#performance

Recently a number of colleagues received performance letters that clearly state they need to be 100% for Q2 or they could be subject to termination based on their performance.

Do you think this is a way for MO to downsize the company without having to pay a severance? I don’t buy for one second that he wants to add more sales representatives. We have downsized starting all the way at the top (I.e ZVP’s/Sr. Dir) but the layoffs never really hit sales.

As a rep, it will be open territory season soon. Get your popcorn ready! I feel bad for my manager. I doubt they will backfill the positions. Managers/directors will get stuck with the quota with little to no production coming out of the territory. I am sure they will be pi---d considering they are paid based on percentage of plan.

I believe Verizon needs to continue building a stronger market-driven culture focused on performance, accountability, and long-term competitiveness. That means making difficult decisions when necessary, including reducing redundant positions and streamlining teams to stay agile in a rapidly changing industry. A stronger return-to-office policy is also important because in-person collaboration improves communication, training, innovation, and team culture in ways remote work simply can’t fully replace. If Verizon wants to compete and grow, the company has to prioritize efficiency, execution, and a workplace culture centered on results.

This is the periodic reminder that while L and D field advisors are performing well the same can’t be said for their leaders and so called directors who don’t do much of anything.
This bad performance starts with Tractor Man and goes all the way down.

It’s no surprise that in his first team wide comments since his disastrous all-teams, that he fell flat on his face again. From the cringy and unnecessary SNKRS comment to rolling out the same exact leadership structure that has accomplished zero over the last 18 months.

Tech deserves better than this clown. The guy is so out of touch. Meanwhile his whole org is ready for him to start talking about all the start-ups he’s worked at and actually accomplish something at scale.

KY TN CA BON reports filed. We have to make sure these lousy incompetent employees are held accountable for their actions.

What if they gave everyone full bonus this year as a thank you for everything and for putting up with all our sh-t. One can only dream, at this rate will we even get a psp pay out?

“I’m a true believer after what’s transpired in the last couple months that our commercial organization has absolutely ki-led it.” -GoGo

this is the way

After moving the poorly performing and poorly built XDR, the new GM (John Morgan) is finally doing the smart thing and setting it up to be shut down.

There is going to be over 100 layoffs across the group on May 14th, with huge cuts coming to a 30-person data science team in Prague that has produced nearly no value in 10 years, and finally letting go the XDR engineer directors who built this Rube Goldberg machine no one actually likes or uses.

What do people think the future looks like for PSKY? Honestly, I thought it was on the rise after the acquisition when it went up to close to $20, but it's obviously dropped back to pre-acquisition levels. Do we think it'll go back up if the WBD acquisition goes through?

TBH I'm asking because I have LTIP shares I'm trying to unload. My fault for not doing it in September/October.

Been at WF for almost 1.5 years and want to switch groups. Problem is, my first year end PR was an IM. Although if any hiring manager read it, they would see the review commentary doesn’t match the rating.

Anyways, how does this affect internal transfers? Do I need to have a “meets” on my most recent review to be considered?

I was told by my manager that SAP is launching a global AI adoption program and will track the usage of LLMs and other AI features on SAP products. They plan to coincide the launch with Sapphire so there will also be a big buzz about it. I bluntly asked if this is going to be used to determine one's performance and my manager said yes. Apparently, we are all supposed to use AI as much as possible in our day to day work and improve efficiency and productivity by doing more work in less time. Our area is deciding to add an area level performance goal that everyone contributes to but we are also asked to include AI in our other goals.

I really don't get it. Yes, I find AI somewhat useful in my work especially if I am researching something. But NO it is not gamechanging to my work. I feel so disappointed by this move that I plan to only use AI but not get work done because no one cares about work anymore and all they care about AI adoption. I feel like we are training our replacements. If AI is useful, why does management need to force everyone to use it?

Half of our management can't even use AI because they are too old school and because they only use German in emails and chats and conversations and AI is somewhat useless in German. Is this also happening in other areas now?

Heard rumors that professional services team would be impacted. Also, people not meeting expectations (NME) after performance review meeting. Any insights?

Is there any truth to the rumor that people who received inconsistent performance rating last year due to not following in-office adherence will be laid off? I am on a very small team and I believe I am the only one on my team who got an IP so I’m freaking out. My role is a grade level 3 phone role.

They’ve now published 2 customer PRs this week, must be desperate to have something positive to talk about on the call. If they think Gyro hut is going to move the needle with investors, things must be even worse than they appear.

If Humana truly has in mimd a goal to have the corporation to be successful, then I strongly suggest they do an across the board evaluation of all persons within the roles of Director, Associate Director, Manager, and perhaps even Vice Presidents of segments.

My suggestion is to fire all those that were hired many years ago in the past (and also recently) who are Cronies, Nepo Babies, and DEI hires.

