#leadership

(A) Are we done with cuts
(B) Is it bigger than we all anticipate
(C) Future cutting plans
(D) Current & Future targets
(E) Movements at the top
(F) Reorgs (potential)
(G) What else?

For those who were unable to attend this morning's meeting:

HR acknowledged a significant decline in employee sentiment: overall NPS dropped 17 points, promoters declined 10 points, and employees’ ability to work in a way that meets their personal needs fell 13 points. Yet the presentation offered remarkably little in the way of corrective action. Several tactics and contradictions stood out.

1. Framing implementation as success while ignoring employee dissatisfaction. HR described the return-to-office transition as having gone relatively smoothly, citing strong attendance and no widespread parking or seating problems. But operational success is not employee acceptance. The survey showed a substantial decline in employees' ability to meet personal needs. Leadership focused on whether the offices were functioning, not whether the policy was working for employees.

2. Promoting flexibility while emphasizing surveillance and compliance. HR spoke about accommodating caregivers, illness, appointments, and weather. In the same discussion, it introduced attendance dashboards for managers to monitor patterns, investigate concerns, and involve HR. Flexibility was presented as a benefit, but the practical message was that employees are expected to comply with assigned schedules and deviations may be scrutinized.

3. Acknowledging uncertainty while avoiding meaningful answers. All info given was on past events that have already taken place. Asked about future return-to-office phases, HR repeatedly said no additional decisions had been finalized. Yet it confirmed that transitions were already underway in New Jersey and Ireland and that workplace and real estate needs were being evaluated across regions. No timeline, decision criteria, or meaningful assurances were provided. Repeating that decisions are not final is not an answer to employees seeking clarity.

4. Reducing transparency while claiming to value employee feedback. Leadership explained that detailed survey reporting would be reduced, arguing that historical results showed little differentiation across business units and leaders. No supporting data was presented. The company is asking employees to trust that feedback is being heard while providing less visibility into the results and limiting employees' ability to assess leadership performance.

5. A significant decline in engagement, but no action plan. Perhaps the most revealing exchange came when leadership was asked whether new action plans or initiatives would result from the survey. The answer was no. Instead, employees were directed toward manager conversations, empathetic listening, and existing culture and engagement efforts. After presenting some of the weakest sentiment indicators, leadership offered no measurable improvement targets, specific corrective actions, or accountability.

6. Deflecting responsibility downward. Throughout the meeting, the proposed solutions centered on managers listening, having conversations, monitoring attendance, and helping employees navigate concerns. There was little discussion of what senior leadership itself would change. The people responsible for implementing and enforcing the policies were effectively made responsible for managing the dissatisfaction those policies created.

Overall: The meeting followed a familiar corporate communication pattern: acknowledge the negative numbers, emphasize positive aspects of implementation, provide carefully worded explanations, redirect concerns to managers, point to published documents, and avoid making commitments. Leadership repeatedly said it was listening, learning, and adjusting, but explicitly ruled out new action plans.

The central contradiction is that employee feedback was important enough to warrant a dedicated company-wide meeting, but apparently not important enough to produce any new initiatives or measurable commitments.

Anyone else?

We don’t have a business set up properly to accommodate this model. I don’t understand the benefits to the CE. They can talk all they want about how the customers like it but let’s talk about how the CE’s feel. I quoted one up by 2X but no change to my comp plan, I now oversee five people under my number who are struggling all the same I am. The effective result is lower attainment and lower pay. Just shifting the selling motion doesn’t change the backend problems of pricing, licensing negotiation, and never-ending back-and-forth.

Holy moly how bad are things really. They've always showed how separate product buckets did YoY. They completely skipped that this time. Dude was literally fumbling his words trying to justify how bad financially things are WHILE READING OFF A CRUMBLED PIECE OF PAPER JUST SO HE DOESNT HAVE TO SHOW THE NUMBERS. How shameless and brain dead are these people really. Manipulate the numbers, have nothing to show for it and then just dont show anything. Fire everyone in the ELT right now, this company is a dumpsterfire.

