Opening a thread regarding the US return to office (right now, the email is just directed to executives and people managers). Let's talk
77 replies (most recent on top)
Eat Sh1+ you corporate simp
get back or GTFO, nobody needs you
6vhp You just netted out the PIP program requirements. The real question is does IBM have the ability to pull the trigger. IBM seems to always blame the employees when goals are not met instead of blaming the management team. Perhaps times are a changing.
8 layers of management for me. That includes two levels of SVPs and two levels of VPs amongst the other id--ts. So, that makes you wonder why you have multiple levels of the same rank?!?!?! That is a sign that management needs to be trimmed... looks like that may be happening though I would suspect the brunt of the blow will impact the first/second lines, as the rest of them are just a mafia!
IBM does not know how to use technology... most of it is cr-p anyway!
When I was there, the corporate "position" was that the majority of US staff (manager and non-manager) were to be customer-facing. If they weren't customer-facing, then their jobs were to be off-shored or eliminated as surplus.
I wonder if the execs still hold to that position.
Also get rid and of the technology sales executive bloat. Too many VPs and directors who add no value.
Except it's not just about execs and management, it really is about a huge US buzz cut across the board. Similar things were done previously, however this one sure takes the cake.
What remains to be seen is when will the other shoe drop? Will the non-managers be told swiftly, or will it be dragged out? FAQ page is as clear as mud, eluding to severance but only when applicable. Rumor has it that there is a meeting for managers happening this week, let's see what that unearths.
IBM overcomplicates everything. Want to reduce useless management? No need for RTO and other games. Run a report - give me all Band 10/D/C with 0 or 1 direct reports. Gone! In Consulting - give me all AP and Partners who attained <50% of signings/revenue target. Gone! Those 2 actions would solve 90% of the problem.
Seriously is this all IBM execs have on ideas on how to make IBM successful?
Pathetic old school thinking
https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/22/opinions/remote-work-jobs-bergen/index.html
Hey for anyone still inside, what is the current layer count, from top (AK) to bottom (rank and file)? How many layers of management are there?
When I was there, the layer count varied from 6 or so during Lou Gerstner, all the way to 11 or 12 (Sam Palmisano). The managers may not like the way things are being handled, but this sort of thing was inevitable.
In 2023 Meta set the management bar for efficiency at 10-1. If IBM is currently at 3 or 4-1 then 2/3rds of managers (using the Meta measurement) are not needed. Should we expect a 2024 15k manager headcount cut? That would certainly drop to the bottom line
IBM's actions and policies over the years are turning out to be a perfect storm for the management class. As IBM sold off divisions, managers jumped around as much as they could from division to division (e.g. GTS to sales or GTS to SWG), so they could retain their management positions. However, as has been noted here there are now multiple imbalances with respect to management vs non-management numbers. There are too many managers for the non-management force, and there are too many managers with respect to the remaining salary base.
Finally, there are too many managers sitting at home, and not working in the office. It's one thing for the "labor" to work at home or at a customer site, but "managers" are expected to be at the office...full stop.
So, for managers...RTO or get out.
Looks like some managers have 1-3 employees, those certainly can be individual contributors and focus on delivery. But here is another thought: with fewer employees the need for managers will be much lower. I certainly expect this new policy to be applied to all US employees. This is where the major cuts AND savings will come from.
Looks to me IBM is finally reducing the management ranks... this has been needed for the longest time. A company with too many managers is a totally dysfunctional company. Not to mention that at IBM, like at many other companies, a lot of managers are absolutely useless and only costing money. Let's get it done!
Certainly, as a non-manager, I am sick and tired to have to work my butt off to pay for these people who mostly make my life a misery most of the time. Sounds like a great payback to me. Only very few managers understand that their reports are the reason why they have a job. These managers should be s--king my you know what! They need to fu--ing grow up and smart up.
One site that's getting hit hard by this policy is Southbury, CT (RIP 1/26/24). They told everyone that if they lived outside of the 50m radius they would be WFH in mid-December and then they dropped this bombshell on managers this week.
Better yet, tell IBM you intend to relocate, but get a new job right away and enjoy the two paychecks until you get the boot from IBM. There is absolutely not reason to be nice to IBM.
