#accountability

The company has been in a literal perpetual layoff cycle. A perfect record for outflows, constant executive turnover. Demolishing 2 of your newest buildings. Yet somehow giving himself a MASSIVE raise all while ruining people’s lives none stop! These people must be held accountable at some point. Hopefully karma can help but it surely doesn’t seem like it will.

My AD manages 2 people and owns one product . No working level duties .. No delivery pressure or resolving ground level problems

Keep making decks and spreadsheets. Attending meetings where they are not even required.. Taking status from us passing it to leaders as if she is making great progress

All those supposedly great security and cost saving decisions by moving to the cloud without knowing what was being done or securing it made by Legg and Baich just keeps on giving... why didn't their heads roll while staff did?

https://www.malwarebytes.com/blog/news/2026/02/att-breach-data-resurfaces-with-new-risks-for-customers

Why it's the leadership at the top not held accountable. They created this disastrous outcome, and we the working employees are paying the ultimate price by losing our jobs and dignity. It's a very sad and heartbreaking day for a lot of good people!

Executives, VPs, and Directors should be accountable and shown the door first.

About a year ago I was talking about MU and the eminent shortage in memory to a Director level dude, his response, 'they're still around?'. That right there tells you all you need to know about the direction of this company. There are a lot of people in high places making important decisions that don't actually care or even understand technology. Middle management has a severe lack of vision and probably accountability.

I've been with SAP for many years and I still trust most of the management but today's call really breaks my trust in it.

Why is management blaming shareholders for the stock price going down? Why can't they take accountability because they set the strategy?

Why is management blaming employees saying we aren't doing as well as we can? We're consistently overperforming even with less resources than before, employees are burnt out and they're setting higher and higher targets for each year. Why can't they allow more budget for areas that need investments?

Why is management trying for share buybacks and layoffs at the same time? They both need a lot of cash flow and the share price rise is modest at best. We're losing budget that can be put to better use instead. Buybacks seem completely unnecessary and layoffs make us lose good employees who can support other initiatives.

Why does management keep talking about Palantir in every fr3aking call? I am tired of comparisons between Palantir and SAP as they are very different companies with a vastly different customer base. I don't understand CK's obsession with Peter Thiel. Our business models are different and we should focus on ours instead of trying to be more like Palantir.

Why isn't management looking into customer feedback around AI? I herd several times that customers aren't understanding AI enough or that they are not using it correctly or that they aren't finding the right tool or whatever new excuse. Microsoft already showed that Copilot generated revenue in the short term because it was forced to be a part of every Microsoft product. But they didn't get the adoption they expected and customers aren't willing to pay more for AI if it doesn't generate additional value for them. SAP needs to work on AI but the focus should be on generating value for customer not on AI adoption of SAP products. So far, Joule has been a failure.

I am tired, boss.

I want less layoffs. I want our management to be more accountable. How do we move on from here? CK and DA are only doubling down on this messaging and SAP's been going downhill.

He’ll blame this latest stock debacle on forces beyond our control. His usual victimhood.

That doesn’t explain the fact that he had a complete id--t running the product organization for 10 yrs who had neither the capability nor the temperament for the job.

Not to mention one disastrous acquisition after another, including the final nail in the coffin, Neustar.

All the metrics are about calls and volume of waste, no real outcomes.

Who’s ready for the Townhall? Anyone planning on posting a very legit, accountability question we all can thumbs up so it gets answered?

Today's word

Can someone clarify whether there are formal guidelines or norms around reporting structures, specifically, whether Senior Directors can have only Band 4 roles reporting to them and no Band 5 (Principal/Director) roles?

VP - endlesslya swashbuckling with engineered decks to ask for more budget for FTEs, consulging engagements (or stupid tech programs with fraudelent value cases that was pitched to them in exchange for a potential board seat down the line). Not accountable for performance and delivery

VP- reports to VP, responsible for procuring the decks for swashbucling and making budget ask justifications. Trying to fill CV to become VP1 in the next gig, only manages up. Not accountable for performance and delivery.

SD- responsible for owning the pretty decks used by VP1 & 2. Not accountable for performance and delivery and wont have any KPIs or OKRs. Only manages up while being responsible for maintaining the facade of leadership. Will threaten and retaliate on any dissent or suspicion of whistleblowing. Will do lots of stupid team events quarterly to provide bread and circus.

D- responsible for creating the decks. Not accountable or responsible for anything beyond managing upwards and keeping the facade up. Will invent BS performance metrics and play bad cop for ICs to keep the order. Just waiting for their SD promotion while not managing more than 3 direct reports.

