Below are all the posts — topics as well as replies — that mention the hashtag #culture.
Mention #culture in your post to continue the discussion!
You know you work for a bottom feeder when:
1) SVPs of finance confidently says we always go down x%/year (instead of a one-time restructure like a normal company to align capital allocation with market opportunity)
2) SVPs of Print still think they 'run the company' despite secular market decline
3) An interim CEO for 9mo+ and no permanent in sight
For a company full of people climbing over themselves to push AI ideas - I have a challenge for you. Ask AI what the actual impact of forced low ratings in a major company. Not to steal the thunder here but - it’s a total failure - across the board!
It brings -
Terrible supervisor behavior
Crushes morale
Encourages disposable practices
Invites lawsuits
Extreme cost from turnover
Moreover - these impacts are worse at a company like P66 because of the annual cycles of cuts, the layoffs, outsourcing, and automation.
What’s so bad about it? Consider this situation:
You are in a group of 60 people, no supervisor has more than 6 people, some have only 3. Because of the continuous cutting of the “worst” since 2012 and the outsourcing or automation of many entry level jobs - your group is comprised of seasoned professionals. You supervise 4 people, all improve their work processes, find opportunities and add value. Through the year you stretch your people and have challenging targets. Almost all are hit. And - this is a big one - you have no reason for substantive performance conversations through the year.
At year end, as you “calibrate” you are asked for your bottom performer. You choose the person who missed 1 of his stretch goals - knowing that this person had a great year, they just happened to be at the bottom of your group. You know they don’t deserve a “3”.
Through calibration, your group of 60 must have three people to hang “3”’s on. Last year, you had 2 people in the larger group who were very deserving of “3l ratings and one more that made sense - they all left the company. Now, as calibration moves on, you realize that your employee is in the running for bottom 5 of the group.
Let’s pause here - because this whole process is built on the idea that each supervisor is as good, as active, as honest as the next. Surely each supervisor is as diligent in giving stretch goals to their employees - right? Surely none of them have employees who do the minimum but don’t mess up - thereby flying under the radar?
Back to calibration. At the end of the session, all of your peers and your people leader agree that your person is the third “3”. Now, after a successful year, you get to tell them they underperformed and are going to have negative impacts to their compensation as well as be put on a performance improvement plan.
This, in various forms, is what forced ratings look like. In every instance you must assume that people who did not earn a 3 will get them. And when that message is given - what will the supervisor say?
An honest comment would be “I believe you did a great job, however, in calibration the group determined you to be in the bottom 5%.” And what would you tell him to work on, exactly?
HR will say you need to “own the rating” and you cannot say they don’t deserve it - but pull all that apart for a moment. Your true feelings, the ones you expressed at calibration, is that this employee does not deserve a 3.
This process cannot exist at a company that claims to care about employees.
Impact
The forced 3 should motivate this employee to look for a job. There is a high probability the supervisor may also be more open to leaving - having seen the true character of our policy. If they leave, how do you know we get someone better, and, when? Many studies show that turnover costs as much as 1 year compensation! Seems pretty short sighted.
Add to this that we don’t have good pipelines for development unless you are hiring from CapGemni!
Legal risk
Why is there legal risk? Because we are rating people low not because of their actions. In many cases, there will have been no negative feedback in the year from the supervisor. When this occurs, especially against a protected class - bad things happen. Use AI to see how many companies have been sued for this practice and how many have stopped because of litigation threat - it’s a lot.
This is a terrible idea - a horrible idea - and it impacts all but the highest level employees.
My hope is that a rigid core of supervisors will ask themselves honestly if each person who is hung with a 3 deserves it. If they do, they should have been given ample notice through meaningful conversations which are documented. If, however, you are a supervisor who is tasked with hanging a 3 on an employee you know does not deserve it - my hope is you say NO, and you inform management you would rather have it assigned to yourself as neither of you have earned it
Just look how critical LeBron has been of Nike‘s innovation. Mbappé didn’t wait around. He peaced out. Others are going to do the same. We are now the next Under Armour. A future case study for decades to come on the collapse and failure of this company.
