#accountability

In my personal experience, Jeff Nibler and Kyle Goodwin are two of the worst managers I have encountered in my career.

Their leadership was an exhausting combination of unclear direction, poor communication, weak accountability and an astonishing lack of meaningful support. Problems were allowed to fester, legitimate concerns seemed to disappear into a void, and employees were left to deal with the consequences of management failures they did not create.

Working under them felt like being trapped in a leadership vacuum. Instead of providing clarity, they created confusion. Instead of building trust, they eroded it. Instead of helping employees succeed, their management approach made already demanding work needlessly frustrating and demoralizing.

What made the experience particularly intolerable was the apparent disconnect between leadership’s perception of itself and the reality experienced by the people doing the work. Accountability seemed to flow downward, while support rarely did. Their management did not merely fail to improve the workplace—it actively made the workplace worse.

This is my personal assessment, and I do not claim to speak for anyone else. However, anyone considering a position reporting to either of them should proceed extremely cautiously. Ask current and former employees direct questions about morale, turnover, communication, psychological safety and how management responds when challenged.

A difficult job can be manageable with good leadership. Under Jeff Nibler and Kyle Goodwin, the leadership was the most difficult part of the job.

All or almost all proposed projects at this time coming out if EMTEC are bogus. Please ask questions 3-4 layers deep and they will be exposed. The managers are intentionally covering up bad ideas in the guise of next big opportunity to get their bonus and move to their next role, while the future organization suffers with their terrible decisions.

Managers are intentionally spinning the wheel on ‘technologies’ and ideas that no one in the industry will touch or have already made a clear decision to never pursue. Closely look at Upstream research, they will drain the company of $$ shamelesslessly, or just out of incompetence.

Under the threat of unemployment, the Research company is also joining in on these made up technology cases, especially getting a chance to contribute on the Upstream side.

Please look closely, just throwing millions of dollars for projects known to be failures is crazy. It is not innovation.

Don’t burden your technical staff with turning slogans from clueless middle manager into engineering execution, when it is simply not possible.

It is one thing for you to ask someone to become a better basketball player — it is possible. It is another thing to ask someone to grow from 5 ft 10 to 7 ft in a year to then become the best player of NBA. It is is impossible, factually impossible. What these managers are forcefully promoting are IMPOSSIBLE ideas.

only ask is please ask critical questions, these Yes men need to be held accountable.

https://www.smh.com.au/technology/telstra-s-only-two-timing-experts-had-been-sent-home-to-rest-before-network-fell-over-20260902-p60tmw.html

The only two Telstra engineers with deep expertise in the system that failed in July were on a mandatory break when the national mobile outage they had unwittingly triggered took hold, an external investigation has found.

The outage cut hundreds of people off from Triple Zero, halted trains in Victoria and NSW, and brought down eftpos systems across the country. It has triggered a Senate inquiry and an investigation by the communications regulator that could result in Telstra being fined up to $30 million.

The pair had replaced a faulty power supply in a timing chassis in Melbourne in the early hours of July 8. When it came back online at 2.50am, a GPS card inside reset and began telling the mobile network the date was 2006. The card was missing a firmware update for a predictable fault the supplier had already flagged in bulletins, confirming this masthead’s (the Age), July reporting.

The report by Technology Audit Partners found alarms on the timing servers were checked only during business hours by a small number of staff and did not appear in the monitoring tools used by round-the-clock support teams. When errors began to occur, nobody on duty could find records of the servers, the work done that night or the people to call.

Chief executive Vicki Brady said the company accepted every finding.
....
Brady also revealed Telstra had missed eight failed Triple Zero calls during the outage and never carried out the welfare checks required to find out whether the people who made them were safe. She blamed a manual processing fault and a monitoring fault.
....
“It shouldn’t have happened. We should have picked those eight up,” Brady said. “We know how important Triple Zero is.”
....
The telecommunications company also revised the start of the outage to 2.50am on July 8, almost 50 minutes earlier than it had said. The previous time reflected when a maintenance ticket was closed rather than when the fault began.

