Thread regarding DXC Technology layoffs

Deliver Excellence: When Process Prevents Progress

I genuinely want to deliver a good service to our customer, but I’m constantly blocked from doing so. At this point, I’ve more or less given up trying.

The client wants something relatively simple, yet getting it done feels almost impossible. I don’t have the access, authority, or trust needed to make the required change.

Even with an agreed task, every individual step has to be re-approved by someone else — often with different interpretations or priorities. Eventually, someone may action it, but more often than not it’s done incorrectly. I then can’t see what’s actually been changed, so I’m unable to diagnose why it still doesn’t work.

The end result is that I often have to resubmit the same ask and hope that next time someone different both understands it and implements it correctly. It’s an incredibly inefficient way of working, and it makes delivering a quality outcome for the customer far harder than it needs to be.

What’s most frustrating is that management appear to see this as acceptable — even desirable — because we charge by the hour. The more friction there is, the more time is spent, and the more the client ultimately pays.

There has to be a better way, but I’m surrounded by people who insist there isn’t. We’re not keeping customers happy - we’re not keeping customers at all. They won’t be won over by a new logo or rebrand — they want the way we work to change. And while people continue to feel undervalued, it’s hard to see how that change will happen at DXC.


by
| 1525 views | | 15 replies (last January 17) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1kexpsjbz

15 replies (most recent on top)

The prime task of a DXC delivery Manager is to block, especially if there is any cost involved, even if its client billable revenue generating.

This pleases the managers above. It is better for the delivery folks not challenge his manager as its like ba----g their heads against a wall.

The people at the top think they have won by reducing costs but all they have succeeded in a shrinkage.

The DXC strategy is good for all involved, dont challenge, don't do, and spreadsheets show low costs, well done managers.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @sn+1kexpsjbz

I’m no longer convinced anyone actually wants meaningful work delivered by DXC.

We lurch forward briefly, only to be dragged back into the same cycle of approvals, justifications, missing information, and blocked access. By the time those obstacles are even partially addressed, the budget has run out and something that should have been straightforward is often quietly abandoned.

The blocking comes from every direction: clients, our own management, and colleagues alike. The end result is a system where it’s increasingly difficult to achieve anything at all.

Like many others, I’ve stopped pushing. It makes no real difference whether I do or not. The outcome is and will be the same. The only question - when it's all going to end.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @s5+1kexpsjbz

@k4
If only there was software that could apply some sort of artificial intelligence (given that that ‘real’ intelligence seems to be lacking at DXC) to the complex and inefficient processes that DXC operates under and streamline them or rebuild them?
Oh well, maybe in the future when someone creates a language that could do this…

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @r1+1kexpsjbz

I love the post "Deliver Excellence".
The management talk the talk, but what excellence do they deliver?

Yearly decline in turnover for 8 years, were not talking 1 year or 2, 8 blinking years of failure.

No pay rises for employees, but "excellencent" pay rises for the Execs.

Where do we go from here?

The Execs take a big pay cut until they deliver some Excellence, eg growth. Simple to put in their Goals.

Reward the people at the coal face who are delivering excellence to the customers.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @me+1kexpsjbz

Instead of investing in a new logo, the company should be investing in practical software that supports how we work day to day. At the top of that list should be effective task allocation and tracking for projects which is at the heart of what we do.

Too often, tasks are blocked behind layers of approval. If a task is required for the project to move forward and the project already has the budget, that should be sufficient approval. Delays at this stage add friction without adding value.

There’s also a lack of clarity around ownership. Tasks are frequently assigned to anonymous “pods”. That can only work when everything goes smoothly, but when it doesn’t, we end up stuck in the same loops—resubmitting requests and hoping someone different picks it up next time. Without clear ownership, mistakes aren’t visible and there’s no opportunity for learning or accountability.

Finally, I regularly see messages starting with “Can someone…”. What this really means is that the sender doesn’t know who is responsible. The result is that dozens of people spend time reading something that’s irrelevant to them, while the task itself still doesn’t move forward.