I used to be on board with no matter what tough times comes Nike‘s way that we will find a path to compete and overcome. That’s not the case anymore. We failed at our own Maxim of figuring out how to evolve immediately. We don’t know how to innovate. We don’t know how to inspire anymore. Everything they do is based on hope. Hope is not a plan or a strategy.
It’s unfortunate that Nike put themselves in this position when the Board of Directors hired JD. It only takes one mistake. Doubling down on that mistake compounds your problem.
Nike made a lot of people rich. Sent a lot of people into a comfortable retirement. Anybody with Nike stock will now have to work for many years to overcome the losses. This will also keep NIKE from attracting great talent, cause great talent to leave Nike, and continue the overall collapse of the brand.
I hate it because I’ve been a Nike fan all of my life. It has just become the inevitable fate. One that nobody wants to take responsibility for despite the obvious failures. Nike was never a tech company. Nike was a company by athletes for athletes.
Does anybody know what NIKE is anymore? No. That’s the problem and that’s what ki-led this great company.
…and with that, just like Shark Tank…I’m out
I keep hearing that “in the old days” it was not like this. It has me questioning whether this is the right company to grow my career with.
It seems like everything is a struggle these days.
I am interested to hear from those people who have worked here for a long time on what they feel has changed and more importantly if it can be fixed.
Maybe if someone up top is actually monitoring this site they will see what is being said. The fear is even if they do I have little confidence to believe they will make the change. Our company is run by people who are days away from retirement.
If you dare (we all know this really isn't anonymous) tell 'em how you really feel!
Heard he crawled back under a rock
It started with a letter from Elliott. Maybe it ends with a letter from the people still in the Tower.
From: The People Still in the Tower
Next stop: stability.
Removing two EMT members is not a cultural reset. What leadership does next determines whether this is actually one.
For years, employees have absorbed the consequences of strategy whiplash, expensive mistakes, consultant spending, restructurings, repeated cuts and leadership decisions they were directed to execute—even when the people closest to the work knew better.
The people making those decisions were compensated extraordinarily well. The people underneath them often paid the real price: jobs, careers, financial security, morale and trust.
That can’t simply be filed under “new leadership, moving forward.”
Leadership owns what leadership allowed.
The fiber chapter is over. The boardroom battles and proxy fights are behind us. The constant strategy pivots need to end. Crown Castle now has an opportunity to get back to basics: operate exceptionally well, generate sustainable organic growth, invest intelligently, execute consistently and rebuild the workforce that actually makes the company run.
And that means investing in people—not another round of cuts disguised as transformation.
Commit to a meaningful layoff freeze and give employees room to work without constantly wondering who’s next. Stop replacing institutional knowledge with consultants. Before launching another giant technology transformation, fix what is actually broken. Rebuild the expertise that repeated reductions stripped out. Invest heavily in cross-training and upskilling. Create career paths employees can actually see. Make mental wellness and psychological safety more than HR language.
And perhaps most importantly: stop treating people who identify problems as the problem.
Listen to them. Protect them. Thank them. Fix what they identified.
TA and KH are now part of the leadership team carrying this company forward. By many accounts, they are capable leaders. Now comes the harder part: demonstrate that the next chapter will be different. Acknowledge what employees have endured, establish clear expectations for how people will be treated, and rebuild trust through actions rather than another mission statement.
Crown Castle is an enormous enterprise supported by a remarkably small workforce. Its people should feel like an extraordinary asset—not an expense line perpetually waiting for another reduction.
Employees have survived the fiber bet, activist battles, reorganizations, leadership turnover, strategy reversals and repeated workforce reductions.
They’ve done their part.
Now it’s leadership’s turn.
Stability. Accountability. Respect. Career development. Operational discipline. Sustainable growth. No more whiplash.
