#leadership

Posts mentioning hashtag #leadership

Below are all the posts — topics as well as replies — that mention the hashtag #leadership.

Mention #leadership in your post to continue the discussion!

DXC: A Field Guide to Corporate Excellence (Bell Curve Edition)

At DXC, "synergy" isn't just a buzzword—it's a religion practiced by middle managers who haven't approved a single decision since 2019 without first escalating it to a steering committee, which then escalates it to a governance board, which schedules a follow-up to discuss whether a meeting is needed.

The performance bell curve is so aggressively steep it's basically a cliff face. Somewhere around the 99.9th percentile, perfectly balanced on the summit, sit exactly two people: the CEO and whichever golden-boy lieutenant he's decided is "strategically essential," each pocketing a multi-million-pound pay bump for vision and leadership the rest of the org has never personally witnessed. Everyone else is distributed along the rest of the curve like sediment, fighting over a 1.8% pool increase and a "thank you for your resilience" email.

The org chart resembles a conspiracy theory corkboard: red string everywhere, nobody quite sure who owns anything, and at least three VPs with "Transformation" in their title who have personally transformed nothing except the breakroom coffee machine, replaced with a worse one to save 4% on facilities spend — savings presumably redirected straight into the summit-dwellers' bonus pool.

Project deadlines run on a unique temporal model where "Q3 delivery" means "Q3 of an unspecified future year," and the only thing that ships on time is the all-hands email reminding everyone "we are one team," sent forty-five minutes after a quiet round of layoffs nobody mentions out loud.

Ask anyone what DXC actually does and you'll get a 20-minute answer involving "digital" and "transformation" that explains nothing, followed by a sigh, followed by them asking if you know of any open roles elsewhere — preferably ones with a flatter curve.


Everything wrong with Citi leadership summed up

Recent LinkedIn slop post by Mike Whitaker that perfectly explains why the Citi MDs that have no clue get the seats that they have:

“Nobody is going to manage your career for you.

I wish someone had told me that in 1980 when I walked into NatWest as a junior office worker.

Instead, I spent the first few years of my career believing that if I worked hard and kept my head down, the right people would notice. That the system would reward me. That someone, somewhere, was keeping track.

Nobody was keeping track.

Here's what I've learned across 45 years and thousands of careers watched, and developed:

The people who progress are not always the most talented...

They're the ones who:

→ Know exactly where they're heading and why
→ Build relationships before they need them
→ Move towards discomfort instead of away from it
→ Think two jobs ahead, not just one
→ Refuse to let their current expertise become their ceiling

The people who plateau are often the most capable people in the building. They're just waiting for someone to tap them on the shoulder.

That tap isn't coming.

I've sat in boardrooms where promotion decisions were made. I can tell you — the conversation is "who's ready?" And readiness is something you build deliberately. Nobody builds it for you.”


Has anyone’s leadership been genuinely transparent?

I’m curious what conversations are happening across the company. Have your leaders:

  • Told you they expect your department to be relatively stable?
  • Suggested your area could be significantly impacted?
  • Discussed how workload, business need, or performance may factor into future decisions?
  • Or are you getting little to no information?

It seems like communication varies dramatically depending on the department, and I’m interested in hearing others’ experiences.


Bloomberg this morning

SAP SE is divvying up responsibilities for its product and engineering functions in its second top-level reorganization this year, people familiar with the matter said, as Europe’s largest software company grapples with staying ahead of rising artificial intelligence competition.

SAP has decided to split the responsibilities of Chief Product Officer Muhammad Alam among existing executives as Alam prepares to leave the company in March, rather than name a new CPO with those duties, the people said, asking to not be identified as the plan hasn’t yet been shared internally. Chief Executive Officer Christian Klein will take over most of Alam’s teams, while Chief Operating Officer Sebastian Steinhäuser will handle industrial AI, the people said.

A spokesman for SAP declined to comment.

Growing enterprise interest in AI tools from OpenAI and Anthropic PBC has put SAP and other traditional software firms under pressure to adapt. Klein is reorganizing the company to focus more resources on AI development, something he sees as key to the German enterprise software company’s survival.

It’s come alongside several executive board departures in the last few years, which have shifted reporting lines and responsibilities. In March, Klein gave another board member his sales responsibilities and took on greater oversight of AI strategy. He said in an email to employees at the time that “we once again need to transform SAP end to end, going all in on AI.”

SAP’s shares have declined about 35% this year.

Read more: SAP CEO Says AI Transition Will Require Short-Term Pain

The company is fending off criticism from some partners and customers that its early AI tools aren’t worth the expense, and others who say that they may look outside of SAP’s ecosystem for AI capabilities. In March, Klein pushed to expand access to AI tools to customers who hadn’t yet migrated their all of their legacy systems to the cloud, prioritizing the newer technology.

