Triggered not due to the caffeine
In some management courses today, I found Steve Ballmer’s time as CEO of Microsoft is often presented as a case study of poor leadership. One critical decision that stands out is his implementation of "stack ranking," a performance review system that forced managers to rank employees on a curve.
This approach meant that even if a team excelled, some members had to be labeled as underperformers. The rankings were based on arbitrary comparisons rather than actual performance. As a result, employees competed against each other, even within the same team. Instead of fostering collaboration, this system created distrust and anxiety.
Imagine working in an environment where you couldn’t fully trust your colleagues because you knew one of you had to be ranked low, regardless of how well the team performed. The focus shifted from innovation and teamwork to self-preservation. Over time, this killed morale and drove talented people away from Microsoft.
This kind of internal competition has held back creativity and collaboration in innovative companies like Microsoft. Despite the apparent negative impact, Ballmer stuck with the system, which became a significant factor in Microsoft’s loss of competitive edge during his tenure.
I would never do this kind of system.
or
Maybe for Microsoft, it didn’t work, but for some companies, it can work
or
I wouldn’t let this decision become permanent if I were in charge.
Isn’t the human mind funny? It's easy to dip into this kind of idea. That smug satisfaction about what you would do if you were in charge? Well, I understand the appeal.
This is how many of us start on the path to management. We think we will do a much better job than the bosses we’ve had. And it sounds terrific until you sit in the seat.
