Thread regarding Siemens layoffs

WB and His Daughter: Double Standards on Business Travel?

During this year's China International Industry Fair (CIIF), WB reportedly brought his daughter to stay at the voco Shanghai Hongqiao hotel, and she also attended events arranged by DI.

This raises some legitimate questions: Were WB's and his daughter's travel arrangements in compliance with Siemens' travel and expense policies? Was his daughter's hotel accommodation, transportation, and participation in DI-organized activities paid for or otherwise arranged by the company? Who approved these arrangements?

It would be worth reviewing the official travel records, hotel bookings, expense claims, and approval records to establish whether everything was handled properly.

At a time when frontline sales employees are facing increasingly strict travel budgets, expense controls, and approval procedures, it is difficult to understand why WB appears to enjoy such preferential treatment.

Are Siemens' travel policies applied equally to everyone, or do certain managers enjoy privileges that ordinary employees could never get away with?

@q9f Which department is WB's daughter in? how to get the HC.

@qa7 Do you know why? YDH: A Master of Fancy Names, Not Business Results. Because YDH doesn't understand the business, and MarCom is the easiest to get into.

"Enduring hardship while waiting for the right moment" perfectly describes WZL.

Back when YDH was GM of MC, WZL had to put up with YDH's endless empty talk, fancy theories, and management methods that were completely disconnected from business reality.

And that helps explain why MC failed to go all out against Inovance in FY24 and FY25, when it should have been fighting aggressively to regain market share.

Instead of taking the fight to Inovance, MC seemed to have lost its fighting spirit. YDH was full of big words and grand ideas, but when it came to real business decisions and critical moments, he had little to offer.

All talk, no substance, and nowhere to be found when real leadership was needed.

WZL endured all of that. Now let's see what happens when someone who actually understands the business takes charge.

Go WZL! Give YDH a good kick in the a-s! Siemens needs leaders who actually get things done, not hypocrites who are all talk, full of empty promises, and deliver nothing.

Looking back at YDH's career, there are some interesting questions worth asking.

YDH used to be just a Segment Manager responsible for MTS under LL in MC. Yet somehow, he eventually made it all the way to GM.

Was this extraordinary career progression driven purely by business performance, or did WHB's influence play a significant role? Some employees have questioned whether YDH was effectively acting as WHB's representative within MC. What was the actual relationship behind these organizational decisions?

The MTS business itself also deserves a closer look.

Given the complexity of machine tool configurations, there is considerable commercial discretion in system design, drive configurations, and pricing. Splitting systems or expanding drive configurations could potentially create additional commercial margins.

Were all these configurations justified by genuine customer requirements?

And who was responsible for reviewing and approving the special pricing arrangements?

This brings us to WYS, who was reportedly closely involved in MTS pricing approvals during YDH's tenure.

Were customers free to select their preferred purchasing channels, or were certain projects directed toward designated partners? How were potential conflicts of interest identified and managed?

Interestingly, YDH and WYS continued working together through multiple organizational changes, from MTS to CS and eventually Vertical.

And now, WYS appears to have received another promotion through a circular issued by YDH himself.

The timing and process raise legitimate questions. What were the selection criteria? Who independently reviewed the decision? Was there an open and transparent evaluation process?

The circular itself is also rather interesting.

Remember how YDH reportedly told other Vertical Heads that they had not been downgraded, even though the new organizational structure appeared to tell a different story?

So what exactly changed in the reporting lines, management grades, and actual authority?

A longstanding professional relationship does not prove wrongdoing. But when the same individuals repeatedly appear in important appointments and commercial decisions, transparency and independent oversight become even more important.

Is career progression in today's Vertical really about business results and professional competence, or is it increasingly about how close you are to YDH?

Perhaps that is the question employees would really like management to answer.

@qa7 Then came ASP (Approved Service Partner), presented as a more standardized approach to service delivery.

But did ASP actually fix the longstanding concerns surrounding CS subcontracting, or did it simply give the old practices a more respectable name?

There are several questions worth asking.

First, competition and customer choice. If customers are directed toward designated ASPs for Siemens-standard maintenance, while spare parts, service pricing, and technical access remain tightly controlled, how much genuine freedom do customers and independent service providers have?

Second, accountability. Customers may believe they are receiving Siemens original service, while the actual contracts, invoices, and engineers belong to third-party companies. Who takes responsibility when something goes seriously wrong?