Then, replace them with persons with the actual education degree for that field, that have the experience and training and past track record, and are fully capable of producing actual effective results that assist the company in reaching its strategic goals.

I’m not going to bother logging on my laptop until it’s time to get my W-2 form for this year of hard work I have been preforming.

I’d like to ask for clarification around AHT expectations within Member Services. We’ve been told that AHT is not a primary performance metric when all other quality measures are being met, yet many of us are now being told our AHT is being closely monitored and even audited.

Can leadership provide transparency on how many employees have been written up or let go specifically due to AHT, particularly in cases where other key metrics—such as quality, compliance, and member experience—are consistently meeting expectations?

Additionally, what does it mean in practice when AHT is ‘not a metric’ but is still being tracked and acted upon? Understanding how this is being applied would help reduce confusion and allow us to better align with expectations while continuing to provide quality service to our members.

Coming soon to an office near you: widespread layoffs dressed up as “performance decisions.” Don’t expect generous severance packages or smooth exits. Companies are increasingly looking for ways to avoid those costs altogether. Instead, they’ll build a case against you.
Return-to-office mandates, shifting performance metrics, evolving skill requirements, incomplete trainings ... Anything &everything can become the justification. The bar will keep moving, and the reasons will keep changing. What used to be acceptable yesterday may suddenly be labeled inadequate tomorrow.

This isn’t always about individual performance and it’s often about reducing headcount while minimizing financial and legal obligations. The strategy is simple: create enough documented “cause” to make departures look justified, even when the real motive is cost-cutting.

In this environment, job security isn’t just about doing your work well. It’s about staying alert to how the rules are being rewritten around you.

It's just a matter of time my friends.

Do people at the management‑ladder level and principals, senior principals, chiefs—ever get put on a PIP? I’m asking because we have a principal on the team who struggles with fundamentals, guided the group in the wrong direction, and then claimed we needed “modifications” once things started going south... he is PIP material

Unpopular opinion: many of the people who were let go weren’t adding enough value to justify their roles. If we’re being honest, there’s probably more inefficiency still left in the system.

So, I have confirmed it with multiple colleagues. Apparently in the last few weeks some of them indeed received salary raises, surprisingly nice ones. If you still haven't received, that means you have been skipped. What is weird - these raises do not follow any pattern, some best performers were skipped, some people who do not have "friends" in management granted, tenure also didn't matter. Seems almost random. I have no clue what this company is doing and it seems they also don't know it...

• Debt has ballooned to $27B -- more than $6B higher than at the end of 2025
• Cash from operations at a loss of $2.3B for the quarter
• Cash from operations ex working capital of $700MM
• Debt to cap of 48%! - this is a BB+ to B- rating (speculative credit) at S&P and implies a significant re-rate of PSX debt and increasing cost of capital

Yet management continue to claim a strong balance sheet.

$3B of cash tied up in working capital with no sources of cash to fund it = debt

The commercial organization is an anchor around the necks of PSX shareholders

PSX has increased volatility by increasing exposure from commercial trading activity and is is competing in shark infested waters. We don't have the stomach or the people to participate in this business. Everyone knows it and they are taking advantage of it.

On top of this, Midstream underperformed and increased capacity in a market that is swimming in capacity and putting downward pressure on renewal rates.

Corporate costs have also ballooned despite business transformation efforts.

Renewable fuels losses are accelerating again.

Yet the tone from management remains optimistic and they can't be honest with shareholders.

This management team must go. A CEO that is out of his depth and a CFO that has taken on increased risk at the expense of a once pristine balance sheet.

Curious perspective: The company has all but ki-led chances of promotion with this new approach to business approval for increase of an individuals grade. You need to have some serious power behind you now if you want that next pay grade - GOOD LUCK! Seemingly, at the same time there appears to be a lock down on performance of wealth, the executives down to directors/RLT receive stock as part of their performance, and not that ridiculous new VCIP rule that you just about can't cash in because they're rolling people out through the night, but a spot bonus as a result of their grade. Dividends are being paid out at a huge sum, while alot of the stock is owned by the uppers who none of us ever see. It's almost as if the money is moving to individuals through the stock attraction of high dividend. I admit, I'm not economist but why are we do eager to pay out the high rate when we are still struggling to get our cost per barrel down?

Devastating review by new young S&P analysts. Employers will now begin to review MoA as a going concern from a fiduciary standpoint. Rich has another 12 months to turn things around.

Mutual of America Life Insurance Co.
Ratings Lowered To 'A-' From 'A' On
Weakened Competitiveness; Outlook Stable

Mutual of America Life Insurance Co.'s competitiveness has been declining in recent
years, evidenced by volatile profitability and business and geographic concentrations
that constrain its ability to achieve performance consistent with similarly rated peers.

S&P Global Ratings therefore lowered the long-term issuer credit and financial strength
ratings on Mutual of America Life Insurance Co. (MoA) to 'A-' from 'A'

The outlook is stable, reflecting MoA's turnaround plan to drive revenue gains and
reduce expenses.