M- very rare creature at nike, manager level work is done by Directors.

P- invented director role to keep pay levels without the headcount to keep people. will do mostly what D does, doing decks without being accountable for anything or owning anything. will be scapegoated for performance if they stay in role more than 2 years.

L- baseline IC, responsible for doing analyst work to create data for the above. Owns everything without owning it. accountable for everything without influence. May have to do excel flipping on a 30 hour basis.

anything below- congrats for failing at corporate, you are essentially a glorified exec assistant. Will be asked to deliver everything from planning events to procuring merch. will be held accountable and responsible for everything. Performance expectations would be at the sky and will always be scapegoated. will be thrown around from role to role until they call it quits. only chance of moving upwards is finding a D to su-k up to that will eventually promote them as they become indispensible for their ego.

Real work will be done in southeast asia, real value will be generated by partners who sell the real work created in southeast asia. None of the above have any influence or impact on the outcomes as they exist for theathre. Occasional product hits or media sensations created by external agencies keep the ship floating.

Take a look, the new corporate leadership and SWN personnel have added way more costs and increased anxiety across the organization, own up to a wrong doing for the long term and put these people in their place

Does anyone know what the he-l is taking the company so long to issue the new picture ids, that they demanded back in October that we needed to do it or face discipline. No1 knows where or when they r getting sent out. Once again rush rush rush with this company n the left hand doesn’t know what the right is doing.

Now even less time for DXC. The AI bot who wrote the earnings call speech is now the DXC CEO.

TikTok USDS Joint Venture LLC Established in Compliance with U.S. Regulatory Requirements

Today, TikTok USDS Joint Venture LLC has been established in compliance with the Executive Order signed by President Trump on September 25, 2025, now enabling more than 200 million Americans and 7.5 million businesses to continue to discover, create, and thrive as part of TikTok's vibrant global community and experience. The majority American owned Joint Venture will operate under defined safeguards that protect national security through comprehensive data protections, algorithm security, content moderation, and software assurances for U.S. users.
TikTok USDS Joint Venture's mandate is to secure U.S. user data, apps and the algorithm through comprehensive data privacy and cybersecurity measures. It will safeguard the U.S. content ecosystem through robust trust and safety policies and content moderation while ensuring continuous accountability through transparency reporting and third-party certifications.
….
Data Protection: U.S. user data will be protected by USDS Joint Venture in Oracle's secure U.S. cloud environment. The Joint Venture will operate a comprehensive data privacy and cybersecurity program that is audited and certified by third party cybersecurity experts. The program will adhere to major industry standards, including the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) CSF and 800-53 and ISO 27001 as well as the Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) Security Requirements for Restricted Transactions.
Algorithm Security: The Joint Venture will retrain, test, and update the content recommendation algorithm on U.S. user data. The content recommendation algorithm will be secured in Oracle's U.S. cloud environment.
Software Assurance: The Joint Venture will secure U.S. apps through software assurance protocols, and review and validate source code on an ongoing basis, assisted by its Trusted Security Partner, Oracle.
Trust & Safety: The Joint Venture will safeguard the U.S. content ecosystem and have decision-making authority for trust and safety policies and content moderation.
Interoperability enables the Joint Venture to provide U.S. users with a global TikTok experience, ensuring U.S. creators can be discovered and businesses can operate on a global scale. TikTok global's U.S. entities will manage global product interoperability and certain commercial activities, including e-commerce, advertising, and marketing.
The Joint Venture, built on the foundation of the TikTok U.S. Data Security (USDS) organization, will operate as an independent entity governed by the following seven-member, majority-American board of directors:
…

Raul Fernandez – Independent Director and Chair of the Security Committee: Raul Fernandez is President and Chief Executive Officer of DXC Technology and a member of its Board of Directors. He brings more than three decades of experience at the intersection of technology, risk, and national security.
…

Full Press Release here: https://newsroom.tiktok.com/announcement-from-the-new-tiktok-usds-joint-venture-llc?lang=en

Just in headend will be contractors based also. They are currently looking at a few potential companies to take over....

Only people to blame are employees for letting this happen.. Chicken sh--s

I don’t know about you, but I’m tired of some of these VPs on LinkedIn talking about AI and the impact they can have when they can’t even look away from their monitor and the script that they’re reading from. The chief people officer is the worst offender of all. Cisco is not an AI company just like they’re not a software company. Stick to selling boxes that’s where you made your money.

If they are shifting employee led initiatives like employees are responsible for development efforts and writing their own individual goals. What's the point of top heavy management? We dont need them! They cause more risk to the company by being sloppy.

