Thread regarding DXC Technology layoffs

I don't know where you're from but in the UK, DXC have been getting rid of offices as quickly as possible. Only a few left

Mike was appointed on the 11th September
2019 and the stock price at the time was $36.49.

2 years on and its $34.64 and no dividends are being paid as they are trying to use the money to pay of debt.

So price loss of just over (negative) -5% so far in 2 years.

In the same period the Dow Jones has gone up 25%. So loss of 15% every year in effect.

I can't see this being allowed to be continued before a shareholder/board revolt soon.

Doesn't say much for 2 years into a 5 year recovery plan or the "stabilization phaze".
As the company shrinks so does the share price.

Leases are signed for a period of time, usually for years. You can't just close expensive offices without financial penalties. After all, the companies leasing out the office space have to make money too.

The stock price has crashed from $43 to $32 on the 2nd September, a staggering 25% within a month.

Wall Street has finally worked out this company is in turnover decline and the "stabilization faze" was just more of the same previous cutting.

Actually where it was sensible to make cuts there hasn been very little eg 100, 000+ people have been working remotely for 18 months and most of the offices are still being paid for. Would have made more sense to have exited the expensive buildings and paid staff an allowance for broadband and heating costs.

But the management only know of making cuts and scr3wing staff.

Layers of ineffective management could have been redeployed in to sales/customer focussed roles but again they are only good at cuts.

That turnover needs to rise, forget the book to bull ratio its just a smokescreen in a declining company, Mike's got 10 weeks before the next set of figures to sort this out quick.

re: the "stack" comment in previous reply - made me laugh to, felt like I was back in the late 80's and 90's with the OSI 7 layer model ...
those who won't be laughing are the DXC investors, the $10B Mike2 turned down from ATOS is now worth $8.9B six months later - whereas a reinvested $10B six months ago in Accenture would now be worth $13.2B or in Facebook $13.8B. Still I'm sure they are happy to forego that $4.3-4.9B extra dollars they could have had ...

@4mff+1cnLzsAf - 'the stack' it did make me laugh - like M2 flipped through the OSI model and thought 'yu know, we could differentiate here' what a c-ck.. In time warp :-)

There's only one area of organic growth Sal talks about, the number of Vice Presidents and other management appointed.

The astronomical associated costs of this growth, especially the Accenture friends circle hits the bottom line profit so hard its unbelievable and none of them have been accountable for growth of the company.

No other growth has been seen unfortunately, which is sad in a time when companies are renewing and updating their IT infrastructure to deal with the new virtual and remote business environment.

Need a new slogan "2122 go for growth" to move the focus on expanding the company.

The "new DXC" and the "Technology Stack" have proven to be the same as the old DXC.

You don't ever hear any managers talking about growing the company, think its they don't possess them skills.

That's we're the effort should be focused in training and town halls.

Them town halls are a waste of time, multiple leaders none of which have a clue or talk about growth.

Usual you've all done well, but we're not recognising that in your pay.

A few other promotions and stories, and some questions some of which are by plants saying how they are loving it.

No talk or detail whatsoever of growth plans, strategy, or figures on when and how much they are planning on growing. Why??? Your a shrinking company this should be P1 on the list, talked about everyday in most meetings instead of the usuall bull.

The management should be taken to task for not coming up with plans,ideas,and implementation on growth.

It's not short term any more we've had 8 quarter's and now we're in year 3 without any move forward, any longer and the shareholders will be looking for new leaders.

@2ewg+1cnLzsAf - agreed on labour locations, but the d-mbest part of the plan, DXC regigged the cost models to use offshore labor rates on advice from PWC - prior to actually moving delivery hubs ! For about 18 - 24 months I ran a service costed @ $20 / hour but delivered @ $50-60 / hour! It was not the only offering to have the same imposition!

I left in the end, even after taking my objections to the then acting global head of delivery who understood the problem, but 'could not' execute! This individual was very 'jaded' after yrs with M1 and was only interested in messing in the stable with horses!

The issue now is can anybody really see a client coming to 'new DXC' over an India based GSI? for ITO services Or other established players for cloudy stuff?

Stock price has crashed another 4.5% in the last 2 days, its below when Mike S took over. Even the Dow has seen through the spin.

Need a change in strategy as the old strategy isn't working, maybe some bolt on acquisitions to boost the revenues for a couple of years was another of lawries tricks to make it look good.