NEW YORK (S&P Global Ratings) April 27, 2026--S&P Global Ratings today lowered its

long-term issuer credit and financial strength ratings on Mutual of America to 'A-' from 'A'.
The outlook is stable. MoA's volatile, below-peer profitability and concentrated product and geographic profiles dent our view of its business risk. MoA has reported operating losses for the past three years,
with a loss of $27.6 million in 2025, compared to $149.6 million in 2024 and $223 million in
2023. The company had positive net income in 2025, of $2 million, for the second time in the
past five years, but in both cases this owed to one-time, unrealized gains from real estate salesand other Non-Interest Maintenance Reserve (IMR)realized gains from the investment portfolio.

We had anticipated that MoA’s cost-cutting initiatives would generate consistent profitability and returns commensurate with ‘A’-rated peers. While the new management team has taken significant actions, the company has yet to demonstrate sustained profitability Although MoA is pursuing numerous strategic initiatives to restore profitability, we anticipate it will take time

The Missed Targets Report
​A report (notably from the Wall Street Journal) revealed that OpenAI failed to meet several key internal goals:

​User Growth: ChatGPT failed to reach its goal of 1 billion weekly active users by the end of 2025.

​Revenue: The company missed multiple monthly revenue targets in early 2026.

​Competition: Competitors like Google’s Gemini and Anthropic’s Claude are reportedly eating into OpenAI’s market share, particularly in the high-value coding and enterprise sectors.

EH will be fired within a year. He came in with more good will than anyone. Employees were ripe for change, and even serious sacrifices. He has squandered that. His tenure will only be known for devastating cuts, backward thinking, and the worst stock performance in more than a decade. Ceding China and Digital will be seen as complete dunderheaded moves when those are the biggest growth areas. Divesting from Tech, when that is what enables innovation in this century. Offshoring and outsourcing jobs when that could not be more politically and culturally toxic. He's had more than 2 years and things are almost inconceivably worse than could be imagined.

Going against the conventional flow o with this post: (a.) thankfully, I wasn’t impacted (b.) not surprised to see this large of a cut—we all knew there would be a round 2, esp once MD was let go 6mo ago (c.) tbh most of those impacted NEEDED TO GO and were low performing and not talented. Feel free to challenge this, but hard to see anyone strongly disagreeing.

Leave you with this: Polymarket is taking bets EH is next to go in <12mos. Take that side bet

• Were you the one writing AI first or AI driven in your linkedin profile?
• Did you posted that “ I would like to share that I recently completed blah blah blah AI course” too often in linkedin?
• Are you the one who bluffs in meetings and throw big words all day long but dont do sh-t?
• Did you kissed the bottom really well all these years?

I am geniunely curious. What did you do right?

The 3 benchmarks are AI, S&P500 and cd’s/treasuries for 5 years total return

AI. 100%+
S&P500. 85%
CD’s/Tr. 15%
Waters 0%

Waters is clearly not a growth company, but stagnant.

Be homest how many of us really want to get RIF we this point? I mean 100% seriously, not just joking around saying it. I do! haven’t yet told my AD, as I’ve seen it make no difference because AD will always pick the low performers over a strong performer that’s asked for it. They do what’s best for them only.

Not only will we beat the numbers, we will blow past them

The numbers are awesome, we are returning to growth

Watching promotions roll out is something else as well. It makes you really question if performance actually matters even a single bit. To say the names on that list don't always match the people who carry the weight daily would be an understatement. It's hard not to notice.

55k Phone net adds. Increasing guidance on EPS and noting we will be at top end of phone net adds range of 750-1M. All major metrics at VZ w YOY increases.

Stock temporarily up.

Don’t get me wrong I’m all for hiring ambitious people. But why when someone screams “I’m using this as a stepping stone” do you hire them? You do realise your stakeholders internally have to tolerate their mediocre work, slow deliverables and lack of knowledge. What is even worse is when as a leader you reward their behaviour and enable them. Then they leave. Great use of everyone’s time and efforts…

Not to be out done, but Human Resources has once again made the annual performance evaluation process harder than rocket science, and has added layer after layer of unwelcome, unwanted, unnecesary and extreme complications to an already ardous process for associates and managers. We are collectively FED UP with all of this BS ! It used to be a simple 1 page form. very effective. high impact. reviews took 1 hour. Now it is at least 8 hours for each associates. It is the crazyist thing many of us have every seen and this behavior from a run a way HR group has got to stop. Does the CEO and COO support this ? You support this ? Memo to the CEO: we don't want this process. need this process. eliminate this process or you will lose support from the rank and file for god's sake.

Heard 4th resignation in last 2 weeks. These people were top performers who found better opportunities outside ... guess with so much uncertainty here and with zero growth opportunities, people are going to leave and these are not slackers

If you have talent then job market is not that bad..