SAP will continue to search outside of the company for a new executive product lead, two of the people added. The company will target candidates in the US, its largest market, where Alam is the only executive board member, they said. Alam, who took the role leading SAP’s global product and engineering organization in 2024, also oversaw SAP’s software applications including product strategy and development. It’s unclear how the role will be structured under the new CPO.


Bring back the good managers

With all the restructurings, layoffs, people leaving on their own, we've lost all the knowledgeable managers who cared about both their people and the company (and yes, it's possible). The ones we have left should be shown the door immediately and 3M should try really hard to bring some of those we lost back if this place is to improve in any way.


How long until it all falls apart?

There's something I've noticed: a meeting starts, someone kicks it off with the generic "How's it going?", and the response is a crestfallen look, a deep breath, and "it's fine."

Nobody is okay anymore. Nobody is happy. Nobody is getting anything done.

We have no leadership, no support, and no idea where to go from here.

We can't go on like this.


Calling brave and informed LEADERS

Since this platform is anonymous, are any people leaders willing to share what they know? Just give us what you can without exposing yourself.
How many need to accept VSP to prevent layoffs? Will layoffs hit all business lines?
Seeing post after post about closed-mouthed leaders only adds to the anxiety and frustration.
My direct leader offered some words of encouragement but not much else. Her leader, who usually has lots to say about everything has said nothing worth hearing, just the usual emotionally void attitude and gas lighting us to accept all this as normal.
Leadership is playing numbers games, but these are people's livelihoods. We deserve transparency.


Verizon’s Future Is Becoming Harder to Ignore

Being dropped from the Dow was a wake up call. The stock has struggled, morale has taken a hit, and many employees and investors are questioning the company’s direction. CEO Dan Schulman seems increasingly disconnected from those concerns. Cutting costs can only go so far, Verizon needs a clear strategy to rebuild confidence, grow again, and prove its best days aren’t behind it.


To BNED - Time for change at our campus!

Look, we know you're monitoring this website. Shoot, it wouldn't be at all surprising if one of your VPs spent half the day refreshing this... or if you paid someone a Store Director's salary to do the same.

So, seriously, just between us: what's your plan?

We all have families, obligations... pets. We're doing our best to support our campuses, support our teams and continue our lives while you keep doing your best to make those things impossible.

So, again...what's your plan?

Asking for a friend.


Market Based No Loyalty Clown Show

The 8/1/25 email may end up being remembered as one of the most damaging leadership communications in AT&T’s history. Maybe even corporate world history. Not because of one quote, but because of the mindset behind it.

Employees said morale was declining, flexibility mattered, talent was leaving, and five-day RTO was making things worse. Instead of asking why so many people felt the same way, leadership explained why employees were wrong. Feedback was described as “more outliers than we’d like,” and employees were told there “might be a disconnect between you and your current professional choice.”

That response didn’t rebuild trust. It widened the gap between leadership and the workforce.

The issue was never just RTO. It was the message that came with it… when employee feedback conflicts with leadership’s narrative, the feedback not the strategy is what gets questioned.

You can mandate attendance. You can track presence. You can enforce compliance. But you can’t mandate trust, engagement, or belief in the direction of the company and that’s what Stinky is too boneheaded to understand.

Leadership is ultimately measured by results, whether people want to stay, whether top talent wants to join, and whether the company is moving in the right direction. Those are the questions that matter.

Stink is unfit to lead and should resign immediately.


AT&T Must Clean House in the C-Suite Now

SpaceX is launching Starlink at full speed, and it is coming straight for the big three telecom companies. This is not some minor disruption. Starlink delivers high-speed internet from space to places traditional infrastructure struggles to reach, and it is moving fast.

AT&T cannot afford to sit back. The current leadership team is not built for this fight. These executives have operated in the old world of limited competition and steady returns. That model is ending. They lack the urgency, vision, and willingness to make the tough calls needed to respond to a competitor that thinks in terms of global satellite constellations rather than quarterly earnings.

The company needs new leaders who understand technology disruption and are ready to move with speed and decisiveness. Cleaning house at the top is not optional. It is essential if AT&T wants to survive and compete in the years ahead. The window is closing. Time to act.


Is there really a BoD?? Charge them with Negligence!!

