[GVIrish]

> but to attack the core idea as essentially wrong is anti math, science, and rationality

The way Microsoft implemented stack ranking was anti math. You're supposed to measure the data then calculate the level of fit to a distribution, not artificially shoehorn the data into buckets to create the curve. If you analyze the data honestly you may find you have a bimodal distribution, or a heavily skewed distribution, who knows.

Stack ranking just clumsily says, I'm gonna give x% a bad score, y% a middle score, and z% the top score.

[fsckboy]

>Stack ranking just clumsily says, I'm gonna give x% a bad score, y% a middle score, and z% the top score.

as long as the ordering top/middle/bad is preserved, I don't see a problem. there are entire respected statistic methods based on rank ordering, not raw metrics.

People don't have a right to fall on a normal distribution. Employers do have a right to grow or trim the workforce, and those numbers are driven by factors that are not necessarily normally distributed.

the people who downvote me simply want participation trophys, and "no" is the answer.

You absolutely can argue that Microsoft pursued a system that hurt both Microsoft and its employees, but not by attacking rank ordering.

[psunavy03]

Ah, "participation trophies" and "if you disagree you're a snowflake."

Took this long down the thread for the thought-terminating cliches to start flying around.