com/2010/07/29/google-mobile-search-market-share/
Yes, I got a 10% once from a clusterf**k of a manager (after several years of promotions and excellent reviews before him) and was able to transition to a new group, where (surprise!) I went back to getting great reviews.
====
This was my experience too (and yes, within the last 3 years). I went from an award-winning E/70 to A/10 in one review period because of conflict with my manager. My new manager got strong recommendations from my other former managers to push through my transfer. I am now back to E/70, gold star awards, etc. Oh, and my previous manager? Kicked out of Microsoft (yes bad/evil partner-level managers do occasionally get dealt with).
Microsoft: The aging rock star
There are rumors circulating in the financial press that MSFT's Board of Directors is going to increase the dividend at their next meeting. Again, just rumors, but I think this would be a good thing for the company's share price.
For the last decade, Microsoft has been pretending that it's still a growth company -- a hot, sexy, young startup with a strong entrepreneurial spirit and lots of great new ideas to bring to market.
Let's face it: This just isn't true anymore. Microsoft is a lumbering software behemouth; a blue chip company that causes ripples throughout the entire stock market when its share price wiggles by a few cents. In addition, the company has a huge entrenched bureaucracy that actively suppresses inovation and risk-taking.
But management continues to fool itself into thinking that the company will go on another 1990s-like growth spurt if they just capture the search space, or the mobile space, or the cloud space, or... whatever.
It's a little like watching the Rolling Stones in concert. A bunch of 60-year-olds jumping around in spandex and singing the same old songs about teenage angst. (A couple years ago, the Stones actually had to cancel a concert tour because Keith Richards needed hip-replacement surgery.)
It's sad to watch people who don't recognize that their lives are a cycle rather than a frozen moment from the past. Sad that these people can't accept (and adapt to) the inevitable changes that come with age. It's equally sad to watch a successful company doing the same thing.
Shareholders derive value from a company either through dividends or through share-price appreciation resulting from business growth. It's time for the Board of Directors to acknowledge that MSFT is a mature company whose growth prospects are limited, and start giving some of that cashflow back to investors in the form of dividends.
I am ashamed to ask this :(
If I short sell on my house then would my career in Microsoft be any way affected? I am planning to stick around for another year.
Previously I would have just gone and asked HR like an idiot. But now that I have read the posts on this blog, I know better.
10% has nothing to do with performance - definitely in India. It has only to do with the manager and manager's manager. This is also treu of 20% and Exceed. The latter are used a doles for the "faithful" and "loyal" and has nothing to do with performance or customer.
Anyone know when each MS employee can get the free WM7 promised?
It seems like a lot of employees getting laid off or forced out (i.e. 10 percenters) are 40 years old or older. 40 and over is a protected class. I would expect lawsuits. Is my org atypical or some other reason why we don't hear more about this?
Does anybody else think it's in poor taste that Ballmer wishes Apple didn't sell so many iPads?
Microsoft does not make an OS suitable for a device like the iPad. Aside from the obvious interface issues, how is Windows supposed to run on a device with a 1GHz processor and 256MB RAM?
So is Ballmer also going to begrudge GE for selling so many light bulbs or Honda for selling so many cars...?
"Does anybody else think it's in poor taste that Ballmer wishes Apple didn't sell so many iPads?"
Umm... absolutely not? Have you ever heard Ballmer speak before? He has a long history of failing to acknowledge that any competition does anything worth thinking about... especially Apple.
Ballmer should have expressed this sentiment years ago about both Mac and iPhone -- instead he became increasingly a laughing stock as he said that Apple was just a niche thing that wasn't worth paying attention to.
His statement here was long long overdue.
I saw how Microsoft treated their STE contractors in the late 90's once the internet bubble burst.
That should have been a wake-up call.
Front page national news. Corporate profits in America are at record levels. The formula is simple: High prices, low wages, and no taxes.
Office 2010 retail $498. Companies everywhere are sitting on mountains of cash and MS is no exception. When they do spend it, it is foremost to automate and reduce jobs.
Wages have been stagnant at Microsoft for a decade. Companies today are better positioned then ever to leverage this economy to squeeze out every last dollar in profit. As far as efficiency experts like LisaB are concerned; be happy your kids aren't making Microsoft Mice in China for 35 cents an hour.
The disparity in pay between middle class rank and file workers whom provide all the value, and the corporate executives whom take all the value is at historic levels.
Let's be frank. After tax, most employee's salaries here wouldn't even fill up the gas tank in their yachts or pay the property taxes on their houses. While HR uses their leverage in this job market to beat employees down and maximize your productivity; many executives and partners in your org chart will spend more this weekend then you'll make in an entire year.
Last, corporations aren't paying their fair share of taxes. What they are doing is using their size as leverage to influence the politicians you elect to represent you. So every dollar they pay you is worth less. Remember this when you go under the 36th ST overpass every morning. That is your stimulus dollars at work. Paying for a bridge to one of the richest companies in the world.
How did we get here?
Microsoft has fought hard for years to prevent WA-Tech from unionizing their workers. Ironically, many MS employees themselves fought the hardest to stop the trust busters from breaking up the company.
Many have only seen good times, but in bad times when the American Dream seems a decade away - they will pay the price for being a bunch of naive geeks and eating up all the corporate BS.
Why am I getting the impression that the accountants and lawyers seem to be taking over the running of Microsoft.
Legal took over ruining, er, running the company around the time of the DOJ antitrust settlement. All hail Brad Smith.
>Whether Microsoft owns what you do on your own time with your own resources depends on where Microsoft employs you. In California, for example, such restrictive ownership clauses, along with various non-competitive clauses, are not enforcible
Some of these are not enforcible in WA state. It exists to threaten some employees
And now Birger Steen is leaving the company. Damn...he was one of the good ones.
"Whats funny about that post is that most of the people commenting are not buying Blodgets argument. They're calling him out on his BS. It's ironic that the only people buying it are in this comments section"
The June 2010 Comscore results show that Google is at 62.6%, Yahoo at 18.9% and MSFT properties at 12.7%. On raw scores MS realized a .6% increase in a month. However both MS and Yahoo scores are exaggerated as they are gaming the system using contextual searches that inflate their score. Consequently Comscore is changing their calculations to compensate.
When the false searches are removed, MS gained just 0.2%. So like it or not, Blodgett is correct when he says MS is spending big to gain share. However he is incorrect in the cost per one percent of search share. MS "invests" (aka loses) $250million per month in the online business. Looking at the real 0.2% gain in June, 1% share would cost $1250million, or 2 and a half times Blodget's estimate of $500mill. To eliminate the potential for monthly fluctuation, consider the run rate for the whole of 2010 to date, where Bing has gained 1.5% share from 10.7 to 12.2, at a cost of $1.5billion. So those data suggest that one percent of search share costs MS $1billion. At that pace, level pegging with Google (i.e. MS’ having 31.3% share) will cost between $19 and 24 billion … and take over 6 years. Is it just me, or is this a fool’s errand? Where the hell is the Board, where is the accountability for this idiocy? All this information is publically available and it is pretty simple math. Maybe a team of HiPos should be formed to analyze? ;-)
Next, there is the question of monetizing search. Google is good at that, MS is not.
What about the Yahoo deal, I hear you ask. Isn't that strategic to grow share? Maybe, but more likely the deal was done to stop Yahoo collapsing, leaving Google with 85% share. Also to buy time to do something different so arguably a good move.
Meanwhile in mobile search, Google's share is 98.29%. As PCs diminish in importance, in this space MS is nowhere, another shameful demonstration of SteveB’s “leadership”.
http://techcrunch.com/2010/07/29/google-mobile-search-market-share/
"You don't get it! Bing SDK, Photosynth are all there to do a better job, an AWESOME job. It is underrated, and under-used."
Hallelujah, my brothers and sisters! I just sold my left kidney for the Kinect. And, may I add, the rest of my internal organs to get a new PC with Windows 7, although I saved my spleen to trade for a Windows Phone 7. Don't forget, Bing will save your soul, YOUR SOUL!!!
Ohhh ... I thought this was 1995 and the Rolling Stones would do Start Me Up.
Amen.
>>Anyone has work with skip level or HR to fight and correct un-true evaluation by supervisor before agreeing or signing annual review?
Sure, but your manager has already that discussion with HR before you did. And they likely set you up at mid-year even if the review didn't contain as many words. Employees think HR is a resource & advocate for them when in reality they are proxies for the company's wishes - aka what your manager wants. They will listen to you and mediate with your manager, they may even put on a good show of push back with your manager, but in the end, the decision is up to your manager. Don't expect any relief. Aim low, buy yourself some time to get to another group.
Anyone has work with skip level or HR to fight and correct un-true evaluation by supervisor before agreeing or signing annual review?
Work with HR?
They work for Microsoft. They are there to support your manager and cover Microsoft's ass.
you can't except that there are people who want to fix those issues, then you are part of the problem. You either need to come up with your own ideas to change things or leave the company. Your bickering and public bashing doesn't help anyone.
If the company really had an open forum to discuss the issues, a fair review and compensation system, and shown that it embraced change.. people probably wouldn't be posting here.
Yet review cycle after review cycle, poll after poll, morale event after event - management has proved that it will be business as usual.
Can someone explain what he is saying? Is he saying the slate is going to run Windows, or is it going to run Windows Phone? If it is going to run Windows Phone, doesn't it run on ARM and not Intel? The journalist implies he means Windows, not Windows Phone. But it didn't sound like that from reading Balmer's transcript.
Some tablets are using Google's Android operating system.
Steve is saying they won't use Windows Phone 7's operating system in tablets.
Instead of adding ARM support to Windows 7, Microsoft will rely on Intel's 'Oak Trail' processor to reduce power requirements in tablets and then "tune" Windows 7.
It seems like a lot of employees getting laid off or forced out (i.e. 10 percenters) are 40 years old or older. 40 and over is a protected class. I would expect lawsuits. Is my org atypical or some other reason why we don't hear more about this?
I have heard, though even posting anonymously I don't feel comfortable saying from whom, that it's not unusual for people around 19-20 years at MS to "mysteriously" start getting bad reviews no matter how hard they work, and either quit or break under the pressure of trying to improve. Such people would typically be in their 40s, with 6 weeks of vacation, a mortgage, and dependents who all need medical insurance.
It must cost a lot less to hire 20-somethings with fresh ideas, fresh college educations, boundless energy, the ability and willingness to work 80 hours a week, no dependents, and minimal medical insurance usage....than to keep supporting the older folks, regardless of how reliable, steady, and loyal they've been.
I'm just sayin'. Of course if each of those 40-somethings believed it was "just them", or that they could somehow have gotten better reviews if they'd just done something differently, like never see their children....then they wouldn't ever stop to think it might be systematic age discrimination in the guise of "cost cutting" or "getting rid of the 10ers". And they wouldn't ever think of a lawsuit. But you know, I wonder if some of them ought to. If staying at MS for 19 or 20 years means a guaranteed bullseye on your back....anybody with a "career" in mind needs to know that. Preferably before they're bullied into quitting, or breaking down.
Holy crap! Even after a decade of late nights and weeks.. several promotions.. do you realize you easily make over 3X what I do, not even counting the stock. I work 12 hour days six days a week plus holidays and RAS year after year. Still, I have to fight every year just to get 80 grand and get a basic cost of living adjustment!
