Wouldn’t we be better as a company if we had the courage to identify the “do nothing” deadweights up and down the ladder? GE used to eliminate the bottom 10% each year to eliminate complacency.
12 replies (most recent on top)
@1iaq+1btMoXlW
Can you pls enlighten us on what contract IT people sound like?
Wouldn't all the levels of management with zero to only a couple reports be then deadweight? Asking for the many out there......
Do nothing deadweights. How about also the subpar engineers that release designs that become instant recalls? Or the ones that hide failures from management?
How about the ones that either know or don't care about customer issues in the field, and do nothing about it?
Or the ones that steal from the company with their excessive m-plate car hogging and misuse? Can't forget about the ones who get promoted to experts, then never help anyone that needs help and always stay on mute in webex meetings?? (that's assuming they even call in)
And the ones that just forward the problem or question to someone else to respond? (even though they are the one who is responsible)
Oh almost forgot the ones that deliberately won't fix or address an issue because it would mean having to do more work?
The sad part is, I've seen this over the years here and there, but just in 2021, I have seen these types on a regular basis! They are all useless to the company and we'd be better off without them.
All these post lately sound like contract IT people.
If you don't like where you are at, find another position at a company outside Ford. Best if you can get direct hired.
It is really that simple!
@OP What do you mean with courage to identify them? There are 2 deadweights in my team. They are not working on anything, not a single project, not providing support on production, not providing training to other teams, just doing ... nothing. At the same time, the rest have our plates full.
Do you think my manager is unaware of all that? My LL6 sometimes try to assign them one of my almost done projects, but as they have no clue nor desire to learn, it ends back on my hands. So in the end, they get assigned mundane, almost silly tasks, that they take forever to finish, and most of the time the tasks get done with the help of the rest of the team.
So how is this situation possible? Because each of those guys were hired by someone who is now an LL5. So no LL6 is going to let go one of those guys, which would be saying the LL5 in question made a judgement error in the hiring process. Whenever there is a reshuffle in the company, the LL6s try to get ridden of those guys by moving them to another team.
BTW, I know of more cases like these, but in other teams.
So why would I point the "elephant on the room", although at this time it looks more like a huge stinky yelling mammoth? I would have better chances of losing my job than solving the issue. Besides, as far as I can recall, the company does not bear my last name, nor I am getting a manager's paycheck or benefits.
Thanks
The biggest deadweights at the company all have "Ford" as a surname. Cut them from the payroll and we'll save millions.
All Ford needs to do is cuf loose approximately 40% of their management ranks as they are simply not needed. We have way too many, quite a few that have no supervisory responsibilities. Then up the reporting requirements to easily a minimum of 10 direct reports.
Who determines who is dead weight?
Stack ranking has been an unmitigated disaster every time it has been implemented at a major corporation. People stop working together and start scheming against each other instead.
How would you describe Ford today? Weekly recalls, lawsuits piling up, rotating door at the top, tens of thousands of incomplete vehicles stockpiled, overseas a mess, abandoned the car business, diluting our truck business, lax workforce, bloated management ranks, and an alienated supply base.
Something about those in the Glass House shouldn’t throw stones.
Ah, yes. Forced rankings. What happens with it is that it turns into a cost cutting methodology. Rank the top earners poorly which gives the company a reason to terminate them. Saw it when I worked at the largest retail company in the world for 10 years. I saw good people that did the jobs of 3-4 employees get terminated because of their salaries. They were then replaced by totally incompetent people.
Ford tried to do something similar under Nasser. It quickly went south. Ford should do some pruning though.
I wouldn't use GE as an example for anything other than unmitigated failure.