Response to Zhaopeng’s blog: Is ranking system effective? or is it a failure?

Without competition, an individual will not have the incentive to invent or improve base of his original creation. Microsoft has removed the employee ranking due to the unwillingness of teamwork among workers. While the ranking system can indicate the best of the best within the company, it also become a system of failure. To create something extraordinary, one must collaborate with others, and each member will specialize their speciality in order to maximize the efficiency. Once the ranking system steps into the game, collaboration alters into competition, where everyone treats each other as enemy. Well, isn’t that obvious? Sometimes the CEO needs to take a risk evaluation before continuing with their plans.

This reminds me of myself working in Roots. There is no commission at all, but the manager still keep track of our selling record. This doesn’t make any sense to me in the beginning. After looking at different perspective, one reason is that Roots is attempted to maximize each worker’s capacity by illustrating their retail record, which motivates them to sell more. Meanwhile, this system will lead to excessive advertising, and annoys the customers. In a large cooperation, it is recommended not to established a ranking system.

To read his blog:

https://blogs.ubc.ca/zhaopeng/2013/11/14/microsoft-removes-employee-ranking-system/