Thread regarding Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE) layoffs

Yes. JH was very excited with almost the ideas from some years ago.

Anyone else see JH nodding like a excited dog on the AEM as Antonio was giving the corporate double speak about wfrs?

I wonder if Justin wrote the last comment - "Compaq has been dead for 20 years. Let the “culture” go people. Enjoy the memories of the chili cook off".

I guess he is also hinting at Antonio to go and enjoy his memories of the chili cook off and quit the CEO position.

Compaq has been dead for 20 years. Let the “culture” go people. Enjoy the memories of the chili cook off

EngineeringDude, this is the most intelligent assessment of how and the industry leader in Servers was destroyed by the new breed "I cannot be held accountable" HPE executives and Senior leaders. Who did not value the experience the Compaq Server Engineering teams. The reason HPE bought Compaq was for this expertise.

Of course my background started in Engineering with Compaq I used to laugh when the acquisition of Compaq by HP many of the Managers on almost any question asked would in unison say "Go to the Portal" Like it was some kind of Crystal Ball with the answers in it.

One thing for sure the answer was not in the crystal ball and it damn sure is not in the Mckinsey and all the other consultants reports on what the issues were and how to fix them. I worked with many of the youngster bought in they had very bad work habits so a few post ago someone talked about being a fat, old guy, who only worked 3 hrs.....In truth those were fat, young people, who did not even come into work (i.e. pre-covid) who after they got hired were not too dumb to figure out duhhh I cannot make a living working for HP so I better go find another job before they find out I do not know Jack$h^t.....amazing.

you all seem like homos

It is apparent from all the messages here that there must be some truth in what's going on. What is for sure is that the real culture of HPE servers which used to be predominantly led by the Compaq culture and many amazing leaders hired in the 90's has been systematically destroyed by the likes of this new breed of leaders. This new breed of leaders hire expensive consultants from McKinsey and the likes to make up a story that justifies the removal of the older employees. There is a systematic attempt to remove employees older than 50 and hire new cheaper employees who have no idea of how sh– gets done in this complex company that has at least 5000+ acronyms and 1000+ apps to launch and manage a product. And after doing all this damage to the institutional knowledge that was with the highly experienced employees, why should anybody be surprised that HPE is having execution issues in supply chain or any other function in meeting a quarter's goals? Does HPE senior management think that a bunch of low paying entry level college hires can make things happen? The CEO should know better. Moral of the story is to stop laying off older experienced employees because what you are paying them is a fraction of what you pay to McKinsey for telling you the story in pretty slides of what is already known.

Who let Hotard get away with such bad decisions. He comes from NCR, National Cash Register. He’s been with HPE briefly but was influential enough to convince Antonio we should send the majority of our engineering overseas. Oh, wait Antonio is from Venezuela. Now it’s starting to make sense. What does he care he’s been nomadic most of his life. Hotard comes in and WFR’s engineers with decades of experience. He knows his NCR experience and MIT MBA make him privy to knowledge few others possess.

Who gets an MBA from MIT anyway.

This guy destroyed many careers. The older engineers, who built this company, will have a hard time finding employment.

Oh wait let’s not forget Antonio, in his infinite wisdom, paid a billion dollars for a company after laying off thousands during a pandemic.

Why is anyone surprised? Once you get at that level, you don't have a heart and it's look out for Number One and Number One only. Don't like it, find another job. Become your own CxO/VPx and step on people like they do. Remember, you're just a number.

The original post talked about the HPE Executive over the last 4 years that would be Justin Hotard.
What the person was trying to do was to absolve Justin of any accountability for the current state of HPE. Carly, Leo, Mark, Meg, they are all long gone with the history over 21 years showing that there continues to be this lack of HPE to hold the executives accountable. Usually when an Executive takes on the leadership role they should be held accountable.

There is usually a 3 year cycle or window of incompetence. Incompetent Leaders are hired, In the 1st year they bring in the consultants (who pick the brains of the HPE Employees for the issues and solutions). Then they repackage that information into a report which the HPE Executives take as the In the 2nd year they attempt to sell and implement the plan tops down with the premise that the "Con"sultants have the expertise to fix HPE. In year 3 these Executives like Justin Hotard (Phil Davis, Chris Ogburn) go and run to the next internal opening within HPE or go outside Amazon.

