once again it is job performance ratings time, and once again - in spite of the tax cut windfalls, upper management will crap on the lower levels, thus enabling the upper levels to, once again, maximize their own bonuses, greedily looking out for themselves 100%
yeah, that’s very true and target bonuses for managers average from $25,000 (M-1,L30) to $125,000 (VP, L50) and that’s a lot of money when you add it all up
Apparently the CREDO really only applies to Management. They shaft the lower level people with Partially Meets so they can essentially rob those bonuses for themselves. Each org unit has a fixed budget for bonuses, it’s just a matter of how it’s divided. Bias against males and older employees is no myth.
J&J’s rating system is WAY too subjective. Demographic groups either look out for each other, or favored groups. Think about it, wouldn’t it go against the WLI principles to give a woman a poor rating?
yes ratings have been so subjective and just a buddy fest over the past few years. It is all about who you know. When the cvs/Medco crew came in those that were brought in were the ones who got the best ratings because they knew SO much more than those who were already there. It was a joke when SW was in AS, TylerM, johnL and CarlD were the favorites but none of them ever delivered anything nor were they leaders that JnJ needed. Now two of them have been walked out and the last should be. How does leadership right this injustice to those who did their jobs and delivered results? I know it will never happen.
This is a very simple formula: Everyone will be shoved into the middle. The exceptions will be Diverse employees who will be given the benefit of the doubt and every opportunity benefit, especially LTI. White males, with an emphasis on those over 45 at the director level and above, will be shoved to the lower end of the curve. Target increases are 3.2%
No management accountability. Every manager who assigns a direct report a PM should also receive a PM for not managing them well. It’s all subjective politics, not accountability. Shameful with the windfall that J&J is receiving from the corporate tax cuts. No CREDO here, just lip service and town hall meetings.
I spent many years at JNJ in Sr. Leadership position and want to let you know that even sr. leadership is subject to the same bell shaped curve as all other employees. With that said it is true that there is a level of subjectivity so make sure your management likes you because that is what will tilt the scale in your favor. It is important to perform but even those who perform who are not well connected or well liked with end up with a lower rating. This is life so get use to it and play the "GAME".
#9 post is correct, those with their heads up the bosses ass will do much better than those who simply keep their head down and work hard, sounds like a monarchy
The worst discrimination I have seen at J&J as a long term female employee is age discrimination, and it has nothing to do with ethnicity or gender. Once you reach a certain age, you get no responses to your applications for new positions or promotions, and LTI is a lot harder to come by. I experienced first hand someone working for me who got the same performance rating as I did and got get LTI while I did not. When I pointed this out to my boss and asked him to explain it to me, he gave me a BS answer, promised to get more information from our VP and get back to me, and of course never did.
Yes, I can see where that is true. Once you reach age 50, you are a target. Definitely not in line with the CREDO, go figure. The CREDO is dead. It once meant a lot, not now. Very sad.
#5 that is such bullshit. Women are working like dogs for less pay than men all over our company and others, and you have the nerve to suggest the fact that an employee group exists for women means there's a ratings bias? That's such crap, especially in tech
It is documented in Forbes that Sandi put in place a bonus structure that monetarily encourages hiring females over males. Perhaps to right past wrongs, but these male candidates did nothing to create this situation. I suppose they are simply collateral damage? Also, HR pushes us to hire minority and female candidates over similarly or more qualified others. Checking boxes to climb a magazine rating for diversity. Sadly, we are not seeing any female J&J CEOs on the horizon since Sandi announced her retirement, so unfortunately there is still a thick glass ceiling despite all the awards and flag waving.
many managers do not know that thier direct reports are not having 1:1s with their direct reports, but who is going to tell them, lazy management at multiple levels
A couple years ago, I was given a rating I felt was unwarranted (meets, vs exceeds) and when I spoke with my mgr, he gave a lot of 'soft' qualitative responses that he couldn't back up. I went to HR and spoke to them about it and when they asked if the topics had been discussed during my 1:1s, I told them we hadn't had a 1:1 all year. Long story short, mgr was asked for documentation that these topics had been reviewed in prior performance reports (mid-year, 1:1s) and when he couldn't back it up, my rating was changed (based on quant performance and peer/partner feedback). Opened a huge can of worms with this manager he was terminated 6 months later. Not my intent, but Karma always wins