This should be concerning to U.S. Bank’s CEO:

There is an ongoing concern regarding the excessive number of management positions within EFCC specifically CRT(Grade 14 and higher) within U.S. Bank. From an employee perspective, many of these roles appear to add little to no measurable value to daily operations, production goals, or team performance, yet they command very high salaries.

There is a growing perception that a significant portion of upper management has minimal direct involvement in the actual work being done. Meanwhile, frontline employees and senior individual contributors are absorbing the workload, resolving issues, and driving results—often without corresponding compensation or authority.

The department feels increasingly top-heavy. Decision-making is slow, layers of approval are unnecessary, and resources are being spent on positions that do not directly contribute to productivity, customer experience, or revenue. This structure is not financially efficient and raises serious questions about accountability, role necessity, and return on investment.

At a time when cost control and operational efficiency are frequently emphasized, it is difficult to understand why so many high-level management roles are maintained despite their limited impact. A thorough review of these positions, including role consolidation or elimination where appropriate, could result in substantial cost savings and improved morale among the employees who are actually doing the work specifically the Senior Reviewers.

What is the DX team? Being in sales I find this group as middleware. They have no knowledge and skill sets and pass all opportunities over to the groups that do the work. I was just on a call the other day and I almost lost the deal because of this group!!!!!!stop selling your bloated and expensive services that bring no value to our customers!

Anyone else know of groups where you just scratch your head and say why are we paying salaries for groups like this….

I reviewed some quarterly meetings with the ELT and one important question was asked to the CEO.

You have mentioned we have the people to win and emphasize we are a people-first culture.
So, why is cutting people first a yearly action plan for long-term growth and profitability?
After five years of people first cuts, might it be time to rethink this strategy. How about people-second?

Does anyone know if this person was made an example of?

Phillips 66 owns a refining system that should be capable of delivering durable, peer-leading returns. The assets are advantaged, the footprint is diverse, and the workforce is experienced. Yet over the past several years, refining has remained a primary source of earnings volatility and inconsistent performance, rather than a stabilizing value engine.

That outcome ultimately sits with leadership.

Under Rich Harbison, Phillips 66 refining has not consistently translated operational capability into shareholder value. While individual sites often perform well, the system as a whole has struggled to demonstrate sustained margin capture or downside protection relative to best-in-class peers such as Valero.

This is not simply an operational issue—it is a commercial and leadership failure.

Phillips 66 frequently points to favorable market cracks and commercial optionality as evidence that refining should perform well. But market cracks do not create value on their own. Value is created when trading, optimization, and asset operations work together to capture those signals consistently and manage volatility when conditions turn.

That responsibility extends beyond refining leadership to the commercial organization.

Under Brian Mandell and Mark Hughes, Phillips 66 has expanded its commercial and trading footprint and repeatedly described it as a differentiator. The implication is clear: stronger trading capability should enhance margin capture and smooth earnings.

The results do not support that claim.

Despite periods of attractive market cracks, Phillips 66 has failed to consistently convert market structure into superior refining returns. Upside capture has been uneven. Downside exposure has been abrupt. Trading appears unable to reliably translate market opportunity into durable value at the enterprise level.

When trading cannot deliver the value implied by the market environment, it ceases to be a hedge or differentiator and becomes just another source of noise layered onto an already volatile business.

This raises uncomfortable questions about focus and accountability.

Valero’s advantage is not just asset quality—it is clarity. Its leadership team is singularly focused on refining and commercial execution. There are no competing internal priorities, no portfolio narratives to balance, and no ambiguity about what success looks like. That focus shows up in more consistent margin capture and more reliable shareholder outcomes.

Phillips 66, by contrast, splits leadership attention across refining, marketing, a growing trading organization, midstream, and chemicals. In that environment, refining leadership must be forceful and commercial leadership must be exceptional. Instead, the system appears fragmented, with no one clearly accountable for turning market opportunity into sustained returns.

This is not a workforce problem. Refineries run. Traders trade. Commercial teams work hard. The issue is coordination, discipline, and leadership effectiveness at the top.

When refining volatility continues to dominate results, when market cracks fail to translate into value, and when trading is invoked more often as an explanation than as a solution, accountability becomes unavoidable.

Phillips 66 has the assets.
It has the markets.
What it lacks is leadership leverage.

Until refining and commercial leadership are held accountable for profitability, volatility management, and peer-relative capture—not just activity and presence—refining will remain a source of frustration rather than a foundation for shareholder value.

