> So you adopt some kind of policy that you believe forces your line managers to have some kind of accountability.
But, it doesn't. Actually evaluating the people within your scope of control (at a minimum direct reports) and holding them accountable for concrete, business-meaningful results does that.
Stack ranking doesn't, and moreover it transparently obviously doesn't in a way which has obvious adverse impacts on subordinate organizations which are effective, so it not only fails to establish real accountability for lower management, it sends a message to lower management that upper management is more interested in pro forma shows of "doing something" than actual concrete business results, which—aside from.the direct adverse impacts of stack ranking itself—has adverse cultural impacts on management throughout the organization.
But, it doesn't. Actually evaluating the people within your scope of control (at a minimum direct reports) and holding them accountable for concrete, business-meaningful results does that.
Stack ranking doesn't, and moreover it transparently obviously doesn't in a way which has obvious adverse impacts on subordinate organizations which are effective, so it not only fails to establish real accountability for lower management, it sends a message to lower management that upper management is more interested in pro forma shows of "doing something" than actual concrete business results, which—aside from.the direct adverse impacts of stack ranking itself—has adverse cultural impacts on management throughout the organization.