Another L for blizzard and it's not even February yet

Community General Discussion
43

doesnt activision own blizzard?

44

I hate to agree but it seems that way.

I had 5 long time friends playing when the xpac dropped and now I have none.

I can’t explain it but something feels off…

45

Yes? Is there a point in there. Blizzard is not able to set their own polices when it comes to compensation after they got bought. My point is the L goes to Activision not Blizzard. OP made this post just to hate on Blizzard and it is not even a Blizzard policy.

1 Like
46

maybe…but was it activision who was forcing blizzard to harass the female staff a while back?
You seem to be defending the company as a rule, when theyve barely proven themselves to be worthy of defense of late.

47

…not to mention that THIS guy quit…“left”…but how many at blizzard havent quit and have just gone along with the policy?
Youre saying blizzard is exempt from blame because ONE guy quit over it?

48

Not sure what, or if, this will mean anything with regards to the purchase but apparently Microsoft had this policy at one point and it didn’t go well.

“In 2012, Vanity Fair reported that stack ranking pit Microsoft employees against each other, incentivizing them to sabotage projects and withhold information out of fear of impacting their rank. Microsoft stopped using the system in 2013.”

49

Most definitely it means Liberace

1 Like
50

what? why are you bringing that up. It’s not even relevant to this topic.

1 Like
51

Woah! You mean to tell me all those people who waxed lyrical about how Activision had minimal impact on the inner workings of Blizz and that the vast majority of the higher level decision making about wow and other games made by Blizz weren’t actually impacted by Activision and that it was mostly Blizz management to blame, were wrong???

I’m shocked! Shocked I say!

52

This topic is concerning performance reviews mandated by execs in Activision. You are saying that guy is “Blizz good” while at the same time you are saying “Blizz bad”.

53

When a company buys another one they are now the controller of compensation and therefore will set the compensation policies. This does not mean they get involved in the day to day on how to run the company when it comes to developing the games.

54

Because the performance quotas weren’t properly set perhaps?

It’s bad management, stop defending it. Oh, but you’re the sales manager setting unrealistic goals, aren’t you?

2 Likes
55

Money talks though. Your wages tied to your performance evaluation metrics will impact your work life and the resulting work environment massively.

56

Microsoft stopped this kinda thing in 2013. lol thats 10 years ago.

1 Like
57

Microsoft… changed the nature of money??? Woah!

58

Is setting a goal of 20 sales unrealistic if they both met it? seriously…

59

talking about this

1 Like
60

1 Like
61

Standards are fine, requiring managers to report x number of low performers – regardless if they actually are – is pretty awful.

62

Yes that’s true. But there are a lot of employees that want to be paid more if they do a good job. The disagreement in this thread seems to be more of what is a good job. Some think that if the company sets a low bar and everybody meets it that everyone should get an A+ rating even if 1 employee was 3 or 4 times more productive than the worst.

And if you want to say “that’s fine the top employee can get an A+++ raiting.” Well what’s the difference between a F to C scale and a A to A++++ scale. Just look at wow’s class tier lists. The worst rating being given out is a C for like 1 spec. Most are B or higher but because there are S tier specs the B tier specs are “trash.”