#leadership

Why does leadership expect us to be in the office if there’s never enough seating?

Why do people reserve seats everyday and never show up?

Why are we even allowed to reserve seats in the first place for weeks out??

I heard through rumors one criteria to be laid off was if you was with company less than five years
Nester Castor: 10+ years

Eidos Montreal announced 124 employee layoffs. These cuts are due to changing project needs. Studio leader David Anfossi is also stepping down. He served the studio for 19 years. This marks the third wave of layoffs since March 2025.

https://kotaku.com/eidos-montreal-deus-ex-sequel-layoffs-2000683242

With so many useless leaders under Shannon who don’t contribute to opentext success . Why are the still here ?

Remember around 2020-21 When a certain VP got fired for letting her son resell Nike shoes in bulk that were purchased on her corporate credit card... I didn't realize she changed her name and is now the CEO of Footlocker. Talk about failing upwards

Anyone in Housecalls get the gaslighting email from leadership last week? Seems in many and I'm guessing most markets, APCs are complaining of the unrealistic expectations this year and how goals are more difficult to achieve. Basically told; we hear you, metric, metric, metrics, some untrue BS, you should be grateful for your job, complete your notes while you're in this disgusting run down homes, with potential insects or parasites, cigarette or weed smoke, for the benefit of company. If you can't see all of your overbooked day, call your lazy and never advocating manager to cancel a patient. Because, as a masters degree trained professional, youh can't make you're own decisions on how to manage your day!! Oh to surely add how important boundaries and mental health are to minimize burnout. 😡 all this with less pay than last year.

Who is the most prominent bullsh-tter in the history of Walmart at the level of Senior Vice President to date?

Nike should be out of DJIA and don't mix with prima donnas.

Get out DJIA and start from bottom with hungry attitudes without worrying about trying to meet financial expectations of DJIA members.

Being in DJIA is hindrance to NIKE. Seems like Nike management is worried about it instead of strategic execution.

Every inconsiderate or illogical move, including pushing people close to retirement over to Cognizant, or making seemingly d-mb decisions about who to cut - it's all intentional. It's all about savings without one iota of respect or gratitude toward us. If they can save a minor buck by sc--wing you over majorly, they'll do it.

I know there have been several posts so just adding confirmation based upon information provided by leadership that 3/31 is going to be a horrible day for Oracle. Executives on calls are very stressed and panicked as they assess impact across their organizations. Good luck everyone.

Paradigm was the best job I've ever had. In about a years time it was turned into the worst. It's depressing.

Paradigm didn't rely on layoffs for quick number pumping. Even during the great recession, Covid, after the incident, my understanding is we never did actual layoffs. Our old leaders would hustle, try to drum up work, dig into the war chest, to make sure we kept operating and innovating and that its people were taken care of.

But we were told, times are tough. Housing is down. We have to tighten our belts to make this work.

A few weeks ago another round, only three people, but all well respected leaders, unceremoniously gone on a Friday. Then, only a few weeks later we have an all company meeting where we meet like 10 new executives and hear about their favorite condiments. Not a good look.

Now we’re told 2% raises company wide.

Meanwhile, all the actual people doing the work are seeing a dozen newer executives running around, making confusing decisions, contradicting each other, stressing people out. They pitch projects but don’t tell anyone the goal. We don’t know who the persona is, how these projects are supposed to make money. I struggle to understand what benefit they actually add.

It just seems like a huge nepotism tree. G-yatri hires all of her old friends, get the band back together. They are all yes men/women. Just do the thing, don’t ask questions.

I’m not an accountant, but they have to cost more than all the people laid off this past year.

And that expense is on top of the probably expensive AI licenses we’re paying for. Tools, that as far as I can tell, aren’t helping us. Hushed conversations in the hallway or at happy hours about how much extra work all these new “tools” are causing. But everyone is too afraid to speak up because they don’t want to be in the crosshairs for the next round of layoffs, so the concerns only bubble up so much.

And then we have to see our company’s LinkedIn page being a shameless commercial for Blitzy. Did we get a deal on our license with them? Where is the 4X development that was bragged about? Their site looks like a marketing guys idea of what AI might be able to do, but I haven't heard any of the product folks saying, "wow, Blitzy really made things better."

Maybe it is. Maybe this is making us so much faster. But we have no idea because communication has been terrible since G-yatri took over.

We’re now extremely top heavy. I don’t know what value these new executives bring. It feels like they are slumming it with us, looking at s-xier tech startups, wishing they were there instead.