Do you know who spent millions of HPE shareholder $$ in hiring expensive consultants and have them frame the story that would propel his career ahead? People are not fools. Everyone knows the game being played. Get the most expensive consultant in and have the consultant tell the story he has in mind and make it look like it came from an outside unbiased consultant. This has been the modus operandi all along.

Nice to know HPE problem is with the Fat, Old, lazy employees great since they will now havre WFR'ed most of those folks when will the execiutives be held accountable.

Everything At Hewlett-Packard Started To Go Wrong When Cost-Cutting Replaced Innovation

1999 From the beginning to Carly Fiorina the “rock star”
2005 Some stability under Mark Hurd but a continuation of cost cutting rather than innovation
Insanity under Leo Apotheker a “do what I know” rather than “know what to do” guy
Meg Whitman lots of uncertainty and huge layoffs
Antonio Neri and JUSTIN HOTARD

I think you just made the person's point. This has been an ongoing issue for 20+ years but one person is responsible for all of it.

To the #1 Justin Hotard Fan Club member yes he is accountable to leading HPE to outright failure.

Rather than blaming your FAT, OLD, LAZY HPE Co-worker why don't you do your research and homework on why HP, HPE is a business failure and the chances were blown by not only your Hero Justin Hotard but he got lots of leadership examples to learn what not to do.
,
https://www.businessinsider.com/heres-where-everything-at-hewlett-packard-started-to-go-wrong-2012-5

Everything At Hewlett-Packard Started To Go Wrong When Cost-Cutting Replaced Innovation

• 1999 From the beginning to Carly Fiorina the “rock star”
• 2005 Some stability under Mark Hurd but a continuation of cost cutting rather than innovation
• Insanity under Leo Apotheker a “do what I know” rather than “know what to do” guy
• Meg Whitman lots of uncertainty and huge layoffs
• Antonio Neri and JUSTIN HOTARD

Innovation and inventing the future rather than trying to compete through Acquisitions how is that working. See prior notes from David Packard and Bill Hewlett.

By the way I work more than 3 hours per day, Currently a Tri Athlete, would not consider myself overweight, and are 27 years old which per the new standard makes me 5 years older than the target hire age for employees.

Just a thought are you stealing from HPE similar to the past executives by taking a Salary, Benefits, and selling the greatest story ever told......laughable

The astounding part of it is that you are very ignorant to the facts that are clearly noted in the thread. So go back and read the information in the thread apologies for not being able to put this at a K School level for your consumption.

It’s astounding at the idiocracy in this thread. Did he push us in a decline faster, yes. But the lazy, old, FAT individual contributors who put in 3 hours a day are more to blame.
He led for a year. Hpe was bleeding for 20. Wake up for your daily nap, take the retirement, and let the company have a chance

When senior leaders in R&D announced that they were leaving HPE or retiring, and development was moving to Asia, that was my cue to find another job. Before I left, a senior engineer was blaming it all on Hotard. Most of my coworkers felt that HPE had become a rudderless ship and were clearly worried about their futures. Several coworkers predicted that Hotard would eventually get fired but HPE will lose billions and many HPE employees will lose their jobs before that happens.

A business with multiple layers of management has a bureaucratic, centralized organizational structure. A decentralized organizational structure, on the other hand, has fewer levels of management within the organization. Having multiple layers of management poses several disadvantages for a company especially in the current business climate where many organizations intentionally work toward decentralization.

A Disadvantage for Making Decisions

A highly bureaucratic business structure makes decision-making more difficult and complex, producing slower decisions. This form of organizational structure, to some extent, goes against the modern business practice of having an open door policy. Multiple layers of management creates different levels between employees and upper management, resulting in ineffective and out-of-place communication. This can result in a certain amount of disconnection between different levels and different areas within the business and ultimately become a limiting factor for the business.

