#culture

This company deserves to fold. The levels of customer service are terrible. Every executive should put a much bigger focus on this. Your platform used to be good. Now it’s horrible.

Kelly King is posting this on LinkedIn. I don't want to hear anything he has to say after what he did to BB&T.

This is a FYI for former employees - I have Anthem BCBS so may not apply to everyone. Went to Dr and went to pick up scripts both showed that I was not eligible. Checked insurance portal and showed I was active. Called today and shocker Centene dropped the ball. They were supposed to send files of impacted employees weeks ago but failed to do so. Anthem received all at once and was scrambling to upload in their system. So there may be a delay in eligibility. I was instructed to let my providers know to submit the claim and Anthem will pay. This entire program rolled about by Centene has been a sh-tshow. I worked for the company for 22 years and simply reduced to a number based on an algorithm. It is sad to see the shift under SL. MFN would have never allowed this to happen or if there was no choice there would have been a more thoughtful choice. For those still there it will happen again. This company had no heart it has been reduced to a cold soul su-king environment.

I know this isn’t Glassdoor but I just joined the team and wondering how secure this group is. It seems like there has been a lot transition and leadership has been a revolving door.

Train performance is in the tank.
238 late
61 on time
62 early.

Sure as heck isn’t anybody in the c-suite, their too busy planning what to do with their millions from the merger.

What are your thoughts?

Worked for the company for many decades, they let me go because they were outsourcing to TCS. They took what was an incredible IT team both onsite and operational and left it in the hands of a third world country. They sacrificed years of experience and knowledge to save money and outsource to a team that can't replicate the experience the company once had.... All to save money. Shame on this "American" company.

IBM faces existential pressure from structural irrelevance in the defining technologies of the era, chronic inability to convert scale into growth, and accelerating displacement of its core cash engines. While the company remains profitable today—with roughly $67–69 billion in annual revenue, solid free cash flow, and a durable installed base—the trajectory of its business model, competitive position, and technological relevance points toward progressive marginalization rather than long-term survival as a top-tier technology power.
Legacy Anchors That No Longer Generate Momentum
IBM’s most defensible assets are also its greatest liabilities. Mainframes and associated transaction-processing software still handle a large share of global financial transactions and core banking workloads. High switching costs create a moat: replacing decades of COBOL and specialized systems is risky and expensive. That installed base delivers recurring software revenue and cash, but it does not expand. Recent quarters have shown sharp declines in mainframe-related sales (infrastructure down 7% in one key period, with transaction processing particularly weak), even after launches positioned as AI-capable (such as the z17). Management has acknowledged that customers redirected capital expenditure toward servers, storage, and memory to secure supply amid AI-driven shortages and price pressures.
The problem is deeper than one quarter. AI tools are lowering the cost and risk of modernization. Automated code translation, agentic systems, and cloud-native alternatives make migration more feasible. Once customers move workloads off the mainframe, the associated high-margin software stack is also at risk. IBM has repeatedly stated that mainframe dollars pull through substantial software revenue; erosion of the former threatens the latter. A business whose primary defense is “it is dangerous to leave” rather than “it is advantageous to stay and expand” is not built for growth markets.
Persistent Failure to Capture Platform Shifts
IBM has a decades-long pattern of missing or under-participating in the major technology transitions that determine industry leadership. It was late and weak in personal computing, largely missed the initial public cloud wave, and has remained a minor player in infrastructure-as-a-service. Current cloud market data consistently places IBM in the low-single-digit share range (around 2%), far behind AWS (roughly 28–31%), Microsoft Azure (20–24%), and Google Cloud (12–15%). The top three control the large majority of the market and are growing faster in absolute terms, fueled by AI infrastructure demand.
Hybrid cloud and Red Hat (acquired at a high multiple) provide a more relevant offering for regulated enterprises that need on-premises and multi-cloud flexibility. Yet this has not translated into market-share gains or growth rates that close the gap with hyperscalers. Software now represents roughly 45% of revenue and is the stated growth engine, but organic growth has been uneven and recently decelerated. Acquisitions have bulked up the portfolio, yet they also add integration risk, higher debt, and the burden of justifying elevated purchase prices through accelerated expansion that has not consistently materialized.
In generative and agentic AI, IBM’s watsonx and Granite models emphasize governance, enterprise data, and hybrid deployment—sensible differentiators for regulated industries. However, the company has not established leadership in foundation models, training infrastructure, or the developer ecosystems that drive platform lock-in. Customers are spending heavily on AI capacity from NVIDIA-centric and hyperscaler stacks; IBM’s share of that incremental wallet is limited. Consulting engagements around AI exist, but evidence suggests some AI-related work displaces rather than expands traditional services revenue.
Structural and Cultural Handicaps
IBM remains a large, complex organization (hundreds of thousands of employees) operating across many countries and product lines. Speed and adaptability suffer under such scale. Recent profit warnings and guidance cuts explicitly cited failure to adapt quickly enough when customer spending patterns shifted and large deals slipped. Layoffs continue as the company attempts to reallocate toward higher-value software and AI, a recurring theme rather than a one-time reset.
Debt levels elevated by acquisitions constrain strategic flexibility. Quantum computing is frequently cited as a long-term opportunity, yet commercial scale remains years away (fault-tolerant systems targeted later in the decade), and current contract value is modest relative to overall revenue. Betting the narrative on a technology that is still pre-commercial while core businesses face pressure is high-risk.
Competition is multi-front and intense: hyperscalers in cloud and AI platforms, specialized software vendors in data and automation, pure-play consultants (Accenture and others) in services, and nimble AI-native firms that can iterate faster. IBM’s integrated stack (technology + consulting + research) is marketed as a strength, yet integration has not produced superior growth or share gains against more focused competitors.
Financial Reality Versus Narrative
Revenue growth has been low-to-mid single digits in most recent years, with occasional better quarters followed by slowdowns. Profitability and free cash flow remain respectable, supporting a dividend and buybacks, but the market has repeatedly punished misses and lowered guidance. Valuation multiples have compressed relative to growth peers. A company that generates cash from a shrinking or stagnant core while struggling to build new high-growth engines is on a path of gradual relative decline. Survival in the absolute sense (continuing as a going concern) is plausible for years due to the mainframe annuity and enterprise relationships. Survival as a relevant, competitive technology leader capable of attracting talent, capital, and the next generation of workloads is far less assured.
The historical pattern is consistent: IBM identifies the right themes (hybrid cloud, AI, quantum), invests and acquires, yet fails to achieve the scale, speed, or product superiority needed to redefine its trajectory. In an industry defined by platform power, network effects, and rapid iteration, that pattern is terminal for leadership. The installed base buys time; it does not buy a future. Without a decisive break from low-growth legacy dependence and a demonstrated ability to win in the platforms that matter, IBM’s long-term survival as more than a cash-yielding utility for aging enterprise systems is improbable.