If Sal had any sense he would be holding town halls just on selling, you can't keep cutting your way to success that strategy has well gone past. Them middle management need a kick to make them sell and grow the company instead of cut mentality and that's how they should be measured.

I bet none of them have a single plan to grow the company, it should be their first goal/objective on their appraisals.

Their primary cost goal is to get employees from higher-cost countries to leave. How they do that is by offering minimal or no pay raises and bonuses, so people quit or retire. It's as simple as that. They aren't going to make mid-year pay adjustments to retain people like some on this forum wish for. They WANT you to leave so they can do your work in low-cost countries. The never-ending scrutiny of each quarter's spending is so the executives ensure they will meet their performance objectives to get the quarterly and annual bonuses promised to them in their employment contract. There is no long-term strategy to grow the business since a big part of their business plan is layoffs.

It's not rocket science.

Mike S has just continued where lawrie left off, all the focus has been on internal cost cuts, adding middle management layers, whilst the top just take insane amounts of money.

1) You need to sell more, get some focus on that and kick some 8ss instead of constant focus on cuts. That book to bill should be 1.4 on these reduced revenues.

2) Remove layers of redundant management who just are focussed on cutting instead of growing the business. They add no value and are only trained and experienced in cuts, well past their sell by date. They should be re interviewed for their job.

3) Allow the people on the ground to help in growing the business. I see lots of opportunities for revenue growth with the customers but I'm constantly been screwed by the cutters and not listened to as they have their tick boxes to tick.

4) you've got to face it the top need to cut them horrendous payouts, they are so hypocritical and obvious it's a joke.

5) stop recruiting more staff put a freeze on. Why do you need more folks when your about to make a load redundant. Cats out of the bag for headcount reduction. The attrition rate is 20% plus so it's so easy to reduce labour costs by not recruiting for 6 months. Your going to need another pay review mid term to address the deficiencies of the recent round, to address competitor wage inflation, general cost of living inflation, staff motivation, and retention of good talent.

6) reduce the endless bureaucracy brought in by middle management to keep busy, the bureaucracy busters was supposed to sort this but these managers keep on inventing new processes against policy. If the company is slim and agile it will be able to deliver much better.

If you can't think along these lines your best giving up as everyone can see the company is still in decline 2 years on, with the Mike lawrie policies you and the middle management are still running with the end is in sight unfortunately.......

Did you hear that sound Mikey? It's the shareholders and they're coming for your overcompensated head. Hahahaha!!

I've never seen at IT company shrink the way DXC has. Sure, many have had to change how they operate. Growth in Hyperscale Cloud has meant a shift away from traditional ITO. But, all the other big players have adapted and managed to grow despite the shift.

So, what's going on at DXC? Easy: too much focus on in-quarter results and no focus on long term strategy or organic growth. Their obsession with just worrying about the current quarter will ultimately destroy this company.

Someone mentioned Atos buying it? Atos ain't that stupid - they took a good long look and walked away. Remember, Atos is a very acquisitive company - and they walked away. That tells you very clearly just how much of a mess DXC is in.

There's only one direction this tired, ill, company is heading and it's down, down until final fire sale

Did JP Morgan finally just realise ? Of course not, they have been playing the game for the biggest clients, working with DXC helping funds get the dividend RETURNS! All during the shrink from $26b 2016 - $14b 2022?...

However, the 'stabilisation' numbers are starting to show that there can be no coming back. Margins for the last 3 years have been from cuts "robbing Peter to pay Paul" but also largely the failure of 'labourer pyramids' that DXC slavishly adopted on advice from PWC. On paper a the Pyramid looks good, until you use L8-9 rates in cost model but fulfill with L6... Also, since they disbanded the offering team over 2 yrs ago, every quote given is based on 4 - 5 FTE. I was an offering manager, I saw the sh-t show.

This not the end of DXC unfortunately, it will limp on, annual revs declining etc... Maybe sold to another outfit, Atos @ $5 - $6b?

No amount of spin can gloss over the data. Year after year of declining revenue. That's all you need to know. That isn't how good companies are operating. Maybe execs can turn a company around (in theory, but in practice these specific DXC execs are failures) but why would you ever invest in DXC until they prove they can turn it around. There are plenty of other profitable with better growth to invest in.