Why does EMIT senior management keep offshoring and outsourcing business facing groups like operations? They themselves rightly said business exposure is critical to their success, and yet these decisions end up creating employees that have no clue how things work at ground level. Did they realize those Nebula Project savings yet? LOL
14 replies (most recent on top)
EMIT and “elite” should never be used together. “Technology” is also a stretch.
Are our Architects paid to send out daily emails about mandates and cloud trainings? Many of us are still focused on delivering value, but we have the rest attending training everyday. Where can you find such an awesome company that pays you to take training!
If you want more talking and no doing, keep jobs in US. They are the people talk the most in meetings but shut up when need to do work. Time wasted in meeting to listen to nonsense
EMIT, do the wrong things, cheaper and cheaper. FAANG could buy XOM with the coins in their couch, however XOM has no clue about the value of IT.
How about we keep ALL jobs in the U.S. to help feed our own????
@vfw+19f6KVl4 What possible value-add work could "thousands" of remaining US-based EMIT could employees still do? We've done digital transformation work that got implemented to multiple business lines and we're mostly life-support right now.
@vfw+19f6KVl4 I’d agree with you if the technology landscape was static, operations is much more closely tied to “value add” than in other industries, see: Cloud, Zero Trust, Mobility
I work in EMIT in an operations role, honestly a lot of operations should move to a GBC or MSP, if it’s not something we can automate. US employees should be working on more value add roles and less so on keeping the lights running on well documented and established processes. Additionally, as the business moves to GBCs, why shouldn’t the accompanying IT role move with it to that GBC?
As a shareholder, we can have anyone do some of the operations work, so let’s have the countries with lower rates do it while we use the more expensive labor for the things that have a larger impact in the long term. The fact that not everyone wants to ship out menial work to lower cost places is exactly why the company isn’t performing financially as well as it could.
If one server goes down today, we lose a little money. If we make the wrong decision with what will be the future of our IT landscape for the next 20 years, that’s damn expensive.
@hso+19f6KVl4 less of a matter of “should” they offshore, but rather “who”. It’s much more cost effective to offshore the overhead “thought leaders” that don’t deliver anything to the top or bottom lines of the corporation (and sometimes not even Tigerbucks).
Gee...why does EMIT continue to offshore jobs from higher cost locations (US, Western Europe) to lower cost ones?
It doesn’t have to do with the fact that the company tells EMIT to reduce their costs by 3-5% a year (25% last year), could it?
Nah...that can’t be it.
We need employees, who can do REAL work and understand business processes. Remove the Product Management ones that keep coming up with ridiculous ideas daily and creating admin overhead for others! A non-value added role pretending to create value.
STP - Senior Technical Professional in EMIT.
Last one I dealt with had PC Magazine archives on his bookshelf.
I'm only a Chemical Engineer, but that seems behind the times.
Yes to elite but no to leaders. Lamers more like it.
EMIT Managers in the past were engineers, chemists, plant operations - that opted into the IT field out of general interest and promotion opportunities.
eMit Managers now - apparently out of that bat cave in Houston.
Droves of them, swooping in and making unkept promises.
Very expensive. Still dropping guano thickly on their funders.