I'm considering applying at Cap One. I heard that the WLB is really good and TC isn't bad. But I've read one of the downsides in the company is the stack ranking. how does stack ranking work there?
Basically just donât be in the bottom ~10% of your job family/level within your org and youâll never have to worry about it. The biggest negative is that youâre competing against your peers for promotions, so things can get a little political there. You really have to work on visibility with your skip level since theyâre ultimately the ones that will be vouching for you Overall the negative perception around stack ranking is kind of overblown. It only impacts you twice a year, only one of which really counts for anything Let me know if you have any specific questions!
An example that happened to me though of how it can negatively impact you is I was promoted then switched teams about 2 months after. So I was now ranked against people at a higher level while adjusting to a new team and new tech stack. Had I still been on my last team I wouldâve been fine, but my new manager told me in so many words he didnât have much to go off of since I was new and he didnât talk about my accomplishments with my last manager so I had to be ranked below strong since I didnât have much delivered compared to the others at my level. Had I known I was in danger of getting the below strong beforehand I probably wouldâve done more to prevent it like all the âinfluenceâ stuff they value a lot here, but I had always been ranked at least very strong before so I didnât see it coming. Anyway, not as big a deal as youâd think to get below strong but it still didnât feel good.
Dang that sucks, Iâm sorry to hear that. My org usually gives one âfreebieâ review cycle for newly rotated people to avoid these situations. Sounds like your old manager kind of screwed you over Which org did you join?
Surprised people are trying to convince you it's no big deal... it's certainly not something that "only impacts you twice a year" and it directly impacts your comp, which is already low compared to peers (in tech, which is what the company keeps saying they are). The stack ranking incentivizes a lot of anti-collaborative behaviors, not least of which is a shiny object obsession with building & rebuilding competing solutions for problems that either already have a solution or just don't need solving. Expecting a bell curve distribution of talent is one thing, but forcing that distribution up & down an org (e.g. stack ranking) inevitably punishes good talent far more than it identifies & pushes out bad talent.
Yeah. Ive worked at a few other companies and C1 is the least collaborative I've experienced. I've never seen coworkers tout such trivial accomplishments so loudly. It's obnoxious and toxic. Stack ranking does not take into account an individuals personality and strength. I'm glad to be leaving in a few weeks. New tc will be 1.7x current.
How bad is the "least collaborative" environment
Elaborate on the downleveling a little more are you with a tech company now?
yeah tech tier 2, but landed a few tier 1. went with t2 for wfh reasons. I just didnât have any impressive experience when it came right down it. weâre not really a tech company and itâs just hard to work on impressive things here in my experience. this usually came up on open ended technical question rounds where they asked about projects etc
Donât join. I regret joining after 6 month joining I was put on coaching plan which is basically means I am on PIP. I was on bottom of ranking with other people on my level. Personally, I am leaving this POS company. Person with 560 leetcode problems solved shouldnât be earning 145 TC
What was their reason for putting you on a coaching plan? By your TC, I assume you are PA?
why did you join c1 if you have 560 LC. I can think of 50-100 companies that are better
COF WLB is pretty pretty bad. Iâm surprised why so many are praising it.
What team are you on?
15-20% are above strong. Very strong get 1.5x the target bonus. Exceptional (top 5%) get 2x the target bonus 65-70% get a strong rating and the target bonus 10-15% are below strong each year. Inconsistent get half the target bonus. Action needed get no bonus. Iâm not sure whatâs so bad about this. The associates getting below strong are getting it for a reason. I suppose the one element that feels wrong or at least inefficient to me is once an associate is rated below strong, they arenât eligible to move internally, when in some cases itâs a matter of the person being in the wrong role. So changing job families, if thatâs whatâs needed, canât be done after that rating is on the record.
Totally agree with this! The other thing to keep in mind is that the below strong bucket usually includes some people who have already left the company, so in reality that percentage is even smaller
No, the associates getting below strong are not always getting it fairly and thatâs the whole problem. The process is subjective, biased, and results in taking a good team and calling some of them not good.