The main reason we are doing as badly as we are on all fronts is because incompetent people get promoted - or hired - over people who have the knowledge and experience to move this place forward. For as long as nepotism and good-ol-boys-club mentality continue to rule, we will continue to sink. As simple as that.
16 replies (most recent on top)
That is precisely how i went from a teller to an engineering manager.
So, we should google the “ Dunning-Kruger Affect” even if we really understand that the author means the Dunning-Kruger Effect”. I’m not sure that illiterate people should be offering such suggestions.
Hey @1xyd+16QuWGLw
Point taken.
Dunning-Kruger, Peter Principle, either, I see both at Wells, and in a lot of cases, a combination of both.
Top down management is a hellofa d–g.
@ziq+16QuWGLw - I'd say Peter Principle more so than Dunning-Kruger. Just because you get to the limit of your abilities doesn't make you stupid :)
To the folks who continually post these types of comments, about how Wells promotes based on who you know, this is known as networking.
Networking is how you get ahead in the corporate world. Fair or not.
Also, and this may be more important, please look up Dunning-Kruger Affect.
The Dunning-Kruger Affect is the most likely reason you have not been promoted to the stardom and riches you think you believe.
BTW, Wells is not the place for stardom or riches.
If you are on the finance/investment side or the tech side, there are much better places that pay much better, too.
@tnu Scharf was named ceo in September of last year. If you think that was 18 months ago maybe you should be on the block. The employees may not have caused the problems but they are part of the problem.
Wells has been spoiled by being able to employ hundreds of thousands of Americans with middle class jobs by using manual processes and that’s simply not efficient in 2020 or beyond. I’m not saying it’s right or wrong just saying it’s how things are. Scharf isn’t going to lead us to the future but he’s gonna get the bank to a place where someone innovative will actually take the job because right now it stinks
They really need to weed out the branch tellers that were hired in, because they were "friends" with an software manager over 20 years ago and are now calling themselves Engineering Managers. They know nothing about technology or running a software development group. They are just really good fakers and bullies. They need to go!
"The main reason we are doing as badly as we are on all fronts is because incompetent people get promoted - or hired - over people who have the knowledge and experience to move this place forward. For as long as nepotism and good-ol-boys-club mentality continue to rule, we will continue to sink. As simple as that."
My boss is an incompetent dou. He kissed a-s on the way up. He's been there for 20 years or so but have a vague knowledge on what we are actually doing. We are in the online billing side of things and the dingdong does not even know half the things we do and how it actually works. We all side eye whenever he talks like he knows what's what. Granted he has been there for a long time now...but I wish if people were actually being laid off, he goes first. We are the backbone of our department and I know that a few of us will be let go. While his know-it-all-as-kissing ways will be saved, like always.
I hope all of those who are positive and hopeful, about Charlie’s potential to get this nightmare of a corporation repaired, are correct.
Why? Because a lot of good people (employees) are depending on him to make sound intelligent decisions in order that even more than 25% of us don’t end up losing our jobs for problems we did not create. And for our shareholders who stood by us and have lost more than half of their principal and 85% of their earnings. And because I would like to go back to working for a company and a management team that I respect and trust. (I did have that at another company who was acquired eventually by Wells. Yes there are authentic responsible leaders out there. ) And for our customers, who trusted their money with us, and were taken advantage of and abused.
Personally, I don’t agree with others who rationalize bad behavior by saying “every other company“ is sending jobs overseas, “every other financial company” has paid billions in fines, “all large companies“ have political bs and are toxic, etc. Its simply not true and it’s not ok. And we shouldn’t accept it as the norm. People are trying to justify bad behavior and make it sound acceptable and appropriate. “Well it’s ok that I’m a thief because everyone is a thief!”
My hope is that Charlie Scharf invests in his people, has a talent for spotting talent, can find more ways to cut costs than just cutting jobs, empowers his employees, is honest and transparent, is accountable, is a strategic thinker, wants to see others succeed, and can bring us into the twenty first century. Because he is getting paid a fortune and should accomplish all this and more.
When Brian Moynihan took the reigns at Bank of America, he had to cut expenses. He also created strategies around particular platforms and services such as mobile and Merrill Edge. Investments were made accordingly.
