Videos · 1 min 24 sec
How ranking grades identify top talent (Jenny)
Jenny walks through how ranked scores map onto a distribution curve (top 2% exceptional, next 25% exceeding, bottom 5% unsatisfactory) so you can see real top-talent density, not a wall of "meets expectations". A 84-second explainer for CPOs and People leaders.
Transcript
Ranking grades remove the guesswork from performance reviews, but how do they actually pinpoint A players? Subjective manager ratings are full of bias, making it impossible to see your true talent density.
Take a single software engineer, Sarah, finishing her annual review. She receives a precise score between 0 and 100, built from strict weighted inputs like goal completion, core values, and manager recommendations. Then Sarah's final score is placed into an ordered list, ranked highest to lowest against every other engineer in her department.
But here is the friction. A raw score of 85 doesn't automatically guarantee a top grade because different managers and departments naturally grade on different curves. Instead, that ranked list is mapped onto a strict distribution curve. The top 2% are forced into the exceptional bracket, the next 25% into exceeding, and the bottom 5% into unsatisfactory.
These strict brackets are applied as a local calibration unit within individual teams. This standardises talent expectations across the entire organisation, regardless of who the manager is. So, what exactly happens to Sarah's raw score of 85? Her rank maps her directly into the top 25% bracket, objectively proving her high performance.
Keep going
Want the method behind the video?
The free People Performance Playbook covers the review cycle, talent bars and goals in one place. Or book a 15-minute discovery call and I'll show you how Revolut People runs it.