Trending @Capgemini; YER 2025 Rating Downgraded from 2 to 3

This is the faltu process but Until January 30th, you can still raise requests to appeal or change your performance rating.

We work hard the entire year. The rating should primarily come from the person who directly supervises your day-to-day work and actually sees your effort and contributions. Instead, someone higher up (often with zero visibility into your actual deliverables) — usually HR or calibration committees — steps in out of nowhere, downgrades the rating without any discussion, justification, or feedback, and then vanishes. It’s an absolutely pointless and demotivating process.

It feels like everything gets forced into a handful of fixed rating buckets (ACLH, BTO, etc.). If a resource somehow clears their arbitrary checklist or “set,” they sail through with a decent rating — even if they barely contribute anything meaningful to the project. Meanwhile, if your direct supervisor (N+1) knows your work intimately and genuinely believes you deserve an Exceptional or high rating because of the real effort and impact you’ve delivered, that often gets ignored or overruled anyway.

Your N+1 is supposed to discuss with the current project supervisor to properly understand the effort you’re putting in, the quality of work you’re delivering, and the value you’re adding — and then stand firmly by that assessment during calibration. They should defend it against unnecessary downgrades. But in most cases, that simply doesn’t happen. Either they don’t push back strongly enough, or the process is designed in such a way that supervisor input gets diluted or overridden regardless.

End result: a completely faltu, unfair, and soul-crushing system that kills motivation and rewards politics/checklist-passing more than actual work and results