Brady said the failure was “not due to infrastructure failing” but to an undocumented design change made in October last year and a software update that was never applied to a GPS card.
....
“It’s not about not enough resources. It’s not about not enough money,” she said. “It’s about the prioritisation.”
....
The Australian Communications Consumer Action Network said the report showed a governance failure rather than a technical fault beyond Telstra’s control, and renewed its call for enforceable reliability standards.

“We rely on telcos to ensure that their networks are managed with the seriousness commensurate with public safety,” chief executive Carol Bennett said. “This report shows that didn’t happen. Not because the problem was unforeseeable – in fact it was very much foreseen – but Telstra didn’t treat it as a priority until it caused a national outage.”
....
More than 30,000 customers have contacted Telstra for compensation, and it has paid just under $1 million in credits, an average of about $15 for consumers. Brady urged anyone still out of pocket to come forward.

“Modern networks are complex but complexity is not an excuse,” she said.

We just had the marketing town hall where Kellyn blathered on and on about how great everything was, how much everyone told her they loved the latest market based BS and how we should do those surveys ASAP.

Then she “interviewed” the new VP of digital who moved from Utah to Dallas. Nice enough guy but he mentioned how awful the traffic is in Dallas. Wouldn’t even notice it most of the time but I thought we worked for a company that provides fantastic connectivity services that allow you to collaborate without having to sit in traffic every day. Kellyn and co. sm--k you over the head with this connection cr-p all the time, so you would think we would I don’t know, live that purpose?

It shouldn’t by now, but the hypocrisy of our leaders just never ceases to amaze me. How they can continually sing the praises of products, services and messages they clearly don’t believe in and keep a straight face is quite a feat.

After 33 years and 9 months with Wells Fargo, Kim Weakley is leaving, roughly a year after being appointed an executive.

Andrew Freymann inherited Kim and, in my opinion, made a good call. Under Kim, the culture often felt like “my way or the highway,” and there was a perception that certain people in her organization were protected from accountability.

Now the attention turns to the leadership structure she leaves behind, especially the San Antonio CSM organization. New leadership should mean new expectations and real accountability, not the same culture with different names.

After all these years, this could finally be the reset the organization needs.

What you think about the Overlay Orgs ? .
I felt the leadership of the of global partner SE Org is one of the most fake org in Cisco?
So confusing, no accountable...just fun and lots of travel?..
Any other ?

im not paying these people anymore. cancelled. leaders are held accountable for results. they are getting fired.

Anyone else hear about the new RE-ORG to "support" EPG? Customer Service is always so garbage at Elavon, the only way itll get better is when QA and leadership actually keep the reps accountable- I know ppl that still have jobs in CS that straight up just hangup on customers (theyve full on told me thats what they do) have been working htere for years.

Just remember that there is more accountability for a mid-level IC than there is for Enrique. He’ll fail and get a golden handshake deal while our colleagues are laid off and job hunting in the worst job market in our lifetime.

F PayPal “leadership”, F the board. They have ki-led what was once upon a time a fintech leader and they have ZERO vision to bring it back from the dead. I would have welcomed a Stripe acquisition even at that number. At least they have some kind of trajectory.

Sorry to all who have been affected. I hope we all find better gigs. Check on your friends.

Japan Airlines was $25 billion in debt. Bankruptcy declared. 16,000 jobs on the line. CEO Haruka Nishimatsu didn't call a press conference.

He cut his own salary to $90,000 - less than his pilots. Canceled the executive dining room. Took the bus to work. No bodyguards. No reserved parking. No perks. While other CEOs drafted layoff lists from penthouse suites, Nishimatsu stood in the cafeteria line with ground crew. Workers noticed.

Morale shifted. In 3 years, Japan Airlines went

from the largest airline bankruptcy in history... to the most profitable airline in the world. It relisted on the Tokyo Stock Exchange in 2012. That wasn't a turnaround plan. That was one man choosing accountability over comfort. Lesson: Most companies don't fail because of bad markets. They fail because leaders protect themselves first.

It's not miracle that saved Japanese airlines. It's the attitudes of leaders that saved. Hope ppl notices.

The SIU townhall, which was already reduced from monthly to quarterly, was just canceled today for the 8/31/2026 scheduled date. The last SIU town hall was in May and the next one is not until November. Sabrina continues to demonstrate that she refuses to face us and take accountability!!

