Thread regarding Cengage layoffs

@d6 Oh.. I have already decided to play the game and milk it. Not trying to sell nada. My why post was more directed at MH's stupid slack post. I think I can out last MH and the last of his cronies and get to see who's next in charge. Then make my decision, but right now watch this slow motion train wreck. Everyone I have spoken to feels pretty much the same as me.

"If trust matters, why were so many experienced employees pushed out? If customers come first, why were support teams reduced? If outcomes matter, why are ..."

Because the company's finances are caca! The ownership is a pariah sooking the life juices out of its corporate host/victim! You can save yourself all of that typing, only a fool asks "why" when the answer is so painfully obvious. The question to ask isn't "why" but rather, "Okay, that's the reality . . . Now what? What am I going to do in the face of this reality?" One can pour tons of energy into whiny public complaints, sure. That scratches an itch, but it isn't a solution to any problem. What action(s) shall you take?

The ET have been doing the PE’s bidding. Neither have understood that the customer is the person paying the wages and profits of everyone. How else can you explain this omnishambles of constant restructuring

What stood out to me wasn't what MH said. It was what he accidentally admitted.

He said, "The takeaway isn't that everything you heard today is new." That's actually the problem. Employees have been hearing versions of the same message for years. The purpose hasn't changed. The strategy hasn't changed. The goals haven't changed. The buzzwords haven't changed. Yet somehow we're still being told to align, connect, integrate, transform, and rethink how we work together.

At some point employees start asking a simple question: if the strategy is working, why does it constantly need to be re-explained?

MH says growth comes from serving more learners, delivering stronger outcomes, and earning greater trust. Sounds great. But trust isn't built through speeches. Trust is built through actions.

If trust matters, why were so many experienced employees pushed out? If customers come first, why were support teams reduced? If outcomes matter, why are employees still struggling with territory ownership, sales credits, reporting, adoption visibility, and accountability months after the reorganization? If trust is growing, why are so many employees openly questioning leadership?

Then MH says the company now has "one shared enterprise strategy." Again, that sounds great. But five months ago we were told the May structure was already the result of extensive research, planning, analysis, workshops, consultant input, and executive alignment. Now we're being told the company needs a shared strategy to help make better decisions, clearer priorities, and smarter investments.

That doesn't sound like a plan that was fully thought through.

It sounds like leadership is still trying to explain why the original assumptions aren't matching reality.

The most revealing line was about making better use of capabilities and strengths across the company. That's interesting because many employees have spent the past several years watching some of the company's strongest capabilities walk out the door.

Experienced salespeople.
Industry experts.
Product knowledge.
Institutional knowledge.
Customer relationships.

Those weren't weaknesses. Those were competitive advantages. Yet many were treated as costs to be eliminated rather than strengths to be developed.

Then came the part about OKRs becoming the framework for goals, priorities, and execution. Employees don't need a new framework. They don't need another acronym. They don't need another management system. They need evidence that the current strategy is working.

The reality is that employees are already testing the strategy every single day.
They're testing it through the reorgs.
They're testing it through staffing shortages.
They're testing it through pricing increases.
They're testing it through customer frustration.
They're testing it through territory confusion.
They're testing it through the constant organizational changes.
The issue isn't that employees don't understand the strategy.
The issue is that employees understand the results.

And for many people, the results don't match the promises.

That's why skepticism continues to grow. Not because employees are resistant to change. Not because they refuse to align. But because at some point people stop listening to leadership explain the future and start evaluating what leadership has actually delivered.

And that's a much harder conversation than another All Hands meeting.