Since we all have to do self-evaluations for the DPM process, how do you think SM's will read? Achieved 34% approval on glass door, laid off hundreds to pad the stock, implemented a failure of a command center. What else?
5 replies (most recent on top)
This C-level bulshitter became very active here, maybe it is SM himself?
No. What you seem to forget is also what is so often understood backwards.
Investors are here because of the workers , senior principal and below. If the workers are unproductive or leave then the company becomes an empty shell and eventually collapses. When that happens all the stock becomes worthless and the investors have nothing.
We are spending millions on stupid ideas that are the opposite to what we need. Stability has got worse in the past year not better. GDPR is a complete cluster and that whole management team should be fired immediately for incompetence. Wasting time with management musical chairs, just reorg theatre, while workers try to get real work done despite the roadblocks put in their way. Technical decisions are being made by those unqualified to comprehend the consequences. Strategic decisions are being made by those with no technical understanding.
Off shoring is dividing us. We need collaboration but we have toxic competition. Siloed teams own complex products that compete with other teams' similar products instead of owning simple components that can be reused to contribute together to form multiple strategic unique compound products. Instead of positive leverage we have negative deleverage. This inefficiency causes teams to suffer severe cost driven understaffing. We have senior VP management and senior principal workers offshore when we shouldn't have anyone offshore more senior than a manager or senior developer. Leadership and expertise has been geographically distributed too widely and too thinly. New blood and new ideas are good but not if they are the wrong new blood who seek self enrichment at the cost of everyone else and not if they are the wrong new ideas because they lack a deep understanding of the historical business and systems. Teams cannot communicate effectively due to language barriers both between teams and within teams. Teams are colocated geographically with identical roles so high cost and low cost colleagues resent each other because the high cost know their days are numbered until the low cost "steal" their jobs. Teams avoid needed communication because of the dog eat dog competition between teams and inside teams. Team members trust nobody because it's everyone for themselves. The easiest way to ensure your position isn't RIFed is to step on someone else. You don't need to be able to outrun the layoff bear just just need to trip your colleague so the bear pauses to eat them instead of you. It is a toxic environment but it could be fixed if C level execs want to (unfortunately the rot is already established up to the SVP level so it cannot now be fixed by SVP or below).
Hi Director,
How do you call a continuous loss of new business for AS despite slashing price at any RFP - since when did we get a PSS customer? And TN lagging behind 1A in most market? Even in Africa where we got Ethiopian! The first expectation from the employees: the management to recognize its mistake and show a clear path to recovery that will build confidence for the employees, the investors, and our customers!
It is good to hear from an obvious C-suite in disguise "Director" RS? I appreciate that you refuted the post intelligently, but to quote Gordon Ramsay "not good enough." The VCP and EPS are his KPIs for us employee non-investor types. Those YOY are not spectacular.
Sean has done just fine with a really challenging situation. First of all, Glass Door is not a reliable or useful metric for anything. Even the salary data on there is completely out of whack (which I know because I participate in HR's calibration exercises for the roles that roll into me).
Secondly, what you guys seem to forget frequently is that we are only here because of investors, and those investors want to see money back. So for guys like Dave, Clinton, and Wade, the job is to run the business as best they can with the money available to them. Sean's role is different; he's a strategist, he reports to the Board, and his job is to make the numbers work to maximize shareholder returns. Shareholders are all of our bosses. They elect our Board, which hires our CEO, who in turn sets the stage for everything else.
So to look at Sean and say "he's not doing a good job" is to misunderstand at the most fundamental level what his job is. Our stock is trading 8% higher than it was 3 months ago, a clear sign of investor confidence. Meanwhile, he was promoted in December 2016, and the stock drop in February 2017 was based on the Feb. 17 Q4 and FY 2016 earnings release. In short, he was dealt a difficult hand that would make any seasoned executive sweat, and he has done a great job stewarding that and providing solid direction to the business.
Now, what I would be criticizing if I were you would be the inability of some of leadership to strike an appropriate balance between executing on Sean's vision and running a healthy organization. Morale is a big problem. Stability is a big problem. We still aren't servicing our customers as well as we need to be. Our organizational structure hampers us more than it helps us. Technology and business are often not well aligned. All big problems, and all things we need to address. But Sean is not going to come into a new role during a period of significant turmoil and make drastic improvements in all of these areas within 1 year.
So, my performance review for Sean is that he is doing just fine.