We do not need a stay of execution; we need certainty and security.
Leadership has lost its humanity in what was once a great company, where people genuinely came first. PayPal is no longer a company I’m proud to work for.

I would welcome the opportunity, if given the appropriate platform, to publicly and constructively critique the decisions and leadership approach that have brought us to this point. People deserve transparency, accountability, and to be treated with dignity—not uncertainty and fear.

If it's true that the board only cares about stockholders and stock price then that explains their worth to the company. It's like our weekly conference calls. I want 30 sales this week, that breaks down to 5 per day, here is a sales plan that involves free time and I want you to call people until you get 30 sales. Same every week and the rvp has done his job. The tools are a cr-ppy POS system, Internet phones and the same call lists week after week. Low sales the store gets blamed high sales the management gets bonuses . You want stock prices to climb get rid of these do nothing fools and put your effort where your customers are. Revenue is generated by stores fools. Dm's rvps svps don't make the company a dime and almost none of them even know how to take a payment. Make us do Amazon returns with the business model of let the stores do all the work with no support or training and ignore what happened to Kohl's. I don't sell cars or insurance I work rent to own. These returners aren't shopping their returning. You are trying to teach us to swim by saying there is water nearby. You have never gotten wet yourself. Ernie Talley ran the business and saw a need. These fools now think since they wear the hat they are chefs but the truth is stock price is low and their middle men are clueless. Blame everyone else but the fault is in the mirror Blasquez. I haven't forgotten about your ineptness or you York with your id--tic power tripping. I would be ashamed if I were you.

My alert went off this morning. Good times for another executive. From publicly available information…

Chris Koster, Centene’s General Counsel:

2023: $4.84M
2024: $5.06M
2025: $6.51M

On August 18, 2026, Koster sold 47,603 Centene shares for roughly $3.11 million. $16.4M in three years. Cha-Ching sir! Here are the stock trades:

https://www.nasdaq.com/market-activity/insiders/koster-christopher-1108982

Not bad for the top lawyer at a company whose business is largely administering taxpayer-funded healthcare.

Koster went from county prosecutor → Missouri Senator → Missouri Attorney General → Centene executive.

So basically, decades in Missouri government followed by millions a year at one of the country’s largest Medicaid contractors.

At least someone figured out how to make Medicaid profitable. But sure, keep cutting the people doing the actual work. That ought to fix the margins. And congrats, Chris. Don’t spend it all in one place.

I am amazed that host governments are letting ExxonMobil continue to do less and less in terms of local benefits. Jobs that could be local are now in India. How is this allowed?

is it they actually live what they preach. And yhr honest truth is we know they won't and their leaders won't. Those who try will find themselves exiting the business.

The health-insurance industry is the largest barely-legal fraud in America.

The guy who started Centene was a money grubbing thug.

The people running the company now have Zero morals or integrity.

You make major profit by denying people “healthcare” and can’t even run the racket quietly without major lawsuits.

The only thing keeping the American people from putting the entire C-suite in jail is government cronyism.

If Centene is serious about understanding what is happening within Corporate Ethics & Compliance, then stop looking at individual employees and start looking at the people making the decisions. The problem is much bigger than SIU. It extends across CIU, SIT, COI, InTP, Privacy, Corrections, and other areas that are supposed to protect the company and ensure compliance.

At some point, leadership needs to take a hard look in the mirror. There is a growing perception that advancement, opportunities, protection, and even how employees are treated can depend too heavily on who leadership likes, who they know, who agrees with them, and who does not challenge their decisions. That is not leadership. That is creating an environment where employees learn very quickly that speaking up can have consequences.

And perhaps the biggest problem is that employees are sometimes expected to follow processes that are not clearly documented, have changed repeatedly, are outdated, or in some cases do not exist at all.

Ask for the policy. Ask for the procedure. Ask for the written guideline. Ask for the reference material. The response is often some version of, “We’re working on it.” Well, if you are still working on the policy, then why are you enforcing it as though it already exists? Why are employees being held accountable for standards that have not been clearly communicated? Why are decisions being made based on “how we’ve always done it” when Compliance should be operating from documented, consistent, and defensible standards?
That is not compliance. That is inconsistency disguised as compliance.

