Someone mentioned this, that customers are angry because it is impossible to deliver when there are no people, and I think customers will get even angrier.
I will not be here to see this, as I intend to give notice, but I wonder if perhaps dissatisfied clients could make them examine their strategy, if dissatisfied employees leaving could not?
"DXC UK are losing a huge Secure account due to their inability to run it properly after taking the account from one of it's major delivery subsidiaries.
It hasn't become common knowledge yet, but the customer is totally p****d off with them and is in the throws of migrating to their own infrastructure.
Poor management and using contractors with no knowledge of the account hasn't helped. Nor has sending out equipment without power supplies."
I worked for that account a couple of years ago... they were far from happy then. DXC responded by replacing the Account Manager. Of course, the new one had the same problem as the old one - endless WFR left him with a shrinking team and no way to deliver.
DXC's incompetent leadership strikes again. At the rate they're losing accounts in the UK, there won't be a DXC UK for much longer.
DXC UK are losing a huge Secure account due to their inability to run it properly after taking the account from one of it's major delivery subsidiaries.
It hasn't become common knowledge yet, but the customer is totally p****d off with them and is in the throws of migrating to their own infrastructure.
Poor management and using contractors with no knowledge of the account hasn't helped. Nor has sending out equipment without power supplies.
I think you are referring to the Flemish Govt IT contract. On May 25, when I saw two announcements from DXC and ATOS, claiming they had own the contract, I was confused. Then spoke internally within DXC. Flemish govt was a 2 decades old DXC client, and as you say, they got fed up with DXC and broke existing contract into multiple small pieces. DXC got a small hit and that was spun up as a major victory by top management. Pathetic bast--ds and bi---es.
That's what you get when you pay your staff peanuts, and don't give them fair pay.
They leave in droves and "its not a problem. We will get more staff, we're not bothered about retention attitude."
Such a costly way of running a business, I'm surprised Mary F hasn't been giving her marching orders because if she had any sense she would be presenting a retention strategy/policy incentives for retaining existing talent instead of trying to come up with some job structure policy which is pie in the sky non delivered.
Lessons to be learnt quickly Mike, times running out.
I am hearing this @ogv+1dUjXHqG from my clients, too. There is one particular DXC client whom is so fed up with DXC's service quality, that the client had broken up the new contract and divided the business among several other technology consultancy companies out there. The business loss for DXC from this client is roughly 50-60%(!)
The response of DXC executives? Hailing the new contract as a victory for DXC and the transformation journey. Not realizing they just had lost millions of dollars in revenue, and lost significant client satisfaction.
All the legacy clients are all customized, so it’s easier/cost efficient to let the contract expire vs moving elsewhere, but once those legacy contracts start expiring, you thought it was bad now? you’re going to see some serious sh-t.
For many clients its too hard and the ROI is too low to move legacy from DXC. Others are trapped on the legacy DXC platforms. This is especially true in insurance. DXC is the valve company in a world of silicoln chips.
I now work for DXC'S client. They don't really like DXC and the only reason why they stay is it doesn't make sense to transition legacy applications to another provider because they will be retired soon. The rates of DXC is significantly higher than competitors.
Now I am wondering where do all the DXC margins go? Too much bosses/execs. The cheaper competitors are able to pay increase and bonuses to their workforce.
It's like 'Emporers new clothes' and we are just waiting for the little boy to chirp up!
I am an ex-employee, came from HPES.. In a portfolio role, I was looking up at exec unwilling to invest (the death knell was set, the day of merge) and down at global delivery teams who used different tools in each region... The rest of the detail is already shared by previous responders, but people need to get out before the 'little boy' states the obvious.
Interesting reference to smart new little outfits running rings round old player's... The old boss of DXC portfolio (left for C-s-o) has now started a new 'Armour' shop! Lots of HPES/DXC types landing, I hope the 'buddy of the boss' malaise does not infect the new team - as they have some good talent joining.
When I left DXC 2 3/4 years ago, two clients followed me. Since then, several have come looking for my colleague and I via LinkedIn so they could leave DXC and maintain the knowledge. The horror stories they tell… no consistent people to work with, severe lack of skill with the people there.
Anyone left at DXC shouldn’t be concerned with pay rises; they should be concerned about the next paycheck the way DXC is bleeding both money and clients.
I worked with 2 DXC clients this year who had DXC as their IT supplier (although mainly just infrastructure these days). I didn't tell them I used to work for DXC, as I wanted to keep their trust. But I did ask diplomatic questions about the Quality of service they were receiving from DXC. You know, just out of personal curiosity. I would never offer any opinion on suppliers to clients, that would be unprofessional.
TBH, I can't say the clients I met were angry with DXC. No, I think they were more disappointed at DXC's apparent lack of innovation and lack of continuity. As the client told me 'its someone different every time there's a problem and you have to explain your business all over again'. One DXC client felt that DXC did not understand their business. They referenced 'some sales guy came in and within half an hour he was trying to sell us something without a clue about what we do here and what is important to us' That's the kiss of death with a client, when you don't listen and go off on a different tack that seems at odds with the priorities the client has just laid out for you.
Client #1 felt DXC is longer a tech leader. They know DXC is losing staff and feel DXC is there just to keep the wheels turning and the lights on, but they don't feel they DXC can help them with their IT strategic roadmap as they already have a Corp Risk indicating their fear of losing completive advantage in their industry and have seen no signs of innovation from DXC. As the client said to me 'they no longer see us as important'. I am not sure if this means that their contract is too small to keep DXC interested or whether they feel that DXC have enough on their plate with their own problems right now.
Client #2 told me they are likely not to renew their DXC contract, but to open it up to tender - they had a industry referenced tech consultancy in mind to assist with a move of Infrastructure and platforms to the Cloud. Why not DXC? I was told 'They (DXC) were making too many mistakes, some of them were our fault, but you can never get hold of them (DXC) these days and half the time you're talking to the US in the evening and India in the morning about something that I could drive down the road and probably fix myself in half the time'
To be fair, I've also heard similar about the other big ITO's (so DXC is not alone). I've noticed a lot of small tech firms suddenly explode and grow this year capturing the middle ground from the big players with exceptional skilled staff that make the big boys look like amateurs - as their attrition rates of 15-27% suggest they are all going through a rough time, yet the niche, smaller tech companies seem to be doing fine.
I am actually seeing a lot of investment in IT staff budgets again, not in ITO but in clients re-investing back into the IT teams again after Covid. Retail, service, manufacturing all seem to be building up the teams that were once scaled back. Now the focus seems to be all on DevOps, Information Security and Fraud specialists. Fear of ransomware and data breaches seems to have woken up a lot of CEO's who are investing again in cloud and security.
A good time to move.
Clients in the UK have been leaving en masse. I can't see DXC existing in the UK soon, as so many major accounts have gone. They've all gone for the same reason: DXC's inability to deliver service after making staff redundant. That's right, DXC has made staff redundant when those staff are actively billing to clients, to the point where it's no longer possible to deliver the service that the client has a contract for. I could just say 'Oops', but what I actually will say is that this is incompetence on a truly phenomenal scale by DXC's "Leadership"
I quit a while ago, as it was getting embarrassing to be constantly apologising to clients for the appalling server we were('nt) delivering.
Don't get it - if clients are angry then terminate the service contract with DXC and go to better vendor.