"Working 12 hour days six days a week plus holidays" doesn't leave a lot of time to work on "visibility".
If you're working really hard hoping to be "discovered", it doesn't work like that.
We had a dev lead that had coffee with the general manager every morning. He did really well.
"Does anybody else think it's in poor taste that Ballmer wishes Apple didn't sell so many iPads?"
Sounds more like a compliment and an acknowledgment about a good product from them... Refreshing considering the usual "It won't last" kind of dismissals common from him...
It seems like a lot of employees getting laid off or forced out (i.e. 10 percenters) are 40 years old or older. 40 and over is a protected class. I would expect lawsuits. Is my org atypical or some other reason why we don't hear more about this?
Microsoft can do something like this:
1. Microsoft lays off equal numbers of employees under 40 and over 40.
2. Gives them all a chance to interview for other positions.
3. People relate to those closer to their own age and pick the younger employees.
Some Microsoft executives get plastic surgery to look younger (so says a plastic surgeon with a practice on Northup Way in Bellevue).
After a few years of drinking free soda, chances are someone over 40 doesn't look young, is overweight or obese and, might even have Type II diabetes.
4. The end result is more people over than 40 are let go than those under 40.
Do the over 40 people who got laid off have a lot of medical expenses?
Since saving money is what Microsoft is trying to do with laying off employees, they are going to look at the cost/benefit of keeping you around. Medical insurance costs are one expense that companies try to minimize.
>>Windows phone 7 seems to be generations behind the iphone. Take a look at this demo of WP7:<<
Wow. You're exactly the type of poster thats wrong with 99% of this comments section.
You realize that that video is from February 2010 right?
You realize we're now in August right?
You realize that you can simply go to twitter RIGHT NOW and get real time feedback on how people are finding the current pre-release version of WP7 on demo handsets right?
Pathetic.
It seems like a lot of employees getting laid off or forced out (i.e. 10 percenters) are 40 years old or older. 40 and over is a protected class. I would expect lawsuits. Is my org atypical or some other reason why we don't hear more about this?
I can partly confirm... A 40+ year old employee "disappeared" from my group this week. Absolutely NO communication from management, and we found out by checking our manager's direct reports in Outlook...was a pretty sad day. :(
Does any group reward managers who have high WHI scores? HR and upper management always talk about the value of good management, but in my group, all of the 'best' managers by this measure end up in career holding patterns or worse, moved back to ICs or leaving the team.
The folks with the highest WHIs seem to have the best employee retention yet it never appears as if management cares about this.
Everyone is graded on a curve.
No matter how well you do in absolute terms, they have to find fault with enough people to fit the curve.
Also, the higher you go in the org chart, the fewer positions there are.
You have to advance or you get moved out.
You combine these two features and you see that the system in place is designed to shed qualified people.
To create room for advancement, people have to leave one way or another.
Where the hell is the Board, where is the accountability for this idiocy? All this information is publically available and it is pretty simple math. Maybe a team of HiPos should be formed to analyze? ;-)
I believe the extent of the Board of Directors arithmetic homework consists of looking at the quarterly and annual reports.
A lot of things get missed in a large organization because people assume somebody else must know this and is working on it.
In Microsoft's culture, people don't want to risk limiting their career by offending anyone who should have noticed it.
The people competing with the person who should have noticed it don't want to point it out until after it has caused a sufficient amount of damage to limit the career of that person so they can advance (see Kin phone as an example).
Since Steve Ballmer thinks this system is awesome, the rest of us can just make some popcorn and watch the show.
If you can't except that there are people who want to fix those issues, then you are part of the problem. You either need to come up with your own ideas to change things or leave the company. Your bickering and public bashing doesn't help anyone.
Who do you plan on telling your ideas to change things?
Is that going to make someone else look bad to their manager?
Will they retaliate?
Try it and let us know what happens. Lead the way.
Why am I getting the impression that the accountants and lawyers seem to be taking over the running of Microsoft. Creativity and thought leadership cannot be substituted with debit/credit transactions but thats precisely what seems to be happening here.
It started with what former COO Bob Herbold called "taming the cost beast".
After a "PC on every desktop", Microsoft has never been guilty of "thought leadership".
You get execs giving you the "pioneers get the arrows" line when it comes to being first in the market with a new idea.
Microsoft prefers to wait to see what is successful, copy it, and then use their deep pockets to fund gaining market share.
It seems like a lot of employees getting laid off or forced out (i.e. 10 percenters) are 40 years old or older. 40 and over is a protected class. I would expect lawsuits. Is my org atypical or some other reason why we don't hear more about this?
There are two places to file "protected class" employment-related lawsuits: state and federal courts. Since the well-known EEOC regulation is a federal law, most people who decide to raise the issue, probably raise it with the federal dept of EEOC. They may or may not even be aware that there are related state laws on the books and that the process for making a complaint under state law is different.
The federal EEOC process involves considerable time in administrative limbo before a "right to sue" letter is issued. It could take 6-12 months or longer, after the initial complaint is filed, to get the "right to sue" in federal court. Since many layoffs have happened in the past 2 years, and many older workers have been affected, it's likely that there has been an increase in complaints that has pushed the timeframe out to the upper end of that scale.
I think it's not a coincidence that the only lawsuit mentioned so far has been one that claims violation of state laws, not federal. I think federal complaints are still in the queue.
My gut tells me that to justify laying off so many people over 40 on the grounds that they received 10% scores is pretexting, and it begs the dangerous question of, "Why were people over 40 apparently so disproportionately given 10%, which is by definition a subjective measurement of future potential?". The answer to that question could have implications for those still AT Microsoft as well as those laid off.
There's a reason that labor consulting companties often recommend that the least legally risky way to do layoffs is LIFO, reverse order of seniority.
I left years ago, but figure the following advice still applies:
- Most teams still deliver on a curve so if you care about actively managing your career, join only teams where you will be the star, or where you know your mgmt chain has your back. Good also to be in a growth org. Someone will get the 10% rating...don't let it be you just because you love a particular role.
- Perspective on your total comp helps. Having been with several Seattle tech firms, there is variability up and down from an MS salary, but the slate of benefits offered by MS is incredible especially if you have a family or any medical needs. And once you compare against other industries, being in tech is great. Take a step back and look at your comp in absolute terms and be happy.
- Finally, as many posters have said, if you don't like it, change groups or leave MS. It's really not that hard. Even if your handcuffs are still golden, your sanity is worth much more.
Does any group reward managers who have high WHI scores? HR and upper management always talk about the value of good management, but in my group, all of the 'best' managers by this measure end up in career holding patterns or worse, moved back to ICs or leaving the team.
The folks with the highest WHIs seem to have the best employee retention yet it never appears as if management cares about this.
I had a manager with very high WHI. He did get noticed for it, he was laid off!
First off, a disclaimer: I enjoy, appreciate, and use Apple products and do not work for Microsoft. I read this blog because I'm curious about the culture of the company that makes the world's dominant operating system.
Having said that, I have no interest in the Microsoft/Apple rhetoric wars. I'm posting because I'm curious what people think about this article by an ex-Apple employee who left to start "Posterous."
http://www.businessinsider.com/management-lessons-i-learned-working-at-apple-2010-7#a-tech-company-should-be-run-by-engineers-not-managers-1
Unfortunately,it's a slideshow with captions that you have to click through, but I think it's worth reading because of the description of the product teams, which are led by engineers, rather than MBA's or the like. From the comments I've read, it sounds like the kind of environment a lot of Microsoft employees long for.
You can argue about the merits of the products they produce, but I think by any measure, you'd have to agree their products are largely successful.
It sounds like there are a lot of people here who care about Microsoft and want it to do well but are frustrated by bureaucracy, politics, and various corporate obstacles. So I'm interested in hearing what you think about what the author says inspires such loyalty among Apple's employees. What strikes a particular chord with you, if anything?
"Does anybody else think it's in poor taste that Ballmer wishes Apple didn't sell so many iPads?"
Umm... absolutely not? Have you ever heard Ballmer speak before? He has a long history of failing to acknowledge that any competition does anything worth thinking about... especially Apple.
It does not matter anymore what that fat oaf thinks or says. Market has delivered its verdict as reflected in the stagnant to down stock. Microsoft will continue to lose one battle at a time as long as this buffoon remains CEO.
"It seems like a lot of employees getting laid off or forced out (i.e. 10 percenters) are 40 years old or older. 40 and over is a protected class. I would expect lawsuits. Is my org atypical or some other reason why we don't hear more about this?"
"Protected" is a relative term. MS manages the numbers carefully; heck, even Excel training these days teaches the ".5%" discrimination rule - never let dismissal of a protected class rise above .5%... In short, don't expect any present WA state or federal administration to take much action around a 40+ white male unless the numbers are huge and the action particularly egregious.
That said, you can fight city hall, and if enough >40 year olds take proactive action such that politicians 'have to' respond, then your rights might be protected. This can take a while...
When someone believes they have been discriminated against due to age, (or other protected class status) they must first go through the EEOC(Seattle), or appropriate State's human rights division...which has/have a yearlong backlog, before they ever get to the "investigation". Now, one can ask for their Right to Sue (RTS) letter early - 90-180 days after the claim is filed (and there is a 300 day statute of limitations before that first 90 days runs). Add that to the 'partial investigation' they do, (3 months) plus another 90 day timeline to sue AFTER one gets their RTS notice and you will only see lawsuits 1.5-2 years hence. So, those even first RIF'd in 1/2009 absolutely could still be waiting their EEOC "Investigation", and haven't filed suit yet.
I left in 2008 and only filed suit later this year, due to my rights being violated, and a ton of backchannel retaliation, which is where MS HR fails to train their Partners and managers on what is retaliation and what it encompasses. All that backchannel whisper net is considered 'retaliation'. They never look for the truth.
I was a long term 'valued' employee, great reviews, great scores, HR did nothing about it, even after complaining in writing. They assume you'll eventually go away, not fight the system, and the ROI says they're right.
Key point: you can file an EEOC claim without a lawyer at any time and still be employed. MS cannot per law retaliate against you for filing that claim.
HR does know that adding you to the next RIF list MAY be considered "retaliation".
To the Short Sale and HR Question -
Interesting question. I'm familiar with short sales because I'm watching two neighbors attempt to sell theirs and have looked into this to see what it is all about.
While many employers check your credit rating BEFORE they offer you a job, I'm not sure if as many employers (or MS at all), checks your credit periodically WHILE employed (check your offer/contract). I would think that if you ask HR, they would, by law, have to tell you. Personally I don't think they do check, or give a shuck - maybe they check the criminal record however. The gravity of the credit check may also be relative to your role. I've seen managers spend more on mortgages than they make, run a landlord business out of their office (often on the phone on refinance deals, tennant deals, etc.) and you would think that if someone made $15K a month at MS but owed $30K a month in just mortgages, taxes and insurance they woud think that person may be a bit too "distracted" to actualy have a full time job, fairly assign review scores to his same level-band employees, and enquire into the situation - espeially if that person's significant other doesn't work full time, and they haven't submitted a moonlighthing request? I mean, even the federal government looks at credit ratings as a security issue. They assume if you don't have at least average credit you coud be comprimised. But at MS, I guess they think that an MS manager could never be - MS managers would always assign fair reveiw scores even if it negativey affected them personally.