Steve R - sure, we shared with investors that we did some reclassification, but they get it. Steve, let me rephrase that "A month into Q1, we looked at what core parts of the business were bleeding money, and we secretly moved all of that into non core business units where that loss isn't reported because it is now non core". So no, core overall continued to drop in a big way.

No one cares about your stupid stories. We are not your children.
None of this will help the company
and you are certainly not fostering any goodwill when you deny your employees increases they earned.

I’ve noticed that during some layoff cycles, the women on the teams are laid off but the men get options to stay. I’ve also experienced weird treatment from the men, particularly in sales, and some customers who are women have admitted the same. I’m already had it with the leadership here so I’m looking for new work but has anyone else experienced this as well, or maybe dealt with a “boys club” vibe at CDW? Especially with all of the layoffs going on?

Check out this article:

https://dwaynegefferie.substack.com/p/the-rise-and-fall-of-fis

Rebooting DC Universe again!!

At this point, it's all about the numbers.

Many employees feel like we're in the most uncertain position we've seen in years. We've lived through the reorganization, layoffs, voluntary departures, territory changes, customer frustrations, and constant disruption. Now the question is simple: what are we actually going to hear on the First Friday call?

Will leadership acknowledge the reality employees are experiencing every day?

Will they discuss the continued departures across the organization?

Will they address concerns about morale, which has fallen to levels many employees have never seen before?

Will they provide clarity on future staffing plans, additional cost-cutting measures, or the overall direction of the company?

Or will we get another round of talking points, buzzwords, and assurances that everything is moving according to plan?

I think most employees aren't looking for perfection anymore. They're looking for honesty. They want transparency. They want realistic expectations. They want leaders who are willing to acknowledge what is working, what isn't working, and what needs to change.

Morale doesn't improve because leadership tells people to be positive. Morale improves when employees believe leadership understands the problems and has a credible plan to fix them.

So let's hear from everyone:

What do you think will actually be discussed?
What questions should employees be asking?
What issue is leadership avoiding that should be addressed?
What is the single biggest change management needs to make right now?
If you could make one leadership replacement or organizational change, what would it be?
What would a truly honest First Friday call sound like?

I'm curious whether employees think we're finally going to hear the truth, or if we're getting another month of corporate theater.

“Sorry but we can’t afford raises this year. But, but, but... here’s an email announcing our record-breaking profits.”

Your Leadership

What's with all these distraction and debate over 1% eps? Will you please take those arguments to linkedin for visibility, synergy, agentic tera or what not. On a separate note, now that a real AI company chief is caught with his pants down, you think copy cat leadership will soon go bragging they never wore pants and been drinking bottoms up?
End.

That's it. That's the post

If you want to know what’s happening at PepsiCo don’t ask your leaders, ask Reddit and news feeds. 1,000 is the number to be laid off and oh yeah we lost Regal.

Some of your best advisors remain in the seat for now, but attrition risk is at an all time high. Find a solution to keep your top talent happy, or risk further resignations.

Really? Another one?

What BS do you think she is going to shovel our way tomorrow morning about the Pulse survey results/ RTO feedback?

Please make it fun, I am slowly dying at work anyway. 🫪😫

who even is the new guy? how did the "advising" engagement start? was it competitive? was he a paid consultant thru his own firm or another vendor? was there any real search before his appointment or was the outcome predetermined? if he spent a year advising, did he also evaluate TCs work, because that's a conflict of interest if his advice led to TCs departure.

JR and BR presumably know each other from Capital Group, so who pushes back on BR if the decisions are wrong? he helps pick his replacement, and 12-18 months is a loonnngggg audition for the role. even tho LinkedIn says he's retired, is he a candidate, who's now on both sides of the search for CIO?

will more of BR's friends from Capital Group start showing up in leadership positions or consulting engagements?

will JR drift towards Accenture, given his Accenture background?