Leadership cannot constantly change expectations and then blame employees for failing to meet them.

You cannot move the goalposts and then criticize people for not knowing where the goalposts are. You cannot demand documentation from everyone else while operating without clear documentation yourselves. And you cannot build an effective Compliance organization through fear, favoritism, secrecy, micromanagement, or a culture where challenging leadership is treated as being difficult or disloyal.

The uncomfortable question is this: Who is holding Compliance leadership accountable? If Compliance is supposed to identify risk, investigate misconduct, enforce standards, and protect the organization, then its own leadership should be subject to an equally rigorous level of scrutiny.

Maybe it is time for an independent, top-to-bottom assessment of Corporate Ethics & Compliance.
Not another internal review where the same leadership structure reviews itself. Look at the leadership. Look at hiring and promotion decisions. Look at turnover. Look at why experienced employees have left. Look at how investigations are handled. Look at whether expectations are consistently applied. Look at whether policies actually exist and are current. Look at how employees who raise concerns are treated. Look at whether qualifications, experience, credentials, training, and resources actually match the responsibilities employees are being asked to perform. And most importantly, look at the leadership culture.

Replacing a few employees while leaving the leadership structure, decision-making practices, and underlying culture untouched does not fix the problem. It simply moves the problem around.

Sometimes you don't need another reorganization. You need accountability. You need new leadership. You need policies and procedures that are actually written, current, accessible, and consistently applied. You need qualified people in the right positions with the right experience and tools. And you need leaders who are willing to hear “no,” accept criticism, answer difficult questions, and admit when something is wrong.

Compliance cannot demand from the rest of the company what Compliance leadership is unwilling or unable to demonstrate itself.

If Centene truly wants to rebuild trust, then it needs to start at the top.
Clean house where necessary. Rewrite what is broken. Create what is missing. Remove outdated practices. Establish clear standards. Put qualified people in the right positions. And hold leadership accountable to the same standards imposed on everyone else.
Anything less is just rearranging the furniture while the foundation continues to crack.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-08-25/sap-renewed-hr-chief-s-term-after-probes-cleared-her-of-fault

“SAP treats all misconduct allegations with the utmost seriousness and is committed to handling them through rigorous, fair, and thorough review processes,” the company, the supervisory board and Vargiu-Breuer said in an email. There was “no evidence of misconduct” by Vargiu-Breuer, according to the statement. “The Supervisory Board carefully considered all relevant information, including critical feedback, and decided to extend Gina Vargiu-Breuer’s contract based on a comprehensive assessment of her performance, leadership, and contribution to SAP’s transformation.”

…that you work for a company that wouldn’t p1ss on you if you were on fire.

A company that thinks it’s fine to have an all hands that unambiguously states that RIFs are happening in the next few weeks, even puts it in writing in a recap email, then does NOTHING, then does not even have enough respect for the human that it sends a follow-up email addressing what they themselves chose to put out there in terms of messaging. Accountability, you see, is only for us peons.

So yeah. Don’t sc--w over your team or the customer but “work to rule”. 8 hours. Don’t volunteer extra work. If you have a legitimate press contact share the email and that there’s been no update.

F@ck Enrique, executive bonuses, and this dying brand.

Who’s fault is this new mess and how severe will the fallout be? What did you think of Cara’s email apology?

Management’s obsession with hitting a rigid, daily efficiency percentage has created a completely broken, circular game of finger-pointing. What’s worse is that these impossible metrics are actively creating an unsafe working environment.
Here is the daily reality: local foreman gives the crew a specific job assignment. The crew completes the assignment exactly as directed, but because the work assigned doesn't automatically equal management's "magic number" for the day, the foreman gets chewed out by their boss.
Instead of pushing back up the chain and explaining that the crew did exactly what they were told to do, middle management tries to point the blame directly on the craft to save their own skin.
The absurdity is off the charts. We are talking about the exact same foremen who assigned the work in the first place, and the exact same foremen who are sitting behind multiple high-def cameras running ops tests and watching our every single move. They see exactly what we are doing every minute of the shift, yet they still look us in the eye and ask why the numbers are low.
What the system completely ignores is reality. Nowhere in these calculations are we allowed to add to our time for things that are completely out of our control.
Our guess? Higher management is trying to figure out how to navigate away from traditional, publicized layoffs. By making up completely unrealistic performance metrics, they can stress people out or manufacture failures.
When the only logical answer we can give a foreman is, "You gave us the job, you tell us," it shows just how detached the metric system is from actual field operations. If you're going to manage by a spreadsheet to squeeze the craft, at least look out the window to see the unsafe environment you are building on the ground.