Anyway, check your credit report for third party credit checks -they will not say "Microsoft" on them, and just plain-out ask HR. Seems they would have to tell you the truth on that one, due to fair credit reporting laws, etc. They may give you a big song and dance that they don't know, and that they use a third party that assigns a "score". Trust me, they can tell you what puts that score together.
Short sales can affect credit pretty negativey. The idea that they only affect credit for 2-3 years is false since any credit line history (mortgage, HELOC) stays on your credit report for 7 years - and a new bank can ask about it anytime in the future. Any NEW employer might certainly see your affected credit score, but I don't think anyone, including Microsoft is really concerned if you specifically 'short sale' your home. Trying to get out of a underwater mortgage with an intact job at Microsoft - and no deficiency due - might still be difficut, but understandable.
Again, I don't have the final answer, but give HR a run for its money and ask if the due periodic credit checks. I bet a dollar that the HR generalist doesn't even know.
My gut tells me that to justify laying off so many people over 40 on the grounds that they received 10% scores is pretexting, and it begs the dangerous question of, "Why were people over 40 apparently so disproportionately given 10%, which is by definition a subjective measurement of future potential?". The answer to that question could have implications for those still AT Microsoft as well as those laid off.
Hope an over 40 class action suit happens, just as a class action suit for permatemps did. I will sign on in a heart beat. I don't care if it takes until into my golden years (retirement) for settlement.
"Everyone is graded on a curve."
Though I thinkt the OP of the above was 99% correct, this comment is not true at MS, I believe. At higher levels, 66+, 10% do not get the dreaded "10%" label. The amount of 10%'s assigned and "Underperfomed" is incredibly small. Ask Lisa during her "listening tour."
My gut tells me that to justify laying off so many people over 40 on the grounds that they received 10% scores is pretexting, and it begs the dangerous question of, "Why were people over 40 apparently so disproportionately given 10%, which is by definition a subjective measurement of future potential?".
For frack's sake, the whole practice of ranking employees based on their "future potential" is age discrimination codified: obviously, the younger you are, the more time available for your wonderful career and therefore the greater your "potential;" and, of course, the OLDER you are, the sooner you're likely to retire -- a "potential-limiting" factor if ever there was one...
Agree with comment on Sunday, August 01, 2010 1:44:00 PM.
This is going to mark me as a bit out there, but after a few years at MSFT I started to see this situation as so absurd that I started to think sympathetically towards the Marxist view on the morality of surplus value. The ICs are breaking their backs and not seeing nearly a fair share of the wealth they create.
When we went into recession mode, employees all raced to further justify these injustices. "You should be happy you have a job." But the company still made absurd amounts of money during this time, off your back. We could have fared better if we had a union.
>>Wow. You're exactly the type of poster thats wrong with 99% of this comments section.
You realize that that video is from February 2010 right?
You realize we're now in August right?
You realize that you can simply go to twitter RIGHT NOW and get real time feedback on how people are finding the current pre-release version of WP7 on demo handsets right?
Pathetic.<<
Actually, a few days ago I saw the demo booths of the WP7 phones at the annual Product Fair. Let's just say I wasn't exactly impressed:
Flash support? nope. Connect to Wi-Fi? wasn't working. Connect a Bluetooth headset? Adobe Reader? Several times I would select an item or app to start and would get a lingering black screen of nothing. The overall fit and finish is just not there dude, and as you said it's AUGUST. Isn't RTM in 3 months?
What's shocking is that the competitors' phones are out there right now to disect and study. Yet the WM7 phone is not even as good as say, an iPhone 3G.
If WM7 was supposed to be a "game changer" and bring Microsoft "back into the fight" then IMO that just isn't going to happen. And really, did anyone expect it to?
Do the over 40 people who got laid off have a lot of medical expenses?
On our team, one did (leukemia that prompted a 6-month disability leave from work), but one did not (two doc visits for the flu, twice-annual dental checkups, and a couple visits for routine "now that you're 40, you should have this test" tests that came up clean, over 6 years).
Coincidentally, on our team, the guy with leukemia was also among the lowest performers and least motivated to improve, which shouldn't necessarily be surprising when one experiences a huge life shift such as being diagnosed with a possibly terminal illness. If I was in his place, my priorities might have shifted away from work and toward helping my kids grow up to be the best they could be, as well.
But on the flip side, our team also included two grossly obese diabetics with heart issues who were near the age of 65, an under-40 woman with two kids requiring 6 hours a day of Asperger's/autism "play camp" therapy 3 days a week in an attempt to get them to be as high-functioning as possible, and an over-40 guy whose significant other seemed to be constantly in the hospital for various serious ailments. So on our team, people who used lots of insurance were disproportionately kept, not dismissed.
That said, the guy with no health problems who was laid off looked like he might have some (he ran 10Ks and Beat the Bridge but was overweight albeit not to the degree of the older diabetics), so that might have been a factor if people relied on publicly observable data rather than looking at insurance records, which might be a no-no.
but I think it's worth reading because of the description of the product teams, which are led by engineers, rather than MBA's or the like
I have heard this about Apple too.
If you tell most people at Microsoft that products should be designed by devs/engineers, you will be laughed out of the room.
A commonly heard insult about a product at Microsoft is "did a dev design that?"
Just a sign of how backwards we are. The devs are the only employees who have a truly intimate understanding of how the products work and they (we) basically aren't allowed to have any input on how users interact with said products. Truly a shame.
Apple products are extremely easy to use but most people overlook that they are also extremely technical and that form follows function. Look at something like "About this Mac" or "Disk Utility" or the networking control panel. Definitely power user stuff designed by devs, but still well-thought-out and pleasant to use.
Lettermans top ten ways to increase stock price
10. Stop international development
9. Cut free soda
8. Cut morale budget by 70%
7. Eliminate MSPOLL
6. Cut HR/Legal by 70%
5. Start medical co-pay
4. Cut partner payout by 80%
3. Fire MSR
2. Cap PM level at L64
1. Replace the Board
It's depressing and heart-wrenching to read the comments here. I worked at MSFT for 8 years, eventually just lost the motivation after seeing my fair share of in fights, unfairness and plain stupidity, and was managed out. I did have two Gold Stars, a super successful BillG review and 4.0 (old scale) for many years. But one day, I did decide to take it easy and let things work out. I don't feel bitter. But the corporate management and the HR did disappoint me. And I've seen outright bullying behavior when I collaborated with a few product groups. Talking about people born into lower or plain middle class, with dubious degrees, trying to out-live their upbringing and resort to lying and bullying when things don't go their way.
Leaving MSFT behind was the best thing that ever happened to my life, second only to leaving Princeton (another shitty place with asshole overachievers). I will never come back to MSFT to work. For those who are depressed while working at MS, for whatever reason, I'd say be courageous and your life will not be the same.
I give MSFT another 10 years before it slowly implodes.
The management at MSFT is mediocre best. This is not to say that the engineering force is all that great. I'd give most devs here a B- grade in terms of ability, talent and seriousness. I'll give them a C- for maturity. So the devs deserve the type of managers they have. No accident here.
I did occasionally wish that I had taken up the Google offer 10 years ago. 50,000 options is a lot of money to a lot of people. But I've come to a point in my life that money doesn't mean much any more. I hope a lot of bitter people learn something from this. One must reconcile with himself and his maker at some point in his life. Do it soon and you'll be happy.
Good luck to you all. I'm waiting for the company to implode so that I can buy a modest house in this area. Patience is golden. Best luck to you.
To the level 64 poster that divulged your salary and stock, I call BS. I don't believe a level 64 can be granted this much stock over 4 years, even with exceeded ratings...
I always used to wonder why BillG elected Ballmer to suceed him.
Here is my take. This happened during the day and time when strategy was important to business ABOVE ANYTHING ELSE. However, things have changed recently. Companies lead by high-flying non-technical MBA's whose path to glory was takeover and mergers are going down every day.
Microsoft is not going anywhere till a technical person starts driving the scene.
"Holy crap! Even after a decade of late nights and weeks.. several promotions.. do you realize you easily make over 3X what I do, not even counting the stock. I work 12 hour days six days a week plus holidays and RAS year after year. Still, I have to fight every year just to get 80 grand and get a basic cost of living adjustment!"
And why are you still here?
Kind of like the guy who hangs out with the hot chick thinking some day she'll realize he's the one, not realizing that if was going to happen it already would have.
This blog is pathetic. To be fair it is mostly due to the comments and not the posts. I see a bunch of bitter comments about all the things that are wrong with Microsoft. When someone writes a comment about how they, as an employee care about the company or believe in the company, they get trashed. May I suggest that if you have nothing better to do but complain and trash your fellow employees, who actually want to do good or even great things then take a look in the mirror.
How dare you interrupt the mob mentality with common sense.
3. Fire MSR
Before firing MSR; it is wise to fire the various labs that are wasting Microsoft money.
To the level 64 poster that divulged your salary and stock, I call BS. I don't believe a level 64 can be granted this much stock over 4 years, even with exceeded ratings...
In my experience (level 64 for 1 year) these numbers are about right for someone with the performance numbers he is describing. 4 straight years of e/20 at level 64, he should be pushing north of $300k easily as the stock awards start to go non-linear around that level.
Someone said: "Actually, a few days ago I saw the demo booths of the WP7 phones at the annual Product Fair. Let's just say I wasn't exactly impressed: Flash support? nope. Connect to Wi-Fi? wasn't working. Connect a Bluetooth headset? Adobe Reader? Several times I would select an item or app to start and would get a lingering black screen of nothing. The overall fit and finish is just not there dude, and as you said it's AUGUST. Isn't RTM in 3 months?"
Great, can I have your phone when you get it, then? You certainly wouldn't want to use a phone that has all the problems you called out.
"If WM7 was supposed to be a "game changer" and bring Microsoft "back into the fight" then IMO that just isn't going to happen. And really, did anyone expect it to?"
I do. Not because WP7 is a great product, but because the VP help every MS employee to write app and sell it.
If he provide 20% free time to all employee like Google does, I will have even more fate.
I truly believe if we leave out all the manager in MS, we can turn any medicore product to gold.
How dare you interrupt the mob mentality with common sense.
The Kin - brought you by Microsoft executives' version of "common sense" and the letters F A I L.
This blog is pathetic. To be fair it is mostly due to the comments and not the posts. I see a bunch of bitter comments about all the things that are wrong with Microsoft. When someone writes a comment about how they, as an employee care about the company or believe in the company, they get trashed. May I suggest that if you have nothing better to do but complain and trash your fellow employees, who actually want to do good or even great things then take a look in the mirror.
How dare you interrupt the mob mentality with common sense.
It might seems to be cribbing ground but then MS being such a giant how do we know which are good team, what is going wrong, how do we push up change by giving this feedback (try giving feedback to manager/skip and you will be joining the U/10 very soon). Personally reading this blog and getting other feedback i took decision of not joining MSIT India.
As always everything need not be true in the comments. We all believe that we are right and rest of the world is either wrong or in sync with our views. All those managers who are breeding nepotism and shamelessly giving everythng to their favs will be congratulating themselves every night of making MS a great place by identifying and rewarding great talents!!!