Software and business process solutions exist - which could revolutionise how we deliver. Yet it's just more of the same. Work harder, stop complaining, if you don't like it leave. We can't continue like this. If that's the plan, I'll sit it out until it fails.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @k4+1kexpsjbz

@bs dxc read that book and determined it meant endless parades of replacement senior execs, logo changes and recycling ideas like pods.

They definitely read the book...

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cg+1kexpsjbz

Do they not have a clue. Everyone is spouting how busy they are. We might all be flapping about, but nothing is actually getting done around here anymore. Nobody replies to emails. Few chase for a response. Assume it wasn't wanted in the first place shall I?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @c4+1kexpsjbz

@b3

If you don't like it, leave

What's not to like? Getting paid for doing fu-k all as a result of DXC's ineffective bureaucracy while I work on my own business.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bz+1kexpsjbz

Many, many years ago I read a book by Robert Townsend called Up The Organisation, published in 1962, yes, 64 years ago. What he said can still be applied to DXC and this is how Chatgpt summaries it:

“While Up the Organization isn’t a textbook on process improvement, Townsend’s message is consistent with the idea that businesses must continually question and revise their internal systems, or suffer decline in performance, sales and customer satisfaction. If companies rest on their laurels — trusting that old policies, processes or structures will keep them competitive — they risk becoming bureaucratic, misaligned with customer needs, and ultimately ineffective.

His concern isn’t framed as a technical process review so much as a cultural imperative for adaptability and avoidance of complacency.”

Sound familiar?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bs+1kexpsjbz

@bb You try and do someone or the client as a favour. You think it's a quick win. It is not. You are just creating a noise your manager did not want, and will be punished for it. You are better to let the whole project fail than ever try and side step the process to get things done. Sooner this company implodes the better!!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bh+1kexpsjbz

These post are spot on. DXC love blockers and towers, they will stop you doing everything possible even if its client chargeable. Its because delivery is a cost and the profits goto corporate. The delivery managers will go out of their way to stop you doing work especially if it involves extra out of hours chargeable pay.

I came in external and was proactive, but over time i have realised you get punished and blocked for this. Better you just sit back makes your manager happy.

DXC bully someone to become a manager/lead who is not capable, and they just follow the blocker manager aboves direction. They need training in people and process skills.

They prefer to block stuff as it costs less and may reward an employees pay which they hate.

Employees are fed up with no pay and all the blocking process so give up in then end.

The execs at the top dont realize the id--t managers below them in delivery take things to an extreme, just act to cut costs and do not consider any other parameters to grow the company or to please a customer.

And this is all good work for DXC, they love to decline.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bb+1kexpsjbz

@b3 is one of those deluded managers who thinks the systems and processes of this company are brilliant, and it's the rank and file at fault. It's not - it's entirely brought upon itself by managers like you who refuse to challenge and change. Sod off. I am not just leaving because you say so. I am going to bill your stupid project until you agree my VR payment. You cannot sack me. I am doing exactly what I've been asked to do. The fact I have to wait 3 weeks with no real work for you or one of your cronises to approve something is not on me! And more to the point because you treat the people doing the work like babies so they act like them. Holding out for the SLA, and then returning the task as missing a full stop so cannot be completed.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @b6+1kexpsjbz

If you don't like it, leave

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @b3+1kexpsjbz

The setup of internal structures within DXC mean that everyone needs to fight for billing scraps.

Every project suffers with missed deadlines and poor performance. You can't blame the employee though.

Surviving in DXC means an employee must make their boss happy, and they do this by eating from another project's billing code for as long as possible.

After all, the success of DXC projects is not the preserve of other departments

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @b2+1kexpsjbz

Remember the old Grisham book/movie: "The Firm"

"booking is the liveblood of our firm, the sky is the limit!"

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a9+1kexpsjbz

Post a reply

: