for daily banking news and anonymous message boards, check out the new site cafebanking.com


» Sponsored ads

» Sponsored ads

» Sponsored ads


Go Back   Cafepharma Message Boards > Company Boards > Merck
Register Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply

 
Bookmark and Share Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-27-2012, 01:46 AM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Flaws of Forced Rankings

It should be of no surprise to anyone here at Merck but there is information out there that shows that forced rankings or "rank and yank" forces poor morale, fear of being fired and forces good people who may have only needed a little or no coaching out of a company for no good reason. It should also be noted that GE was the pioneer of this system and they no longer use it.

If you Google "forced rankings" there is plenty of info out there talking about this. Here is one article about it listed below.

http://www.tlnt.com/2012/02/01/force...itrary-system/
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-27-2012, 01:55 AM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: The Flaws of Forced Rankings

These companies are not going to change. That is why ass kissers are at the top (a bunch of "yes" men and women) and a great rep is shown the door. Makes no sense and no one inside these corporations cares. They need to put their dipstick somewhere and point the figure of blame when things do not go right. This is a perfect way to do it. I agree, though, it is horrible and ineffective and does not promote or foster the right people or the right kind of culture.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-27-2012, 07:15 AM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: The Flaws of Forced Rankings

if you talk to anyone in compensation design systems, they will tell you unequivocally that this system was designed for SHORT TERM use only, and that its implementation over a longer period results in exactly the dysfunctional cultural manifestations that we have at Merck. All of this data has been available for a long time, Merck had access to it, it was completely predicateble.

Here is what is most telling: In light of all the available evidence that this system results in creating a highly toxic culture, in light of all the experts, papers, commentary and understanding within the compensation world, Merck's decided to ignore it and continue to use it.

This pretty clearly says to all us "We know that this one aspect of how we conduct ourselves leads to a highly dysfunctional culture, and we know we have options, and we know we have almost UNIVERSAL support to change this one aspect, and we know that the chances are pretty good that if we took this ONE step, it would probably result in a massive cultural shift in a positive direction, yet we - the leaders - have made a conscious decision to ignore all the available data and forge ahead knowing that we employ a system that encourages exactly the kind of behavior we publicly state we are trying to change".

they know culture eats strategy for lunch every day, and those of you who paid attention to Mark Timeny at the meeting in Feb, when this question was answered, he very clearly said, yeah we know this forced ranking system is leading to all kinds of negative outcomes for the organization, but we are not changing it.

so folks, just in case you think maybe there is a chance that one one gets it, they get it. they understand completely what they are doing, they have the ability to change it and they are making a very conscious decision NOT to change it.

that should pretty much tell you everything you need to know about how committed to changing the culture the leadership really is.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-27-2012, 07:28 AM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: The Flaws of Forced Rankings

Merck's short-term performance measurement leanings have been underscored by their general ejection of all the talented sales reps over the last few years. Those are the reps who delivered results, had their salaries rise and, ultimately, became the targets for removal---usually at the end of a bayonet. Good companies embrace those employees. Cost-cutting, short-term efforts at improving a weakening bottom line drive those cream of the crop sales reps out the door. That's where Merck has been, exists now and is exactly where she's going.

Goodbye, my fellow reps. It's been nice knowing you....or, at least, some of you.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-27-2012, 03:38 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: The Flaws of Forced Rankings

Rank and yank. That is definitely what Merck is doing. Unfortunatley they hired and fired the wrong people. Now Merck is ranked very low in customers' eyes as a reputable pharmaceutical company that can deliver and they are yanking investors with a b.s. illusion that they are turning this ship of fools around. You can only fire so many people and not bring any new effective products to market to pay dividends. This ponzi scheme won't last forever with this pathetic model.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-27-2012, 06:34 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: The Flaws of Forced Rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
It should be of no surprise to anyone here at Merck but there is information out there that shows that forced rankings or "rank and yank" forces poor morale, fear of being fired and forces good people who may have only needed a little or no coaching out of a company for no good reason. It should also be noted that GE was the pioneer of this system and they no longer use it.

If you Google "forced rankings" there is plenty of info out there talking about this. Here is one article about it listed below.

http://www.tlnt.com/2012/02/01/force...itrary-system/
Counterproductive to working as a team and doing the less glamorous things from what I've seen. People are more worried about looking good, visibility. More about me than we. It's become too much about the show than substance.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-28-2012, 06:30 AM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: The Flaws of Forced Rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
if you talk to anyone in compensation design systems, they will tell you unequivocally that this system was designed for SHORT TERM use only, and that its implementation over a longer period results in exactly the dysfunctional cultural manifestations that we have at Merck. All of this data has been available for a long time, Merck had access to it, it was completely predicateble.

Here is what is most telling: In light of all the available evidence that this system results in creating a highly toxic culture, in light of all the experts, papers, commentary and understanding within the compensation world, Merck's decided to ignore it and continue to use it.