That said, the guy with no health problems who was laid off looked like he might have some (he ran 10Ks and Beat the Bridge but was overweight albeit not to the degree of the older diabetics), so that might have been a factor if people relied on publicly observable data rather than looking at insurance records, which might be a no-no.
If your illness affects your work performance to a degree that you require what they call an "accommodation" from Microsoft, they get a peek behind the curtain at your health records when your doctor has to justify the accommodation.
Otherwise, like you said, it is most likely based upon what they see - a fat old guy who doesn't stay as late as younger employees and someone with whom they have little in common.
Flash support? nope. Connect to Wi-Fi? wasn't working. Connect a Bluetooth headset? Adobe Reader? Several times I would select an item or app to start and would get a lingering black screen of nothing. The overall fit and finish is just not there dude, and as you said it's AUGUST. Isn't RTM in 3 months?
>>What's shocking is that the competitors' phones are out there right now to disect and study. Yet the WM7 phone is not even as good as say, an iPhone 3G.
If WM7 was supposed to be a "game changer" and bring Microsoft "back into the fight" then IMO that just isn't going to happen. And really, did anyone expect it to?<<
Yeah, I'm gonna have to call bullshit on this post. Why is it that your "review" is the exact opposite of the majority of reviews on the web from tech journalists to normal users?
""Holy crap! Even after a decade of late nights and weeks.. several promotions.. do you realize you easily make over 3X what I do, not even counting the stock. I work 12 hour days six days a week plus holidays and RAS year after year. Still, I have to fight every year just to get 80 grand and get a basic cost of living adjustment!"
So get yourself a better job, duh... cuz the one you have now sounds like it sucks.
To Anonymous :Monday, August 02, 2010 8:38:00 PM
Thanx for the reply :) I doubt if I will pick up enough courage to go to HR though :)
Your post reminds me of one scenario where HR runs credit score (almost every year or two). This happens if one holds a corporate credit card. :(
Anyone know when each MS employee can get the free WM7 promised?
1+
Can someone explain what he is saying? Is he saying the slate is going to run Windows, or is it going to run Windows Phone? If it is going to run Windows Phone, doesn't it run on ARM and not Intel? The journalist implies he means Windows, not Windows Phone. But it didn't sound like that from reading Balmer's transcript.
He appeared to say Windows and Intel only. Not WP7 or another flavor of CE. No ARM. That’s actually more limited than previous, where CE and ARM seemed to be part of the picture. You're not alone in finding it difficult to follow. One analyst the next day summarized it as "a strong tablet/iPad response is still lacking, in our view." Many are now speculating that MS won’t have any viable response to iPad or the coming Android slates until at least first quarter of 2011 or later. This is like mobile all over again. Only this time failure is going to cut into the heart of the company and earnings. This is probably Ballmer's last mistake, but probably the one with the most negative consequences for MS’s future.
Good luck to you all. I'm waiting for the company to implode so that I can buy a modest house in this area. Patience is golden. Best luck to you.
------------------
Good luck to YOU: Hope you are in very good health and not too old. Thanks to some stellar and happy (surprise surprise) employees, this company ain't imploding in the time frame you have in mind.
Please, for those of you who will start with: "yet another delusional happy employee.. you don't even know you are imploding..," get a life and stop downloading your life frustations on the rest of us.
And again, Microsoft is skating to where the puck was, not where it will be:
Android tops BlackBerry, iPhone grows in US smartphone OS share
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/10/08/04/android_tops_blackberry_iphone_grows_in_us_smartphone_os_share.html
"Nick Eaton from the Seattle P.I. reported that Steve Ballmer, at Microsoft's Financial Analyst Meeting,:
a) assured analysts that the stock price is important to him."
Yeah, how could they ever have gotten the impression that it wasn't? /Sarcasm.
FAM failed. Analysts are more convinced than ever that MS is poorly positioned for the future and that inroads by competitors in the cash cows will start showing up clearly in MS’s financials in the next few quarters. With iPad continuing to sell like hotcakes and Android tablets coming, MS should easily fall into the teens by next year, never to return above $20. Ballmer gets fired by then, but like most things MS it’s too little, too late.
For frack's sake, the whole practice of ranking employees based on their "future potential" is age discrimination codified: obviously, the younger you are, the more time available for your wonderful career and therefore the greater your "potential;" and, of course, the OLDER you are, the sooner you're likely to retire -- a "potential-limiting" factor if ever there was one...
MS is aware of the potential for age discrimination and most likely mitigating by making sure that % from protected classes in 10% not too high. But that might not be good enough, if distribution along the age curve does not align (i.e. percent of 10%ers increase relative to percent at specific ages (i.e higher percent ranked 10% at age 45 than at age 40). So, even if less than 50% of the 10%s are in protected class, (median age for MS employee is 37.6), if age is a determining factor in any way, it is still age discrimination.
This blog is pathetic. To be fair it is mostly due to the comments and not the posts. I see a bunch of bitter comments about all the things that are wrong with Microsoft. When someone writes a comment about how they, as an employee care about the company or believe in the company, they get trashed. May I suggest that if you have nothing better to do but complain and trash your fellow employees, who actually want to do good or even great things then take a look in the mirror.
The posters here who complain care at least as much about the company as anyone else, if not more.
We see that Microsoft has the potential to be a great company and are [extremely] frustrated by its missteps. Otherwise we wouldn't spend time writing all these posts.
I would suggest that if you're happy with the company the way it is, that doesn't mean you're better than the whiners. It means you're complacent, or not very observant, or not good at thinking of ways to improve things.
And I think it’s fair to say that Microsoft’s tablet troubles are indicative of the larger problems that are haunting today’s Microsoft — similar teams competing for resources, minimal collaboration between similar projects, and not enough vision from the top to get everyone pushing in the same direction.
What’s puzzling is that Ballmer and the Microsoft board of directors haven’t come under greater fire for this lack of product focus, and for the misguided strategies that have led to Microsoft falling so far behind in the mobile computing race, which will likely end up spreading to far more people around the globe than the PC revolution.
This failure is a direct consequence of Microsoft putting an accountant in the CEO position to succeed Bill Gates. Steve Ballmer has done an excellent job of maximizing Microsoft’s profits and milking as much money as possible out of consumers and businesses for Microsoft products — primarily Windows and Office. But, Ballmer has done little to propel the company forward technologically or strategically.
That’s why Wall Street has continued to bet against Microsoft. The stock market is a barometer of the expectations of a company’s future success. Microsoft’s stock price has hovered in virtually the same place for a decade because Ballmer’s leadership has given the market no reason to bet on Microsoft’s future.
When you hear Ballmer speak, the stuff he gets most excited is things like explaining that Microsoft now has eight separate billion dollar businesses. Ballmer would make a great CFO or COO/President of Microsoft. He’d also be a great CEO of a mature public company trying to maximize its profits in order to produce a dividend for its shareholders.
However, Microsoft’s top dog needs to be a product leader. If you look at all of today’s successful tech companies, they almost all have a product visionary at or near the top of the org chart.
Microsoft still has plenty of strong assets and a ton of smart engineers in Redmond. But, where’s the leadership? What’s the company’s vision of the future of computing? At a time when mobility is about to power the next great wave of expansion in the technology industry and bring the benefits of computing to hundreds of millions of new people, Microsoft is standing on the sidelines still trying to figure out which play to run
Microsoft's misguided tablet strategy is the apotheosis of the company
<>What's shocking is that the competitors' phones are out there right now to disect and study. Yet the WM7 phone is not even as good as say, an iPhone 3G.
If WM7 was supposed to be a "game changer" and bring Microsoft "back into the fight" then IMO that just isn't going to happen. And really, did anyone expect it to?<<
Yeah, I'm gonna have to call bullshit on this post. Why is it that your "review" is the exact opposite of the majority of reviews on the web from tech journalists to normal users?>>
Did you even *go* to see the WP7 booth at the Product Fair at the Commons? Do you even know what I'm referring to? I held and was demoed two different phones. What have you seen? <> yeah that's what I thought.
I don't even know what is up with the WP7 people at that demo booth:
They couldn't even answer questions (or wouldn't) about basic things like: how long is the battery life? Their excuse was "this is prototype hardware so we can't say". How the hell do you not have at least a ballpark figure 3 months before RTM? Any normal producut should be in the final stages of fit and finish and bugfix lockdown 3 months away from release - but they are so far away from that given what I saw at the Product Fair.
Neither of the 2 phones I saw/demoed were even connected to a real mobile network. WHO THE HELL DEMOS SMART PHONES WITHOUT NETWORK CONNECTIVITY???
3. Fire MSR
(Ex-MSFT) Please please fire those "useless" researchers. As a competitor, I am just waiting for these "jokers" and would love to hire many of them.
Seriously, do you have any idea what MSR brings to Microsoft? Just go to any academic conference and see how people think of Microsoft - and then see how they think of MSR. Don't go to PDC, TechReady, Mix, etc to see what grad students think!
MSR and researchers have their flaws and problems but compared to most PMs and leads in product groups, those problems are miniscule. And in terms of sheer intelligence, the researchers are quite amazing.
Of course, if most MSFT employees think that MSR is a waste of money and some of us competitors are waiting for these good-for-nothing researchers, please, please, do fire them - every one will be happy.
Pretty please?
Thanks to some stellar and happy (surprise surprise) employees, this company ain't imploding in the time frame you have in mind.
Yes, per Ballmer at FAM, nobody's asleep at the switch at Microsoft. Uh uhh, we're on top of our game. Everything's coming up roses here.
Is there anybody posting on this blog that earned a 10% at one time in Microsoft (or knows somebody) and was was later hired by another group in Microsoft?
Yes, I know someone who was A/10% on their last review, was hired in a different group by a great manager for a role that was more closely matching his skills.... They were both laid off a few months later. Once a 10% you are doomed and so are those around you who bet on you. In fact, in this climate this scenario becomes a trap, and the GMs will use it to target their hiring managers and put them on the layoff list!
Is WP7 hiring? Yes, no - please be direct. It can use some serious help!!!
At Health Solutions Group the MSPOLL results have been going down for 3 years in a row. Each year worse than the previous one.
No leadership and therefore no career growth for ICs. Management favorites always do well.
This is a totally dysfunctional organization.
QUOTE from Anonymous @ Wednesday, August 04, 2010 11:59:00 AM
Good luck to YOU: Hope you are in very good health and not too old. Thanks to some stellar and happy (surprise surprise) employees, this company ain't imploding in the time frame you have in mind.
Please, for those of you who will start with: "yet another delusional happy employee.. you don't even know you are imploding..," get a life and stop downloading your life frustations on the rest of us.
--------------------------------
"Thanks to some stellar and happy employees." But not you, the HR or the partner manager. An intelligent human being would never call himself an employee. It's a degrading term. Only arrogant managers, especially HRs, use this term. It's so corporate, so "professional" to the point of sickening.
Don't worry about my health. I'm young, fit and resourceful. I said no to 50,000 Google options 10 years ago and I can do that again and again. Just a few months ago, I turned down Goldman Sachs. Well, not exactly. I cancelled the final round interview at GS, 'cause I took an offer from a tiny wall-street boutique after talking to the founder for just one hour, after a Goldman Sachs interview that went way over time.
