The Lingering Scars of GE’s Management Legacy

Yesterday, I stumbled across an old book on my shelf: Execution by Larry Bossidy and Ram Charan. It had been handed out to the management team after the company was taken over by a group of ex-GE high-flyers, staunch devotees of Jack Welch’s legacy.

As I flicked through it, I was struck by how the entire book revolves around individual performance. Although it covers topics like crafting strategy, managing operations, and developing the business, its real focus is squarely on individual performance, with a relentless mantra that only the very best should be chosen for each role.

 I found this exhibit with the famous 4 squares grids where the “behaviour” and the “performance” are evaluated, it also came with the not less famous forced-ranking. 

I recall how implementing this approach fostered a company culture where people were constantly assessed, ranked, and shown the door if they didn’t measure up. Given how challenging it is to evaluate performance properly, the process ended up becoming highly political, with individuals being judged against one another during calibration sessions with other managers. It was a bit like bookmakers placing bets on horses… You can imagine the toxic behaviours that such a management practice could encourage!

The book views the company as a well-oiled machine: put the best individual performers in the right roles, and the company will outperform the rest. Simple as that.

Yet we see countless examples everyday proving that a team’s performance isn’t merely the sum of its individual parts (hello, Mr Mbappé at Real Madrid!). A team is a social group, not a machine.

The damage caused by this GE-inspired culture is still evident today. The infamous 4-block grid remains in use in many companies, albeit with some amusing variations: 9 blocks instead of 4 (presumably to add a touch of nuance?) or replacing “performance” on one axis with a vague “how?”.

I’ve also seen people, myself included, influenced by the belief that “good people like to be challenged,” making it almost a mission to constantly test others with difficult questions. The reality, though, is that working with people who are always challenging your ideas can be exhausting!

Fortunately, management practices have evolved, with a growing emphasis on teamwork and well-being in the workplace. These values are better understood and increasingly embedded in how organisations operate. Yet, I can’t help but wonder how much of the poison from those old, rigid management approaches still lingers beneath the surface. Are we truly free from the shadow of forced rankings and relentless individual evaluation? Or do traces of this mindset continue to influence the way we lead, challenge, and judge others? It’s a question worth asking—and a shift worth fully committing to—for the sake of healthier, more collaborative workplaces.