This pretty clearly says to all us "We know that this one aspect of how we conduct ourselves leads to a highly dysfunctional culture, and we know we have options, and we know we have almost UNIVERSAL support to change this one aspect, and we know that the chances are pretty good that if we took this ONE step, it would probably result in a massive cultural shift in a positive direction, yet we - the leaders - have made a conscious decision to ignore all the available data and forge ahead knowing that we employ a system that encourages exactly the kind of behavior we publicly state we are trying to change".

they know culture eats strategy for lunch every day, and those of you who paid attention to Mark Timeny at the meeting in Feb, when this question was answered, he very clearly said, yeah we know this forced ranking system is leading to all kinds of negative outcomes for the organization, but we are not changing it.

so folks, just in case you think maybe there is a chance that one one gets it, they get it. they understand completely what they are doing, they have the ability to change it and they are making a very conscious decision NOT to change it.

that should pretty much tell you everything you need to know about how committed to changing the culture the leadership really is.

and in light of this, what's really stupid is that we keep "measuring the culture" with these surveys and culture scores, and actually holding people accountable. we have a system that not only supports but encourages dysfunction, but we hold people working in that system accountable for what something the system doesn't support.

so instead of just being honest (have a little courage and candor leadership) and saying - hey, we have this system that encourages really dysfunctional behavior, we have no intention of changing it and because of that - its pretty clear that we don't give a crap about the culture so we are just going to stop measuring it.

our scores have gone to the point where we are no longer a "high performing organization" (not that that should be a surprise to anyone) and we out here in the field are saying "NO SHIT" we've known that for years.

so leadership, stop looking like a bunch of fools and either do the right thing, and get rid of the forced rankings, or just man up and say 'we like our dysfunctional culture"

grow some balls will ya??
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-28-2012, 09:34 AM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: The Flaws of Forced Rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
Counterproductive to working as a team and doing the less glamorous things from what I've seen. People are more worried about looking good, visibility. More about me than we. It's become too much about the show than substance.
This is so true and exactly the culture that has been constructed at a lot of American companies. Funny thing, they all use the PMP method of evaluation. It is horrible. Never seen such a waste and such B.S. It measures nothing and is so subjective. You are 100 percent spot on with this method destroying teams because it is too focused on the individual. Love your post.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-28-2012, 10:18 AM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: The Flaws of Forced Rankings

If a picture is worth a thousand words, say no more. Adam Schechter.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-28-2012, 10:59 AM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: The Flaws of Forced Rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
Counterproductive to working as a team and doing the less glamorous things from what I've seen. People are more worried about looking good, visibility. More about me than we. It's become too much about the show than substance.

I like.....solo territories. 100% accountability. 100% visibility.

No slacking....no putting it on the other guy.....its all on you.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 04-29-2012, 12:09 AM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: The Flaws of Forced Rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
This is so true and exactly the culture that has been constructed at a lot of American companies. Funny thing, they all use the PMP method of evaluation. It is horrible. Never seen such a waste and such B.S. It measures nothing and is so subjective. You are 100 percent spot on with this method destroying teams because it is too focused on the individual. Love your post.
And easily manipulated--the CTL gives reps assignments that allow them to "present" to the "team" then they are eligible for S3, excellent awards and higher raises. The "objective" sales assessment can be share, share change, PPO depending on where the "chosen" ones fall. They are also "coached" and "practice" what comments to give in front of the DCO. Who are these "chosen" few? The ones that reiterate everything the CTL says, never has an idea or comment beyond that. As each of you have said in your own way, the reason that Merck is failing is that talented people are held back (basically to get the work done) and poor performers are promoted.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-29-2012, 12:11 AM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: The Flaws of Forced Rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
I like.....solo territories. 100% accountability. 100% visibility.

No slacking....no putting it on the other guy.....its all on you.
True except the sales calculations must be transparent and objectives set early in the process.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-29-2012, 11:34 AM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: The Flaws of Forced Rankings

I find it amazing something so destructive to the performance of the company is allowed to continue.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-29-2012, 12:03 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: The Flaws of Forced Rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
And easily manipulated--the CTL gives reps assignments that allow them to "present" to the "team" then they are eligible for S3, excellent awards and higher raises. The "objective" sales assessment can be share, share change, PPO depending on where the "chosen" ones fall. They are also "coached" and "practice" what comments to give in front of the DCO. Who are these "chosen" few? The ones that reiterate everything the CTL says, never has an idea or comment beyond that. As each of you have said in your own way, the reason that Merck is failing is that talented people are held back (basically to get the work done) and poor performers are promoted.
One reason I left. I did not, however, point out that I knew some had goals that were incredibly different than others in my division. It is so manipulated that the entire structure is unfair and reps know it. It makes for a very hostile work environment. I felt like you are damned if you do and damned if you don't. Speak up (C&C) and get punished (not anon as it says), shut up and kiss ass and get promoted but then never get anything to change and be burdened with a lot of nonsales-related busy work (change agent, DCO rides). It is creepy. Everyone on top just doing whatever they can to justify their glorified executive jobs and high pay. This probably used to be a good company like many others a long time ago. Now, I doubt there any good companies anymore. Maybe that is the problem. We have no place to go that would be much different. I kinda like the 15 x 15 guy. Not honorable but it clearly does not matter anymore.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 04-29-2012, 01:15 PM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: The Flaws of Forced Rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
And easily manipulated--the CTL gives reps assignments that allow them to "present" to the "team" then they are eligible for S3, excellent awards and higher raises. The "objective" sales assessment can be share, share change, PPO depending on where the "chosen" ones fall. They are also "coached" and "practice" what comments to give in front of the DCO. Who are these "chosen" few? The ones that reiterate everything the CTL says, never has an idea or comment beyond that. As each of you have said in your own way, the reason that Merck is failing is that talented people are held back (basically to get the work done) and poor performers are promoted.
Merck is not failing...they are doing quite well thank you, at least according to the Financial Press that covers Wall Street...

Merck is only failing for the drug reps...the executives and managers are kicking but...

Hell, Merck is their personal piggy bank...

FU MERCK!!
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 05-03-2012, 08:16 AM
Anonymous
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: The Flaws of Forced Rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous View Post
Merck is not failing...they are doing quite well thank you, at least according to the Financial Press that covers Wall Street...

Merck is only failing for the drug reps...the executives and managers are kicking but...

Hell, Merck is their personal piggy bank...

FU MERCK!!
For the execs and management Merck is like that movie Casino. It's one big cash register for them to exploit at our expense.
Reply With Quote
Reply




Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.