I think he's the seventh or eighth CIO in six years. I don't see him lasting long either. if the churn is so high one has to wonder whether the problem really lies with the person in the chair or with NM...

Today. Any insights?

I see in the org chart that Gerd is reporting to Klein , is this just operation because his contract is ending in 2026 ?

I am considering a job in IT. But I also heard that there were several layoffs already in 2026, and more to come because of some unsavory executives in Informatics and ESI. Also heard that IT will be outsourced and some California hospitals will be sold.
Is this a good work place to come into?

Got wind of a rumor that there is another massive round of lay offs coming to Gore.

Any leader that is more than 6 degrees or levels (even though Gore "doesn't have levels") away from Brett Snyder is going to be cut.

They are also refusing to backfill important roles and just piling on their work to other associates.

This messaging is extremely weird considering they just gave a profit share check out - which implies we are exceeding expectations.

I hope when all of this goes down Aetna takes a good hard look at the multitude of layers of management. My friend is a lead director. Ready for this? Above her- AVP, VP, Sr. VP, EVP & COO, EVP & President, Chairman. I mean seriously what do the 4 layers above her even do?

If we don't change fast enough, we're done. If we change but in the wrong way, we're also done. Basically, there are very few paths in which Oracle will be okay, and many more where we're done.

We have a clear ambition for PepsiCo North America: to build a stronger, more future-fit business that delivers industry-leading growth. To do that, we need to be faster, more connected, and more capable, while continuing to invest in growth – behind our people, capabilities and brands.

Many parts of our organization were designed for a different chapter in PepsiCo’s history. They helped get us to where we are today, but the marketplace is changing; our customers increasingly expect us to operate in a more integrated way, and too much of how we work today remains complex and fragmented. We have opportunities to simplify our structures, clarify accountability, and make decisions faster.

Over the coming week, we’ll make changes across parts of our organization to address this. We will simplify how we operate, better connect teams across PEPNA, and strengthen the capabilities we need. The goal is to move faster, execute better, and invest behind the opportunities that will drive our growth.

I recognize that changes like these are difficult because they affect people. Leaders and HR will speak directly with those whose roles are impacted before broader team updates are shared. Please give those conversations, and the colleagues involved, the privacy and space they deserve.

While our organization changes, our ambition remains the same. We are building a stronger PEPNA, with clearer accountability, stronger capabilities, and greater ability to operate as one team.

I’ll follow up on Monday, November 16, with more details on the changes across PEPNA, why we are making them and what they mean for us going forward.

Best of luck my friends… hope the whole SLT is next 🤞🏼

Work from home is a total joke!
HRBP, GVP, RVP, asset protection, and any other executive positions need to get back into stores 5 days a week ! Put offices in the stores so we can see for ourselves what these folks actually do! Most are making six figures working from home! That’s a disgrace !

This work from home nonsense is driving the company straight into the ground!

Belk has HRBP’s, GvPs, and RVP’S appearing to work full days with the occasional conference call, zoom meeting. when in reality they are at home running errands, watching television, doing yard work, and napping while the rest of us are actually managing the stores!! This is disgraceful and needs to stop!

I left about 2 years ago, I'm sure this won't just be a pure toxic forum...

But... If some objective entities could chime in if it got better or worse, I'd appreciate it.

Fu-k Wayne Peacock.

Any idea why there is an owner's meeting earlier than normal?

This board's default setting is to treat SM, SA, and the rest of the ELT like a punchline. I'm not joining that chorus.

I think well of this leadership team because of what they actually reported and decided, not because I claim to know their motives. Non-GAAP EPS came in at $0.70 and beat the Street. Public cloud ARR reached $700 million, up 11%. Adjusted free cash flow was $96 million. They raised the full-year EPS outlook and reaffirmed the ARR and adjusted free cash flow ranges. They've also been putting real investment into AI, including the products and capabilities they just highlighted with the quarter. That's the record. It's why I respect the job they're doing.