If you’re considering a role on the Markets side, know what you’re walking into. The culture there isn’t just competitive, it’s dog-eat-dog, and it’s shaped by leadership that’s more interested in protecting itself than developing people. Too many of the “managers” running these teams are underqualified for the seats they hold, and they’ve built environments that reward toxicity because toxicity is what got them there.

Loyalty and tenure mean nothing. Years of contribution mean nothing. If you value a workplace with real accountability from the top down, look elsewhere.

Instead, I got no training, no mentoring, and assignments outside my skill set. So much for my expectations.

Compared to this same time last year, everything is trending in the wrong direction:

• Customer Success output is way down — fewer courses built, slower turnaround, more backlog.
• IA/EA adoptions are noticeably lower across multiple disciplines.
• Salesforce closed business is so far behind that leadership is blaming “CRM hygiene” instead of acknowledging the real problem.
• Faculty frustration is rising — some are openly threatening to switch materials.
• Customer Success and reps are already exhausted, and it’s not even September.

We’re running back‑to‑school with a skeleton crew and a roll of duct tape. Org chart vacancies everywhere. New hires who don’t understand their roles or the workflows they’re supposed to support. Experienced colleagues continuing to exit, and many who remain are actively looking for new careers.

And here’s the part leadership won’t say out loud:

This is NOT what Apollo wanted heading into an IPO.
Apollo expected a clean, stable, predictable back‑to‑school season — something they could point to when selling the story to Wall Street. Instead, they’re getting:

collapsing workflows
missed in‑stock dates
angry faculty
exhausted teams
shrinking adoption pipelines
declining IA/EA momentum
internal confusion about roles, ownership, and accountability

This is the opposite of “IPO‑ready.”

And it all ties back to the May 1st reorg.
The May 1st reorg removed the last wave of people who actually understood Higher Ed The people who stabilized operations, built courses correctly, managed timelines, and kept faculty relationships intact.

In their place, leadership installed a structure full of:

• inexperienced managers
• unclear roles
• pods stretched across institutions
• Customer Success teams drowning in work
• reps covering territories that make no sense
• workflows patched together with duct tape

The May 1st reorg wasn’t a “reset.”
It was a detonation, and we’re living in the blast radius.

Apollo wanted a clean runway to an IPO. Instead, they got a back‑to‑school season that looks like a controlled crash.

Employees can see it.
Faculty can feel it.
Customers are talking about it.
And the numbers reflect it.

This isn’t “a tough year.”
It’s a disaster, one created by leadership decisions that gutted the last of the real industry talent right before the busiest stretch of the year.

If Apollo thought the May 1st reorg would make Cengage look stronger heading into an IPO, they’re now seeing the truth:

You can’t cut your way to stability.
You can’t reorganize your way to expertise.
And you can’t IPO your way out of operational collapse.

We were at 245 summer st. The room was vp’s on up. Lots of mba, egghead types. We were talking about updates to a platform, to include new offerings. I had spent 8 years on the phones and got a new gig. I felt like I could adequately describe and represent the associates who are on the front lines.

The conversation was about logical progression and workflow of a call. I insisted that not all calls flow a logical progression but many times clients get emotional. I cited several examples and case studies to make my points. The discussion became difficult, especially for this one svp bonehead who’s claim to fame was he was smarter than everyone. By the end of the meeting, because of time, the decisions made were to not change a single thing because the logic was good and the back office would just need to get more efficient.

These eggheads do not know what they’re talking about and think they’re superior to the associates.

Let’s be clear: this is not a criticism of women broadly and certainly not of the many women of color at Nike who consistently kick a-s, deliver exceptional work, challenge broken systems, and make the company better.