Just tell IBM you intend to relocate, then spend the next several months landing a better job elsewhere.
1yls I have to agree with the article, that RTO/relocations are just layoffs in disguise. IBM HR has to hide behind a policy, as the previous impacted employee headcount policy implemented by managers has become radioactive. Too much favoritism has come back to bite IBM, thus the RTO/relocation policy is now in vogue. NOTE the new policy gets to exactly the same results (older/more expensive workers leave and younger less expensive workers stay). The goal of HR is to have a measurement stick that can’t be called into question. So Live within 50 miles = show up or don’t. If you don’t, you will be impacted. Live further than 50 miles = take the relocation or don’t. If you don’t you will be impacted. I expect at least 35-40% of all managers will be impacted depending on how many approved locations IBM designates. The lower the number of approved locations will result in a higher number of managers impacted. When this policy bleeds over to employees (end of 2nd q) I expect a similar percentage to be impacted. NOTE this new policy should fall harder on Infrastructure and SW as that’s where the older/more expensive legacy employees reside vs consulting. Yes consulting has expensive employees too, but consultings high turnover (over 20k per year) and their utilization vs PIP requirements reigns them in. All in all 2024 is going to be the year where IBM NA gets down to a sustainable Enterprise focused workforce. Everything outside of “enterprise” is on the chopping block.
Also dont forget to demand what you need to stay with the company when the relocation is offered, increased pay (since many are only there for the flexibility not pay), designated office space, more vacation since you are relocating from family support ( again play the game) Sky is the limit since they are trying to renegotiate your contract. Dont forget about all those skeletons in the closet you have regarding IBM as leverage!
Here is my thoughts, specifically for those over 50 miles. Hold the line, make it as dificult as possible for IBM , dont transfer anything to anyone (including basic knowledge), keep your buisiness your business and play the game (understand that no matter the years and sweat you put into the company they do not care and never will so keep all interactions with this in mind), hold this lesson to your heart however things pan out (future business as a client or doing the bare min within the company to continue to survive, do not remove direct reports because it is coming to all (you have more leverage now (this was not thought out as usual). Get creative in creating a disruption!
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/09/12/why-rto-mandates-are-layoffs-in-disguise-according-to-workplace-experts.html. Yep.
Agreed focusing on enterprise and mainframe is good. Focusing on financial cloud is good. Focusing on hybrid cloud is good. Focusing on government is good.
These are all things nobody else wants to touch. Aws would rather partner with ibm then try and bring on these clients.
The shame is that arvind took over instead of whitehurst. IBM should have fit itself into the red hat model, not the other way around. Oh well.
In AK's defense, there is nothing inherently wrong with focusing your resources on mainframes and enterprise clients. That is a perfectly acceptable strategy, with the caveat that you'll end up with a much smaller and more focused company. The financial and human wreckage will be substantial, but everybody already knows that part. All that remains is how the plans are executed...no excuses.
I would say AK has certainly changed the trajectory of IBM vs Ginni. He is growing revenue, and FCF while disposing of the shiny objects acquired under previous CEO’s. That is new to IBM given the last 10 years performance. So the current question is does the new back to the office policy represent yet another turn away from the status quo and an embrace of “there is a new sheriff in town and I only need 1/2 of you” as we are transforming. AK has certainly stuck to his vision, as every action has fed the embrace of Hybrid cloud/SW modernization/Enterprise. I suspect he will continue to down size the legacy (think all things midrange and non-strategic) as enterprise is the goose that laid the golden egg. Time will tell, but 2024 is fish or cut bait time for IBM to make the transition as no more excuses will be tolerated. Starting with excessive management in January is a good start
Next CEO must be from outside company or IBM is dead if not already spiraling out of control.
For several decades now, IBM has suffered from lack of vision, lack of execution, and internal executive politics getting in the way of being competitive and growing revenue. Low Gerstner was an attempt to correct some of that, but once he retired, the executive chain of command reverted back to the old ways. Arvind Krishna may end up being the Bob Palmer of IBM, who took over from Ken Olson from Digital Equipment Corporation and ended up selling off portions of DEC piece by piece until DEC could no longer stand on its own and got acquired by Compaq who later got acquired by Hewlett Packard. Palmer also lacked vision and was too fixated on his own opinions on where the market was going. The IBM board is also to blame for a lot of this by their lack of vision and allowing incompetent IBM executive leadership.