And if the remaining EMT can’t commit to that, then on this casual ride we’ve apparently been taking for years, can someone please announce the new riders and the next stop?
—— And yes, AI helped mask the writers. We’re not d-mb, we’re survivalists. We’ve learned a few things around here.
It's Friday and this is the first full week that I am not working for a company that doesn't appreciate the value that at least one employee brought to a company's customer where we always kept the customer's well being top of mind. I was in the OCI org in North America, and I would be lieing to you if I told you that I had a great relationship with my manager who I would call today a true id--t -- he would be a great engineer but an incrediblly stupid manager and the irony is they kept him haha. Sorry for my ex-peers that are stuck with him.
For namesake there seem to be plenty of requirements posted and many say multiple openings.
If these were labor filings, why waste others time?
If these were internal rotations why waste others time?
If they dont need candidates why do they keep raising hopes only to disappoint?
Momentum is everything.
Watch the people who moved fast. VP to CEO. VP to President in under five years. Then watch what happened to the people who were "doing great work" and stayed at level.
If you're being told how good you are but you can't get out of L09–L11, LG1–LG3, or LG5 — you're keeping a seat warm. Praise is what they give you instead of a promotion, not on the way to one.
And levels move both directions. Look at how many presidents from five years ago aren't presidents now. Special assignment. Retitled to SVP. Moved to the franchise team. Out. Some of them got jumped by people they used to sit above.
Nobody is going to tell you which side of that you're on. The climbers compound. So does standing still.
History repeats. Pay attention.
I read that uniforms designed by some goober are being released for stores, are they going to (try) make us wear uniforms? LOL
We would like to hear why you love this slogan. Thank you for your attention to this matter!
Imagine the mess coming.
IT&V is going to take much of Audit’s work. IT&V hired a large group of Big 4 leaders that do not know internal audit, do not know how to identify an issue, or how to navigate the bank. They effectively QA control documentation pretending to evaluate the control enviornment. IT&V is not built to find issues and is not finding issues. Risk is a bigger mess than it was 5 years ago with over reliance on RCSA.
We will back in a huge mess in less than 3 years. In the meantime, we shrink. We make questionable decisions.
These things take time. Grab the popcorn.
Listening to Emily Elswick discuss her faith this morning and then walk through an entire slide dedicated to her personal travel and work trips was certainly a choice. Given that our MIP was 70%, I’m not sure this was the moment for a personal highlight reel. Also genuinely curious how she ended up in this role. What experience or qualifications actually supported putting her in this position?
They are making fun of us for our poor operating performance at Golden Pass
https://lnkd.in/p/dADWkHiN
Imagine, if you will, a world where a survey can give a clear view of improvement or decline in how employees view leadership and the overall health of a company.
Imagine that the survey responses are collected by Gallup, who has been in business since 1935 and is widely recognized as one of the most credible analytics and advisory firms in the world. A company that tracks individual survey links or access codes on the backend to prevent duplicate submissions and route data correctly and any identifying data is permanently walled off from the submitter's employer. That company's reputation would be destroyed if they identified who submitted the surveys.
If Gallup didn't know who you were then people could put as many surveys in as they want and stuff the ballot box like mail-in votes. Oops... better stop there. They have to be able to tell the company that an entire organization or department has so little care that they haven't submitted 7 out of 10 possible surveys. How would they know that? Because the employer says here is our email list and the departments they work for, please tell us the percentage of surveys submitted so we will know by their silence if there are leadership issues.
If Gallup exposed the individuals then a nearly 100 year old company's reputation would be ruined.
The work around is for an employer is to ask for optional long form answers that are only shown to managers with more than 10 direct reports.
But who do those managers show it to? I have been personally asked if I submitted certain answers. It has also been suggested that I submitted answers over the years that I would think I had submitted because they sounded like something I would have written.
Oh, did I forget to mention that some of the directors have read the long form answers on All Hands calls? I don't think I'm the only one who had slack and jabber start pinging with people claiming to know who the submitter was.
