After every layoff when there's a role to be filled IBM hires somebody and then soon after another person has to be brought in to help do the job that was previously done by one employee. It's funny that in its effort to cut costs IBM ends up having to hire extra people incurring extra costs in the name of savings.
7 replies (most recent on top)
You don’t get it. IBM doesn’t care if they need 15 people to replace 1 local Band 9, as long as those replacements come from India or “new collar” resources. I have sat in meetings with GMs who have railed into my peers about why do we have so many local resources and we to use India more. Look into our rate structures and you’ll understand why - it has everything to do with buying down overhead, which higher bands bear disproportionately more of. That overhead is way too high because of Armonk, heavy corporate back office functions, and executive salaries.
I have seen the job one person was doing broken up and given to 4 people (already in the company) and they still ended up dropping 3 or 4 things that person were doing because they either did not have the people or the knowledge.
It's called hysteresis ... an amazingly efficient way to waste resources.
Outstanding! That's what is called rightsizing! didn't you learn that in your MBA class ? :)
That is because IBM Is always in "react mode". There is no long term planning in IBM. The last time they plannned, and it was poor planning, Sammy and Ginni wanted IBM to hit $20 per share by 2020. How did that disaster work out for IBM...IT DIDN'T.
Layoffs happen when an exec needs to meet a quarterly earnings target. Hiring happens when they figure out a couple months later that person was doing a job the client needs and can't do without. Then the cycle repeats.
Yeah... offshoring is having the same effect