Nike only lays people off when changing the organization structure, not when someone is doing a really cr-p job or royally sc--ws up a business.
Why doesn’t Nike fire people more often for poor performance?
17 replies (most recent on top)
There are no objective KPIs at Nike for most every job so it comes down to subjective analysis and 360* feedback. There is zero accountability for the most part.
As a former manager, HR was the primary blocker. Even with strong documentation of under performance, it was nearly impossible to get through the process.
Nike doesn’t fire underperformers. They are given highly-successful ratings and/or promoted!
@OP They do. My team lost an under performer, but also lost some good, strong performers.
Because the under performers are supposedly firing “under performers” who do all the work
@jc Nike’s leadership problem is a result of the DEI push that defined talent management over the last decade.
Because then most of leadership will need to go. See the thread on toxic managers.
I had some blunt convos with leadership about this. If you can’t hire/backfill a role, no reason to fire someone for underperforming. Literally keeping people around “as fodder for the next layoff”. As long as someone is not actively harming production, better to have the person than loose the headcount for your team permanently. We need to fire and quickly replace underperformers if we want to fix the talent issue.
Nike has leadership problem. There are way too many managers who have no clue what their team is doing so it becomes impossible to fire anyone because none knows who are the underperformers. Taking random shots and layoffs has unfortunately sent the brains and best out of nike. Nike is still limping on because there are still some decent folks who care about what they do, are good at it and getting things done.
@OP , I believe that we are not allowed to call them ”under performers”. The preferred terms include the following, ”Emerging Talent, Developmental Contributor, Potential-Rich Associate, or Learning-Focused Colleague”.📖🧮🎓
If they fired underperformers, then they wouldn't be able to hit their diversity metrics.
@by We know that doesnt happen
fear of getting sued for unlawful termination. That said, they have started firing underperformers in the past 18 months in certain orgs at least. Think about it, would you know if some shmuck i another org than you that does cr-ppy work or no work at all, is let go? What impact would that have on you.
Because they let consulting firms decide who gets canned.
Because that would require people to be accountable and have direct conversations
Middle management has zero trust that leadership will let them backfill vacant positions if they were to manage people out. As long as the under performer delivers better than losing headcount, they end up staying around.
Fair point but I think the real question is does Nike even have a good system to identify low performers? I really doubt it by looking at what we have done in the last couple years.