IBM used to be a $107B company, now we are less the $65B. Yes, starting to grow, but we continuously become smaller. I believe their lack of ability to successfully manage human resources is one of this big reasons. This RTO and changing the retirement option from 401k to RBA is the latest in a race to the bottom for people wanting to come to and stay with IBM. With no control to build wealth with the IBM contribution it is also a way to not only get rid of high performers. but also to limit the high performers from coming to IBM. All of this "sc--w" the worker actions will lead IBM to have mediocre results at best. This is a recipe for mediocrity. Sell your stock if you have any. BTW, this is RTO is for all areas of IBM, NOT just consulting.
How many people that joined in 1985 are still here? Where I sit in Consulting most people have been here 5 years or less.
IBM used to be a $107B company, now we are less the $65B. Yes, starting to grow, but we continuously become smaller. I believe their lack of ability to successfully manage human resources is one of this big reasons. This RTO and changing the retirement option from 401k to RBA is the latest in a race to the bottom for people wanting to come to and stay with IBM. With no control to build wealth with the IBM contribution it is also a way to not only get rid of high performers. but also to limit the high performers from coming to IBM. All of this "sc--w" the worker actions will lead IBM to have mediocre results at best. This is a recipe for mediocrity. Sell your stock if you have any.
This is the last bite of the apple in IBM US if you use a 40 year retirement age. What’s driving it? The excess hiring that occurred mid 1980 and the head count that remains due to that excess hiring. Gerstner ended the excess hiring when he came on board in 1993, BUT IBM had already started to throttle back before his arrival, so you can see the classes of 1985-1990 are now in the cross hairs. Because IBM has gotten into trouble when they have asked management to select specific folks, they have decided to use the tried and true “relocate or else” policy. Like it or not, it’s quite effective at weeding out folks who are over 35. (during the last great weed out, 80% of the folks who accepted relocation were in their 20’s and single). Hum HR using a policy that achieves 80% of what you are after and gets rid of the high cost employees? That’s what HR does best, and the bonus is it just about eliminates that pesky getting sued issue. Make it so!
It looks like the executives are trying to use the 1st and 2nd line managers to set an example. If they can succeed in forcing the line managers to RTO, then the rank and file employees will no doubt be next. It seems to me that people managers for the consultants would make easy targets because they are probably not on customer sites. What a messed up policy.
I love how the one of the FAQs specially addresses this as a U.S. only RTO policy. As a first time manager impacted, with a team in Mexico and Canada who remain work from home, no questions asked, this disgusts me. My 12 person team is not impacted, nor has been questioned about ever complying. Canada RTI utilization rates are poor. I am not resigning, relocating or complying as this mandate is targeted discrimination. No “issue” to be found. Published FAQ. “Question: Why is this a U.S. only policy? Answer: Out of the U.S. IBMers have largely returned to the office or client worksites. Compliance with IBMs return to office directive has largely been an issue specific to the U.S.”
Fu-k this sh-t a I'm outta here
Only a mo--n would look to relocate solely to keep a job LOL
Let’s get rid of as much management as possible. They are a total drain on this company. Time to act!
another effort to reduce US based employees to offset the current significant India based hiring. A once great American company turning its back on American workers. I would love to see the Presidential candidates pick this story up. Whoever has the back of the American worker gets my vote.
This is ridiculous dilbert executive management decision.
https://www.arnoldsofficefurniture.com/10-best-dilbert-cartoons-about-cubicles/
Most managers do absolutely cr-p at IBM, most of them only have a few reports. There are way too many VPs at IBM, these are the ones who need to go first. These VPs make around 400K a year. This is a quick way to save big money. Let's get it done.
If management is serious about enforcing this initiative, then they will exhaust their resources while monitoring the staff as they go in and out of the office. If they are not serious, then things will be pretty loose and behavior will drift to BAU.