Moving away from the rank and yank approach

Forced distribution, recalibration and making humans fit a predetermined model of performance is still widely practised. ‘Forced ranking’, ‘rank and yank’ or a ‘vitality curve’, were championed by General Electric chief executive Jack Welch.  

Employees are plotted across a distribution curve of high performers, mid-ranking performers and finally a tranche of under-performers.  

The premise is that there is a ‘normal’ curve of distribution where there is a small number of underperformers, lots of people in the middle, and a small number of star performers who are rewarded based on their placement. Employees in the bottom 10% are placed on performance improvement plans or in the worst cases dismissed for not meeting standards. 

If employees are ranked, they will compete against each other and so everyone’s performance will improve. Despite its ruthless nature, it had until recently been a relatively common approach to managing performance.  

Since competition with team members is anti-collaborative, this approach also adds stress, pressure and workaholic tendencies over flexibility and inclusivity. The number of meetings, paperwork, disputes and complaints caused more pain than any performance increases. 

Microsoft ditched it in 2013, saying it wanted to focus more on “teamwork and collaboration”, Accenture dropped it in 2016, along with annual performance appraisals. Amazon stopped it too to create a collaborative and inclusive culture.