And when the market crashes, and it will soon, the do-ers are going to be the ones sacrificed on the altar of “Shareholder” value. Most these AI companies won't exist and the ones that remain are going to start charging the real prices for their licenses instead of the venture capital prices they currently are at.

I don’t know if BFS and Peter Jackson know the level of talent that they have/had at a discount because the Paradigm culture was worth getting paid a lot less for. Well the culture is dying. Everyone has updated their resumes. And if the job market were any better, there would be a mass exodus happening.

We all sit here, on the eve of the financial quarter end, anxiously staring at the all company meeting on our calendars for Thursday. Never knowing what reorg, layoffs, or new executives will be announced. These used to be fun meetings where people got together, saw each other in person scheduled happy hours for after work. Now, the meetings are met with a mixture of dread and disgust.

It’s the "who you know" club all over again. We’ve got directors jumping into "AI Lead" roles who clearly haven't read a technical paper in years. They’re still pushing 2023-era prompting guides like they’re some kind of holy grail, even though that’s basically Stone Age tech for modern models.

Just sat through a meeting where a lead told us to "stay away from the newest models because they’re still learning." Tell me you don't understand how LLM training or inference works without telling me. It’s embarrassing. We’re throwing insane amounts of money away because the people making the calls have zero technical literacy. If you know anything about how this tech actually functions, you’ll see why this is destined to fail.

Note: Ran this through a scrubber to strip out my specific lingo/quotes so I don't get doxxed. You should too.

If layoffs were executed according to the following playbook Nike would almost certainly be better off.

Let go of employees at the Director level or above who:

1. Started at Nike post 2010
2. Have only worked for Nike
3. Were ‘promoted in place’ to receive their current title

While I’m sure there are a few good leaders that meet the above criteria, as a general rule this cadre of leaders are near useless in our current predicament.

Much like every stock investor is a genius in a bull market, leading when things are going well is easy. These folks have no experience managing through adversity - and it shows.

Nor do they have career experience outside of Nike to draw upon for other ideas. This means they will stick with the status quo: things that worked in the past at Nike that are no longer working now.

Lastly, because they received their titles without undergoing a competitive interviewing process, the scenario surrounding their original promotion bears little resemblance to the environment that they were re-orged into. Despite this, they retain the inflated title.

There must be a few hundred candidates that meet the above criteria, maybe more?

Serious question: is this an actual leadership change… or just another episode of “nothing to see here, carry on”?

Because if you’ve been here longer than five minutes, you’ve seen this headline before. Big announcement. Big promises. Same results. Now we’re being told the MM exit is happening in July.
July??

So we’re just supposed to sit tight for a few more months and pretend everything is fine while the same dysfunction keeps running? That the damage they did to people didn’t happen? At this point, it’s not even skepticism, it’s pattern recognition.

Let’s recap what employees have actually experienced:
• Constant churn
• Strong people walking out the door
• “Transformation” that somehow makes things worse, not better
• Leadership narratives that don’t match reality on the ground

And now we’re supposed to believe this time it’s different?

I think the real internal reaction is:
“I’ll believe it when I see the calendar hit July… and even then, I’ll give it a week.”

Also—genuine question—how much did this last year of “strategy” actually cost the company in lost talent, momentum, and dollars?

Because that’s the part no one ever addresses. If this is real, great. Long overdue. But respectfully… employees aren’t celebrating yet.

We’ve learned, we have the scars, the damage has been done and we will pray for the future org they fake their way into.

if you look at tgs, all sr dirs and vps are stuck in late 90s or early 2000s. our chances of building a modern and prosperous it org are zero unless we have new folks in these positions. that will never happen, so rest assured, things will continue to go downhill as the rest of the world accelerates change. at some point someone will wake up but it'll be way too late

How many people want to wipe that smug look of DF’s face with these sh---y corporate risk emails we get on the regular. What an a$$hat this guy is

Noticed they’ve separated onshore and offshore Datadog access.

Is this a response to concerns around PHI and PII exposure offshore? Or is there another operational or compliance reason driving the change?

If anyone in leadership has context on what prompted this decision, it would be great to understand the thinking behind it. Increased data controls are always worth discussing, especially would shape on/offshore future hiring pattern.

The server business was always more sticky and now is hugely more strategic than storage.
Years of comp plans for lEMC sales focused on pushing unity, powerstore, powermax etc distracted from the real prize of owning the entire data centre. They never understood apps, infrastructure. Just boxes.
If they had focused on overall sales, share of wallet, Dell would have been even more of a powerhouse than today.
Servers were never as high margin as storage, but highly profitable and close enough to matter.

