I'm in full reaction mode right now. I'll be fully transparent that I haven't taken the time to let the information sit with me and consider the perspective of the leaders who decided that the people strategy that I'm about to rip to shreds in front of you would be effective. I will certainly protect the privacy of the leader who described it to me, and the organization where he works but I feel I have a duty to employees everywhere to expose the cracks, no chasms, in this approach. Forced ranking of employees is LAME and OUTDATED. This is the process where, as a manager, you are forced to plot your direct reports on a bell curve of performance. You have a small slice of stars, a larger grouping of average performers, and the end of the curve where you place your under-performers. These ranking systems are typically set up to tie into a succession planning or development system but mostly to help with compensation strategies. Your highest performers get the biggest slice, the average performers enjoy a smaller piece of the pie and the poor suckers at the bottom of the list often go hungry. If you're (still) a Jack Welch fan this will all ring a bell- he suggests cutting the bottom 10% every year. Get rid of the dead wood and encourage (or terrify) your good performers to up their game. (As usual, because of space, I'm simplifying the strategy a little but this is the gist). I can tell you from direct experience (yes, I admit, we tried this at a former company of mine) this approach will KILL creativity, teamwork, engagement, true professional development, and yes, happiness... It's often a secretive process but don't be fooled. Your people will find out about it and you will reverse any of the positive impacts you've had on them. This is where it gets purely infuriating for me: the leader I was speaking to shared with me the story of the manager in his department who shared that he was retaining a poor performer because he needed a body for the "FAIR" spot of his curve. He needed this guy to keep on sucking so that he would have a pawn for the process. He did nothing to help this employee, because he had to use him to fill a spot on a chart. I am saying the same thing over and over again so that you get how THAT IS PURE INSANITY. It's why I hate so many of the HR "strategies" that are designed to drive performance and increase retention and end up forcing managers to adopt purely IDIOTIC behaviours that do just the opposite. I just feel sorry for managers who have to jump through hoops for some corporate initiative that they know flies in the face of their capacity to be effective. A great manager, let it be known, finds what is unique and special about every person on his or her team and then strategizes WITH them to unleash those strengths for the benefit of self, team and organization. They work tirelessly to find opportunities for their people to do more of what they are amazing at and team with them to get super crafty about managing around weaknesses. They are partners to their people. The know and care and understand their people and they never cease looking for ways to know more. Through this trusted relationship, they are able to evoke the sort of performance and discretionary contributions that no amount of money or FEAR would ever be able to elicit. They are not lording over people, they are standing behind them and supporting them. Wouldn't you want the teams in your organization to be filled with people who are consistently creative, engaged and productive? Sure, you are going to have some poor performance. As a manager you may have to take a long look in the mirror and understand that you have massive responsibility in that. You recruited this person. You had the opportunity to learn and understand where they are at their best- and if you selected them based on that and then put them in a job where they do not have the opportunity to perform those activities, shame on you. Period. Should you keep them around and try to force them to learn and execute on activities for which they have no appreciation or appetite, blame them for being lazy or unmotivated and whine and complain about the impact they're having on your team ? Maybe, if you have to fill a spot on a chart. Otherwise, you have a duty to either find a place on your team for them to re-flourish or help them transition to a new role or organization. It is downright selfish to force a person to continue doing a job that is sucking the life out of them, Vampire. Big sigh. I think I've ranted enough. Please- if you use forced ranking at work and you see benefits to this strategy- share them. I love productive dialogue and I am very open-minded (seriously). There are always ways to tweak and refine. Add your thoughts or experiences - or if you like, use the space below to rant a bit about how this strategy is driving you nuts at your organization too...