Anyone find that sr directors and VPs in their org were protected while everyone else suffered losses? How is this ever the right approach to a company re org? Hard watching the same lifers play musical chairs every year and then we all act surprised when the company struggles bc of no innovation
7 replies (most recent on top)
Yes this is nonsense. At least 20 Sr Dr were let go and 2 vps not to mention several Dr.
@ar you nailed it!!!
DEI targets have also played an essential role over the last 5 years.
The last three layoffs have been done via algorithm, primarily comparing how much you’re getting paid to your band level.
Yes, if it seems like the most competent people are getting let go, that’s exactly the case.
How do you get to be in the top tiers of pay for a band level? You either stick around for a long time, or you do an amazing job, get high ratings, and get big raises.
It’s the d-mbest way to do things, and everyone in charge doesn’t seem to acknowledge it.
Nike thinks it can be successful merely by being Nike, which is clearly, overwhelmingly, untrue.
@a4 got it correct. When Nike lays people off it’s almost as if the thought process is “Let’s get rid of known high performers, and keep low performers and/or people who don’t actually do anything. Yeah, let’s do that!”
I swear, I would LOVE to know how layoff decisions at Nike are made. I’m not even kidding. I’m super duper curious how the people who make these decisions go down a list and decide who stays and who goes. And how much they even know about the people they’re letting go. And the people they aren’t letting go.
We can all speculate, but at the end of the day I’m guessing there’s, like, maybe only four or five people who TRULY know how these decisions get made. And they ain’t talking. It’s as if it’s the best kept secret in the universe.
What I do know is that over the years I’ve seen several people let go that caused me to think, “Why on earth would you get rid of THAT person?!? They were one of the strongest people on that team!”
This also taught me, “Don’t think that being well-liked or being a strong performer will ever save you from a layoff. On the contrary and from what I’ve seen, when it comes to layoffs those traits seem like a liability.”
Let’s take a look at the amount of senior levels that were laid off in the past 2 years. Majority were the actual people who got sh-t done.
Finance saw a few VPs legal saw senior directors all of which were solid people and workers.
Then you get into groups like GPS who kept all their 3rd party workers (CBRE/JLL) and laid off their tenured employees but kept low performers across the board. Primarily on the global side but HQ as well.
All of the layoffs are so disappointing. So many great VPs SD Directors and managers who gave their heart and soul to the brand only to be shown the door. Godspeed and good luck to you all.
Not sure what you’re talking about. Directors and Sr. Directors comprise the largest category of people let go. There were also at least 2 VP’s let go, that I know of. And the published layoff list from the prior layoff clearly showed this same category of employees took a huge hit.
It’s difficult to answer a question when the underlying premise of that question is itself flawed.