And Gallup has formatted the survey to isolate questions to each level of management to target which levels are declining and which are in improving.
They also group good and bad responses by organizations. So bad customer service managers don't affect good supply chain managers and vice versa.
If I am a manager at any level, I want you to think we know who you are and that "straight fives will keep you alive" and other BS answers to dupe you into thinking you're saving yourself.
Wake up!! Straight fives saves the leadership that needs to be gone.
And if I am a company sycophant then I am going to go on every forum and tell everybody that "straight fives will keep you alive".
I have given honest detailed surveys for years. I know there is a character count in the long form because others have said in meetings that they had too carefully edit them to get under the limit. And I am still here and they are still here. But all of our managers at the top are gone or moved and the direct manager, who is good, is still there.
That rips apart any of the claims that people are posting right now to the contrary. You don't have to believe it but it's a fact.
Think about it. Do they need a survey to get rid of you? They don't need any reason other than your name came up in the layoff lottery. And because they get a chance to review and provide feedback on the list, if you are kissing your boss's Southern Ring, they will make sure your name is removed from that list. Or will they?
They are afraid you will answer in a way that exposes them for the shams they are.
So remember:
"Straight fives keeps leadership alive"
MVGA
The AD was shaking, voice weard, eyes blinking when talking about the Pulse, going to crash under the loads.
Okay Target you still su-k and majority of your team members are overworked and over all the racism however you ki-led it this Target Together. The content from the leaders was the same old same old but the performances were a home run. How did everyone else feel?
I didn’t know I joined a frat
They are very cautious about who will be around them and when you by any chance happened to be in a such "Team" ( They always like to portray themself as a "FAMILY" ) you expect to be on a street in around 4-5 years, because they do not like you from the very beginning, like an adopted child, and will try to get rid of you as soon as possible. They use very many sophisticated techniques to justify their useless to IBM existence, hiring people for a short period of time ( 4 - 5 years ) to create a shield to protect their own existence. When a company wide layoffs get announced that shield ( first line of defense ) goes to the street and those bad people stay at IBM and continue doing nothing. Managers in such teams are very incompetent and stupidly execute commands from upper management. Here is a suggestion: to sweep any corner in IBM Silicon Valley LAB to get rid of all toxic managers, remember Intel did it 20 years ago and the company now is much of a better shape and health.
Comrades, do just enough to get paid and nothing more. This place is a sinking ship and they’ll throw you to the sharks long before you are given a seat on a lifeboat. Spend more time with your family. Take long walks before the sun goes down. Medtronic will not take care of you. Only you can do that.
We’re a complete financial disaster, yet we’re building a new multi-billion dollar campus nobody wants, and this leadership actually thinks the Street isn’t going to react??
The fact that Stink sits in his office talking about and arguing over the number of bowling alley lanes and golf simulators rather than figuring out how to set this company up for financial success is actually fu--ing insane.
These guys have completely lost their minds.
We’re dealing with massive financial pressure, a rapidly changing industry, growing competition and serious threats to the business, and somehow the priority is building a giant corporate playground???
Nobody wants your stupid new HQ. Nobody cares about your bowling alleys. Nobody gives a sh-t about your golf simulators. This was clearly stated in the survey last year. NO OFFICE not new office.
We need leadership focused on making this company financially successful, not designing the fu--ing employee country club.
And the only silver lining is that this guy has already been involved in enough disastrous strategic decisions like TMO, DTV, Time Warner Xandr, etc. etc. etc. that there is absolutely no reason to believe this one will somehow be different.
Undoubtedly, this will prove to be the wrong decision yet again and set this company back decades further than he already has.
At this point, the only question is how much more damage these guys can do before the Street and the board finally says enough is enough. The sound financial decision here is to short the stock before everyone else does.
Nobody wants or cares about your stupid new HQ. Retire and let us go back to the way it was before Covid. Everyone hates you.
At what point does leadership admit the entertainment strategy isn’t working?
