#culture

My manager still sits in the office with the door closed. I guess it thinks its safe as long as it hides.. Anyway, when they shutter this place, I am pretty sure my maanger will never know until the next day, when the potato chip bag is empy and it goes out for more supplies and cant get back in. Meanwhile, the q cespool ferments .

Came across this quote by PepsiCo legend Roger Enrico:

"Beware of the tyranny of making small changes to small things. Rather, make big changes to big things."

Feels particularly relevant in today's PepsiCo world, where the tyranny of small decisions have given way to the tyranny of small-minded leaders.

https://www.azquotes.com/quote/675560s.

Having worked at other new age companies, here is what I see.

The people responsible for investment decisions don't understand the customer deeply, neither do they understand the product deeply.

The bigger problem is that they aren't humble enough to admit they don't know and speak as if they know what they are talking about. It's so irritating that they won't even ask questions to learn but rather just go on and on to loudly shut down any other opinion in the room that doesn't match theirs.

It's funny to see two leaders having a conversation with half baked knowledge and driving investment decisions.

It was so embarrassed to see the guy lost his "train" on the stage. I guess he forgot to bring his AI assistant as he usually did for most meeting calls to assist him and make him look good.

We hasn’t evacuated families from the Middle East even though the U.S. government has and our competitors have. Oh yeah and then there is this. The executives are cancelling their trips due to safety concerns. Nothing to see here. Keep working peasants. Is executives will stay safely at home. U.S. executives don’t get paid enough to take such a risk!

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Exxon-Chevron-Executives-Cancel-Gulf-Visit-Over-Security-Concerns.amp.html

How about showing some respect and recognition to the people who grind every day to earn those big fat paychecks for executives?

My impression thus far is that

Would you still be at Intel if you:
1) Blew up a fab
2) Accused of spying for China by Trump and DOJ
3) Alienated SpaceX
4) Stole $2.3B for fake quantum software while laying everyone off
5) Crashed stock 50%
6) Oversaw 20% decline in PC sales
7) Produced no viable AI product

What else did I miss?

please be patient for God 's sake 🙏
there's Literally life beyond Q

Just hating on this place? Wouldn't it be better to simply leave?

I just want to do my work without someone constantly overseeing every little thing. Even managers who start out reasonable seem to end up worrying more about control than letting people get on with the job.

That’s it, that’s the post. That’s what it feels like inside this dumpster fire.

The finance organization shared the full list of laid-off employees. Shame on you, Chryssa Halley! Have some respect for personal privacy. If you can’t keep 22 names confidential, how can you run Fannie Mae’s finances? Resign immediately, and take your SVPs and their VPs with you!

Chryssa Halley didn’t speak for the first two minutes. Her video and mic were off. When she was supposed to explain what was going on, she froze. If you don’t have the guts to tell people they are laid off, don’t occupy CFO title.

My boss basically told me I'm needed too much in my current role to get promoted. So apparently, being good at my job is the very thing holding me back.

See the posts full of sarcasm, ridicule, demeaning, belittling and frankly, juvenile behavior. That's Humanas leadership at its best.

Saw this article on Tech Rights;

100 Years of IBM Racism

I believe racism remains a real issue at IBM, but its manifestation may have evolved. In some instances, DEI initiatives appear to have been exploited, distorted, and we-ponized by certain groups to advance their own interests, potentially creating or reinforcing new forms of racial discrimination under the guise of promoting equity and inclusion. In that sense, a framework intended to combat discrimination can itself become a vehicle for it. I’m curious to hear others’ perspectives on this. Thoughts?

CRUEL.
Merriam-Webster defines cruel as “devoid of humane feelings.”

I could never be this kind of leader. And frankly, I question the humanity of anyone who can.

How do you spend years hiring people, mentoring them, getting to know their spouses/children/pets, celebrating their milestones, and coaching them, only to discard them like yesterday’s garbage?