The Problem of Communication

The problem of communication within an organization with multiple layers of management is multifaceted. As an essential part of any functioning organization, these multiple layers can create multifaceted disadvantages. This organizational structure negatively affects communication by limiting the flow of information within the organization. When multiple channels and walls exist, workers can easily become discouraged from spreading information effectively and efficiently. An offshoot of this problem occurs when information does transfer, but is communicated incorrectly.

Difficulties Instituting Change

An additional disadvantage of this type of business structure results from changes that occur outside the organization. Because of the multiple levels of management, this outside information can have a difficult time penetrating the many layers of management inside the organization. This places the company at a disadvantage by making it more difficult for the organization to keep pace with developments and innovations in the market. This also relates to the slower pace of decision-making. As any change must pass through management approval, accepting the changes comes slowly, putting the company at a disadvantage.

It’s Expensive

Vertical organizational structures with many layers of management are also more costly to maintain than horizontal organizational structures. With more layers, there exist more levels of managers. Because managers typically make more money than other employees, multiple management layers cost businesses a considerable amount of money. Thus, a manager-heavy organization creates additional expenses for the organization. From a business standpoint, this can increase an organization’s costs without increasing output.

Wow....this thread is getting a lot of attention. Must be some truth here.

HPE is a company where executives rarely lose their jobs. They play musical chairs at that level repositioning all their buddies in other "newly created" roles and justifying their existence. This company still has so many Directors and VPs making a ton of $$. There are Directors and VPs who are individual contributors. The company can't afford this any longer. A major cleanup is needed.

True, but the thing is we are standing in front of greatest layoff carnival of layoffs in recent history. Thousands colleagues will leave. This will be anything but fair due to limited information leadership has either missing or intentionally skewed. What are just numbers to them is at the end capabilities of company that we cut off. What appears as simplification to leaders is mostly utter nonsence as the old rigid processes are still being utilized. Procedual f—ups are being solved by throwing dozens of low cost country peons or more proces layers mulfiplyng effort produced destroyng option for value adding people. This gives feeling that we fail in providing continuous internal evolution in cost of few individuals' growth who will leave for better anyways leaving burnt bridges behind. Maybe it's the market that is unfair and cruel so we need to adjust. But losing ths Bill's and David's vision stinks.

All, starting at managers and up are there and playing politics to survive and grow. Their interests come first and they have hookups with the vendors for their own vested interests.

Do you know who spent millions of HPE shareholder $$ in hiring expensive consultants and have them frame the story that would propel his career ahead? People are not fools. Everyone knows the game being played. Get the most expensive consultant in and have the consultant tell the story he has in mind and make it look like it came from an outside unbiased consultant. This has been the modus operandi all along. Hence,

JH certainly isn't the only exec playing that game at HPE.

The original Innovation Mount Rushmore had four faces:

1. A.G. Lafley, former Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Procter & Gamble, whose “consumer is boss” mantra urges innovators to always take an external perspective. Get out in the market and invest the time to understand the customer better than they understand themselves.

2. Robert N. Anthony Sr., my grandfather and member of the Accounting Hall of Fame, whose classic workbook Essentials of Accounting reminds innovators of the double-edged nature of capabilities — every strength has a corresponding weakness. Corporations seeking new growth need to organize and act differently to avoid the “s—ing sound of the core.”

3. Thomas A. Edison, the legendary inventor, highlights how innovation is an active exercise, not an academic one, with memorable quips such as “Genius is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration.”

4. Mike Tyson, the great philosopher and boxer, reminds innovators not to overly obsess about developing a seemingly perfect plan with his line, “Everybody has a plan, until they get punched in the face.”

Thanks for the in depth information regarding leadership and strategies.

Basically the last few replies and the Fake Heroship attributed to Justin Hotard and the new management team that failed can be realized in the summary business quote below from a sports legend.

The Bears are what we thought they were. Th-they're what we thought they were. We played them in preseason. I mean, who the hell takes the third game of the preseason like it's b—s—? b—s—! We played them in the third game, everybody played three quarters... the Bears are who we thought they were! That’s why we took the damn field! Now, hits microphone if you want to crown them, then crown their a–! But, they are who we thought they were, and we let them off the hook!