Listen asshole, good people can find great jobs anywhere in this world. (I arrived in a new city without a job, without job leads, and without a place to stay. It took me less than a week to find a great apt and a job.) For me, it's a matter if I really want the job and whether I like the people. For the last few months, I've been working 10-12 hours every day, because I like the work. I can't say the same thing about working at Microsoft today.
My integrity, my self esteem and my disdain for low-grade people trying to improve their lots using questionable tactics have always led me to a life of freedom as opposed to sinking with these skanks (including you).
Let's be fair, there are some very good people at Microsoft. I have worked with a few of them. But let's also face it: The majority of the company are mediocre. A lot of these good people don't realize how much better their positions can improve once they leave MS and the mediocrity behind.
I have also seen a lot of people leave and then come back after a short stint outside. You know, do what's best for you. But the ones I know who did such a tour tend to be the average-to-above-average type. People with true courage and brilliance don't ever look back once they decide to embark on a new career.
>I have heard this about Apple too.
>
>A commonly heard insult about a >product at Microsoft is "did a >dev design that?"
>
>Just a sign of how backwards we >are. The devs are the only >employees who have a truly >intimate understanding of how the >products work and they (we) >basically aren't allowed to have >any input on how users interact >with said products. Truly a shame.
Devs aren't designers. Apple is RUN by designers NOT engineers (witness recent antenna-gate and trickling stories that engineering tried to raise concern pre-ship but where shot down by Ives and crew). Just because you know how an app works doesn't mean you have some magical ability to design UI and UX; in fact the entire PC eco- system is pretty much an existence proof that you don't. Most app UX experiences suck massive balls, Apple is held up as some paragon of design but really it is only amazing compared to the generally low level of shit out there (including Microsoft and Google). Have you even read a book on design? Do you have any idea how to go about making a usable, enjoyable interaction experience? Or are you a 'let's slap a menu/toolbar/context menu on it' type of guy and think that represents a cutting edge interactive experience? The arrogance of most software engineers is eclipsed only by the sheer and utter massive fail of design of all products 'designed' by engineers.
I think everyone posting negative comments about their manager needs to also evaluate his own social skills. Maybe improving those is the key to success at MS (or any other company for that matter). For example if you manager hates you, have you tried to find out why? I have never worked for a manager that hates me, and I don’t think this is just pure luck. The simple truth is that your ability to function as a member of a tribe are just as important now as they were at any time during the last 500,000 years. And they are now and always have been more important than your technical or hunting skills.
"It seems like a lot of employees getting laid off or forced out (i.e. 10 percenters) are 40 years old or older. 40 and over is a protected class. I would expect lawsuits."
I was just at a DBM event. DBM is the outsourcing service that Microsoft provides to laid off employees. Of the 30+ people in the room, I think I was the second yougest at mid-forties.
Sometimes, when it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it may just be a duck. Yeah, I would expect a lawsuit, and a well publicized one, in the not too distant future.
MS HR can game the system all it wants by playing the percentage game (x% of people over 40 gets a U10 rating, blah, blah, blah). Sooner or later, someone is going to catch on to the game. And you can tell me that HR and LCA all work for the MS side, don't forget, they also work in the Microsoft culture. Namely, "I am a SVP of so-and-so, so tell me what I want and tell me how to do it, or you will get a U10 next year." Gee, you think you'll get sound advice in that environment?
Well, well, well! What do we have here, but a timely news article! Look what's abounding at Google.
Google ordered to defend against age bias lawsuit
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN0516195820100805
Thanks to some stellar and happy (surprise surprise) employees, this company ain't imploding in the time frame you have in mind.
Microsoft is a large company. I know there are teams and swathes of employees who are happy working at MSFT. Try to see the whole picture across all of MSFT, not just your own little slice. There are also many teams (even Divisions) and swathes of employees who are miserable, confused and going nowhere.
I had several years at MSFT where I was deliriously happy, loved the work and loved the company. By the time I left in 2009, I was in a building on Campus full of unhappy employees. About the only "happy" ones were the GMs and Partners.
MSFT probably won't "implode", it will just become steadily more irrelevant as a tech giant. Eventually selling Windows and Office to corporate customers, as a variety of legacy software. Just like people still buy VMS software from DEC^H^H^H HP.
Up until last year, I was a strong A/70 guy with over ten years under my belt. I got stuck with a U/10 by a weak and ineffectual manager last year. My review was all "there is the perception that...". HR was totally useless. I'm told that although I've done well this year, my review will send a strong message. I.E. here comes another U/10. It pisses me off that my jack hole of a manager has fucked my career. The company has no interest in seeing people succeed nor work their way out of a U/10. This is not how you treat people nor is it living our corporate values. I agree with others that HR would rather have you quit--my HR person pretty much told me to leave. MS is a broken company.
>that my jack hole of a manager has fucked my career
Correction, your career AT MICROSOFT. Microsoft is not the only, or even the best tech employer. Hell, with the hours some groups expect you to put in you may as well join a real start-up, at least that way you also get the prospect of reward with the sweat, not just a kick in the head come review time while the hordes of incompetent middle management spin their nothing or turd-like output into strings of magical gold. The day of reckoning is coming for Microsoft in the tech world, the ground work is already laid and the only people that can't see it are the ones who put the blinders on themselves. Wait for the massive ball of fail that will be Win8. The HiPo visionaries have really taken over that project, and it is shaping up in fine fail form.
>> Please please fire those "useless" researchers.
>> As a competitor, I am just waiting for these
>> "jokers" and would love to hire many of them.
I think this is MSR's raison d'être - to make sure all those freakishly smart folks don't end up elsewhere, and to get them to file their couple of non-trivial patents a year (some file far more than that). Now, this is not to say that everyone at MSR is a genius, but I've known some people there who clearly are. I'm also certain that a good 70% of MSR researchers wouldn't even need an interview to get a job at Google.
The arrogance of most software engineers is eclipsed only by the sheer and utter massive fail of design of all products 'designed' by engineers.
Of course not all engineers are good designers. Not all engineers are even good engineers. And not all designers are good designers either. You talk about how much crap UI is designed by engineers, let's talk about how many crap web sites there are out there made by "designers."
Ideally you want to hire engineers who have a good sense of design--not that they can do the artwork themselves, but they should be able to "design" good user experiences.
From my understanding, Apple hires these sorts of engineers and gives them the appropriate level of authority, whereas Microsoft is run by designers who can barely use a computer other than for Photoshop and PMs who don't seem to have ANY marketable skills.
The result is, for example, the Network control panel in OS X. Very technical, but clearly laid out and pleasant to use for advanced users. Form following function. Versus the networking UI in Windows, filled with fruity pictures of park benches and the planet Earth and other bulls***, with captions and messages written in incomprehensible dumbed-down "plain English" which is worthless to beginners and advanced users alike. Only non-technical designers would think this sort of nonsense is a good idea. And which OS gets lauded for usability? Hint: not the one with the park benches.
Have you even read a book on design? Do you have any idea how to go about making a usable, enjoyable interaction experience? Or are you a 'let's slap a menu/toolbar/context menu on it' type of guy and think that represents a cutting edge interactive experience?
Sorry, forgot about this part. In fact I have designed (redesigned, really) quite a bit of UI that's been very successful in terms of measurable, objective statistics, i.e., reduced calls to customer support and increased product usage and usage of key features.
The key to this was not to create some "cutting edge interactive experience" crap or make the graphics cooler looking, but to use old-fashioned things like "menus" and "toolbars" and to lay them out intelligently.
Since you are making yourself out to be a design expert, can you say, categorically, that your designs have maximized user confidence and satisfaction and success? Because most of the designers I know at Microsoft can't.
>>Did you even *go* to see the WP7 booth at the Product Fair at the Commons? Do you even know what I'm referring to? I held and was demoed two different phones. What have you seen? <> yeah that's what I thought.<<
Don't be a dumbass. There are tons of recent WP7 demos all over the web as we speak. There are also tons of reviews from people with demo handsets. You're sitting here asking people to take your "review" as gospel and ignore everyone elses.
Your arrogance is pretty impressive.
Google ordered to defend against age bias lawsuit
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN0516195820100805
Aha, I'd wondered if that had fallen off into the ether(nets). Reid gets his day in court after all. Good, because it didn't pass the sniff test to me that a well-respected engineer who's done that much for the industry would risk tarnishing his name with a frivolous complaint.
Now about that talk of Microsoft age discrimination class action. What may have caused some to exercise restraint regarding age discrimination claims is not the thought that they're the only one who experienced it, but their reasoning that Microsoft wouldn't be so careless or stupid as to fall into that trap and that therefore a claim is a waste of time.
Start with the assumption HR ran the numbers and Microsoft believes they're a sufficient defense against any age discrimination claims. That may or may not be true, but let's give them the benefit of the doubt and assume it is.
Now. Have you ever fudged a result by removing edge cases you didn't want to consider, or used a monthly average instead of a weekly average to smooth out uneven performance numbers, or known of someone doing something similar? To control one's results, control the input data used to calculate them.
HR's numbers could be both true and misleading at the same time.
Suppose when you factor in all layoffs that took place last year, the numbers look fairly reasonably distributed across younger and older employees. Suppose those are the numbers Microsoft is certain it can defend itself with.
But wait. Broadly speaking, people landed in the layoff bucket two distinct ways. Some people landed there due to being on a team that was eliminated in toto. Others landed there due to being singled out in some way. For many of those singled out, it wasn't the case that their work was no longer required. It was reassigned to other remaining staff, not eliminated.
A common thread among most of the over-40 layoff reports posted here is that those employees were singled out from their teams for some reason, rather than being a member of a team that was cut entirely.
Personal observation: The whole teams I knew that were RIF'ed, tended to be in divisions or departments where employee ages tended to skew much lower than the Microsoft average of around 37. E&D, cough.
The conjecture: remove from the calculation those situations in which it can be argued that people were not individually targeted because the entire team was RIF'ed, and the distribution of ages of those laid off will be statistically more concerning.
Maybe Microsoft is relying on no one thinking to do that calculation /* opppps */, or on their ability to convince the court to disregard it and look only at total layoff figures.
The conjecture: remove from the calculation those situations in which it can be argued that people were not individually targeted because the entire team was RIF'ed, and the distribution of ages of those laid off will be statistically more concerning.
MS might argue that those being laid off individually were "fired for underperformance, not laid off."
I'm sure HR would far rather people just quit and go away quietly, but there will be ones who refuse to do so, and will keep working, keep trying valiantly to bring their reviews up, because very occasionally it can be done even if the number who manage it is small. So, let's say somebody has had 1 or 2 U/10 reviews, and they're pouring their heart into trying to bring that up - 10-12 hour days, trying valiantly to prove themselves to a new manager.
Suppose, then, that this fails: suppose the person's dismissal is already somewhere in the pipeline and it doesn't matter how hard they try, they will not be permitted to succeed. They are "let go". Is this a layoff? Or is it for "cause"?
And what if that person, and many people like him (or her) just happens to be over 40? Is it age discrimination, or for cause? The trail of reviews would seem to show cause. The statistics on age might disagree.
Well?
"And I think it’s fair to say that Microsoft’s tablet troubles..."