Not because they failed. Not because they underperformed. But because someone decided their position no longer served the future. (Cruel)

You leave people in limbo for weeks. You allow fear and anxiety to consume them. You deliver life-altering news just before the holidays, offer vague explanations about “business changes,” and reduce years of dedication to a pathetic “thank you for your contributions.” (Cruel)

Then, days later, you gather in a room like the cotdamn 12 apostles, unveiling your recycled organizational charts as though you’ve just discovered the future of business.

And the audacity to look straight into that camera, knowing the people who remain are watching you in absolute disgust, and talk about how “emotional” and “difficult” this has been for YOU. (Cruel)

Are you kidding me?

You knew these people. You knew their families. You knew their stories. You knew what they had sacrificed for the company.

And somehow, you managed to turn their devastation into another corporate presentation.

Spare us the scripted empathy. Spare us the speeches about competitive markets and transformation. And spare us the self-congratulation for having the “courage” to make difficult decisions.

There’s nothing courageous about making decisions other people have to suffer for while you collect the paycheck.

No one is asking you to cry on camera. We’re asking whether you have enough humanity left to recognize the damage YOU collectively as a group caused.

Because cruelty isn’t always loud. It doesn’t always look like the horrors we see on television.

Sometimes cruelty wears a suit, sits in a boardroom, collects a bonus, and calls itself leadership.

And perhaps the greatest tragedy isn’t that these decisions were made. It’s how comfortably the people responsible can move on.

May the devil/mara/lu----r find you.

The EOCs distain for anyone over 40 is simply due to the fact that the majority of us are not good sheep. Today in the cafe at my location they were running a 30% off sale on BNY merch and there was literally a line. Why would anyone in their right mind spend money to have the logo for the company that will do anything to lay you off and send your job overseas to be made a mess of? They were all young kids and H1-Bs in line. Disgusts me.

The reason you won't find a better paying job is because Intel makes agreements with the other Big Tech companies not to hire each other's employees.

And if true, how is it legal?

that's all you need to know about why this place is the way it is. and this is nothing new. you simply have to learn to deal with it.

We lost several essential people on our team, and somehow the laziest person is still here. Can somebody make it make sense for me, please? How is this good for the company?

Let's have an honest conversation and admit that we have too many (toxic) managers that don’t lead but only got into these positions with no prior training and they drain the room, break the team, and call the wreckage “success.”

I am curious as to how the current employees feel about the whole MofA debacle. Job security, company outlook and general overall view of the direction of the company!
Actually I don't care, but it would be interesting to see how the inside feels. lol

On a scale of 1-10 how much of a cr-p shower will it be?

https://open.spotify.com/track/3uZzf26YgBf921VoLVVc9I?si=njNdiVYTQliqY09zMLUmEg&utm_source=copy-link

I must say that the CPO being demoted - not fired or retired - is accountability. Gonna have to clean up that huge pile of po-p and not gonna drag anyone down anymore. Big ball of mud! We are all watching!!!

Better together was such a childish idea for our divisive culture. I'm glad the baby talk is over. For years the CPO failed to bring together Comcast and Sky. Failed to bring together Entertainment and Connectivity. Failed to bring together Product and Technology. Wasted our investments chasing delusions. He and his SLT always so insecure about the size of their scopes. Always tapping each other on the back, congratulating themselves for their minor achievements. All they ever delivered was beautiful power point presentations. Let's see how much longer the legacy X1 bros will survive together.

Thank you SC for letting him know he is na--d! It was about time someone told him the truth.

What a show!!!

Im really tired of the constant lectures about how wonderful AI is and being pressed on how we need to submit ideas to the company on use cases and things about our job that can be automated and done with AI. Whats the benefit if I spend a minute of my thought on this stuff. Being eliminated sooner? At Cisco I guess you can argue that will be a benefit but would it double my bonus or even get me a 3% raise at the end of the year? He-l no. Figure out the cr-p yourselves or put an AI geek on each team to take care of it and quit jamming it down our throat! This sh-t may be the company goal but it sure isnt a goal of mine.

