Lots of dotted lines or unspoken lines, but the bottom line is that the fat is in the depth and breadth of needless middle managers, it was a great ride in the vague wasteland of no real defined duties but it is unaffordable to the company. Those who still can be meaningful independent contributors will have a future.
23 replies (most recent on top)
Play the game, lest the game play you
Bumping an old topic but in regards to 7:1, I have seen middle managers pulling people out from under their direct reporting managers. Those people pulled out now directly report to the middle manager in the hierarchy, but have an invisible dotted line back to their original managers.
In essence, middle managers are getting themselves up to having 7 direct reports on paper, but this not be the case in reality of day to day operations.
Innovation needs to be re-worked. Reporting to the head of innovation you have 12 managers with an average of 4 directs and a max of 6....
Maybe their new leader will clean it up
There probably will be some folks let go from spans and layers. A lot of folks will lose their mgr title and probably a little bonus. It stinks but being a manager without any employees is stupid and never made sense. Managing 3 doesn't make much sense. I think 5 is a better # than 7 but that is just my opinion. Unless someone can make a case to save a role, I think there will be some losses. We are too heavy and unfortunately some cuts will happen. I hate it for anyone to lose a job. Some of us are not evil you know.
I've seen what happens when a company uses a bell curve and employee ratings.
Many teams are actually very busy, and there's a no replace policy right now, so letting go of the "bottom" 10 or 20 percent of people overwhelms the remaining team members.
And the customers for that team get a degraded experience, then complain about the once busy team that was doing good work.
And everyone suffers.
The Jack Welch style of cutting costs degrades the company for years after.
It's lazy, irresponsible management.
Corp communications just alerted managers that the mid years have to include a rating (1-5, 4 and 5 being exceeds, 3 being meets) and that rating also includes a bell curve with % for high to low performers. You best hope you get a 4 or 5 and that is shown as only the top 20% of a team. While some groups celebrate mediocrity, at this point no one wants to lose a TM because they need that 7:1 ratio so this should be interesting.
LOL @ thinking avp/vp has any meaning. Did you know that once you are bestowed those ‘titles’, it remains there your entire career no matter if you drop down and have absolutely zero responsibility? Hell i’m just a peon support person and am considered AVP because it carried over from when i was in the business line. SVP and EVP actually do have some meaning.
Exactly! There are sooooooo many managers doing nothing valuable like administrative tasks, redundant meetings, waiting for the paint to dry and taking all the credit from individual contributors.
You don't need to pay $175K+ for a manager that brings close to zero value. Simplify the structure and get rid of the redundant layers of management.
Yep, 7:1 span is correct. And to be honest, good! There are way too many instances of people being a “manager” with a couple of dr’s and it just adds to delays in communication and inconsistencies. We need more people that can actually execute against their work; not more people to oversee that training was done on time. Most 1x1’s with management are a joke and time is wasted in needless updates or waiting for someone 2 levels up to give an “ok”.
Is the 7:1 going to be mandatory for every department across the company? Or is that the average they are looking for?
I am in audit and I just can’t see how that would be possible in my group. We are essentially 3:1 now, and 5:1 seems like a reasonable change, but 7:1 would require cutting so many people at the AVP/VP level. We’d be left with a bunch of staff that are not nearly qualified to run an audit on their own.
That makes sense to me, displace "okay" performers, but that is also idealistic. We all know, meritocracy is dead, who you know/likes you olays a role. "Ok" + "buddy" will win everyday against "performer" + "so so liked" that's how it works.
When will the marketing reorg go into effect? JM is out as of September, but in my group everyone acts as if nothing will change. We have multiple managers with 3-4 directs. Maybe it’s because we’re not all together, but they all seem to think they’re immune.
The 7:1 ratio is true. However, the reply I read that said if you already have 7:1 you’re safe is NOT true. The plans due next week are nameless. They’re simply a listing of the various “roles/positions” needed in each area.....no names associated with them. Once those plans are approved, THEN they will start slotting names into those roles. Just because you currently have 7 direct reports does not mean you will be the one selected to fill one of those roles/positions. If I am someone who is a fantastic performer and I only have 2 direct reports and my peer, who has 8 direct reports is just “ok”, if they only have 1 manager role/position now due to the elimination, I would likely get the position and just absorb all 10 of the direct reports. The “ok” performer wouldn’t automatically get it just because they already have 8 direct reports. So for those of you with 7+ direct reports, don’t just assume you will be safe. Notices won’t go out for displaced TMs until October. Remember, just the plan for roles/positions is due mid July. Then there is time needed to review and approve those, then time to identity the individuals who will fill those roles/positions, then review and approval of that, then HR needs to create displacement packages, THEN come the notices.
Owen not Owens... he is mentioned in Saul’s weekly diary.
Google him
There is no Gary Owens in the Wells Corp Directory.
Charlie and team need to do a deep dive in to ICS (Gary Owen's org). So much redundancy and layering in here that its just plain dumb.
managers with as little as TWO direct reports are floating around doing nothing more than regurgitating information to show that they are adding value or doing something of use. People being told to go "manage projects" doing nothing more than attending meetings because the project is already being managed by the owner and the PM. Why? to look busy.
they even have an "old timer" who is so toxic that the person's nickname is "pit bull" and has had multiple complaints filed with nothing done. and why is this person still here? they report to the Head of Cyber who has also been here 20+ years.
We were told the 7:1 ratio - if you have that no worries if you don't, you either need to have people added and groups combined and if not the manager (assuming that they are doing needed work) would be reassigned as an Individual Contributor. That could (aka will) come with a pay decrease.
So the tea leaves seem to show a lot of managers either leaving or taking a pay cut. Of course none of the shiny new layers Chuckie brought over in his Friends and Family plan! I do think Wells is manager heavy but the 7:1 ratio will really eliminate a ton of layers.
Mark Weintraub Chief Operating Risk Officer left the company. They are almost imminent.
This policy is real. Each OC member has to have their plan ready by 7/15. We had to submit ours by the end of June. Actions need to be complete by end of year.
I have heard of a new 7 direct report policy. Each manager job title should have 7 people reporting to it. If it’s true, it will wipe out a huge layer of middle management 😔
I think the last we heard plans had to be in place July 15th. That doesn’t necessarily mean people will be notified July 15. Plans have to approved and packages put together.