Too Many Chiefs (or Chefs) at IBM, They Don't Know How to Run a Company (With a 100+ Year or Century-Old Brand Recognition Advantage)
Earlier this year: IBM CEO and CFO Make It Hotter in the Kitchen
IBM is a total mess. No strategy. No roadmap. Nothing.
Look at how IBM's CEO, who came up with the idea or the plan to buy Red Hat, is turning it into trash that's marketing slop while abandoning communities and openwashing via the OSI.
See our IRC logs for further context.
It has long been said that the managerial structure of IBM dooms everything. Insiders can tell that based on firsthand experience.
"This excessive middle management (especially in consulting) overlap is a result of very poor management at the top," somebody wrote some hours ago. "The exec’s are not setting a span of control nor justifying headcount and billable hours. It’s time for middle management to re-interview for their jobs and justify their existence. I’ll bet 80% will not be able to justify their existence and the cost savings via job elimination would total well over a billion."
"Albany too. Reinterview is such a good idea," someone then said.
This morning we mentioned the latest discussion about PIPs (they're ongoing right now) and earlier today somebody wrote: "Interesting how management has no honor or integrity left and lies to put a previous high performer on a PIP. You will have to live with your conscious..."
It seems like a consensus opinion; some line managers or middle managers are too selfish or self-deceiving. They don't wish to understand that when they mark 15% of "their" people as "low performers" they set them up for RAs via PIPs (or the "fast lane"). █