I’ve never experienced so much faffing about in my life this is what DXC has become!

The entire IT Delivery Business Desk is being laid off globally, and we've been told that only a handful of positions will be available for affected employees to apply for. This is devastating. Many of us could soon be out of work despite years of dedication, hard work, and loyalty to Marriott.

It makes you wonder what happened to Marriott's core value of putting people first. Does that commitment still mean anything? Does Tony recognize the contributions and sacrifices of long-serving employees, or has the bottom line become the only priority?

What's most disappointing is how easily people's lives can be turned upside down. We're not just numbers on a spreadsheet. We're employees with families, mortgages, bills, and responsibilities. We've given years of our lives to this company, believing that loyalty and commitment meant something.

If Marriott truly believes in putting people first, this is the moment to prove it. Values should be reflected in how a company treats its people during difficult times, not just in corporate presentations and slogans.

I thought this content deserved to stand on its own. I've compiled it from the other posts and added some bolding using copilot. Of course there is nothing to suggest this feedback is actually coming from GE as might have been suggested.

MH — EVP & President, Gas Distribution & Storage

You have strong judgment and an admirable capacity to make decisions quickly.

More often than not, that decisiveness serves the organization well.

The corresponding risk is acting before enough contrary information has reached you.

Decisiveness loses some of its value when people conclude that bringing forward uncertainty, mistakes or an opposing perspective carries more personal risk than remaining silent.

The strongest decision-makers deliberately create conditions in which people can tell them something they may not want to hear.

Your leadership opportunity is to protect that space.

Encourage dissent before the decision. Reward candour when something goes wrong. Give people genuine permission to admit uncertainty.

**Before major decisions, deliberately invite the strongest contrary view and make it safe for people to surface uncertainty, mistakes or opposing evidence.**

A leader does not become less decisive by listening longer when the stakes warrant it.

Better information will not weaken your judgment.

It will make it stronger.

⸻

CG — EVP & President, Liquids Pipelines

You are a strong champion of the organization and of the people who make it successful. That loyalty is a strength.

The corresponding leadership challenge is ensuring that harmony never becomes a substitute for accountability.

Every large institution develops entrenched interests, concentrations of influence, capability gaps and functions whose size or complexity can outgrow the value they create. Senior leadership must be willing to confront those realities, particularly when doing so is uncomfortable.

Relationships, history and organizational politics cannot be permitted to make legitimate questions harder to ask.

Your opportunity is not to become less supportive of your leaders. It is to demand more from them.

**Create an environment in which constructive challenge is expected, value must be demonstrated, and difficult questions are welcomed rather than managed around.**

The organization already knows you will stand behind it. It should also know that you will challenge it to become better.

⸻

MA — EVP & President, Gas Transmission

Your leadership style has brought a welcome degree of openness and accessibility.

There is real value in creating an environment where capable people can contribute without feeling that every discussion is a test of survival.

There is also value, however, in a culture where weak analysis, unnecessary complexity and poorly supported positions are expected to withstand serious scrutiny before they reach the decision table.

Some of that discipline can be lost when openness becomes too comfortable.

**Your leadership opportunity is to preserve the accessibility while raising the standard of challenge.**

Good leadership should create psychological safety, but it should not create intellectual complacency. People should expect to defend their assumptions, demonstrate the value they are creating and answer plainly when something is not working.

The goal is not a return to a harsher culture.

It is something better: high trust and high standards at the same time.

⸻

PM — EVP & Chief Financial Officer

You articulate a compelling view of how central functions should serve the enterprise.

Your leadership opportunity is to make that operating philosophy unmistakably clear in practice.

There is a fundamental question that requires resolution: are central functions primarily expected to enable the businesses, or are they also expected to provide an independent check when business decisions create enterprise risk?

Either model can work. A deliberate hybrid can work.

