Bunch of useless roles like program and bsa where both are overlaps who can only run their mouth and ask engineers to do this and that. Should get rid those and hire engineers
11 replies (most recent on top)
@dn your response proves the point about our thought process for the Cal group, how the heck are we supposed to know you are any good, if you were "not productive because of politics" , that means you failed in this environment and are not worth the money.
what's your ask to be productive just so I understand - please dont say that you need an ideal environment to show your worth.
your logic sounds like - "I'll be a millionaire if someone gifts me 1 million$, and the only reason I am not is that I don't know who will gift it to me, so it's not my fault that I am not a millionaire"
done?
when was it a credible org- all I saw was Tech focused org not really close to Nike business, bunch of empire builders trying to push their products as the best thing in the world.
Over complicated solutions -
want an ex: Membership - a lot of stores get your phone number and use it as a membership ID for understanding your shopping patterns, but not Nike, Nike asks you to download Nike App in the store, join Nike , use the barcode to scan to say you are a member , because Nike is special , and using a simple phone number is below Nike's brand value, why go for that when Game / GT leadership can build 100s of jobs under a leader for Membership by making it a Nike brand way... it's honestly frustrating how many of them talk about eventual benefits and their eventual benefits never consider operating and maintenance costs values in the calculations...
Style over substance....
@cy another plus one for cy...
lots of #kohlskrew left... but don't forget about the "long time" Nike folks who buddied up to them and got their promotions while following through on the kohls krew's seriously questionable tactics. e.g. duplicating product and program org, I mean seriously they created an org that was a mirror image of the existing Product and program, but they called it "Technical Program" or "Technical Product". Same thing with all of a sudden using 'preferred' vendors like gspann. The extent of unethical behavior is unfathomable. I had a VP in tech tell his directors and managers we weren't good leaders because we challenged the logic and cost of doing this. That VP was also hosting off-sites at the Allison Inn in Oregon or flying his directs to New York when his org was being told we had no T&E budget. It was like trying to do the right thing was a curse for your career. Same clowns tried to do it with MD. Think of the cost save if you just did an audit on anyone that was hired by or promoted/given a raise from RAT and his whole lineage. Do interviews with folks that weren't given promotions or raises and figure out if those clowns are really adding value or even halfway decent leaders. All levels, VP, Sr Dir, Dir, DE, PE, etc. If your only skill is being hired by someone shady or doing their bidding and managing up, you should be gone. We should name names. I bet there's at least 25 folks at band 45+ who should go and be named publicly so they can't do this to other companies.
@dk+ dare to share your name brother. all California hires specially during RAT's time are all useless resources to be very honest. forget about Nike way or Silicon way they lack basic skills.
@d1 FU bro, I am worth every penny. The regards don't let me be as productive as I can be because of their stupid a-s politics. I've learned the hard way that the Nike way is the wrong way with more steps. Everything is designed to benefit some jackasses little fiefdom.
@cy+ is correct. Given the current focus on cost optimization and organizational efficiency, it may be worth reassessing compensation structures for certain California-based senior roles (SM, Director, Senior Director, and Principal Engineer). In several cases, total compensation in the $300–400K range does not appear to consistently align with technical depth, productivity, or measurable business impact.
There also seems to be a pattern of hires from specific legacy cohorts where performance outcomes may not fully justify the cost. A structured, data-driven review of these roles — evaluating contribution, ownership, delivery metrics, and ROI — could help ensure compensation is tied closely to value creation.
By identifying underperforming or misaligned roles and rightsizing accordingly, the organization could potentially realize meaningful cost savings, possibly in the range of $10–20 million annually, while maintaining or even improving overall effectiveness.
Writing on the wall the minute EH come back to undo
@OP if you are talking about layoffs..there are lot many CA based resources who are expensive and need to be removed. SM,D,SD and PE level resources where their paycheck is too fat and contribution is very very less. Also dont forget there is some RAT's rotten tomatoes (KOHLS batch)still left out in the organization.
@op what do you mean by game org done??
Why about data science?