I mean you guys have a very different opinion . Shankar did the best for the company last 15 years . I met him few occasions and his vision is great and he is always optimistic and up to date with the latest trends . If not him , i dont know wht will happen without Shankar to Vz. All his juniors aren't root for verizon to win . They find a way to put more pressure for them to survive and it goes down to the bottom . SShankar is the main guy who kept calm and composed .
16 replies (most recent on top)
Agreed
I took the VSP a while ago. It was clear those Wireline IT leadership were a bunch of boot licking slide-deck warriors with zero ability to execute anything.
@ae Is not American ?
Shankar shanked ya all lol
This was posted by Shankar himself !!
I don't know this guy and I am in different org...why do people hate this guy so much?
just curious...
@OP: did you get paid to post the original message, for example, by the Shank's public relation agent or Shank's inner-circle or an executive placement service??? Auditioning, for Shanks's next gig???
I am still lol at the ridiculous slo mo video he did to give some employee an award. What is this, star search? Meanwhile tmobile and att continued to crush us while Shankar played theater here.
Below is one of the primary missions of VDSI India, making Shankar looks good and provide strategic vision deck to him so that he can show off to Hans. That is why he keeps expanding his kingdom in India.
“ PowerPoint Proficiency: The organization became focused on "PowerPoint proficiency," elevating the ability to create visually appealing, hollow presentations above demonstrable return on investment (ROI).”
That makes it worse not good that he was so slick but let the company slide in the gutters without putting up a fight. As far as being calm and composed and up with the trends that typically is because they are being coached on how to talk about the latest trends by the expensive consultants and analysts. They have made leaders being theater actors as a virtue rather than having discernment and leadership to drive outcomes , He was disastrous as technology leader, good riddance.
Shankar will be ok. He has paid too many cronies for this rainy day.
Self Respect however will be lost and can’t be gotten back.
Would have been nicer if he had quit with Craig.
Better VSP than Fired
Shankar only wanted 2 outsource to his peeps
Good riddance - replace him with an American
@OP You wrote this like you're one of those guys that calls me and says I have a problem with my windows operating system.
@a3: what the f__k are you writing as its so very incomprehensible. Add some value to the ongoing and fluid nature of the discussions impacting livelihoods.
@a2 He definitely has done a great things to be at the top of some multi million company . no one handed over to him.
Classic Decline from Leader to Showman
He was undoubtedly a high-performing asset during his first 15 years with the company. However, his contributions sharply declined over the last decade.
The Leadership and Ethical Lapse
As a leader, his greatest failure was one of moral and ethical responsibility: he did not recognize and act upon the appropriate time to step down. His relentless strategy of aligning solely with his boss to secure the next promotion reveals a motivation driven by self-interest, not independent leadership. This is a critical indicator that he had ceased being a true leader in the organizational sense.
📉 The Conflict of Vision and Execution
While he may have possesses a genuinely strong vision, remains highly optimistic, and stays current with the latest trends, the efficacy of these qualities was neutralized by his environment. A three-decade-long tenure surrounded by "yes" men meant he lacked the necessary external challenge and perspective to refresh his approach. As a result, even if his vision was inherently correct, both the strategy and execution failed to deliver anyresults.
🎨 The Culture of Showmanship
His long tenure fostered an insidious internal culture that prioritized showing off over substance:
PowerPoint Proficiency: The organization became focused on "PowerPoint proficiency," elevating the ability to create visually appealing, hollow presentations above demonstrable return on investment (ROI).
Political Displays: Internal meetings and reviews were less about critical analysis and more about elaborate, dazzling displays designed to serve the leader's political advantage and showcase effort rather than actual impact.
False Security: This reliance on easily digestible but ultimately empty visuals created a false sense of security and progress, effectively insulating the leader and his internal circle from the genuine operational failures taking place within the company.