Ambiguity cannot.

If leaders in central functions are expected to challenge the business, they need the authority, information and executive sponsorship to do so. If their primary role is to enable business decisions, accountability for those decisions must remain with the business.

People should not be held responsible for outcomes they were never empowered to influence.

**Your challenge is to establish that compact clearly and enforce it consistently.**

Ask whether your leaders genuinely possess both the responsibility and the authority required to prevent a materially poor decision.

If they do not, either give them that authority or place the accountability where it actually belongs.

That clarity would strengthen both the business and the functions meant to support it.

⸻

AC — SVP, Corporate Strategy & President, Power

It is encouraging to see real attention and leadership capacity being directed toward diversification, power and renewables.

The challenge now is to convert more of that attention into momentum.

Emerging businesses can spend too much time evaluating possibilities, refining analysis and attempting to remove uncertainty before acting. In markets that are changing quickly, waiting for certainty can itself become the greater risk.

**Your opportunity is to create greater permission to move.**

Make smaller bets. Learn faster. Allow intelligent failure. Adjust as evidence emerges. Give capable teams room to act before every variable has been resolved.

Not every opportunity needs to be perfected before the organization participates. Sometimes six months of doing will teach more than another year of analysis.

The organization has considerable capacity to think.

Your leadership challenge is to make it equally confident in acting.

⸻

MW — SVP & Chief Commercial Officer, Liquids Pipelines

You bring energy, ambition and a valuable instinct to challenge the status quo.

The organization needs leaders who create momentum.

**Your leadership opportunity is to put more discipline between an idea and an instruction to act.**

At your level, even a relatively casual request can mobilize significant effort. Before launching work, it is worth understanding the problem being solved, the scale of effort required, what existing priorities will be displaced and whether the likely value justifies that disruption.

Not every interesting idea needs to become organizational work.

Your challenge is not to reduce the energy. It is to focus it.

Fewer initiatives. Better understood. Properly sponsored. Adequately resourced. Driven through to completion.

The organization will benefit most when your ability to catalyze change is matched by equal discipline in deciding which changes deserve its finite attention.

⸻

MC — SVP, Operations & Engineering, Liquids Pipelines

You bring exceptional capability and considerable intellectual strength to the organization.

Your leadership opportunity is humility.

An enterprise of this scale contains many highly capable people. Senior leadership becomes more powerful when personal capability creates room for the expertise of others rather than inadvertently diminishing it.

**Listen with genuine curiosity.**

Invite challenge from people who may know something you do not. Demonstrate that seniority, confidence and intelligence do not automatically confer the best answer.

You do not need to diminish your own strengths.

The challenge is to use them in a way that makes the people around you bigger as well.

The strongest leaders are not remembered simply for being impressive themselves. They are remembered for making an entire organization more capable.

⸻

ML — SVP & Chief Accounting Officer

Your leadership opportunity is to create greater clarity around how financial discipline should enable the enterprise rather than inadvertently constrain its ability to perform.

The fundamental question is whether Finance and Accounting exist principally to establish the framework and information within which the business exercises judgment, or whether they are expected to exert more direct control over those judgments.

Either model can work. Ambiguity cannot.

This matters particularly when resources are constrained. Broad reductions made without a sufficiently deep understanding of the underlying work, accountabilities and cost drivers can create very different levels of organizational capability without any deliberate decision that those differences should exist.

Financial discipline must be rigorous. But rigour is not the same as indiscriminate restraint.

**Your leadership challenge is to understand the economics of the work deeply enough to distinguish true efficiency from the simple transfer of cost, risk or unfinished work somewhere less visible.**

If the business is expected to exercise autonomy, give it clear boundaries and let it lead. If Finance chooses to exercise greater control, it must also accept greater accountability for the consequences.

Clarity on that compact would materially improve both performance and trust.

⸻

MM — SVP & Chief Human Resources & Inclusion Officer

HR cannot credibly ask an organization to live by standards that its own leadership does not visibly model.