That entire section that you quoted is the single best summary I've seen on MS.
"My integrity, my self esteem and my disdain for low-grade people trying to improve their lots using questionable tactics have always led me to a life of freedom as opposed to sinking with these skanks (including you)."
Yeah, you sound like a real asset to any organization. My guess is that every time you leave an employer, which is probably frequently, the biggest celebration isn’t your going away party but the one your former coworkers have after that.
"Microsoft’s stock price has hovered in virtually the same place for a decade because Ballmer’s leadership has given the market no reason to bet on Microsoft’s future"
Exactly. In fact, he's given them every reason to bet against MS's future and on the future of leading competitors instead.
HP, please take KT
FYI, from the WSJ, a Former HP Employee and Shareholder wrote on Hurd's resignation:
...This is a sad day for HP’s shareholders but also a great day for them as well.
Mark has done an excellent job of reducing the fat and leading the company to be more competitive. From a business perspective, it is rational and reasonable to cut jobs and to find cheaper talents overseas.
However, Mark also decreases HP’s long-term vitality with his obsession on short-term cost, his lack of effort in investing for long-term growth, and his complete lack of focus of making HP the desirable and attractive place to work. The talents in the Bay Area would choose Google, Cisco, … and many other firms before settling for HP.
While Mark is good at turning around HP, he is also good of enriching himself and his immediate lieutenants to the point that destroys the HP culture that espouses the “US” mentality. There is no US. There is the management that gets huge bonuses and there are the lowly employees who have job cuts and no raises. This lack of unity in spirit drives “what’s in it for me mentality”. Instead of doing whatever I can for HP, many would choose to do just enough. Many know that the only recipients are the management and execs who have little concern about them.
It is sad that the great operational guru Mark Hurd manages to destroy the HP culture in just 5 short years. Most of the current HP execs would likely continue that trend as they have tasted the enormous personal benefits of the Mark’s approach of enriching the executives and of treating most employees as replaceable nuts and bolts rather than important assets to be kept.
I am not a bitter employee as I was sufficiently rewarded for my contributions — not as much if based on what the execs get for their contribution but sufficient. I left HP on my own free will. I am not a bitter shareholder. I sold nearly all of my shares accumulated for the last 10-20 years a few months back. I am just saddened of the great company culture destroyed.
However, that is part of life. Some things are created and some are destroyed...
Sound familiar?
With Mark Hurd having resigned from HP, MSFT should hire him to replace Ballmer. He will whip this discombobulated company into shape.
>Since you are making yourself out to be a design expert, can you say, categorically, that your designs have maximized user confidence and satisfaction and success? Because most of the designers I know at Microsoft can't.
I made myself out to be a design expert by pointing out that 99% of engineers can't design for dick yet probably 100% of that group think they can? Interesting. I am actually an engineer if you must know, but one that recognizes that good design is actually hard work, and 99% of people that think they have the talent don't. We can certainly talk about crap websites designed by designers, there are more than a few, but let's not forget crap web sites designed by engineers as well, I mean have you ever seen 95% of MS properties? They look like absolute ass. Like their sole goal in life is to shove one more link into what little white space remains. Engineers tend to look down on all other disciplines as something they could easily accomplish with a modicum of effort, because they are such unparalleled geniuses. These are the same ones whose code looks like it was 'designed' at a spaghetti factory and can't even choose clothes that look like they are from this decade. I can't comment on your mad design skillz, perhaps you have them, perhaps you don't. My comment was on the general statement that engineers should be more involved in UI/UX decisions. In my experience with my kind, no, no we should not. Nerds have an almost pathological inability to view things from the perspectives of people without their level of technical expertise (read 95% of the rest of the world). This tends to translate into designs that are chock full of 'features' and 'options' and knobs and dials, because they assume everyone in the world wants to spend their free time tweaking every ridiculous detail of the apps they use. News flash: They don't. They want shit that works, and in most cases works without me having to find/tweak 27 different knobs and settings. I never suggested 'cutting edge UI' (though if you think menus/toolbars are the ideal arrangement for all situations...well you are just stuck in a reality based on what is and has been), but please do point me to one good UI designed by engineers. If you claim Apple's UI is designed by engineers please back it up with proof. I know a few engineers and designers that work at Apple, none of the engineers have ever claimed to do UI design and none of the designers have ever said a dev did any of the UI design. I am sure every company has some engineers that can do design, it isn't an impossible scenario, but I think the number of engineers who think they can do design FAR exceeds the number that actually can. Just like 80% of drivers are 'above average' when asked to rate their own abilities (see also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Wobegon_effect)
>Since you are making yourself out to be a design expert, can you say, categorically, that your designs have maximized user confidence and satisfaction and success? Because most of the designers I know at Microsoft can't.
Never made myself out to be a design expert, I am actually an engineer. I just understand that there is more to good design than thinking you can do it. Engineers as a whole tend to look down on all other disciplines thinking they could 'do that' with a modicum of effort as they are unparalleled geniuses. See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Wobegon_effect
My original claim was basically most engineers can't design for dick, there are lots of crappy web sites from 'designers' but there are as many if not more crappy websites from engineers (have you looked at ANY MS owned property that caters to a technical audience and is thus likely 'designed' by engineering? They all are epic examples of pure fail). If we let engineers at the company design all UI/UX we would be so fail in the market I can't even imagine it. Using your logic open source should have the BEST UI/UX since it is all nerds making it. Do they? If not explain. If so please point out such marvels of design so I can learn from them.
“Start spreading the news”: the future of Jimmy and IronRuby
However, a year ago the team shrunk by half and our agility was severely limited. I’m omitting the internal reasons for this, as they are the typical big-company middle-management issues every software developer has. In short, the team is now very limited to do anything new, which is why the Visual Studio support for IronPython took so long. IronRuby’s IDE support in Visual Studio hasn’t been released yet for the same reasons. While this is just one example, many other roadblocks have cropped up that made my job not enjoyable anymore.
Overall, I see a serious lack of commitment to IronRuby, and dynamic language on .NET in general. At the time of my leaving Tomas and myself were the only Microsoft employees working on IronRuby.
>Did you even *go* to see the WP7 booth at the Product Fair at the Commons? Do you even know what I'm referring to?
Is this the PM from Office that got to be partner by adding menu items to excel?
I've lost all faith in the performance review process at Microsoft, and my management.
I routinely interact with far higher level peers and managers that seriously don't inspire or impress me. Maybe they came in at a higher level, or came from a team with bigger promotion budget, or were friends with the right person, or buried themselves in their office so no one had anything bad to say, or have the most impact at stack rankings, or whatever.
The enabler is management- they are sucking the life out of this company. Finding a good leader at Microsoft is akin to striking it rich at the Casino. Most managers here don't seem to appreciate or know the difference between good work, and bad work, and hard work, or really much less care. Good ideas welcome, but bad ideas/designs are just as good.
Goggles on. The future of Windows and Office is a slow death. Microsoft history is going to read a lot like Nintendo down the street- too little too late.
Hindsight is 20/20 - it won't be any one thing which knocks Microsoft down, it will be all these little things (ineffective managers, culture, review system, changing business, technology, etc.. ) that will cause the implosion.
The best career strategy I've seen at Microsoft: an exit strategy. I have never heard of a good ending to a death march.
Kind of like the guy who hangs out with the hot chick thinking some day she'll realize he's the one, not realizing that if was going to happen it already would have.
-----------
Did some one not get a karaoke set when they were younger?
This mantality is part of the problem, not the solution. Not everyone needs to have a type A personality, nor can be or wants to be a rising star and beat the curve.
A lot of people you've never heard of without big titles perform important and neccessary roles, and have more then carried their weight.
I think employees want team work, respect, and appreciation within their groups. What the Microsoft way gives them is divisiveness, conflict, and negativity.
The company is big enough that employees should be able to find their niche and excel. It is unfortunate that the internal transfer process and middle management culture has been left broken, leaving so many talented individuals stranded in unrewarding roles in dysfunctional organizations.
Microsoft is not the only, or even the best tech employer.
Microsoft is not even in the top 10 anymore for tech. As general employers go they have slipped to 86th last I checked. It just gets worse every year.
If WM7 was supposed to be a "game changer" and bring Microsoft "back into the fight" then IMO that just isn't going to happen. And really, did anyone expect it to?
You know, I was going to drink the kool-aid here, but Steve Ballmer did a belly flop in the punch bowl and now there is none left for the rest of us.
Most of the people I know who got laid off or were put on the 10% list were in their 40's. One was in his late 30's and it has nothing to do with their performances.
I have several circles of friends in the BG and sales group so I think my sample size is representative.
I think there is a great chance that a class action suit will prevail or a large settlement.
Some enterprising law firm is probably already looking this!
The only thing Ballmer has done with any consistency is be wrong. Search, the cloud, and virtualization were all ignored for years, letting others build lucrative leadership positions and forcing MS to now spend and lose billions in a vain attempt to catch up. He was also wrong about Salesforce.com and their business model, Zune’s chances, iPhone’s appeal (big time), and iPad (also big time).
Technology moves fast, and even leaders can be forgiven for missing one or two trends over the course of a decade. But Ballmer has missed almost every one. And in all cases rather than figuring out the mistake early and responding quickly, MS has often taken 2-3 years or more just to respond to a competitor’s first product (in virtualization it was almost ten). In the only two areas that Ballmer managed not to miss and actually got in early, smartphones and tablets, MS’s position has been blown away by Apple, a recent entrant.
When I hear Ballmer or Turner bragging about a couple of win backs against Google apps, or how Dynamics CRM finally grew at the market for once (i.e. half the rate of Salesforce), or what a great job MS has done against VMware in “just two years”, or that WP7 is going to be really competitive, all I see is excuses from a failed management team that should have dominated every one of those markets but instead were too blind and too incompetent.
Google ordered to defend against age bias lawsuit
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN0516195820100805
Having interviewed in their Kirkland office a few years back with my graying hair (age 37 at the time), I have no trouble believing the plaintiff. I have never felt so unwelcome anywhere I have interviewed (full disclosure: it was one of the 10% of times I didn't get an offer).
For frack's sake, the whole practice of ranking employees based on their "future potential" is age discrimination codified: obviously, the younger you are, the more time available for your wonderful career and therefore the greater your "potential;" and, of course, the OLDER you are, the sooner you're likely to retire -- a "potential-limiting" factor if ever there was one...
My manager says that stack ranking measures potential based on "visible impact" and "perception" and not on skills or past performance. It appears that there is no accounting for a person being in a group that has low visibility, or for a person who has skill levels higher than their peers, but is in a job where those skills are not able to be used.
The "visible impact" concept is supported by the "demonstrate" keyword in the contribution ranking descriptions, but the Limited Situation 2 description includes "Most likely to remain...". Likely is a statistical word implying probability, which is obviously influenced by age, If it turns out that the 10% Limited 2 assignment is distributed proportionately by age, there is probably not a case. Reading this blog, the 10% Limited II distribution seems skewed, but it is hard to believe that MS would make such a basic error as this, given the cost of a class action lawsuit and number of employees involved.
