#businessalignment

In the company wide email, they mentioned this, "Stop or reduce work that is not aligned with Lead to One". Does anyone have any insight or even guesses as to what work will be stopped or reduced?

From HT's perspective, there appears to be a lack of genuine partnerships with any stakeholders. He does not value relationships with employees, customers, system integrators, or OEM partners. The primary focus seems to be on financial gain, as evidenced by the frequent price increases each year, which adversely affect partner margins and lead to a reduction in the number of partnerships. This approach reflects a short-sighted strategy, seemingly attempting to apply a semiconductor business model to the software sector. It raises concerns about whether shareholders and investors would be inclined to invest in a business that lacks a clear future.

I'm part of the talent acquisition team that's been laid on today 11/2/2026. There were 3 of us who were laid off. Also confirmed - 30 people on the IT team along with folks in financial aid, student services, adjunct faculty. Morale is low. Meanwhile they will announce that business is good and those that remain will get their end of year bonus. And of course all the c-suite folks get $$$
UTI is opening 3 new campuses next year. Who's left to hire these people?

Overall Performance Summary

Over the past review period, I consistently met and exceeded my core responsibilities by driving key project milestones and supporting team objectives. I focused my efforts on improving process efficiency, enhancing cross-functional collaboration, and aligning my daily work with broader company goals.

We’re here to show up, stay aligned, and support Verizon and Frontier priorities, and we will continue doing that while maintaining BAU responsibilities.

That said, the current operating model is becoming highly inefficient due to significant duplication of effort. In many cases, it feels like multiple groups are running parallel versions of the same call, covering the same topics, and producing the same outputs independently rather than consolidating into a single streamlined effort.

From our perspective, this creates unnecessary repetition and makes it difficult to understand why workstreams are not being centralized or aligned into a single execution path. It also results in situations where multiple teams are effectively doing the same work in parallel rather than building once and scaling across groups.

We are also seeing limited alignment between operating approaches. Frontier teams bring established, proven ways of working that are efficient and well understood internally, but there does not currently appear to be a consistent mechanism to evaluate, adopt, or standardize those approaches across the broader Verizon-facing effort.

At the same time, we are being pulled between BAU responsibilities and multiple overlapping Verizon meetings, often without visibility into prioritization or coordination across groups. This creates conflicting expectations and makes it difficult to balance delivery without clearer structure.

We want to be clear—we are engaged and willing to support, but the current structure feels like “too many cooks in the kitchen,” and it’s not clear how decisions are being streamlined or who is accountable for reducing duplication and aligning execution.

We would appreciate clearer direction on meeting structure, decision ownership, and how leadership plans to consolidate parallel workstreams so teams can focus on execution rather than repetition, along with clearer prioritization across BAU and Verizon-led initiatives.