Third, conflicts of interest. Who selects and approves these ASPs? How are service fees, subcontracting arrangements, and potential financial relationships monitored? What prevents preferential treatment, inflated service charges, or improper benefits?

Fourth, technical and data security. When third-party engineers access PLC programs, software licenses, firmware, and sensitive production systems, who ensures proper authorization, traceability, and security?

Let's be clear: calling someone an "Approved Service Partner" doesn't automatically eliminate compliance risks.

YDH, where is the evidence that ASP improved transparency, customer protection, and business performance?

YDH: A Master of Fancy Names, Not Business Results

During his time in CS, YDH seemed far more interested in coming up with fancy product names than delivering meaningful business results.

Take "Kongming Ce" , for example. Seriously, who comes up with names like that? It sounds more like a marketing gimmick than a serious business solution.

Meanwhile, the CS subcontracting model had long faced questions about transparency and compliance. Then came the concept of ASP (Approved Service Partner).

But here's the real question: Did ASP actually address the underlying compliance concerns, or did it simply give the existing subcontracting practices a more respectable name?

Changing the label doesn't necessarily change what's happening underneath.

Fancy names, fancy concepts, endless presentations. But where are the actual business results, and who is accountable for ensuring that the subcontracting process is transparent and compliant?

@q9h CQC not CCQ

CCQ: The Difference Between WZL and YDH Couldn't Be Clearer

When it comes to CCQ, the contrast between WZL and YDH is striking.

YDH appears perfectly comfortable looking the other way when it comes to CCQ's questionable commercial decisions. Why has there been so little scrutiny of his pricing authority, channel selection, and potential conflicts of interest? The same questions should apply to any financial interests connected to marketing activities.

WZL, on the other hand, seems to take a very different approach. When WZL challenges CCQ on critical pricing approvals, CCQ apparently struggles to provide convincing business justifications.

That is what real management accountability should look like: challenging questionable decisions, protecting the company's commercial interests, and taking ownership instead of simply protecting your own circle.

The difference in leadership and sense of ownership between WZL and YDH could hardly be more obvious.

Siemens China needs more leaders like WZL who are willing to challenge the status quo, enforce accountability, and clean up the internal management culture.

CCQ seems to be one of YDH's biggest yes-men.

In FY26, CCQ reportedly stood out as the only Vertical Head with pricing authority. Why was such commercial power concentrated in one person's hands?

There are serious questions about how certain distributors and system integrators were selected and whether preferential treatment was involved.

Who reviewed these channel decisions and pricing approvals? Were potential conflicts of interest properly disclosed? And what safeguards were in place to ensure that no personal benefits were received from distributors or SIs?

Siemens talks endlessly about compliance. Maybe it's time to show how these decisions actually complied with company policies.

WB and His Daughter: Where Is Siemens Compliance?

WB's daughter previously interned at DI China, and questions have been raised about whether her internship recruitment followed the proper procedures.

There are also concerns about WB bringing his daughter to internal company dinners where gifts from sales colleagues were reportedly accepted. Were these arrangements and gifts properly disclosed and approved?

Now that WB's daughter is employed by Siemens China, another question needs to be answered: Did she go through the standard recruitment and interview process? Was her application independently assessed? Were the family relationship and any potential conflicts of interest formally declared?

Siemens constantly emphasizes integrity, transparency, and compliance. So how were these situations handled, and were the same rules applied to everyone?

What's the point of having strict compliance policies if nobody can explain how they were followed?

@q93 YDH apparently can't handle WZL and seems to have given up trying. So now he's sending WYS to hold a workshop with WZL instead.

WYS claims to be an MTS expert. Let's see if WZL will show this so-called expert any respect, or just give him the same treatment.

@q94 JJZ acted like a little emperor back in PA, as if he owned the place. What about the allegations of freeloading on meals and drinks, taking kickbacks, and going to KTV clubs looking for girls? Has anyone ever seriously looked into these claims?

@q93 @q93 Let's not forget that JJZ was originally recruited into Siemens by YDH. His conduct during his time in PA also deserves scrutiny, particularly regarding business hospitality, professional behavior, and the appropriate use of company resources.

More importantly, there is a question worth clarifying: Does JJZ operate or hold interests in a private company outside Siemens? If so, were these business interests properly disclosed and reviewed under Siemens' conflict-of-interest policies? Are there any business relationships between that company and Siemens that would require additional scrutiny?