So let’s all just admit the extension is nothing great . our union leadership took what ever was offered after the company 2 times prior shut them down .So let me say I voted yes ,but I really am tired of the leadership in all locals patting themselves on the back .In the end they continued the scrw ing extension on the retirees and now the possibility of us retiring .The whole deal was Dan needed to settle to move to the next stage !!There will be major management layoffs and reorganizations .Then by end of year there will be basic Eisp offered to union associates probably across board .Anyone who wants out or can afford it will be allowed to leave .The final stage is yet to be determined but may include the separation break up of lines of business.After that if that happens the sky is the limit to be used sold off or spun off .One things for sure the contract extension is not the end but the beginning of the end for union and management in wha I would call the end days .So advise anyone with under 26 years or under 55 start looking for somewhere else to begin your career

Why are we spending so much time talking about the chevron way history? Trying to rationalize current decisions?

Voluntarily(?). Louie in, and doesn't appear to be as Interim.

Too little, too late?

1.) Hire exec. team of highly compensated "friends" to virtue signal
2.) Create us vs 'them' environment
3.) Have numerous employee indoctrination meetings
4.) Spin-off non core businesses
5.) Quarterly lay-offs of 'them'
6.) Complain that Bryan isn't Chairmen of the Board

Rinse and repeat.

Layoffs are coming, not because AI has replaced any jobs, but because Jeremy Legg is simply not intelligent enough to implement AI in a cost effective manner. He has spent so much money attempting to implement something he knows nothing about that we will have to lay people off to save the balance sheet. R.I.P CDO, it was nice knowing you!

Stankey loves AI because it’s the only thing that tells him his ideas are good. We need more Dunning Kruger machines so we can make more incompetent business decisions to line the executives pockets, and we will spend billions to get there! Glory to Netanyahu!

What’s Going Wrong with FIS

Fidelity National Information Services (FIS) is struggling less with outright business deterioration and more with a sustained loss of investor confidence a poor executive leadership. While financial performance remains stable, growth is modest and not compelling enough to drive a re-rating plus the stock price continues to drop. Now at $46 where under the finer CEO it was 4x higher.

The company is in a prolonged strategic transition following major portfolio changes (e.g., Worldpay), continual layoffs, outsourcing and constant reorganizations leaving it stuck between.

The leadership direction and lack of strategy creates uncertainty about its long-term identity and competitive edge.

Leadership under CEO Stephanie Ferris is weak, directionless and manic and has focused on massive cost-cutting, buybacks, and margin improvement, but investors question whether this is substituting for real organic growth and innovation. As a result, FIS risks being viewed as a financial engineering story rather than a growth company.

Additional pressure comes from over reliance on third party Consulting companies, balance sheet constraints, inconsistent guidance credibility, lack of projected leadership confidence, internal instability and strong fintech competition, all of which reinforce skepticism about execution.

I mean, not really. Maybe on paper, to an extent. Paper is just the cover. It will be money based, without any long-term strategy, any concern for team cohesion and efficiency, and without any thought about talent retention. It’s the scrambling phase. Chickens coming home to roost for the string of bad decisions, driven by greed, grandiosity and mediocrity.

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/jamieschorr_xerox-has-lost-75-of-its-market-value-in-share-7440843685967323138-DQww?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_ios&rcm=ACoAAAfaElsBwXinezoJMaXHkbihsRTojWhnJRU

How confidence inducing

Occidental CEO’s Tenure May Be Over. It Hasn’t Been Good for the Stock.

Only a company that doesnt care a bit hospitality would bring Bridget back into the fold. There were parties when she left! O well glad im gone. Good luck to those still at macys. Watch your back.

Seems like an ego maniac ---- since he has been on board as ceo the stock has gone 50%. Said he was friends with Apple founder - again at best an exaggerator at worst a lier.

There is no doubt that some leaders are driven by ego, and we all know such people. They may seem to be propelled by “legitimate” goals such as building or expanding an organization, but what is foremost in their minds and emotions is making a success for themselves, gaining fame, fortune, influence, and personal power. They are also driven to a great extent by fear and self-protection, which is reflected in the pessimism that many of them exhibit, as well as inflexibility because they feel they have to hold on to positions, ideas, and ways of doing things that have worked in the past. In short: they are afraid of change. They are motivated to try to control change rather than embrace it.

The egotistic leader is self-centered, self-righteous and self-congratulatory. This leads to criticism of others’ ideas, actions, and abilities in order to prove one’s superiority.