I think something else is brewing here. Many managers have been unavailable and attending meetings. There doesn't even seem to be a sense of priority on the projects we are working on. I think we've all just become numb to the noise and continue to work until something happens. Happy hump day. I'm taking a 3 hour lunch because no one's around to reprimand me anyway.

I’ve seen people mention more than 6 or 7 hours of activity needed a day but our leadership told us we need to have 8 or more….and that the safe spot is more than 8 hours

That seems like a lot to me. I work 8 hours a day not counting lunch but I’m not sure if I’m even meeting this number since I’m not constantly typing or clicking. So far I have not had any issues but who knows. Sometimes I’m reading through documents or doing required training videos or I need to take a break. Ironically I got an invite to an in person event but how am I supposed to attend when I have to be active on the computer all day? This company is becoming a joke.

Anyone think OpenAI will magically become profitable. Nope? Me either.

https://www.fool.com/investing/2026/09/30/oracle-stock-is-down-60-from-its-high-heres-why-im/

Anyone working here who isn't actively looking to get out might as well be sitting on the Titanic.

guess theyre fed up of us now lol

They keep asking me to do more significant projects, while telling me how my last work output was poor.

The CEO has aged 10 years in just 18 months. Reminding us that the psychopath, is the person 2 levels up. Don’t allow them to break you.

We can do this, despite being under paid and a complete disregard for gratitude.

People think this is new but it's not. I've worked here long enough to know that intimidation isn't some recent management trend. The constant warnings about termination and performance plans have been happening for at least the last decade, if not longer. We're just finally starting to talk about it openly.

https://x.com/LeGrandPoteau/status/2107775639944389036

I was annoyed when CH emphatically stated that the WCK footprint reduction was not about cutting costs. Yet the very next statement was telling us they overspend. I’m totally okay with LT telling us they need to cut costs. Every decision Shell makes should have money in mind, either long term or short term gain. I feel like LT is more worried about feelings than running the businesses and that underpins why we lag behind. Without Iran war, we’d be failing horribly. Total BS Emma said chemicals would be improved even without Iran. No Emma, taking ethylene and polymer capacities offline throughout ME region DOES mean we didn’t do this on our own. Our record throughput is not because we understand how to run plants overnight. We have no reason for hubris, all Iran war. But alas, doesn’t matter. Investors DGAF so long as WS keeps working towards sewing his golden parachute.

Look at me! I am starting a new role and the company has relocated me multiple times! Strange posts about how great everything is because someone has relocated d times in y years. I guess people feel the need to make sure everyone is aware of their mobility. The self promotion is a bit over the top.

Saw someone with a backpack emblazoned with ExxonMobil future leader. Total cringe.

Since Dan Griffith has joined he has slowly made life miserable for the Tech teams.
Under the current modernization strategy, sudden organizational shifts and budget cuts have created an unstable environment.
• Hiring freezes and roadblocks make it incredibly difficult for highly integrated vendor staff to transition to permanent, direct-hire roles.
• Resource constraints mean remaining teams are stretched thin, handling heavier workloads with less structural support.
Work culture has eroded gradually due to unreasonable demands from the CTO. I remember when this used to be a fun place to work!