On the question this forum never gets tired of asking: my view is that further layoffs are unlikely, but possible; I have no inside information. That is not a forecast I can verify, not a guarantee, and not proof that anyone's job is safe. Earnings don't certify headcount. If there's an official announcement, that will speak for itself. Until then, I'm going to judge the people running the company by the results they put on paper, not by the next date someone invents in a comment.

Are the leaders behind the FIFA going to be held accountable?

Program was such a waste of money. But it sure looked nice on their linked in posts.

Obviously still very early days but there is a part of me that is worried this guy got overvalued more because he looks the part than is

PNC REVENUE: Q1 2024 vs Q3 2026
Metric Q1 2024 Q3 2026 Change
Total revenue $5.15B $6.56B +27%
Net interest income $3.26B $4.21B +29%
Noninterest income $1.88B $2.36B +25%
Diluted EPS (GAAP) $3.10 $4.97 +60%
Adjusted EPS $3.36 $5.09 +51%
Net interest margin 2.57% 2.94% +37

STOCK PERFORMANCE vs S&P
FISV – Lyons exit (post) Jun 15 $47.91 $62.88 +31.2% -2.3% +33.6

TFC – Lyons Day 1 Aug 31 $49.58 $49.38 -0.4% -4.0% +3.6

Man, that recent CPM round in CCPG was basically just a "loyalty layoff." People who actually ki-led it and teams handling critical stuff for Intel got canned anyway. Meanwhile, all these useless, dead-weight CVPs, VPs, and Directors are just hanging on to collect their RSUs and APB bonus checks.

Intel’s seriously on life support right now. Honestly, if you get a severance package, just take it and walk. Word is the next wave in January is going to be performance-based, where they’ll slap "Below Expectations" on 20% of the team so they can kick them out with zero severance.

And you already know all the old-timers will still be clinging to their seats like glue.

but instead of removing nepotism and cronyism, he has amplified it because the leaders who got pushed out were the least "protected".

Just look at who's in the calibration room when it's promotion time for this performance cycle. This company is rotten.

My team was shown out CES results… I guess. It’s laughable, and totally on brand, that they only show very very select portions of the results now. I have it from very good sources that this is all an exercise in gaslighting, to make it appear the issues are at the team level, not the actual complete systemic dysfunction the aggregate results actually show. Yet another demonstration the emperor has no clothes and we’re lead by a group of sociopaths.

I wonder how much he was aware of how much things had slid under.

US car companies have been protected and bailed out too many times and are now not only completely uncompetitive on the global market, but set up to be completely demolished as EVs take over.
Their bad leadership and overall inefficiency mean that either investors are going to pay a massive price, or US consumers are going to pay a massive price. If we keep on pushing up consumer costs by propping up bad manufacturers with protectionism and bail outs, the US's entire economy is dr-g down by that.
There needs to be some creative destruction, ruthless culling of the least efficient manufacturers, so that their best workers can go to the better manufacturers, if the US is ever going to be a top tier car manufacturer again.

20% off the top? Verizon can easily get there by rolling back a fraction of the layers of band 5+ fat built up without touching anyone else. Ever hear of a corporation whose CEO gets axed and is not followed by their disciples? Verizon continues to be saddled with way too many unnecessary SVP's, EVP's, VP's, AVP's, Sr Directors, Directors, etc. It's absurd. And the VZ board needs a slap for allowing it. Bertolini needs to be shown the door. Perhaps a trip to the Verizon annual meeting for an employee presentation of what’s really going on is needed. Any middle manager who threatens a report with "get on the bandwagon or leave'' needs to be reminded – uh, excuse me – “you’re actually the cause of this – and the target.”

How many org models does it take for us to realize maybe the same leaders who have been here for twenty years don’t get want people want to wear anymore