How long will the BoD hide, and ignore the fact that Ole Danny Boy and his id--t CFO sidekick are running this company to the ground? We obviously overpaid for spectrum, the stock is tanking, $700M loss being booked in Q2, non-existent CEO who only comes around to cough, drink coffee, and get millions in pay. He’s totaly absent and Alphonso is the one in charge, and he doesn’t know if he’s a badger, a kangaroo, or a lion. The BoD should be charged with negligence!!!


who is this dude who just joined to run tech?

self proclaimed transformation agent, from GBT American Express travel. A travel website? To running all of tech for a top fintech? Another bad decision by Lyons that now we all have to live as he's on to the next company to tank. Mike's short tenure here was a complete disaster. Look at the people he hired. The prima donna queen of AI, and more useless payroll. I hope Takis cleans house or this place sc--wed.


Has your People Leader gathered their team and addressed the VSP concerns of the team?

My People Leader has not spoken to the team. People Leaders on other teams in different departments have met with their teams as a whole and with individuals. I refuse to believe that the PL don’t know who will be impacted by the future layoffs.


This is why Verizon su-ks at M&A

They buy a company for billions of dollars. They lay off all the experts that grew that company to billions of dollars and in their place put in Verizon cronies that have no clue how to run the newly acquired business. Then they are all surprised when it all fails. Buy the company, keep the experts and cash in. It’s not that hard…


WFH NY Times article

When the pandemic came to an end, many people who had been working from home assumed they would be allowed to maintain that habit at least a few days a week. But today in the U.S., a third of companies have forced everyone back to the office full time and have banned remote and hybrid work.

Some leaders say they insist on full-time in-person work because it boosts productivity, despite clear evidence that it does not. Others claim it’s about collaboration, creativity or culture. Our new research reveals that the objection to any work from home is more likely to be driven by something else entirely: ego.

Case by case, there may be good reasons for teams to work together in person. As a general rule, though, it turns out that ordering people back to the office full time is a power and status move. It’s a signature strategy of leaders who exhibit narcissistic qualities. They see any kind of remote work as a threat to their authority and admiration. They want to be worshiped at the office altar.

Over the past six years, we’ve studied why some leaders continue to support remote work, while others resist it. We surveyed thousands of executives, middle managers and frontline supervisors on a host of personality traits. When we later asked them about their stances on hybrid and remote work, their answers didn’t correlate with how much they trusted their employees or how much they loved being around people. The only trait that consistently predicted objections to remote work was narcissism — the tendency to be self-centered and entitled. The higher the opinions of themselves leaders expressed, the more they coveted power and status — and the more they favored return-to-office mandates.
ADVERTISEMENT
SKIP ADVERTISEMENT

That pattern held for chief executives of Fortune 500 companies. Since we couldn’t directly measure the size of their egos, we measured factors that many previous studies have identified as reliable proxies for narcissism: the sizes of their pay packages, their signatures and their photos in their company reports. (No, the chief executives probably aren’t directly overseeing the page layout, but their underlings have to figure out what will and won’t please the boss.) Commanding outsize compensation and projecting an outsize image sends a message right out of Ron Burgundy’s playbook: I’m kind of a big deal. We found that the higher chief executives scored on this index, the more likely they were to seek power and status by becoming chairmen of their own companies and joining the boards of other companies. These were the chief executives who made the most negative statements about remote and hybrid work during the first two years of the pandemic.

The connection between narcissistic personality traits and wanting people in the office full time is not coincidental — it’s causal. In one experiment, we got leaders to reflect on the role that a bold, assertive ego played in the success of Steve Jobs as Apple’s chief executive and Larry Ellison as Oracle’s. After participating in that exercise, leaders were more likely to oppose remote work.

None of this is to say that individual leaders who reject remote work are necessarily egomaniacs. Many factors influence workplace policies around flexibility. But our data does show that overall, self-centered leaders tend to struggle with the idea of employees making independent choices about where to work. Psychologists have long suggested that narcissism is like a dr-g — it leaves people craving a regular supply of attention and validation. Remote work deprives leaders of access to that supply.

When people aren’t in the office, it’s harder to command and control. Leaders can’t intimidate by hovering over cubicle desks and slamming doors. They can’t establish their dominance by summoning people to a conference room and pounding their fists on the table. They can’t even make direct eye contact to stare people down.

ADVERTISEMENT
SKIP ADVERTISEMENT

Remote work also prevents leaders from basking in the glow of employee reverence. Instead of standing out in the corner office, leaders are lost in a sea of equal squares on a screen. Instead of rapt attention, they’re met online with boredom, fatigue and interruptions from partners, children and pets. Instead of being showered with immediate gratification, they get glitchy facial expressions and delayed replies. Sycophantic reassurances from employees just don’t have the same effect if they’re on Slack.
Self-centered leaders often respond to these threats by tightening their grip. They declare that people are shirking from home instead of working from home. They threaten to fire people who aren’t on site five days a week.