CP keeps getting squeezed while resources continue going toward chasing another Barbie movie moment. Barbie was lightning in a bottle. Instead of strengthening the businesses that actually generate consistent revenue, leadership seems determined to recreate something that may not be repeatable.
Then come the layoffs, reorganization and promotions at the top, while everyone else is expected to do more with less.
“Toy to Joy” sounds great in a presentation. Employees are still waiting to see the Joy part.
Losing both my direct and skip level managers in a single layoff round I survived. Both were complete a--holes, so to say that was one of the best days of my life would be an understatement. Yes, there was a lot of confusion and issues until everything settled down, but it was worth it.
nothing to say about layoffs as there are none. i am an account mgr (gov't). i think it really depends on who leads you and the person that's leading my group is a great mentor and she cares. nothing else to add here, good benefits, stable company and highly recommended for anyone that's looking for a meningful job in a very stable company. again, no layoffs that i am aware off. w-w-grainger
Just heard we got a new director and she is from there. Why is all senior management affiliated with this school?
wow the new CEO did a glossy magazine photo shoot, even involving a "groomer"/makeup artist: https://www.fastcompany.com/91587895/walmart-ceo-john-furner-ai-revolution. Things are changing that's for sure
Takis posed the following in the townhall regarding this topic:
Do you enjoy coming to work every day?
Do you enjoy the people you are working with?
Do you feel that you have a future here?
Does the company value subject matter expertise?
Am I getting paid fairly?
The answer to all of these for me is a resounding NO! What about the rest of you?
To be fair to the people I work with… it’s a small handful of peers that are impossible to work with, a few that aren’t contributing nearly enough, and the VP and up leadership chain that is making work life miserable for everyone
Not OP of orginal post but that post maybe me realize:
IMAPS Corporation Award to IBM?
How? That department was completely destroyed and disbanded by the leadership of their last management chain. Their buffoonery bungled, fumbled, and mismanaged, driving the department straight into the ground by people who clearly had no idea what they were doing. In fact the only thing those guys were good at was destroying and ending other projects and programs. How can IBM win this when it literally no longer exists internally at IBM. How exactly does a team that's been wiped off the org chart win an award for work it can no longer even claim credit for?
grow careers! (from stressed out e execs who Only want to hear that you’re going to work extra hours to get them off one of the thousands of naughty lists that fiserv uses instead of management)
keep the list going:)
What a grouping of incredible dipsh-ts
Do you think I gave a hoot about some damn ethics or security risk training due? Lol let alone a progress checkpoint? Kick rocks!
Wish they had a better dress sense for the “Global Townhall.” I’ve seen McDonald’s managers dress better than these executives. 😂
The most experienced people appear to be at Citi. The least experienced appear to be at Goldman
https://www.efinancialcareers.com/news/wall-street-experience
A few hundred, maybe. Please stop lying to people. We'd know and it'd be all overt the news if it were 3k.
Watch Charlie Youakim’s latest post on LinkedIn about Sezzle’s growth. This is the sort of leader employees rally behind. Warm, grounded, respected. A unique subscription model to BNPL - a new p2p offering that’s unique.
What will we learn about today? That their idea of making people more comfortable is to add a Wellbeing center to a fully saturated, overpopulated, and loud office environment? Or pickleball for all? None of that will improve the quality of the experience for the customer, who can’t hear us on our calls due to the noise around us. The only part that makes me feel included is that it stinks for everyone.
Large number of people are not criticizing layoffs. There is very little lament, or for that matter - very little anger...
What I see here is MANY Citi employees just asking whether we can stop anticipating layoffs, whether a meeting means something, and whether this or that area is next.
That's a sad place to be at. I feel defeated.
There was a time when I would've defended this company without thinking twice. After everything that's changed, I don't have that same attachment anymore. The way employees are treated has made me much more careful about how much I give. Now I do my job, collect my paycheck, and keep some of myself for my life outside of work.