Your most important leadership challenge is therefore consistency between what the function expects from others and what its own leadership demonstrates.

Where expectations around spending, policy or organizational discipline are applied strictly across the enterprise, exercising visibly greater latitude within the function creates a credibility problem regardless of how individual decisions might be explained.

At this level, perception matters because senior leaders establish the behavioural standard for everyone below them.

For the head of Human Resources, that standard should be higher, not lower.

HR asks employees to respect policy, leaders to exercise discipline, and the organization to accept difficult decisions in the interests of fairness and consistency. Those messages lose legitimacy if people believe the function operates under different rules.

Leadership by example is foundational to trust.

**Your challenge is to hold yourself and your organization conspicuously to the standards you expect from others: disciplined judgment, transparent exceptions, personal accountability and visible respect for the rules the institution asks everyone else to follow.**

If HR is to champion fairness and integrity, those qualities must be unmistakable at the top of HR.

⸻

MF — SVP & Chief Communications Officer

Your leadership opportunity is to ensure that Communications creates more value than complexity.

Every central function has to decide when it is enabling the business and when legitimate enterprise risk requires it to exercise greater control.

Some governance is necessary. But governance should always be proportionate to risk.

Not every communication warrants the same degree of central intervention, review or ownership. Consistency should not become an argument for inserting the function into work where the value of doing so is marginal.

The important question is whether Communications is materially improving clarity, trust and effectiveness relative to the time and organizational friction its processes create.

**Your challenge is to simplify the model.**

Be rigorous where reputation or material risk genuinely requires it. Everywhere else, trust capable leaders and allow the organization to move.

A high-performing Communications function should make the enterprise clearer, faster and more credible—not merely more controlled.

⸻

MGeo — SVP, The Next 75 & Chief Transition Officer

The ambition behind the transformation agenda is important.

The harder question is whether that ambition has translated into durable change in how the organization actually works.

Are processes materially clearer? Are accountabilities better understood? Is the organization genuinely better prepared for AI and technology-enabled work? Or has the pursuit of the future sometimes moved faster than the discipline required to understand the present?

Transformation can easily become a contest over future ownership and organizational control instead of a disciplined examination of how work is performed, where value is created, where waste exists and what the future process genuinely requires.

Urgency matters.

But urgency cannot substitute for method.

**Your opportunity is to bring greater discipline to transformation: rigorous current-state analysis, measurable problems, clear process ownership, evidence-based future-state design and an honest assessment of whether change has actually produced better outcomes.**

The standard should not be the volume of transformation activity.

It should be whether the organization works materially better because of it.

⸻

SA — SVP & Chief Information Officer

Your central leadership opportunity is conviction: knowing what you stand for, being prepared to defend it, and communicating clearly when legitimate reasons cause your position to change.

The concern is not that you change your mind. Good leaders should change their minds when facts, risks or circumstances warrant it. The concern is establishing a direction, giving people confidence that they have your support, and then allowing that direction to change under pressure without adequately resetting the organization.

That creates real consequences.

In a large organization, people exercise judgment based upon the principles and direction established by their leaders. When those principles move without clear communication, capable people can find themselves working against a position they did not know had changed and later being questioned for decisions that were entirely reasonable when they made them.

TIS depends upon hundreds of people exercising judgment every day. They need to know what their leader believes, which principles are durable, where they can rely on executive support and when circumstances genuinely require a different course.

**Your challenge is to become more resolute about the things that matter and more transparent when your thinking evolves.**

Leadership at this level is not simply making decisions. It is establishing enough consistency of principle that other people can make good decisions when you are not in the room.

Your people need to know what you stand for. Give them that certainty.

⸻

CW — VP, ERP Lead & Sustainment

An ERP transformation of this scale requires leadership that people can see, hear and experience.

Employees should not simply know that executive leadership exists somewhere above the governance structure.

