Microsoft tightens policies for low performers, adds voluntary exit plan

[midian182]

In brief: Microsoft is cracking down on those employees it considers to be low performers. The Redmond company has laid out new policies and tools in an internal email to managers, which include a ban on internal transfers for poor performers and a two-year rehiring block on those let go.

In an internal email seen by Business Insider, Microsoft's new chief people officer Amy Coleman wrote about new and enhanced tools that would help accelerate high performance and swiftly address low performance.

The email adds that the tools will help "foster a culture of accountability and growth." Employees who are not meeting expectations will be put on Performance Improvement Plans (PIPs), which are described as a new globally consistent approach to set clear expectations and a timeline for improvement.

Those who don't meet expectations also have the option to leave voluntarily under a new exit plan called the Global Voluntary Separation Agreement (GVSA), which comes with a separation offer.

At the start of the year, Microsoft confirmed it was implementing performance-based layoffs, though it said those let go would be replaced with new hires. The company rates employees on a scale of 0 to 200 and bases their stock awards and bonuses on this rating. Anyone in the 60 to 80 range – 100 is average – is rated as a lower performer.

Those employees who have poor ratings that fall between 0 and 60 will no longer be allowed to apply for different roles within the company. Anyone who leaves during or after a PIP will not be allowed to reapply for jobs at Microsoft until two years after their termination date.

The email also states that managers will have access to scenario-based, AI-supported tools designed to help prepare them for "constructive or challenging conversations" by practicing in an interactive environment. Presumably, that means an AI simulating what it's like to tell someone they are in danger of losing their job.

Meta has also been making layoffs that are supposedly based on employees' performance, though there are several reports claiming many of those fired received average or even good reviews during their time at the company. It's led to claims that, much like the return-to-office mandate, companies are simply cutting their workforces without making official and more costly layoffs.

Masthead credit: Wonderlane

Permalink to story:

Microsoft tightens policies for low performers, adds voluntary exit plan

 

[AndreV]

"ban on internal transfers for poor performers and a two-year rehiring block on those let go." So its two years or lifetime ban?

 

[madboyv1]

"ban on internal transfers for poor performers and a two-year rehiring block on those let go." So its two years or lifetime ban?

From the Business Insider article:

Updated Internal Movement/External Rehire Policy: Employees with zero and 60% Rewards outcomes and/or on an active PIP will not be eligible for internal transfers. Former employees who left with zero or 60% Rewards or during/after a PIP will not be eligible for rehire until two years after their termination date.

 

[candle86]

If they are let go of for poor preformance why bring them back at all

 

[seeprime]

Bill Gates corporate culture lives on.

 

[axiomatic13]

Low performer = Someone resistant to crappy middle managers BS. When I was with HPE I worked with MS a lot, I mean a lot lot. They are just as bad as any other company. So many had hit their Peter Principle.

 

[Dreadcthulhu]

If they are let go of for poor preformance why bring them back at all

They might have done poorly in one sort of job but may be a better fit for a different kind of position. I.E. someone who works in the B2B sales might be let go because they just weren't good at that sort of thing may end up reapplying a few years later for QA testing or something and be fine at it.

 

[toooooot]

Even the most talented and hard working people can sometimes lose interest to their job.
Not all would leave voluntarily. Of course, MS would want them to be gone.

 

[Eldrach]

So like - If you want to fire someone at Microsoft, just give them goals it's almost impossible to achieve, call them out as low performers and off they go

 

[daffy duck]

If they are let go of for poor preformance why bring them back at all

So they can upskill at better company!

 

[Just Some Dude]

In MS reviews, within each "set of people" (could be a team, project, or larger), 2 people get "exceptional", 2 people get "must improve", and the rest somewhere in the middle. It's a standard way to reduce workforce. It often backfires of course. As people move around and move to new projects, they look at the other people and go "woh, those people are all top performers, I'm not joining that group no matter how good I think I am because I might end up in the bottom 2", then they move to projects where they are top, so they can get more stock/salaray/awards. People always find a way to play the system, but in the end it satisfies its purpose, to reduce headcount, even if projects suffer as a consequence.

 

[candle86]

So they can upskill at better company!

still its a bad policy, if your record says your a poor preformer you shouldn't be rehireable

 

[BuckarooBonzaii]

As the fisherman said plenty of fishes in the sea (considering all species), and Capt. Picard said in First Contact "Plenty of letters left in the alphabet".

 

[Gezzer]

Bill Gates corporate culture lives on.

While old Billy was hard nosed, most of the performance based evaluating was thanks to twitward Balmer. In fact from what I understand he created a atmosphere where rating was an employees more important consideration instead of actual performance history producing a lot of moral problems. Employees would spend more time trying to keep their ratings up then actual production AFAIK.