The assets deserve better integration.
Shareholders deserve better outcomes.

If Schwab is serious about expense management, start holding MD levels accountable.
Not sure how many are in STS about 50% can be reduced… they all just enable politics and misdirection as they are not needed…. If we already have 2 MD layers why are 1-2 more layers needed?
Such a wasteful org model, and mismanaged dept that is hindering our firm. Starts at the top.

Anyone else's manager losing their mind and creating insane and unclear and unreasonable expectations they cant even explain? Its like there is absolute no accountability for these middle managers running amuck reeking havok and creating chaos.

Is there a secret department at UCR where job descriptions go to die?

Because after watching this place operate, it is convincing, that a solid chunk of long-tenured personnel have absolutely no idea what their job duties are - despite having occupied the same chair since the Bush administration.

The environment is peak toxicity, propped up by a nonstop flex of credentials:

“I have a master’s.”
“I have two master’s.”
“I’m certified in 17 things that don’t apply to this role.”
“I attended a webinar once.”

Cool. So… who’s actually doing the work?

Apparently no one - because whenever accountability shows up, it’s immediately chased off by a blizzard of excuses that have nothing to do with the task at hand:

“That’s not really my responsibility” (it is)
“We’re waiting on alignment” (with whom?)
“Process changes” (none occurred)
“Bandwidth” (translation: vibes are off)

These are jobs they’ve held for years, yet somehow every request is treated like a surprise pop quiz in a subject they’ve never heard of. The degrees get louder, the excuses get stranger, and the actual output remains… theoretical.

Accountability? That left the building a long time ago — probably reassigned to a committee that never meets.

At this point, UCR doesn’t need more certifications. It needs a basic refresher course called: “So What Is It You Do Here, Exactly?”

As a senior woman at this bank, I am appalled at the handling of the bully and harasser Andy Sieg. The HR team here is the absolutely worse. In fact, Sara told us at a meeting of senior women that she knows nothing about HR and is just "fake it till you make it".
Jane, do us all a favor and go hire someone who understands the important role HR can play when led by someone with integrity and an ounce of employee advocacy.

Are they scared of losing their job? It is just horrific these days. Grow a spine and tell the truth and take ownership instead of blaming others.

I see that ex boss of platform X is still in the company after catastrophic failure of her product. At the same time, 200 of hard working people from PX build team were fired. The captain should go down with the ship, but this rat escaped first and now attending conferences across the globe to sell thin air.

It is clear that the ELT is grasping at straws. Retention and Growth are stagnant as our overall service level has fallen to never seen levels of FA disappointment . The promised efficiency of Salesforce and Moneyguide for branches has never arrived.

We are all living the agile worst case with broken systems and products that will never live up to the hype. If this is finding our Rich then count me out.

Truly seems like management is being paid to run this company into the ground without consequences. I can only imagine what investors would think if they went to the HQ to see what is really going on with this company. Such potential and it is all going to waste because the wrong people are on a power trip and they are removing competent people who would replace them and do a better a job. If only the investors knew what was really going on at Estero and Atlanta.

Maybe the investors do know and they are making a profit when we fail? Maybe the plan is for Hertz to fail and this was all done on purpose.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnTU_hJoByA

Festog and Greed are primarily to blame for the destruction of the company, that’s not in dispute. Have there been any consequences to them? They both walked away with generational wealth, but have either been held to account? Major lawsuits? Financial claims against them? These two vicious, evil sc-mbags need to pay, but it looks like they’re gonna walk scott free. What can be done?

Our Board are directly culpable for the situation we now find ourselves in. It is how corporate governance works.

My question: when will the market, activists etc hold them accountable and force change. It needs to happen.

Head of a BU (L1) appointing his old (kisser) report to be the head (L3) of a highly technical domain which the kisser has no education, training and experience.

I'm not talking about the old head of HR with engineering background moving to a business role in wealth which you may say she just get this extradentary business sense that makes her a perfect fit. I'm talking about the reverse: a leader of low tech appointed to be the leader of high tech which Fido desperately needs some external leadership.

I guess it doesn't rise to the level of unethical behavior on the L1's part, but apparently he either is so d-mb or just doesn't care about the wellness of Fidelity. How can I lodge an complaint? Chairman's Line? As DARN won't work since the L1 is up on my report chain. I don't particularly care about my career in Fidelity as can't wait to get out of here after my fifth anniversary after all things vests.

Mobility for the bottom echelon is a joke at Fidelity I know for a while. Every time those
"leaders" invoke the word "mobility" I chuckle. This appointment just once more affirms that mobility is only for the higher ups at Fido!