This is about a specific corporate archetype: privileged, entitled "leaders" who we-ponize victimhood whenever their competence or conduct is questioned. They demand accountability from everyone beneath them while treating accountability for themselves as persecution.

They turned personal insecurity into “leadership,” favoritism into “talent strategy,” and organizational politics into a substitute for results. They promoted one another, protected mediocrity, punished candid dissent, and surrounded themselves with people unlikely to challenge them. Competence became threatening. PowerPoint replaced product.

Meanwhile, the people who genuinely understood athletes, footwear, design, engineering, and innovation were sidelined while professional meeting-attenders accumulated titles and congratulated themselves for “transforming” the company.

Now, after helping dismantle a culture built by generations of talented people, they will undoubtedly insist that none of it was their fault.

That may be their most enduring Nike innovation: failing upward while presenting themselves as the victims.

The leadership that has been running the company to the ground for several years has decided the failures aren’t due to their own choices — not the years spent pulling engineers away from innovation to chase a commodity PC chip, not the fixation on edge AI while the entire industry moved toward datacenter AI, and not the pattern of entering mature markets long after everyone else.

They never prioritize, never take responsibility, and always look for someone beneath them to blame.

Now they’ve concluded that the real problem is the workforce. Their “solution” is to push out hardworking people and replace them with new hires from the industry, buying themselves another 3–4 years of insulation while nothing fundamentally changes. Because the core issue is them.

And this is the only company where one individual simultaneously controls the financial decisions, the operational direction, the business strategy, and the sales pipeline — all concentrated in a single seat, right next to the CEO. There is no separation of responsibility, no checks and balances, no accountability. When one person holds every lever, failure has nowhere to go but downward.

By 2029, when shareholders start asking why the promises remain unfulfilled, they’ll either quietly exit or invent another cycle of excuses.

Meanwhile, countless careers and families will be disrupted — while the same leadership circle continues to thrive, untouched by the consequences they created.

They can't take any constructive criticism without getting defensive, making excuses, and refusing accountability. In today's corporate world, errors get you fired so fast, but they seem to think mistakes are just part of the process. Good luck to them. They're going to need it.

Verizon sales and support representatives often keep customers on expensive plans against their requests because company commission structures and performance metrics heavily incentivize high-tier plan retention and upsells.

Why is the TAO leader (P. M.) threatening an employee about his job security in front of hundreds of employees during her talk in Bengaluru? Why has the Board of Directors and CEO not taken any serious action? Are leaders at that level not accountable for their words and actions? What happened to Nokia being an Ethical Company? How do you think the employee who was being threatened felt after being embarrassed in front of hundreds of employees? Does she think this is a joking matter? What type of damage does this do to Nokia (brand, investors, customers, future contracts (gov't and commercial), employees, etc)? Should leadership be just as ACCOUNTABLE as any other employee?

I know every team has that one person who somehow helped ruin WPE for everybody.

So instead of actually dealing with that person, we changed the rules for everyone and just collectively took it up the a-s.

And the funniest part? That person is still gonna find a way around the new rules.

They’ll come in at 11, walk around talking for 30 minutes, complain about being there, make sure enough people saw them, then disappear and somehow still count it as compliance.

Why didn’t we just create a way to report the actual problem employee and handle it directly?

Because now everybody gets punished, productivity gets disrupted, morale gets worse…

…and Captain Loophole is still doing exactly what Captain Loophole does. 😂

The recent documentary about Boeing is an interesting watch.
How those at the top exercised rampant cost cutting, destroyed trust in a company and lined their own pockets at the expense of everyone else

"In 2009, Boeing opened a facility in North Charleston, South Carolina—a non-union state—to produce the Boeing 787 “Dreamliner” plane as cheaply and quickly as possible. The majority of the plane structure was outsourced from cheaper suppliers rather than being assembled in-house. The facility was soon full of shoddy engineering—ill-fitting pipes were sledgehammered into place, holes were found in aft body fuselage sections, and tiny metal slivers that were liable to cause massive electrical problems were found in the planes.

How do executives think the AT&T guarantee is a good thing?

If anything, it’s a complete middle finger to the customer when their internet is out for a day, and they get $2.32 refunded 30 days later.

