According to this contribution assessment system, employees must achieve 100% of their basic work metrics. Even a shortfall of 1% will result in punishment.
If the assessment metric is between 95% and 100%, 30% of the year-end bonus will be deducted.
If the assessment metric is between 90% and 95%, the entire year-end bonus will be deducted.
If the assessment metric is between 80% and 90%, not only will the entire year-end bonus be deducted, but the basic work metric for the following year will also increase by 10%, and a public criticism will be issued throughout the company.
Finally, if the assessment metric falls below 80%, the employee will either be demoted or directly terminated. The penalties are extremely severe.
These assessment metrics are designed as hard, objective data points—specific numbers—rather than incorporating subjective judgment. Therefore, they are considered very fair and free from the possibility of human interference.
Furthermore, the review of these assessment metrics is not determined by individual departments but by a dedicated assessment department established by the head office. Having connections within a department will be of no use.
However, if an employee exceeds their basic work metrics, even by over 100%, there will be no additional reward.
This is because the next step is to tally the contribution work metrics.
Compared to the almost absolutely objective basic work metrics, the extra contribution metrics are relatively more subjective. They will tally all work achievements obtained during the year. Excluding those that fall under basic work, all extra work completed will be used as assessment metrics.
It is worth mentioning that this assessment does not deduct points; it only adds them.
This means there is no situation where doing more results in deductions. As long as you undertake tasks beyond your normal duties and achieve success in your work, you will receive extra contribution points.
And if an endeavor fails, no points will be deducted.
Concurrently, contribution metrics will also track the benefits you bring to the company and record them in the metric assessment.
For example, if you are responsible for developing a mobile phone's built-in balance meter project, the daily research and development falls under your regular duties and is included in the basic work metrics, yielding no extra benefits.
If this built-in balance meter project is successful and successfully applied to a new mobile phone, it signifies that the project has generated revenue for the company. This will then be included in the corresponding contribution points, becoming an employee's contribution value.
So, what is the use of these contribution points?
Their use is incredibly important because, for employees, the most crucial aspects of promotion and salary increases are entirely dependent on contribution points.
Basic work metrics can only ensure that you are not penalized by the company, but if you wish to advance within the company, you can only rely on contribution points.
As per Mr. Huang's instructions, for future promotions and advancements, except in special circumstances, the company's internal promotion system will completely exclude human selection, aside from Mr. Huang himself, and will be based entirely on the contribution point system.
When there is a promotion opportunity within a department, the contribution points of all candidates will be ranked directly. The employee with the highest contribution points will be automatically promoted, without the need for a leader's decision; everything will be based on contribution points.
Of course, those who can be promoted are a minority, as there are only so many leadership positions. So, what can be done with the surplus contribution points?
Very simply, they can be used to exchange for job levels.
The job level system is another employee evaluation system designed by Mr. Huang. Many internet companies will have such job level systems in the future. For instance, Company A classifies all employees into seven levels.
Company B has a total of 12 job levels, both ascending and descending, and so on.
However, Mr. Huang's job levels differ from those of these companies. The selection for job level advancement in these companies, while appearing to have rules, actually lacks true regulation.
Taking Company B as an example, the rules for job level advancement are explicitly stated: first, the annual KPI must be met, followed by a supervisor's nomination. After the supervisor's nomination, the advancement committee conducts an interview. Upon completion of the interview, the advancement committee votes, and the final voting result determines whether the job level advancement is approved.
How does that sound? The rules seem very clear; by following them and working diligently, one can advance their job level.
This is both right and wrong. Upon closer inspection, one will discover that this entire rule system is entirely controlled by people. Apart from the KPI, which is a hard metric, all other aspects are decided by individuals.
For example, in the second step, the supervisor's nomination, if you do not find ways to maintain good relations with your supervisor, you might never receive a nomination in your life.
Then there is the interview with the advancement committee, which is even less reliable.
Shouldn't the decision to promote be based on the employee's performance in their daily work and various achievements? These are actual accomplishments accumulated through practical work and are the most accurate indicators of an individual's capabilities.