They should experience regular engagement from the leader accountable for the transformation: listening to the people doing the work, understanding the obstacles they face, resolving difficult issues and being personally present when consequential decisions are required.

Programs can be managed through governance structures.

Transformations cannot be led exclusively through them.

**Your opportunity is to become significantly more visible to the people expected to make the ERP transformation succeed.**

Visibility is not ceremonial. It creates alignment, builds confidence, surfaces problems sooner and signals that the transformation matters enough for its senior leaders to remain personally engaged.

If the organization is being asked to change fundamentally, its leaders need to be present in that change.

⸻

LP — VP, Human Resources & Development

Your leadership opportunity is to spend less energy explaining the culture the organization already has and more energy creating the culture it says it wants.

HR can easily become the institutional interpreter: explaining why a decision was reasonable, why a process technically worked, or why an employee experience is consistent with established policy.

Some of that work is necessary. It cannot become the default response to legitimate concern.

The more important question is whether the organization is becoming better.

When employees identify inconsistency, unnecessary bureaucracy, weak leadership behaviour or a gap between stated values and lived experience, HR’s first instinct should be curiosity rather than justification.

Listen before explaining.

Seek direct exposure to perspectives that may not travel comfortably through the hierarchy. Distinguish understanding a decision from defending it.

**Your leadership opportunity is to make HR a stronger agent of cultural change: acknowledge where the organization falls short and use the influence of the function to help leaders close those gaps.**

Culture is not something HR should merely interpret. It is something HR has a responsibility to help create.

⸻

LW — VP & Chief Compliance Officer

An organization should be willing to hold itself to the standards it sets for others and to the standards it sets for itself.

Those commitments matter most when honouring them is inconvenient, uncomfortable or requires challenging people with significant authority.

That is where Compliance should carry particular gravity.

The function cannot allow itself to become merely an institutional advocate whose role is to rationalize an outcome, defend a preferred interpretation or explain why what has already happened should be accepted.

If Compliance becomes primarily the function that constructs the best defence of an existing position, it risks surrendering the independence and moral authority that give it value.

**Your leadership opportunity is to decide what Compliance is prepared to stand for.**

There will be moments when that requires telling colleagues at the most senior levels that the organization should do better—not because a technical rule compels it, but because the standard the institution has chosen for itself demands more.

That is not disloyalty. It is stewardship.

The strongest Compliance leader does more than protect the institution from wrongdoing. They help the institution become worthy of its own commitments.

⸻

MP — VP, TIS USUI, ERP & Central Functions

You bring deep experience, strong judgment and considerable credibility with your peers. You know what good can look like and are well positioned to recognize where TIS needs to improve.

**Your opportunity is to use that influence more assertively.**

There can be a tendency to conclude that an issue is not sufficiently consequential to warrant a difficult disagreement. But leadership is not reserved for crises.

Institutions are shaped just as much by the accumulation of smaller compromises, weak decisions and missed opportunities that capable people chose not to challenge.

When you have a clear conviction about what needs to change, state it. Advocate for it. Use the experience and credibility you have earned to influence the outcome, even when doing so introduces some discomfort.

You do not need to become confrontational. You do need to become more deliberate and visible in exercising your influence.

TIS would benefit from hearing more clearly what you believe, why it matters and what better looks like.

You have earned a platform. The leadership challenge now is to use it.

⸻

MGla — VP, Utility Public Affairs & Communications

**Your leadership opportunity is to consider more carefully how your presence affects the willingness of others to contribute, challenge and disagree.**

Strong executive presence does not require being the dominant force in every discussion.

Some of the strongest leaders demonstrate confidence by creating space for others, responding proportionately to disagreement and allowing the quality of an argument—not organizational rank or force of personality—to determine its weight.

When leadership presence becomes too dominant, capable people begin to edit themselves.

The organization then receives less challenge, less creativity and ultimately less value from the talent in the room.

Your opportunity is not to become less forceful.

It is to use that force with greater proportion and judgment.