Posting anonymously, just sharing what I’m seeing.

The recent cuts in the T-Mobile Technology org were deep. In some parts of the org, reductions were around 20 percent. Some very strong performers were caught up in it, including people I respect and consider friends. I’m not happy about that, and I genuinely hope those folks land somewhere better quickly.

At the same time, if we’re being honest with ourselves, this wasn’t random chaos, and it wasn’t just about cutting costs.

For years after the Sprint merger, the company carried massive overlap, silos, and layers of ambiguity. When an organization grows that quickly, some people inevitably disappear into the gaps. High performers noticed. Morale suffered. Accountability blurred. That kind of rot doesn’t fix itself.

This round feels different. It looks like a baseline reset, not a cosmetic trim.
Does that mean every remaining employee is suddenly a top performer? Obviously not. Anyone still inside can look around and name a few head scratchers. That doesn’t destroy the credibility of the reset. It actually explains it.

Structural RIFs come first. True performance sorting comes later.
With fewer people, fewer layers, and less cover, it becomes much harder to hide. Coaching gets real. Expectations get explicit. Outcomes matter. The next phase will not be about headcount targets but about contribution.

The message from senior leadership afterward was clear: this is an all-in moment. I took that as both a rally call and a line in the sand. This is not a season for quiet quitting or waiting things out. The bar is being raised, and everyone knows it.

For those who remain, this is an opportunity to help shape what comes next. Don’t get pulled into the constant negativity or the doomsday narratives. They’re loud, but they don’t move things forward. This is a moment to show up with integrity, collaboration, and execution. Those qualities are always in demand, and they open doors whether you stay at T-Mobile or move on to something new.

Painful resets are sometimes necessary to restore accountability, clarity, and forward momentum. And for those who instinctively roll their eyes at statements like that, assuming they are just another round of talking points, I’d encourage you to read the room. This one feels different. The actions so far make it believable.

I’m not celebrating layoffs. I’m acknowledging reality.

Support each other. Stay professional. Keep your integrity. The story isn’t over yet.

Verizon downfall can be easily summed up. Cant post work emails here but 90% of these foreign born directors (guess what country?) cannot spell basic first grade words right. Do they forget that VZ has gemini built into google workspace for a few years now??? Its as simple as hitting autocorrect. Who is hiring these lazy directors.

End H1Bs now!

Did Rich Baich engage in conduct that may constitute a conflict of interest? Rich Baich serves as Chief Information Security Officer (CISO) and Senior Vice President at AT&T. Rich's daughter, for reference, serves as Director of Product Management at SimSpace, a cybersecurity training platform.

• In November 2024, Rich Baich hosted SimSpace’s Cyber Cup competition at AT&T's HQ, in which AT&T placed first in the Cyber Cup Defensive Challenge.

• Rich and his daughter presented together at RSAC 2025 in a session titled “Nurturing the Next Generation of Cyber Defenders” on April 28, 2025. https://www.rsaconference.com/experts/rich-baich

• Rich Baich hosted the 2025 “Telecommunications Cyber Cup Challenge,” involving 13 global telecommunications carriers in Washington D.C., with SimSpace. https://www.attconnects.com/working-together-to-prepare-for-tomorrows-threats-today/

Do these activities represent a potential conflict of interest, abuse of position or authority, lack of objectivity, breach of fiduciary duty, or violation of corporate ethics policies?

AT&T Code of Ethics https://investors.att.com/~/media/Files/A/ATT-IR-V2/governance-documents/att-code-of-ethics.pdf

Remember it’s not us vs each other. It’s the have vs the have nots, or top vs bottom.

The execs don’t have to badge in, they have dedicated offices, they don’t track hours, they negotiate their pay, and the list goes on.

https://fb.watch/EPm6kmUn3N/?

Hold them all accountable.

IDM 2.0 was never a bad idea. In fact, it was necessary to save the manufacturing side of the company. But Pat’s mistake was investing in fabs before fixing yield and before we could reliably produce competitive chips for our own products again.
Lip-Bu Tan is doing all the right things to right-size the ship and inject discipline back into the company. I expect we will soon see changes to the focal process to align with that expectation from employees. But none of it means anything if yield does not reach industry-leading levels.

The fixed costs of underutilized fabs designed for future yields and future customers are ki-ling our bottom line and shortening the runway to get us there. If not for the investments Intel received last year, it would be over already.

This is actually becoming pathetic. You can’t get the data on time, never mind right. People’s employment is tied to this stupid report, Jay. Get it right.