Has anybody else had the wonderful experience of getting promoted into into a higher calibration band (i.e. 64 -> 65) and then being promptly put into the 10% contribution ranking in the next review cycle? Is this typical?
http://bit.ly/a1tAN5
"I wonder if HP's search committee might still consider any Microsoft executives as a replacement for Hurd. Bob Muglia perhaps? Kevin Turner?"
Oh Please, Please, PLEASE!!!!
"I would write an app for an iPhone if I was going to write a mobile phone app in my spare time."
That would be a conflict of interest and not normally allowed. (You could be terminated for that.) Microsoft now has its own phone that apps can be written for and employees should only focus on making WP7 a success.
There may be exception, like writing a free app for Android that promoted bing search, but in general if you want to make some extra coin, you should only write apps for the WP7 if you are a Microsoft employee.
As for WP7, I work on Windows & my Director let me play with his at the coffee stand the other day for 10 minutes. As an iPhone user I like that it is different from what Apple or Google (w/droid) are doing. He knew I had an iPhone, not sure if that was just observation or something more...
I really liked wp7 & will kick the iPhone habit if the hardware is cool. He seemed to think the samsung he has was not final.
Who knew Ballmer was such a CareBear compared to Steve Jobs?
Roz Ho still employed.
iPhone 4 antenna exec gone.
Executive Leaves After iPhone Antenna Troubles
Mark Papermaster, the Apple executive in charge of hardware for the company’s flagship iPhone, has left the company in the wake of widely reported problems with the antenna of the recently introduced iPhone 4.
It is not clear if Mr. Papermaster was ousted or left on his own accord.
"How the hell do you not have at least a ballpark figure 3 months before RTM?"
If you don't know why, most likely you aren't authorized to know why.
Yes, there are battery figures, a strategy for PDFs, yadda, yadda, yadda, for the final devices (not the ones you saw at the fair). No, you're not going to find out what the answers until they're publically announced.
"How the hell do you not have at least a ballpark figure 3 months before RTM?"
How the hell did someone like you, who thinks nothing of disparaging another group’s product that is strategic to the company's future and in a public forum no less, get hired?
>> it was one of the 10% of times I didn't get an offer
That's normal for Google (not to reject people with gray hair, but to reject _almost everyone_). If anything, I see more diversity here in Seattle offices - quite a few graybeards, much higher percentage of female engineers (and more female leads, too).
The hiring process is downright depressing for the interviewers. As a candidate, you either need to be brilliant or you need to get very, very lucky, or both to get hired. I've interviewed quite a few people, and I the hire/no hire ratio is very low, which means interviewers are likely to do a dozen or more interviews before anyone gets an offer. And that's if they're lucky.
Which is why I find your story difficult to believe - if you did well on the loop, Google would pull all the stops to get you to join, because _hardly anyone does well_, and we need good people. No one cares if you're old or young - plenty of ex-Microsoft old-timers are doing just fine here.
I'm sure Microsoft would also gladly hire competent engineers irrespective of their age, simply because competent engineers are hard to find (Microsoft tends not to hold on to them once they're hired, though, but that's beside the point). Just do realize that your age or the duration of your career does not guarantee you a higher level. You have to have a reputation, and be able to support that reputation in an interview. Your Microsoft title means very little here. If you're an engineer (or an architect, or a researcher) and you're not good at coding, it is 100% certain that you will NOT get an offer.
My original claim was basically most engineers can't design for dick,
Let's approach this from a different angle. It's generally agreed that Apple has good design, and Microsoft bad. Having been on several MSFT engineering teams, I can tell you that the design of those products was dictated by "designers" and PMs. Both of said teams had little to no technical expertise, and the UIs they designed failed for reasons that were easily predicted by the engineering teams. There is no doubt in my mind that if the engineering teams were responsible for the UI, the result would be at least somewhat better than what we got from the "designers." So you tell me, if designers and PMs are super great at UI stuff, why do Microsoft products suck? Is it just bad luck?
Roz Ho still employed.
iPhone 4 antenna exec gone.
You must be new to Microsoft. At Microsoft, execs, partners, GMs are not held accountable for their failures. We had a round of layoffs and some day-to-day grunt did get the boot for KIN fiasco.
Microsoft is not even in the top 10 anymore for tech. As general employers go they have slipped to 86th last I checked. It just gets worse every year.
Microsoft is 51st.
Aside from that, most of the 100 aren't in the computer industry. You want to be a IT drone someplace else? Have fun with that.
>>Who knew Ballmer was such a CareBear compared to Steve Jobs?
Roz Ho still employed.
iPhone 4 antenna exec gone.<<
I find it comical that you make the assumption that Steve Jobs fired the guy. For all we know the guy might have left out of disgust at Steve Jobs refusal to listen to his RF engineers.
That Apple RDF never ceases to amaze me.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/mobile-phones/7928956/Hands-on-preview-Windows-Phone-7.html
Has anybody else had the wonderful experience of getting promoted into into a higher calibration band (i.e. 64 -> 65) and then being promptly put into the 10% contribution ranking in the next review cycle? Is this typical?
This seems to occur at all levels. You get promoted only to be told that now the competition is higher at your new level so you are under performing now. Thanks but no thanks.
I think it is their way to throttle careers in a way that fits within their operating budgets. At the end of the day, each team has X dollars allocated for promotion budget. The managers divide it up a they see fit based on their own subjective assessments of performance on a curve- right or wrong.
You could still be doing great work but now they need to get around to promoting the other guy they sidelined for two years and they will look at you again 'next time'.
My manager says that stack ranking measures potential based on "visible impact" and "perception" and not on skills or past performance.
-------
You should tell him that he approved your committments, he should be the one to take responsible for them.
A common problem at Microsoft is changing priorities. What he wanted you to do was probably very important to the team in October, but by July- not so much.
Never have I once seen a manager get the boot for wasting an employee's or even an entire team's time for six months on a dumb project.
It's always the engineers on the ground that pay the price for management's big-bets and bad ideas.
Microsoft still has plenty of strong assets and a ton of smart engineers in Redmond. But, where’s the leadership?
Mingling with Paris?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1300982/Cant-afford-super-yacht-No-problem-This-summer-stars-simply-hijacking-elses.html
What’s the company’s vision of the future of computing?
Windows 14 and Office 35? Personally I am rooting for clippy..
http://www.8164.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/clippy.jpg
"That would be a conflict of interest and not normally allowed. (You could be terminated for that.) Microsoft now has its own phone that apps can be written for and employees should only focus on making WP7 a success.
There may be exception, like writing a free app for Android that promoted bing search, but in general if you want to make some extra coin, you should only write apps for the WP7 if you are a Microsoft employee."
I don't think this is accurate, the moonlighting policy prevent you from working for competitor product so you cannot contribute to the open source development of Android but you can write an application that sells on Android or iPhone or any other platform as long as Microsoft does not produce the same application on that platform.
But in the end well are all employees at Will Microsoft does not need a reason to terminate any one :)
I would even rate Microsoft as high 86th. It's way outside of 100 and I agree that it's getting worse.
You are better working for any federal agencies or non-profits.
Non-profits are required to file Form 990. Check it out, people there make alot of money for doing something meaningful.
"Who knew Ballmer was such a CareBear compared to Steve Jobs?
Roz Ho still employed."
If Ballmer started firing people for failing wouldn't he be about a dozen failures ahead of Ho? He was also one of the two main executive sponsors of Project Pink, along with that other failboat leader Bach.
65) and then being promptly put into the 10% contribution ranking in the next review cycle? Is this typical?>
Not typical. Usually, the newly promoted is given a pass the first calibration. After all, your manager with the agreement of his manager and perhaps also your managers peers just backed and blessed you. A 10% right away makes them all look very bad.
I have seen a lot of folks have this happen the second cycle.
A lot of people here have been talking about Microsoft’s recent layoffs and the threat of being laid off if you are in the bottom 10%. However I think the math simply does not add up.
You see Microsoft has decided to stay under the WARN radar by laying off less than 500 employees each year (check the WARN website, none of this year’s layoffs show up). A major reason for this strategy is the Employ America Act. Microsoft is afraid that if this bill becomes a law, it will cause it to lose all its H1B employees within one year. Not that this bill has a chance of passing, but you never know, so better be safe by staying under the WARN radar.
So, what does less than 500 a year mean for the nearly 50,000 employees in Redmond? It means you have to be in the bottom 1% to get laid off. (Unless your entire group gets nuked, but it that case performance does not matter.) Bottom 1% - this is the bottom 10% of the bottom 10%! So please, even if you end up in the bottom 10% you have 90% chance of surviving.
Fascinating:
"Mr. Papermaster had lost the confidence of Mr. Jobs months ago and hasn't been part of the decision-making process for some time, these people said. They added that Mr. Papermaster didn't appear to have the type of creative thinking expected at Apple and wasn't used to Apple's corporate culture, where even senior executives are expected to keep on top of the smallest details of their areas of responsibility and often have to handle many tasks directly, as opposed to delegating them."
(emphasis mine)
iPhone Executive Is Out At Apple
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704268004575417572159585144.html
Where does 'Kim' come from? Is it an acronym? Or was there a famous person named Kim that got right-sized?
http://minimsft.blogspot.com/2006/11/no-so-limited-kim.html
The result is, for example, the Network control panel in OS X. Very technical, but clearly laid out and pleasant to use for advanced users. Form following function.
lmfao
Has anybody else had the wonderful experience of getting promoted into into a higher calibration band (i.e. 64 -> 65) and then being promptly put into the 10% contribution ranking in the next review cycle? Is this typical?
Happens all the time. 64 to 65 can sometimes be a death trap. When I hear employees pining for a promotion to a 65 I tell them to be careful for what they wish for. They need to understand the status of the other members of the 65+ pool they are looking to join. Unless there are some turds in that pool they might find themselves getting a "welcome to the new 65+ pool. Since you are the newest member and we can't give a 10% to a partner here is your 10%. Don't be offended. You asked for this promotion".
Hope you find a way out of the death trap.
>Seriously, do you have any idea what MSR brings to Microsoft? Just go to any academic conference and see how people think of Microsoft - and then see how they think of MSR
MSR needs a vision besides publishing papers. Researcher must be managed by PM group.
Thanks to some stellar and happy (surprise surprise) employees, this company ain't imploding in the time frame you have in mind.
---
Yes, per Ballmer at FAM, nobody's asleep at the switch at Microsoft. Uh uhh, we're on top of our game. Everything's coming up roses here.
====
How is your reply related to the original comment? The original poster believes that the company will implode in just a few years allowing him to buy depressed real estate; I called out his rather sophomoric statement.
Your irrelevant "roses" opinion added to a quote from Ballmer does not address the original point.
Did you even *go* to see the WP7 booth at the Product Fair at the Commons? Do you even know what I'm referring to? I held and was demoed two different phones. What have you seen? <> yeah that's what I thought.
Yes, those phones out there on display were demo hardware. None of the OEMs would ever like to have their yet-to-be-released/announced hardware out on display like that.
For safety and anti-spam sake, am sure the phones did not have cellular connectivity (anyone can dial 911 or harass someone from that "public phone").
I know the Bluetooth was disabled deliberately, for reasons I am not going to divulge on a public forum.
And as far as Wi-fi is concerned, looks like you've never ever demo'ed something over network?
Battery life is something is again, either not known yet (the final PCB design & casing do affect battery life) and also kept confidential by OEMs.
