IBMers Discuss Who Killed IBM (It Impacts Red Hat)

posted by Roy Schestowitz on Aug 02, 2026

Many layoffs at Red Hat this year (the media turns a blind eye)

Hours ago:

15 years ago IBM was considered more valuable than Microsoft, at least temporarily. Sam Palmisano, who had befriended ODF and GNU/Linux, was the CEO. Later in the same year, "on October 25, 2011, [...] he was stepping aside as president and CEO." (Source: Wikipedia) He had been CEO since March 2002.

Earlier today we quoted some new discussions, which haven't been disrupted by the rage-baiting troll lately.

Somebody has since then said: "IBM Management started to be become a industry joke under Gin 'N Tonic. She was the egomaniac who built and destroyed Watson Healthcare in a sitting without even trying. Management continues as the industry laughingstock under the Indian cockroach CEO, Arvind Krishna who failed with spectacularly with Cloud and AI, and now looks for further humiliation with Quantum computing diarrhea. But Cramer keeps giving IBM great reviews, so he must be on to a good thing. He's likely milking IBM out of a good amount of $$$ under the table, because it's evident that he (Cramer) sure doesn't know a thing about Quantum computing, but he keeps yapping as though he does. He's nothing but an ex-used car salesman on TV."

This has not (yet) been censored for calling Ginni "Gin 'N Tonic". Somebody then responded:

IBM management took a steep nose dive around year 3 of Palmisano. It’s around that time that IBM replaced its simple, core values Executive Leadership Principles with a new, high-falutin, buzzword heavy, but principle light version because execs were scoring too high on the old metrics. Scoring high on them consistently quarter after quarter was the whole idea and it worked until Sam replaced it. At about that same time he went on an executive hiring binge and let the snakes slither in.

That also happens to be the first year that my submission to the ancient IBM executive and technical leadership competency tracking system was rejected for being too honest. I was told the mandatory rating distribution across categories and in which categories I was to be marginally and seriously deficient as a matter of unwritten corporate policy independent of reality. If cooking the books works for finance, why not do it for planning the future high level leadership of the company as well.

Good people do still occasionally get su-ked into IBM executive positions. The acid test in the 21st century is whether they survive for two years. The survivors have black hearts and corrupt souls.

Some people blame Ginni, some say the decline began under Palmisano, and there's this latest comment speaks of nepotism:

Agreed. Too many bad actors saw an opportunity to consolidate power for their own self-interest. They then surrounded themselves with friends, allies, and loyalists to reinforce their positions. Others watched this succeed and replicated the same approach within their own organizations.

IBM management was once criticized as an “old boys’ club,” dominated by a narrow leadership circle. But replacing one exclusive inner circle with another doesn’t solve the underlying problem—it simply changes who benefits. When advancement depends on being part of the right network rather than on performance, merit inevitably suffers.

This is why hard work, technical excellence, and measurable accomplishments no longer carry the weight they once did at IBM. Increasingly, career progression seems to depend on being recognized and sponsored by the right inner circle rather than on consistently delivering results. It is also why IBM management and leadership does not carry the respect it once did.

IBM's demise impacts Red Hat. By extension, it has enormous impact on GNU/Linux. Fedora is fast becoming like another CentOS - something few would bother using. █