Create more room for other people to be heard. Invite disagreement. Demonstrate that challenge is welcome rather than something that has to be survived.

The measure of executive presence is not how much space a leader occupies.

It is how much capability they unlock in everyone else.

⸻

RH — VP & General Manager, Enbridge Gas North Carolina

You bring substantial experience into an organization that is now operating within a different company and a different culture.

That gives you an important opportunity.

Integration should not mean conformity. Acquisitions create value partly because incoming organizations bring practices, experience and perspectives that the parent company did not already possess.

You have credibility. Use it.

Where your experience points to a better way, say so. Where established approaches deserve to be challenged, challenge them constructively. Where Enbridge can learn from what you have seen work elsewhere, bring those lessons forward with confidence.

**Your leadership opportunity is to become a more visible voice in shaping the combined organization rather than simply adapting to it.**

Leadership at this level requires more than fitting in. It requires helping the institution become better because you became part of it.

⸻

TS — VP & Chief Supply Chain Officer

Supply Chain has carried a demanding workload through significant organizational change.

Your people need visible leadership and clarity about the mandate they are being asked to fulfill.

The fundamental question is whether Supply Chain is principally an enabling function, a control function, or deliberately both.

The answer needs to be clear to your teams and equally clear to the businesses they support.

Once that mandate is established, people need to know that leadership will stand behind them when they exercise it properly.

Employees cannot reasonably be asked to enforce enterprise standards and then be left exposed when those standards become inconvenient to others.

**Your leadership opportunity is therefore threefold: clarify the mandate, remain close enough to the people doing the work to understand what they face, and visibly support them when they make difficult decisions consistent with that mandate.**

Clarity without sponsorship is not enough.

⸻

TL — VP, Technology & Information Services, LP/GTM

Your leadership challenge is fundamentally about trust, accountability and follow-through.

People need to know they can rely on their leader, particularly when decisions become difficult, attract criticism or produce uncomfortable outcomes.

When leadership support recedes as pressure rises, people learn very quickly. They become more cautious. They protect themselves. They take fewer reasonable risks. Eventually, they begin asking whether their leader will stand beside them when it matters.

You should ask yourself some difficult questions.

Can your people count on you? Do you consistently follow through on what you say you will do? When an outcome is poor, do you first examine your own role before assigning accountability downward? Have you committed to more than you can realistically deliver?

Accountability begins at the top.

Leadership requires ambition, but credibility also requires restraint. Sometimes the stronger decision is to say no, narrow the agenda, make fewer promises and deliver them relentlessly.

**Your opportunity is to rebuild trust through predictability: be clear about what you support, follow through on what you commit to, and stand beside people who have exercised reasonable judgment based on your direction.**

Your people do not need protection from accountability. They need a leader who shares it.

⸻

AS — Director, TIS Strategy, Policy & Programs

Your leadership opportunity is to close the gap between intention and execution.

Strategy, policy and governance functions inevitably generate discussion, frameworks and commitments.

Their credibility ultimately depends upon whether the business experiences a meaningful result.

When a commitment is made, it needs ownership, a date and closure. When circumstances prevent delivery, that needs to be communicated directly rather than allowed to drift.

Repeatedly articulating the right intention without producing the expected outcome eventually becomes a credibility problem.

The standard should be straightforward: people across the business should be able to rely on what you and your function say you will do.

Build that reputation deliberately.

Make fewer ambiguous commitments. Establish clear ownership. Follow through. Communicate early when something changes.

**Make fewer commitments, assign clear ownership and dates, follow through, and communicate early when circumstances change.**

Reliability is not administrative discipline.

It is leadership.

⸻

HT — Director, People & Performance

You have capable people around you.

**Your leadership opportunity is to give them more voice, more room and stronger sponsorship.**

A People & Performance function should model the very behaviours it seeks to encourage across the organization: listening, constructive challenge, empowerment and a willingness to improve established ways of working.