At present, all the business units are going through their 2021 investment dollar requests and everything is being cut by 25%. Outside of IT infrastructure and IT sponsored investments, it’s the business making those calls within the limits they are given. 2021 decisions are in process, so whatever budget you think you have is being cut right now if you work on business sponsored initiatives. AND, testers are being cut very vey heavily despite automation testing not being ready.
Scharf has not mentioned any strategy beyond cutting expenses. Your link is not the CEOs strategy, it is someone’s opinion about Warren Buffett’s strategy.
@tnu - Interesting. I work in IT and have a budget so I'm pretty familiar with what's going on but that's not to say you don't have more insight.
The press (as an example - https://seekingalpha.com/article/4372884-wells-fargo-this-bank-can-double-part-3-warren-buffetts-latest-mistake) seems to confirm that expenses are the issue and as for Scharf's go forward plans, what are you expecting to hear? His public statements, as the CEO of a $98Bn publicly traded company are understandably strategic more so that tactical and if the staff that were in place were capable, things would be fixed already so clearly new industry wide talent is required. Either way, things will either get better or worse - hopefully better.
Let's see!
New position created > new person comes in > decides how the org needs to be set up > people are moved into new org > leftover positions are eliminated. It's a classic reorg scenario.
Some CEOs are good at coming in, trimming fat and setting things up for the next guy to come in and take over. Again a classic reorg scenario.
Some people spend their whole career righting the ship. Some come in when things are good. A few are good enough to do both.
Well neither of you seem to have any knowledge of the fact that budgets for new technology and new products meant to drag the company into 2010 are being slashed and taking 2-5 years longer as a result.
And sorry, but how does hiring people into net new positions help? It’s one thing to top grade talent into existing roles, it’s entirely another to create new jobs out of thin air.
And this bank is not remotely in the same position as other banks. They are not operating under an asset cap. And yes, one year is plenty of time to make meaningful change. The asset cap has been in place for over two years now, 18 months on Scharfs watch. Just exactly what progress has been reported in this area?
And just what exactly is Scarfs long term plan? Cut headcount, that’s it. What is his strategy for the bank. Post a link to the place where he outlines any type of strategy that isn’t just a headcount reduction.
He is not going to be a long term CEO. Just ask BNY and Visa.
Have to agree with @HZW. We can’t at once talk about how poorly the bank was run and all the useless managers while criticizing the ceo for cutting some of those layers. I worked in BBG a few years back and was surprised by the fact that every office had their own team of underwriters. It simply wasn’t efficient and these type of staffing issues are consistent across the bank.
I saw a comment on another post mentioning how no business would want to do business with wells and that’s the same with executives. If I were to take the wells CEO job I would need a salary to set me up for life in case the banks reputation tainted my resume too.
The previous ceos (allen and tim) wanted a quick fix to turn the bank around and that simply dig the hole deeper. Charlie actually seems to have a long term plan that’s going to get wells in line with the industry. News flash every corporation is looking to move cost center jobs overseas. Wells chose to keep jobs here at the expense of technology and that’s hurt the products . So yeah it s—s right now and there’s a lot of uncertainty but come 2022 wells is likely going to be in a better position.
@ont+16QuWGLw - you mention what he's done in the first year - what could you realistically achieve in such a short period of time? It's like steering an ocean liner - they don't turn on a dime. Where do you get experienced managers from other than other banks?
Our financials are pretty much in line with other banks other than expenses which need to be trimmed. We underinvested in technology for years and now we're paying for it. We need to reduce headcount. We need to invest in technology. By the time we get to 2022, hopefully Covid-19 will be well managed by a vaccine, the headcount reductions will be done, the Fed will remove the asset cap and we can move forward. Even though I hope to get laid off, I'll hang onto my WF shares because I think there's plenty of upside and I think, so far, Scharf is doing a decent job.
Of course that's just my opinion and I could be wrong.
Sadly, and as I have pointed out before, Scharf’s only real changes in his first year have been to bring in friends to newly created and probably unnecessary multimillion dollar positions. Lester Owens has like 30,000 people “dotted line” reporting to him, I mean.... wut?
Has anything else changed besides their new and insincere vision and values? Oh wait, there is also the oh so important renaming from team members to employees, and shutting down museums. This is cutting edge stuff folks. Pathetic. This is just going to become an increasingly unbearable place to work, and I for one am planning my escape this month.