Given the longstanding relationship between YDH and JJZ, transparency regarding recruitment, business interests, and management oversight would help address employees' concerns.

MB vs. Vertical: Another Internal Power Struggle?

Interestingly, MB and Vertical now seem to be competing over customer ownership.

When the One Tech transformation started in FY26, DI China established a Zone-level Vertical organization that appeared different from the global setup. What was the business rationale behind this decision? Did WHB obtain HQ's support for appointing YDH as Vertical GM, and was this structure fully aligned with the global operating model?

Looking back at the Q&A session during the FY26 Vertical Outing, the atmosphere was rather telling. Apart from ZPF, who has since moved to SW, hardly anyone raised a meaningful question. Was that really because employees had nothing to ask?

JJZ's remark about feeling that he had not earned his Siemens salary was particularly memorable. But shouldn't accountability also include transparency around external business interests, potential conflicts of interest, and the relevant disclosure procedures? These standards should apply equally to everyone, regardless of their position or relationship with management.

More importantly, YDH, do you genuinely believe employees have no questions, or is it simply that they don't expect candid answers?

And have the overlapping responsibilities and disagreements between YDH and WZL been properly resolved? Who actually owns the customer relationship, and who is accountable for the business results?

At some point, leadership needs to stop focusing on internal politics and start providing clarity to the people doing the actual work.

When leadership fails, the entire team pays the price.

@py9 Now everything makes sense.

@q69 It's not just you. We all feel the same way.

Since the One Tech transformation, I haven't seen any meaningful integration. If anything, the organization has become even more fragmented, disconnected, and chaotic.

One Tech was supposed to break down silos, but somehow it has only created more of them.

Get your own house in order before trying to take on Inovance.

DI China is such an organizational mess, yet management keeps talking about how to beat Inovance.

How the fu-k are we supposed to beat our competitors when we can't even get our own sh-t together?

Fix your own damn problems first!

WB is obsessed with so-called "corporate culture building." He's still stuck in the old WHB-era mindset.

Remember the final years of WHB's reign over DI? Almost every GM would put decades-old Chinese Communist Party slogans on the last slide of their PowerPoint presentations.

Seriously, are we running a multinational technology company or holding a fu--ing political propaganda session?

@q2n Sounds like that was your first time dealing with him.

@q2k Sounds like you're talking about my boss.

The most arrogant managers are the ones who simply forward an email to their subordinates with two words: “Pls prepare.”

No context, no guidance, no effort. Just dump the fu--ing work on someone else and call it management.

Any manager who thinks forwarding emails with “Pls prepare” counts as leadership is a fu--ing mo--n.

@q2g I couldn't agree more. SSB used to cling to WB like a fu--ing leech back in RNE. Now he's YDH's loyal lapdog.

Same a-s-kissing game, just a different master.

@q2e JHH is WB's bed partner.

YDH and WB once locked horns over JHH's fate. And judging by how things turned out, WB clearly came out on top. Looks like YDH lost that round of office politics.

@py9 You've hit the nail on the head. Why is YDH so obsessed with marketing activities? Because they're the easiest to control—marketing people are much easier to manage than sales.

@pzw YDH has never respected employees. If you think he's responsible, that's all an act. He has no real insight into the business, but he just puts on this "I know best" attitude to bluff people.

@psp I still remember the CIIF in FY25. Dahan and I were discussing things on-site. Back then, I thought he was a sharp, capable and responsible manager. But well… I’m really disappointed.

DI China desperately needs a younger generation of leaders to bring fresh energy and new perspectives into the organization.

Just look at the current middle and senior management. From what I can see, a significant proportion are already in their 50s or beyond.

The problem is not age itself, but the management culture that has developed over the years.

Too many managers seem to have settled into their comfort zones. Some are simply waiting for retirement, while others spend most of their energy flattering their superiors, managing upward, and protecting their own positions.

Meanwhile, frontline employees are left to deal with virtually every business challenge. Managers give instructions, employees do the actual work. When problems arise, responsibility gets pushed downward. When results are delivered, the credit goes straight to management.

And then we wonder why so many talented young employees are leaving the company.

DI China needs fresh blood in its leadership team.