When talented people identify something that should change, leadership should help them sharpen the idea, test it and, when it has merit, champion it through the organization.

Your role is not simply to manage capable people. It is to amplify them.

Create an environment in which thoughtful challenge travels upward, good ideas can become action, and people know that leadership will stand behind them when they are trying constructively to make the institution better.

⸻

SS — Director, Financial Planning & Analysis

Analysis creates value when it helps an organization make better decisions.

It creates less value when the pursuit of certainty prevents a decision from being made.

Leadership sometimes requires reaching a conclusion with imperfect information, being explicit about the assumptions behind it, and remaining prepared to adjust as better evidence emerges.

Your opportunity is to become more comfortable exercising that judgment.

People do not expect certainty where certainty does not exist. They do expect leaders to synthesize the available evidence, state a position and help the organization move forward.

Disciplined conviction is often preferable to prolonged ambiguity.

**Develop the confidence to take a position when the evidence is sufficient, even when it is not complete.**

The atmosphere is bad enough on its own, but watching certain people get special treatment makes it even harder to put up with. It's difficult to feel motivated when the rules don't seem to apply equally.

I work with too many Kool-Aid drinkers. It's good to find others who realize what a joke this place has become.

Hahahahahahahahahahahah

Ahhhhhhhhhhahahahahahahahah

We were good while under csbbo but ever since moving back to ECrL sh-t show . And now they are making us work EO cases which i don’t think we are properly trained for . Also changes happening daily but no heads up given .

My director level manager has no management or relevant experience and is essentially an AI bot. Every question is answered by AI. Every meeting they are using what I suspect is Teams live captions to copy text and put it in AI and I’m then read an AI response word for word I can see their eyes reading text. The response is delayed while AI answers, they stumble and the response is generally not relevant or wrong. Is anyone else experiencing this? I’m not against AI but this feels insane.

TDC stock is down $22 per share the past five years in a rapid growth market. Pathetic performance by any measure. It’s such a dog, that’s why the board keeps the same CEO in place. They don’t expect any better. Must be a depressing place to work. #TheDyingCo (TDC)

Good morning, team. 😊

First of all, I want to thank everyone for being here today, especially those of you who managed to arrive without turning a minor scheduling conflict into a full-blown emotional support emergency.

Truly inspiring.

Today, I want to talk about leadership. Specifically, how we lead a team of people who apparently believe that every task is unreasonable, every change is a personal attack, and every expectation is something that should have been discussed in a committee.

Because here’s the thing: leadership is not the art of making sure nobody is ever uncomfortable. It’s the art of getting things done while everyone involved develops the resilience to survive an email.

I know change is hard. I know accountability can feel uncomfortable. And I fully understand that sometimes, things don’t go exactly the way we wanted.

But at some point, we have to ask ourselves: are we facing a genuine obstacle, or are we simply experiencing the consequences of being asked to do our jobs?

Because those are two very different things.

Imagine if, instead of responding to every new responsibility with a 14-part explanation of why it’s inconvenient, we simply assessed the situation and figured out what needed to happen.

And imagine if we could receive constructive feedback without behaving like someone had just revoked our streaming subscriptions and canceled our three day weekend.

I am not asking anyone to be perfect. We all make mistakes. We all get frustrated. We all have days when the last thing we want to do is deal with another person’s nonsense.

The difference is that SOME people manage their frustration, while OTHERS apparently believe it is a team-building exercise to make sure everyone else experiences it with them.

And respectfully, we ARE going to GET TO WORK on that.

I realize that may be a difficult message to receive. Please take whatever time you need to process it. I’ll give you a moment.

Because I know that complaining is easy. Criticizing is easy. Name calling is easy. Let's stop confusing resistance with constant negativity.

Until then, I remain committed to supporting your growth.

Because apparently, we still have some growing to do.

Thank you. Let's get to work. 🙂

Employees have concluded that withholding feedback is safer than providing it.