Rigorous evidence shows that forcing people to come in every day backfires. Take it from studies of over 450 companies and over three million employees: Return-to-office mandates fail to increase financial returns. They succeed only in motivating star employees to quit, reducing the satisfaction of those who stay and discouraging new talent from joining. Experiments at tech companies and nonprofits show that letting people work from home part of the week boosts happiness and decreases turnover by a third — without any cost to performance. In many cases, those employees even get more done, because they don’t have to spend time commuting and don’t get distracted by office interruptions.

There are limits to the benefit of flexible office policies. Research suggests that working from home for more than half the week can be isolating — it’s harder to build connections and cultures. It’s also more difficult to encourage creative collisions, informal learning and mentoring. But it doesn’t take five days a week to accomplish these goals. In fact, it turns out that people are most collaborative and creative when they work remotely part of the week. They can use a day or two at home to focus on individual deep work and reserve the rest of the week for communication and collective problem-solving. It’s well documented that too much togetherness breeds groupthink (not to mention germs). When we spend some time apart, we actually generate more innovative ideas and make smarter decisions.

ADVERTISEMENT
SKIP ADVERTISEMENT

Hybrid work does have its own challenges for leaders. It’s not fun to try to inspire through a recorded video message or lead a brainstorming session on a digital whiteboard. But to maintain a competitive advantage in an increasingly flexible world, it’s time for leaders to put their egos aside and master the art of managing from afar. Evidence supports a few basic guidelines.

One: Coordination counts. Teams need anchor days when everyone shows up — especially to welcome newcomers and mentor junior people. At Microsoft, new hires who spent at least a couple of days a month with their manager and their teams were more satisfied with their early experiences, which in turn meant they were more likely to stay over the next year and a half.
Two: Intensity beats frequency. The software company Atlassian has found that spending a few days with your team at a well-designed quarterly team gathering does more for connection and belonging than daily schleps to the office.

Three: Hybrid work is not one-size-fits-all. Different jobs require different amounts of time in person. So do different people; for example, flexibility proves particularly important in attracting and retaining women. And you need to gather together more if your staff operates like a basketball team passing the ball back and forth, rather than a gymnastics team whose members do their own individual events. (This explains why fully remote teams struggle to patent new technologies, but the people who examine patent applications are more productive when they can work from anywhere they like.)

ADVERTISEMENT
SKIP ADVERTISEMENT

Four: Most people care more about when they work than where. If they can choose the hours, they’re more willing to let leaders pick the place.

Organizational policies shouldn’t be vanity projects. The responsibility of leaders is not to mold the world to their needs. It’s to adapt themselves to the world’s needs, even if it means learning to live without the thrill of a live audience.


Nasdaq Honeywell Aerospace - Ringing the bell

It’s so nice to see that everyone on that stage receives founder bonuses today. While everyone else is receiving a T-shirt, lanyard and drink ware. So glad that we are truly dedicating the employees on who makes the success of the company. JC, time to think differently, time to be the difference in a leader.


The Forge Target is a 20% Cut

Ask about that number in the next town hall.

Leadership has been sworn to secrecy for that reason alone. It is a big number and it will get a lot of press in Milwaukee. Extravagant north building rebuild. Eating a massive loss on Franklin. Mckinsie is leading the way. All while collecting massive consulting fees.


Feeling defeated, tired and angry…

I really thought centene was a great company when I joined. I thought I had a pretty solid team with great leadership. Only to find out it was all a facade. My leadership still refuses to address this issue with empathy towards the team. The director doesn’t seem to gaf about the team and their well being and neither does any of the leaders under her. They should focus on replacing all of management and irrelevant positions. I need them to hurry up and let me go if that’s what they want to do so I can collect unemployment. I have zero desire to do any work and to top it off, every single teammate is disgruntled leaving all their work for others to do…. Job hunting has been an utter nightmare and staying positive is beginning to take a toll. Sorry for the venting this is just terrible. I’m so disappointed in my leadership team and their lack of concern or empathy for their team.


Don't know why my team is rushing to restructure

Don't know what got into our organization lately. They're moving all the leads into completely unfamiliar areas instead of letting them work on what they know best. The whole org just feels more and more chaotic. It feels like leadership has turned everything upside down. More people are leaving on their own, and layoffs keep happening too. I honestly don't know what management is thinking. Almost everyone in the org is disappointed with all these changes. Nobody seems to understand why they're doing this, but at the same time, it feels like if you push back or question anything, you're just putting a target on your back.