So before you bash WP7 at the fair, go try to think how business is done.
WP7 may not be an iPhone killer but it's definitely a game changer.
I am not a fanboy, i am just part of a team who has put in a lot of blood and sweat and are waiting for the sunny days to reap the harvest. We aren't in any illusion, trust me, we know WP7's shortcomings.. but we also know its strengths.
But not you, the HR or the partner manager. An intelligent human being would never call himself an employee. It's a degrading term...
I'm young, fit and resourceful. I said no to 50,000 Google options 10 years ago and I can do that again and again. Just a few months ago, I turned down Goldman Sachs. Well, not exactly. I cancelled the final round interview at GS, 'cause I took an offer from a tiny wall-street boutique after talking to the founder for just one hour, after a Goldman Sachs interview that went way over time.
Listen asshole, good people can find great jobs anywhere in this world. (I arrived in a new city without a job, without job leads, and without a place to stay. It took me less than a week to find a great apt and a job.)
=============
Before you hit the "post" button, you really should read your rant.
You want the company to die so you can buy depressed real estate. You do not want folks to think of themselves as employees. You call me as "asshole" for calling out your depraved, demented, sophomoric, narcisstic, "I am better than evryone else because I moved into a new city without a shirt on my back and in a week I had royal robes covering me" rant...
We may be drinking Microsoft kool-aid... you are drinking your own... if you are that smart why are you on this forum .. there is enough real estate you can buy without wishing the loss of livelihood for thousands of people - including contractors, vendors, and entire small-medium companies that depend upon the MS ecosystem.
You people don't care about anything or anyone - you are small minded, self-absorbed loons who are wishing evil for everyone associated with MS. There are companies imploding all around the world - just move again (and this time, you will already have clothes) and buy a good home.
Almost any fool can see and should have seen that the volumes and interest for iphone and android will create such a vibrant marketplace for those devices that WP7 will be DOA. Also, a long time ago, when the iPod came out, any fool could have seen that apple will make an iphone and the established winner in the "locked" music market will be hard to beat in the smartphone market. Instead of launching a zune phone, MS launched Zune (me too) and continued on with a disastrous WM program. Now iPad is the threat to Windows and then Office. MS will launch its "slate" too late and furthermore not address the iPad market. And so, Apple will continue to make money hand over fist while MS will make $10 for an OS for a slate that will eat into a $40 Windows laptop. Bad times are ahead due to wrong strategy people.
"Kind of like the guy who hangs out with the hot chick thinking some day she'll realize he's the one, not realizing that if was going to happen it already would have.
-----------
Did some one not get a karaoke set when they were younger?
This mantality is part of the problem, not the solution. Not everyone needs to have a type A personality, nor can be or wants to be a rising star and beat the curve. ......blah, blah, blah."
You missed the point. You beleive you deserve better. OK, after 10 years of not getting it either move on or accept it. Because the company clearly has a view of you that is different than your own.
Has anyone known the review result? Mine is Exceeded, 70%, but still have no idea whether or not a promo is on the way.
Has anybody else had the wonderful experience of getting promoted into into a higher calibration band (i.e. 64 -> 65) and then being promptly put into the 10% contribution ranking in the next review cycle? Is this typical?
I have seen it, but I would not call it "typical". Under the old system of course someone promoted 6-9 months into the review period would routinely get 3.0. This made some sense as they may not have had enough time to demonstrate higher performance at the new level.
With respect, your question demonstrates the lack of knowledge of the various performance measures in place. It really surprises me that HR does not bother to post some actual facts here as opposed to the inaccuracies that abound.
By way of background I worked at MS for 10 years, having left in 2009. I was a people manager for 9.5 years managing teams of 5 - 50.
These are the main categories with their respective drivers:
Merit raise. You get this based on the combination of Commitment rating and Contribution ranking. There is a budget set for each manager. This is a combination of backward looking (performance during review period against commitments) and forward looking (your manager's perception of your future potential).
Bonus. Mostly backward looking, based on performance against commitments.
Promo. Based on 2 factors - business need and personal readiness i.e. why should your position be L62 as opposed to L61 today? AND can you meet the higher expectations of L62?
Stock. Entirely forward looking, based on your manager's perception of your potential to advance and contribute.
Gold Star. Backward looking, usually linked to strong delivery of project / extraordinary success during the current review period.
So you see your question is very strange. If someone was promoted to 65 from 64, that says they are exceeding their current goals and there is business justification for the level change. Placing that individual in 10% is completely orthogonal to the intent of the promotion, which is recognizing the individual's potential, and subsequently squashing it with a 10%.
Has anybody else had the wonderful experience of getting promoted into into a higher calibration band (i.e. 64 -> 65) and then being promptly put into the 10% contribution ranking in the next review cycle? Is this typical?
+1
My manager says that stack ranking measures potential based on "visible impact" and "perception" and not on skills or past performance.
This is very true. Stack ranking depends more on who you are, and how mgmt perceives you. If you screw up, but they perceive you as a good resource, then they'll blame something or someone else, and not you. On the other hand, if you do well, but they don't think much of you, they'll undermine your accomplishments.
We are a people company, so if you are lucky, the a@#holes ranking you, like you.
I've been on both sides, and could not figure out why, on either side!
To people who post quite lengthy, multiple paragraph, responses: do you really think anyone is going to read them? I know I don't!
Also to people, who keep saying they left MS a few years ago, and they are so happy: do you think anyone believes you? If you were so happy, you wouldn't bother reading and posting to this blog! I know I won't!
I think everyone posting negative comments about their manager needs to also evaluate his own social skills. Maybe improving those is the key to success at MS (or any other company for that matter). For example if you manager hates you, have you tried to find out why? I have never worked for a manager that hates me, and I don’t think this is just pure luck
I agree up to a point. I had a couple of confrontations with my manager, and ended up getting an A10. Instead of fighting that though, I tried to change my manager's perception of me, by focusing on areas, that he thought I lacked. And it is working.
I however had a similar situation with another manager, but had no luck, no matter what I did. I think that was just a case of he not liking who I was. For example, if outside work, you are a person that does not like blue people, when you come to work, and a sob blue person reports to you, then it is your chance to give it to that miserable sob!
Has anybody else had the wonderful experience of getting promoted into into a higher calibration band (i.e. 64 -> 65) and then being promptly put into the 10% contribution ranking in the next review cycle? Is this typical?
Does it make any logical sense to 10% and get rid of someone right after promoting them? Who are you replacing them with -- with someone new to the company who has to spend years to get similar experience? If these 10%'s are just a cheap way of doing layoffs why not suck it up and call them that? That they are used to avoid severance is evil.
I am interested in joining any age discrimination lawsuit.
Please post information or if there is a law interested in taking the case.
"With Mark Hurd having resigned from HP, MSFT should hire him to replace Ballmer. He will whip this discombobulated company into shape."
You want to replace an accountant with an individual with expense report creativty?
Well at least Hurd's being innovative in trying to land hotties!
I already started to look for a job even I got E/20. This company is boring to the hell and I do not see any future here, I can tell I become lazy and less competitive than before. This is a good company for a new graduate; but boring for experienced one. You just sit there and fight with old technology and office politics. People are living in the illusion of their product is so successful in the market.
You never know what you are working on, people are caring about numbers, even sometimes they do not really know what that number mean. When you try to use new MS technology, people are worrying about how to maintain it later on. Fine. I will leave that new stuff to myself.
My suggestion to people:
1. open your eye to the whole computer industry; Microsoft is not always the best.
2. take care of yourself, already get prepared.
3. treat yourself as an individual business, not a employee to a company and always try to make addition to your skill set.
The accountants and lawyers... Microsoft has increased its investment in vendors every year for the past five plus years - cost savings of $100K per head versus $200K per head, especially in sales. Most of the vendors are "B" sellers who cannot get hired as FTEs for other companies, so what does Microsoft do, it says, "Come call on our best customers after a week of training." Yikes. The pace needs some serious sales leadership versus people who run the business from reports.
There's a comment in here somewhere about how a "career" at Microsoft has become about how you are perceived rather than what you do.
I've been at MS for 10 years. The accuracy with which that comment reflects my experience in the past 3-5 years is startling.
I see people doing a rapid ascent of the "ladder" by spinning their slim achievements into greatness whilst their boss is doing the same.
It's tragic to watch and it's even more tragic to hear that it's happening in lots of places in the company.
It's a broken culture. The sort of culture that lets things like Vista and Kin go out of the door.
That would be a conflict of interest and not normally allowed. (You could be terminated for that.) Microsoft now has its own phone that apps can be written for and employees should only focus on making WP7 a success.
I'd so like to see them try this. The negative publicity would be nuclear. There's more than an handful of iPhone apps now written as spare-time projects by nominal Microsoft employees. I know that or a fact.
Slowing PC demand + iPad = perfect storm
More layoffs to come...
Review results are going to be posted pretty soon by employees. It is going to be depressing with the hiPos bragging about how great they had it while the rest count themselves lucky if they get COLA and praying their manager does not plot to put them in 10%.
I wonder, should the employees boycott products by orgs where there is an abnormal career velocity? Seems like adCenter, Bing and OSD have obscene career velocities for their employees. Someone posted they get promoted every 6 months.
Given this disparity between that division and rest of the company where people who are working thrice as hard as them have a third of their career velocity, not only should others boycott them but should get all their friends and families to boycott it.
Initially I was all up for using live, bing and evangelizing it to my friends. But looking at how unfairly slow others careers are compared to those lucky bastards in adcenter and OSD, I am now making it a mission to boycott it. I want to use Google and want to tell all my friends and family never to use any Microsoft online products ever. It just seems unfair and unethical to support employees of a division that rewards their employees so disparingly well compared to rest of company…
"Msnbc.com is undergoing site maintenance. You may experience slowness or other problems at this time."
Ha ha, that's a laugh. How is this different than any other time?
To all the windows phone 7 critics, just shut the f*** up.
Don't you know who was behind it?
It was me Terry Myerson and my group of handpicked exchange heroes. There is nothing we can ever do wrong and we will prove it by organizing parades and other self aggrandizing events till you are sick of it. We will also give a free phone to every employee to prove it is good phone. And all of you are expected to contribute after your 12 hour shift to put good apps in my marketplace.
Now that phone 7 is almost out, I am also available to use my leadership skills for other orgs.
These are my conditions
1. Authority to press reset button and declare everything my predecessor did a failure
2. Authority to bring my people and promote them to partners within a two month span and redo what was done before but with our name on it.
3. Authority to re reset my own adecisions and re discover what my predecessor did but with me being given the credit for the discovery
So looking forward to your calls and offers for me to head your division, you know how to contact me...
Thanks, victory to Exchange and WP7!!!!
This is my first hit of this blog. A disgruntled, frustrated and finally happy (to get out of MS) friend forwarded this blogs link.
Wow... there are so many MSFTEs here with 10s of years of MS experience... OMG... 13..14 years.
That is part of the problem.. for MS not producing anything innovative and ground breaking (well some argue...ok ill say except for kinect).
The WP7 "start screen" is unattractive because it is unsymmetrical. IMHO this is a big mistake. The beauty of symmetry is innate. Microsoft designers?
Post a Comment