Conversely, what does an interview represent? If an employee's attire is slightly inappropriate during an interview, or their speech is not sharp enough, or they appear unenergetic, or not particularly intelligent, or look like a bad person, are their work efforts then invalidated?
In essence, this advancement committee is a tool used by the company to control promotion rights. Even if your work performance is outstanding, by failing the interview through this committee, and citing reasons like "unqualified during the interview," they can reasonably and fairly revoke an employee's opportunity for job level advancement.
This completely places the right to job level advancement in the hands of individuals, rather than in fixed data and systems; it prioritizes human rule over the rule of law.
Moreover, all employees within Company B know that promotions before P6 are relatively easy. Some even achieve the feat of being promoted from P1 to P6 in just one year.
Even ordinary employees, as long as they do not make mistakes, meet their KPIs, and accrue years of seniority, can become P6. Therefore, within Company B,
P6 is not valuable.
However, starting from P7, the difficulty increases significantly. According to the officially released job level structure, only one P7 is produced for every 20 P6 employees.
This is because, from P7 onwards, the job level system becomes linked to the employee's position.
To become a middle-level employee at Company B, one must possess a P7 job level. Similarly, if you attain a P7 job level, you are almost guaranteed to be promoted to a middle-level position within the company in a short period.
The subsequent levels follow the same pattern: each level increase represents a step up in your status within the company. Your position within the company will have a corresponding job level, and your job level is essentially completely tied to your position.
The reasoning is simple: company leaders cannot accept having subordinates with higher job levels than themselves. This is not only unsightly but also makes it impossible to manage. If a P6 leads a P7, does that make sense? Will they listen?
Therefore, job levels ultimately become a tool to represent company status. However, this also causes the job level system to lose its original purpose.
In Mr. Huang's view, the most important function of a job level system is to establish a second promotion system within the company to satisfy employees' aspirations and goals.
After all, the fundamental promotion system in a company is the management personnel system. There is a fixed number of positions for each "萝卜" (turnip, meaning person fitting a specific role). When one diligent person gets a promotion opportunity, other equally diligent individuals lose the opportunity.
You cannot simply remove seasoned employees without cause and replace them with more positions for new hires.
This is also the root cause of many "big company diseases." In the initial stages of a company's founding, with great potential for promotion, almost all employees can be promoted through diligence, filling the entire company with a spirit of hard work and vitality.
However, as the company operates for a longer time, its potential for growth diminishes, and various management positions are occupied by long-serving employees. Unless these long-serving employees resign voluntarily, they will forever occupy senior positions. Consequently, new employees joining the company might have to wait decades for a promotion or salary increase, leading to a completely stagnant company atmosphere.
To address this situation, a job level system was introduced to create an incentive model distinct from direct promotions, allowing all employees, even those remaining in grassroots positions, to strive for higher job levels, thereby ensuring the company's internal vitality and enthusiasm.
To achieve this objective, the difficulty of advancing to higher job levels must not be artificially controlled, nor should there be a fear of subordinates having higher job levels than their leaders. Otherwise, this job level system will be rendered useless, becoming merely an honorary medal attached to the existing hierarchy.
In this scenario, ordinary employees will discover that after reaching a certain position, unless they are promoted, they cannot further advance their job level. This would render the entire job level system meaningless.
To rectify this, Mr. Huang has thoroughly reformed the entire job level system by completely eliminating artificial factors from the job level advancement system. The advancement within the entire job level system will be placed entirely on data and achievements. Only your contributions and achievements for the company will determine the contribution points you receive, and these points will be used to advance your job level.
Similarly, the job level system and the position system have been completely separated. Management positions have no relation to the employee's own job level. A manager can be a completely new employee with only a Level 1 job level, while overseeing over a dozen super-employees with job levels of 10 or higher. This is entirely permissible.
In this way, employees will find that as long as they work diligently, strive, and achieve results, they can advance their job level, enhance their reputation and status within the company, and become the most respected individuals.
Yes, the rewards of the entire job level system are directly tied to money and respect.