Are they just THIS out of touch with normal people?

Sorry peeps, but this is therapeutic… doing the work for the reporters so they don’t have to. 🤷‍♂️

Centene expects to spend $315 million to $365 million on employee separation costs while reportedly committing $500 million to as much as $1 billion to Cognizant for technology services involving TriZetto, claims, billing and customer service. Source: https://www.beckerspayer.com/workforce/centenes-buyouts-could-have-a-315m-price-tag-for-the-rest-of-the-year/

Here’s the important part… *Investors, CMS, and the state agencies sending billions of taxpayer dollars to Centene** should ask whether the work is actually disappearing or whether Centene is trading internal capability, institutional knowledge, and direct accountability for vendor dependency.

A point of comparison: Citi is moving in the opposite direction, reducing its reliance on technology contractors from approximately 50% to 20% to strengthen data governance, risk management, and operational control. Source: https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/citigroup-plans-slash-it-contractors-hire-staff-improve-controls-2025-03-13/

Why is Centene increasing vendor dependency at exactly the moment its execution risk is increasing? Why did Citi decide to do the opposite? Both are highly regulated industries. United Healthcare is also investing heavily internally and is quarters or years ahead of Centene in that regard.

What is the purpose of their job? Track token usage and scold us if we use too much or not enough?

https://www.medicaldesignandoutsourcing.com/medtronic-ceo-pay-2026-executive-comp/

This is a 10% raise from 2025 Meanwhile stock down 27% last 5 years. Congratulations. Great job GM

Imagine the amount of RIFS that could’ve been saved if these people like GM take a pay cut for the incompetence. Sadly accountability doesn’t exist in this company. And instead they get raises.

What are the benefits of having him represent AT&T?

There’s a point where “culture” stops being what a company says on LinkedIn and becomes what people actually experience when they work there.
You can post all the polished messages you want about people-first leadership, growth, transparency, and culture—but saying those things doesn’t make them true. Culture is reflected in who gets listened to, who gets protected, who gets developed, who gets held accountable, and ultimately, who chooses to stay.
If leadership continues asking the same small circle of people whether everything is okay—and those people are the ones benefiting from the current system—of course the answer is going to be yes. But that is an incredibly narrow way to measure the health of an organization, especially one that desperately needs to right the ship.
At some point, leadership has to get uncomfortable enough to actually listen. Not just to the loudest voices, the favorites, the “yes” people, or the people sitting closest to power. Talk to the people who left. Talk to the people who stopped speaking up. Look at retention. Look at engagement. Look at production beyond the surface-level numbers. Look at what happened to the travelers and relationships that were handed off to people celebrated as “top performers.” Did those relationships grow? Did those travelers stay? Were those desks actually nurtured—or were they simply inherited?
And if the same people have been sitting in leadership seats for three years while the same problems continue to surface, it is fair to ask whether the problem is no longer the circumstances—it’s the people in the seats.
Leadership should not be a talking head. It should not be gossip, cliques, politics, favoritism, or protecting the people you personally like. Leadership means fighting for your people, advocating when it is uncomfortable, holding everyone to the same standard, and having the courage to admit when something isn’t working.
Stop fluffing certain desks while demanding everyone else prove themselves over and over again. Stop celebrating numbers without examining how they were achieved or what happens after the handoff. Stop confusing loyalty to a leadership circle with loyalty to the company.
Three years is enough time to make meaningful change.
At some point, continuing to do the same things, empowering the same people, protecting the same behaviors, and expecting a different outcome becomes exactly what we all know it is: insanity.
What makes this particularly sad is that this company once talked so passionately about being different. About putting people first. About creating something better than the corporate environments so many people had experienced elsewhere.
Somewhere along the way, it started becoming the very thing it said it would never become.
Profits matter. Performance matters. Growth matters. But people have to matter too.
And when good people continue walking out the door, leadership shouldn’t be asking how to improve the messaging around culture.
They should be asking what happened to it.

Why does HCSC still maintain project manager roles? Beyond following up with people, what value do they actually add and why don’t they seem to be held accountable when projects fail? Shouldn’t these positions be considered redundant with us being agile ?