What is Hero Worship?
Hero worship in business refers to the attribution of organizational success to a single individual. Often, this means exaggerating the results of that person. As a result, an individual becomes the face of an entire company and the organization’s success or failure rests upon their shoulders.

The Problem with Hero Worship

There are many problems with hero worship in leadership, including:

1. Implies the leader alone is responsible for the success. There is little or no sharing of the success with the many people that made it possible. Industry experts know other individuals played a critical role in Apple’s success, especially Steve Wozniak. However, popular culture sees Steve Jobs as the lone icon atop the company.

2. Lacks sustainability. Without a successor at least equal in stature, accomplishment and fame, success associated to that leader is rarely sustained. Insiders know Tim Cook, Job’s successor, is an outstanding executive in his own right. However, the limelights consumed by Jobs left little awareness of Mr. Cook’s contributions and capabilities.

3. Singular Focus: Most hero worship praises an individual for a select few attributes. In Jobs case, I’d suggest this was creativity, innovation and technology. However, he was not a man I would consider exemplary in other attributes, such as character or people leadership

They lack depth in their competitive context. Taking on broader leadership roles usually results in greater insularity for leaders. Their focus is pulled toward internal issues: resolving conflicts, reconciling budgets, and managing performance. Consequently, they pay less attention to external strategic issues like competitor moves, customer needs, and technology trends. One study reports that 70% of leaders spend on average one day a month reviewing strategy and 85% of leadership teams spend less than an hour per month discussing strategy. When leaders fail to understand the competitive context of their organizations, they sometimes hide behind unrealistic goals to overcompensate. When I ask executives to show me their organization’s strategy, they often hand me a strategic plan that has product quotas and market share growth targets, or they show me the mission and values statement with some lofty statements on one page. But they rarely show me a clear market identity that articulates who they will serve and who they won’t, what capabilities they will be disproportionately better at than their competitors, and why their target customers would choose them over competitors.

Appointing that many unprepared leaders into roles directly responsible for crafting and executing strategy only fuels the risk of executional failure. Here are four of the most common signs that an executive is likely to fail when attempting to bring the organization’s strategy to life.

https://hbr.org/2017/11/executives-fail-to-execute-strategy-because-theyre-too-internally-focused

Experts have opined for decades on the reasons behind the spectacular failure rates of strategy execution. In 2016, it was estimated that 67% of well-formulated strategies failed due to poor execution. There are many explanations for this abysmal failure rate, but a 10-year longitudinal study on executive leadership conducted by my firm showed one clear reason. A full 61% of executives told us they were not prepared for the strategic challenges they faced upon being appointed to senior leadership roles. It’s no surprise, then, that 50%–60% of executives fail within the first 18 months of being promoted or hired.

As a level one grunt, I already knew who you were talking about from the initials lol. My boss used to complain about braindead decisions from him all the time. Apparently this is very well known among even the middle management.

Does someone think adding a bunch of red negatives is going to sway people? Well, look at the red negatives, I need to not listen to this person. THE COMPANY HAS BEEN SAVED!!!!!!!!

Hortard sent engineering that was done in Houston to Taiwan. Their work s**ks. They lack the necessary experience to accomplish basic engineering tasks. They can really only do testing. That is if you create the tests and show them in detail how to setup and use the equipment to perform the testing. Lastly you have to explain to them what an acceptable outcome from the test performed would be.

Good job Hotard!

Who was JH , “Who was Justin Hotard”

LOL - This company was already a sinking ship well before JH had any impact of that. Those old leaders needed to go, they were not helping the cause moving forward. It's not like there was any innovation to actually go and market.

Like you have just exposed the unknown. I seriously doubt you have shocked AN into action by exposing this guy. This guy is doing what???!!!!

It’s doubtful that Antonio will read this.

He has better things to do than to read our gossip and complaining. That’s all this website is meant for. Making yourself anonymous is further proof of this.

There’s actually a psychological study on correlation of anonymity and basically doing whatever you want. It was one of themes in Lord of the Flies when the kids were wearing masks when they raided the more civilized group.

I’m not saying that our gossip and complaining is unjustified. Sure it’s good to point out issues within a company but how much does it really contribute and make differences? The only thing it does is add bad morale towards the company.