What makes you think otherwise, statistically?

phendrenad2 · 2024-10-06T19:38:53 1728243533

There isn't any reason to believe that companies can or even want to identify the lowest performers, especially when doing mass headcount reduction.

tgma · 2024-10-06T20:52:35 1728247955

There isn't any reason to believe...

There's no reason to believe the sky is blue.

...even want to identify...

Short of cuts of an entire division, sounds like fairy tales. Now, they might want to claim they have or have not done so; that's a different issue.

phendrenad2 · 2024-10-06T23:48:27 1728258507

What are you even talking about?

tgma · 2024-10-07T05:29:38 1728278978

I am simply suggesting your assertion is self-evidently false.

phendrenad2 · 2024-10-11T03:26:31 1728617191

By that logic, so is yours. We should talk to the World's Records people to see if we set a record for biggest waste of time.

tgma · 2024-10-11T04:03:17 1728619397

Perhaps you should. It's obvious that all companies at very least desire to know who is the high performer and who is not. To deny that for a trillion dollar successful company is just ridiculous.

phendrenad2 · 2024-10-14T02:50:53 1728874253

Well, I wish for a lot of things, doesn't mean I get them.

tgma · 2024-10-14T22:24:00 1728944640

Well, this is what you stated previously: "there isn't any reason to believe that companies can or even <<<<want>>>> to identify the lowest performers."

And yes, there is at least some evidence to believe they do that identification somewhat successfully: their business is working.

phendrenad2 · 2024-10-18T20:00:44 1729281644

Yes when I go to the store, I hope to find a million dollar gemstone in my loaf of bread. But is that evidence that my trip to the store was meaningfully motivated by this?

Anyway, I've made my point every way possible now, it's time to leave it and let those who understand, understand.