If the company genuinely wants to regain its competitiveness and vitality, it must accelerate leadership succession, promote capable younger employees, and give the next generation real decision-making authority.

Senior managers should gradually make room for emerging talent rather than holding on to positions and decision-making power indefinitely.

Experience deserves respect, but seniority should never become a lifetime entitlement to leadership.

Otherwise, DI China will continue losing ambitious young employees who see little room for career development in an organization dominated by outdated management practices.

For the younger generation, the biggest problem is not just bureaucracy. It’s the overwhelming “father-knows-best” management culture, where senior leaders expect unquestioning obedience while taking little responsibility for the consequences of their decisions.

DI China doesn’t need more bosses telling young employees what to do. It needs a new generation of leaders who actually understand how to lead.

One Tech was supposed to transform the organization. Perhaps it’s time to transform the leadership as well.

@pfz WB and YDH are both holdovers from the WHB era.

During WB’s tenure as RNE GM, there were allegations of improper entertainment and excessive wining and dining in Northeast China. Even during company-wide cost-saving initiatives, WB allegedly instructed sales employees to dine at a restaurant owned by his relatives and purchase alcoholic beverages there.

As for YDH, during his time in MTS, the supplier of the MTS roadshow vehicle was allegedly connected to his relatives, raising serious concerns about potential conflicts of interest and the misuse of company funds.

Perhaps this also explains YDH’s obsession with marketing activities. In my view, he lacks genuine business expertise and seems far more interested in controlling marketing budgets than creating actual business value.

The real question is: How much of the company’s money has been spent on genuine business development, and how much has potentially benefited personal connections?

These allegations deserve a thorough and independent compliance investigation.

@pf6 Dr. Xiao is nothing more than a figurehead. He has virtually no influence over DI and can’t even get YDH under control.

Remember what Cedrik said at the FY26 DI CN TAM? “The Achim Meeting.”

That says it all. Achim is the one who really calls the shots in DI.

@psp YDY has always been like this—showing no basic respect for colleagues, which only further proves that he is nothing but a sycophant who curries favor with those in power. He doesn't understand the business; if he did, he would have replied to your email. You should ignore him too—don't be too weak.

@psn CJB has finally broken free from YDH. FY26 was certainly no walk in the park for CJB, thanks to YDH.

@ps9 DI CN Compliance should take a closer look at WQ and YLF in RE.

@psm I'm really disappointed in YDH. I felt completely lost throughout FY26. I sent him numerous messages and emails, but he chose to ignore them all. Now, with the new organizational structure in FY27, what options do I even have? What am I supposed to do now?

@psm Perhaps this explains why so many people consider ZPF both smart and lucky. Leaving Vertical for SW was arguably one of the smartest career moves he could have made.

Sometimes, the smartest career decision is not climbing higher within an organization, but knowing when to get out of it.

YDH, now that the new fiscal year has started, let me ask a simple question: What exactly are IE and VSA supposed to be doing?

Have you ever considered how many Vertical Heads have been pulling VSA and IE teams into one round of seemingly meaningless PowerPoint assignments after another, simply to complete your homework?

How many VSA colleagues spend their days visiting customers, only to end up completing these assignments during their limited time at customer sites? Instead of focusing on customer engagement, technical roadmaps, and market development, they are constantly being dragged into internal reporting exercises.

And a message to SSB and WYS: Please focus on doing your own jobs.

The follow-up actions you assign to Vertical Heads eventually trickle down to VSA and IE. In the end, the people who should be visiting customers, understanding market dynamics, and providing technical support are spending their time completing management assignments.

Do you actually understand the industries you are trying to manage? Do you have sufficient industry knowledge and frontline experience to direct teams working across different sectors?

If not, please stop pretending that you have all the answers. Stop issuing generic instructions and pushing work onto people who understand these industries far better than you do.

VSA exists to drive industry standards, influence customer technology roadmaps, and support business development. IE exists to provide genuine industry expertise. Neither organization should become a PowerPoint outsourcing department for Vertical Heads.

A simple question for FY27: Are we going to spend another year creating presentations for management, or are we finally going to spend more time creating value for customers?

Please start to audit the SPR quota of RE OEM. Why can Suzhou TZTEK be allocated so much quota? While sales use the company's direct-supply SPR to obtain improper benefits, it disrupts normal market prices, and the company has already been repeatedly caught dumping goods in the market.