Senior leaders (VPs and above) are meeting to figure out how to use AI to put together polished sentences to assist them to communicate to employees that we have a great culture.

I know it’s a movie name but that’s what I’ve been telling everyone left at Oracle to do.

And please for the love of Pete do not refer people in.

This company is not normal.
This leadership team is not normal.
This way of working is not normal.

Overall, this is not normal

We all get distracted through short term instant gratifications like as simple as nice mail & forget long term degradation of culture...

Agreed and confirmed 100%, these moves will drive the company forward

We are going to be more agile, leaner and will deliver value faster and more effectively

Our car parks are going to be full 7 days a week. You will need armour to protect yourself from someone trying to get to their desk before you so they can do their best work

Our team is doing activity tracking and we are averaging 7+ hours a day but apparently that’s not enough and we need to be at 8+. So subtract our lunch time, bathroom runs, taking a water break or just a minute where we are not clicking away and we need to be at the office 9+ hours to meet this number. WF is not a tech company and they do not pay us enough for this type of treatment. No wonder people hate it here

Is it worth complaining ?

Genuine question about the current structure of DPM roles at Allstate — does anyone else feel that the company has accumulated a very large number of Digital Product Managers, particularly when a significant proportion appear to have little or no previous experience working in technology? It would be interesting to understand how these roles are being assessed, what the expected technical/product experience is, and whether the current number of DPMs is actually aligned with the needs of the business. On my current team we spend more time having to explain the work we do to our DPM and sit in pointless meetings than actually getting to work.

And now you know why the Blue Pulse survey was done before the open enrollment materials were released.

What's people thoughts? Iam surprised no changes in personal, however a few wings look to have been clipped!

With overall better financials being reported and bottom-line performance, it feels like company culture is going in the complete opposite direction in a decline. Is this sentiment felt across multiple disciplines?

If you are just going to read to us word for word off a script, in a monotone voice, just send an email. We can read it ourselves.
Has the first guy who spoke never presented before?

So almost 3 years to the day of firing a bunch of people we have a call about how to talk about people leaving?!??
Either bad omen or tone deaf.

PM here. So many of the CW I work with don’t meet deadlines so why are they still here? Why do their managers end up getting laid off instead of them?

Not been careful with shareholder capital… Yah think?

Oracle employees are not trained in Oracle cloud or other products they build.

Oracle has significant restrictions on employees using its own products internally. People often know only the specific area they work on, with limited opportunities to explore the broader product ecosystem hands-on.

Even provisioning an internal server for experimentation can be difficult. How many Oracle employees actually know OCI in depth ? how to create a VPC, configure load balancing, set up networking, and deploy services end-to-end?

Another sh-t show at the fu-k factory

I have been here less than a year and noticed over time that in times of high anxiety whomever runs the Comcast corporate handles including @Comcast, @FWC26Philly (World Cup) views my personal instagram stories to monitor what I’m doing when I’m not in the office. Like during the week or weekend.

I brought it up to my manager at the time and she was shocked that someone one the team was doing that. Honestly it’s so creepy to me because I do not have a personal relationship with my immediate team due to how toxic, gossipy they were when I started. I am here to do my job, get paid and go home. Has anyone else has these “monitoring spirit” team members and how do you deal with them. Im also one foot out the door after the bullsh-t I have seen, the lack of accountability and corporate platitudes.

There has to be something...

i honestly think part of the proble is our executives just aren't as good as the people running some of these other car companies. look at toyota &honda. people keep buying them because they are reliable and they give customers what they want. now you have the rav4 passing the f150 and that should be a pretty big wake up call. the f150 has been one of the biggest things ford has going for it for years.

then look at the edge. ford got rid of it and maybe the edge had problems and maybe sales weren't great, but meanwhile toyota keeps selling the rav4 like crazy. korean companies are doing well too. so somehow everybody else keeps figuring out what people want while we keep changing plans. we used to benchmark toyota and honda all the time. from what i remember we would look at a few things they were doing, copy a piece of it, and then go right back to doing things the ford way. we never really changed the whole system. that is what bothers me.

toyota is not doing magic. honda is not doing magic. they just seem to make better decisions over a long period of time. at ford we cancel products, start new programs, reorganize, change priorities, bring in new leadership ideas, talk about software, evs, subscriptions and whatever the new thing is. then a couple years later the direction changes again. and when something doesn't work the explanation is always complicated. regulations. interest rates. china. labor. dealers. suppliers.

customers didn't understand the product. whatever. at some point maybe the answer is simpler. maybe the people making the big decisions at toyota and honda are just better at their jobs. you can make fun of toyota all you want, but customers keep walking into their dealerships and buying their vehicles. that is the scoreboard that matters.

(~VISIONARY) &. (~INNOVATIVE) & (~HUMAN_FIRST) & (~ORGANIC)

Are they really going to give out Maxim Awards to people they’re going to fire a few months later? Didn’t they give out maxim awards to the team that pumped the market full of retro shoes? Didn’t they give maxim awards to the team that started wellness week and now it’s gone? Who gives these things away?