Genuine, justified confidence inspires and builds followership; egotism drives followers away. For egotistic leaders, the game is about themselves, protecting their image, winning every argument, feeling entitled and defending and justifying their decisions. Egotists don’t learn from their mistakes, they defend them. They are afraid to be wrong, to show vulnerability, to listen to other’ views, and they resent having to do work they consider beneath them. They focus on personal ambition, power, status, and inflating and promoting an image. As T.S. Eliot put it, “Half the harm that is done in the world is due to people who want to feel important. “

Their Narcissism

They believe they’re the smartest people in the room. They assume they are always right, don’t listen to others’ opinions and ideas, don’t trust others, and end up trying to do everything themselves.

Narcissism is an extreme form of over-confidence that is actually quite common in leaders. Narcissistic leaders use their self-confidence and charisma to draw others and initially inspire them to follow. Dr. Berit Brogaard is both a physician and professor of philosophy at the University of Miami. She has spelled out some of the main characteristics of people who have a narcissistic, exaggerated sense of their own worthiness.

They have a grandiose sense of self-importance, tend to exaggerate their achievements and talents, and expect to be recognized by others as superior — even if their achievements don’t warrant it.

They are preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance.

They believe they are “special” and unique, and can only be understood by other special, high-status individuals. Thus they require excessive admiration and have a sense of entitlement.

They are interpersonally exploitative, and tend to take advantage of others to achieve their own ends.

They lack empathy, and are unable to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others.

They are often envious of others or believe that others are envious of them.

They are arrogant and haughty, these are all signs of an ego that has run amok.

They talk but don’t listen. Or if they appear to listen, they don’t actually act on the advice or information given.

They don’t acknowledge the contributions of others. Many great leaders find a way to praise team members and give them all the credit for success. Ego-driven people seek out the praise and gladly take all the credit.

They don’t train others, and won’t give up control and their teams never live up to their full potential.

They have excessive confidence in their own judgment and contempt for the advice or criticisms of others, as well as exaggerated belief, bordering on a sense of omnipotence, in what they personally can achieve. Sunflower bias, confirmation bias, over-confidence bias can lead to not considering what might go wrong, or that one’s own judgment might be flawed. A big ego and arrogance lead to bad decisions.

They are prone to recklessness and impulsiveness. Daniel Kahneman, who won the Nobel Prize winner for his research on decision-making, has cautioned that, “The brain is a machine for jumping to conclusions.” If you think you are the smartest person in the room and possess unique abilities and intuitive judgment, you probably won’t consider what might go wrong, what you may have overlooked, what information is missing, what assumptions need to be questioned or what might be the consequences of taking a risk.

They feel entitled and have a distorted sense of their own omnipotence. Thus they don’t plan and don’t handle the things that need to be done. They just assume things will work out for them and don’t think about the details or the difficulties of implementation.

It feels like the people making decisions no longer have a clue what our work actually involves. We tell them what's broken and they just ignore it. They acknowledge our concerns and then do absolutely nothing about them. Why should I trust anything they say at this point?

I see some groups had engineering cut heavily. This is typically a very bad sign especially when the 'process' professionals who mostly bring no value and simply get in the way of innovation (at this company) remained unscathed. The budget cut requirements could have been serviced by dealing with those groups while giving innovation in engineering a chance going forward. There was a belief this was a Mark B. policy but clearly that is not the case as this goes right to the board and IS the business model. Time to accept that.

I can't keep track of who I report to anymore or what I'm supposed to be working on. Projects constantly get started and then abandoned mid stream. Can somebody explain to me how this complete chaos benefits anybody, including Nike?

Meta, led by CEO Mark Zuckerberg, is continuing to shrink its workforce, like many of its peers in the tech industry. After laying off hundreds of employees earlier this week, a leaked document revealed the tech giant’s bizarre plan for several of its remaining staff as it shifts in a new direction.

https://www.thestreet.com/technology/leaked-meta-memo-reveals-companys-bizarre-plan-after-layoffs

Profits all go upstairs. We'll just keep getting cut like always.

Another week with almost no communication from leadership, just nonstop guessing and speculation about what’s coming next. I’m so tired of this. I’d honestly pay good money for leadership that respects its people enough to just tell the truth, even when it’s not what we want to hear.

The painful and sad truth is that Cisco has become a company run by financial managers and lawyers. Such a company has no chance of growing and being competitive at the crazy growth rate of the AI ​​market. The facts are that there has been no innovation at Cisco for a very long time, the company has been operating conservatively and cautiously, resting on its laurels, there is no risk-taking, no innovation, but rather maintaining the status quo. This is the truth that all need to understand and know about Cisco. All the other talks of the ELT are worthless.