Anyone have any idea why this is happening? Forcing people to quit doesn't seem realistic, and if they keep laying people off, there won't be anyone left to do the work. The whole org is going to literally fall apart.


Do you think we have a fighting chance?

This site is often filled with responses from the jilted and jaded. Does anyone still believe the company has a viable path forward? Are the right people still in place to execute that turnaround, or is it time for employees to start planning their exit?

There is a lot of complacency abounds with people openly stating they are just hanging around for the paycheck. Does anyone have faith? I'm by no means the "Company Man", but I would like to still believe that there is a path forward.


Ok lemme get this straight

Hundreds of millions already spent on AI with no benefits so far. None
1400 laid off does not balance the ai debt.
Shipped jobs to ITC and vendors who do absolutely nothing and are robbing us with inflated contracts that leadership is clueless about.
Tons of bloat, inexperience and toxicity in tech leadership and down.

Tech can’t drive excitement for product or make meaning commercials, but we’re sure not helping the sinking ship.


Jun layoffs wtf is going on?

They laid off people holding the project together and kept the ship afloat. It's funny how none of the senior leaders are not getting laid off but people doing the actual work are. They have been hiring massively .. there are 5000+ opening in Optum currently, 1000+ IT roles, so it's not a budget issue... It almost seems like being smart and good at what you do and bending to your managers will is seen as a weakness..the most arrogant Karens and Kens that push back at everything are the only one surviving in this burning he-l. Better start worshipping Satan if you want to survive the coming rounds.


IBM Should Develop a leadership academy named after Mr Gerstner

When Mr. Gerstner became CEO, IBM was facing one of the most challenging periods in its history. He made difficult decisions, refocused the company, preserved IBM as an integrated enterprise, and helped restore its competitiveness. His leadership demonstrated that successful executives must balance long-term strategy, financial discipline, innovation, and customer focus.

A Lou Gerstner Leadership Academy could teach future leaders about:

Leading through major organizational change.
Making tough decisions under pressure.
Putting customers first.
Driving accountability and execution.
Building a culture focused on long-term success rather than short-term popularity.

Whether someone agrees with every decision he made or not, Mr. Gerstner's turnaround of IBM remains one of the most significant corporate leadership stories of the modern era. There are valuable leadership lessons that today's and tomorrow's IBM leaders can still learn from his example.


The Secret Reason Bosses Want Everyone Back in the Office

"Ordering people back to the office full time is a power and status move. It's a signature strategy of leaders who exhibit narcissistic qualities, Adam Grant, Marissa Shandell and Courtney Elliott write. "They see any kind of remote work as a threat to their authority and admiration. They want to be worshiped at the office altar." https://nyti.ms/4uWqZhq


The axe will swing

Let’s get real peeps.

FIS bought, absorbed, renamed, reorganized, and stacked business on top of business without ever turning the whole thing into something coherent. Too many layers, too many handoffs, too many teams protecting their little kingdoms, and too many people paid to attend meetings about work instead of doing work.

That kind of structure can survive for a while, especially when revenue hides the rot. But eventually the bill comes due. And when it does, headcount is where leadership goes first.

Your impending layoff is the natural consequence of FIS getting big without getting better. The smart move is to stop treating this like a personal betrayal and start treating it like a warning. Update your resume. Call people. Look outside. Move before the axe swings.

And if you have spent years coasting inside FIS, this is the moment of truth. The market will tell you very quickly whether you were building a career or just collecting a paycheck inside a system that made underperformance easy to hide.

Get over it.


Topgolf Leadership Initiates Turnaround Amidst Sales Decline

Topgolf recently laid off hundreds of employees nationwide. The company also lost nearly $1 billion in value under previous ownership. New CEO David McKillips aims to revitalize the brand. His plan includes upgrading golf ba--s and introducing simulator leagues. McKillips also intends to expand locations and diversify entertainment options.

https://www.dmagazine.com/business-economy/2026/06/topgolf-ceo-david-mckillips-plan/


Another week done

How is everyone doing?
Another week done and it feels like we are hamsters on wheels. Same s*** different day. We get a message from
Our Chief Revenue Officer about finishing the Q strong - with 2 days to go that’s kinda late. Where he been hanging out the last few months? Maybe if he checked integration that was supposed to help like move to D365 now even more late than the 7th version of timeline we’ll all get to a more stable position?


Passing out opinions like lollipops

Since when does a company have almost every single person in the building make a decision on even the littlest things? The higher ups, like ML and that whole lot, have better things to worry about than half of the stuff they have to “approve” before anyone can actually move forward with their jobs.

Have a little faith in the people you employ, and maybe focus more on idk maybe a cohesive brand????? We’ve lost the plot entirely