Silly question - what about growth strategy? Does it even exist here anymore? It’s amazing to me that DXC has dropped to this level today, because there used to be really a lot of optimism here and people loved working here. It was a real art to succeed in setting such a company backwards. / s. Growth is no longer even mentioned here.
9 replies (most recent on top)
@2tqz+1cC3N3j6 I am none of your assumptions.
Your suggestions may be valid, but given this company's 4 year history in decision making for employees, they do not care what you think or what should be done. Only what shareholders dictate your executives to do.
Don't get me wrong, I sincerely hope I am wrong and that you and your colleagues get the recognition they deserve, sooner or later. The workforce is being bullied and demoralized and it shows to the outside world. You don't need to be an expert to notice this.
To the person who said "Growth requires investment" tell me what makes you an expert? I assume your a Windows or VMware technician that has no real clue, because if you did you wouldn't be working for DXC or another company but on your own.
DXC just issued bonds to repay down debt at a lower interest rate, that is investment!
What DXC still needs to do is cut unnecessary waste, in people, process improvements and managers. The whole people manager way of thinking needs to go, you should report to your functional lead and get rid of so called managers that don't have a clue of your day to day activities .
There are plenty of SA's that don't do SA work and thats a waste of talent an d money DXC has to pay them.
The executive team is way overpaid in salary, bouns and especially stock options. The Executive of HR has over $8,033,299.00 of stock options let alone her $5,000,000.00 pay check
Growth requires investment, whether that be money, time, energy, and more. Proper business leaders, those who have built a business from the ground up, know how crucial investment is in order to succeed and grow in a competitive, capitalist market.
Not every manager or leader shares that entrepreneurial mindset; they tend to see it as cost and risk. Our executives think of investment as cost and risk. This is also rampant in people with an MBA - the cost of everything, the value of nothing.
This is where DXC is at. It has one job and that is to return profits to shareholders at the highest value possible. Growth is nothing to them.
You've got the wrong leader, I am afraid. Kind of obvious, but the trouble is, there are no obvious takers who want to tarnish their career with that beast in the state it is in. Probably why they pay him more just to stay.
It would need someone with a lot more energy, a risk taker, someone with innovation and ideas rather than the cautious playing the waiting game in the hope that the share price might just climb slowly over the next 18 months.
It would probably need carving up with a new value plan and direction. Once there is senior belief in the right direction on the road-map, they can start to release investment into focussed areas. Whereas at the moment, they are just too scared to invest in anything for fear it won't generate any ROI and know they've lost the will of the majority of staff to endorse or follow them, so resort to threatening them to get out. Its all gone a bit...t1ts up!
The business is too big for its remaining passengers. Its run over most of its clients at the last crossroads. Its now just a rusty old pick-up, all over the road with poor direction and a flailing steering wheel that is in dire need of a driver.
Its tyres are worn by years of running over the the same tread and its fuel tank continues to drain its energy and drive without any sight of a viable gas station on the horizon.
The "kids" in the back are getting really, really restless and bored now. The steak-eating grandparents were removed for throwing too many kids out of the back window and the remaining kids are getting really bored and fed up. Giving them a survey to fill in won't keep them quiet for long.
"because there used to be really a lot of optimism here and people loved working here"
I don't know where you got that idea unless you are referring to recent college graduates who just landed their first real job. The rest of us had reserved optimism about anyone being able to successfully merge two poorly managed companies (CSC and HPE). Lawrie's strategy to terminate substantial numbers of knowledgeable staff has made it difficult to compete. Paying excessive compensation to the executive staff has done nothing to improve morale when the money would have been better spent retaining staff and giving out real pay raises instead of the insulting ones some got. Condescending comments from the new Mike aren't helping matters any.
The main focus is just about cuts, the management don't have the skills or direction.
The middle management is mainly ex lawrie and can only do cuts, they don't have the skills or get up and go to grow, the lower level management cant think for themselves so are just yes people who don't question anything.
So until someone at the top takes a decision to grow things won't change, a few levels of ex lawrie need to be trimmed down to make the organisation dynamic and agile with a view to growth and future not cuts, and keep implementing old past thuier date policies.
They seriously need some training or be shown the door 🚪
Well there is a strategic direction to focus on ITO business, ITO is still there and accompanied by high levels of automation/tools, shrink wrapped solutions and slick ops a GSI can make a thin margin!
For companies that made investments in the above mentioned support infra say 5 - 6 years ago - ITO can be the door opener to more meaty contracts!
How much investment was made back when CSC/ES merged? - split tools and processes are still evident.
When was the last time anyone got on a bid team of less than 10 people over 4 months? Have you seen evidence of automation in pricing or still reliant spreadsheets and a few individuals`in the know'?
DXC is not equipped to participate in ITO bids, the margins for 24 months of a 36 month deal is already spent in bid costs, the operational expense over 36 months exceed what remains of the profit?
DXC is now in a 'Catch 22' scenario, pump the bid margin to cover antique ops and lose the award to others... Or submit loss making bid suck up the pain to show turnover.
ITO is poisen to DXC, most on the ground understand this, but the head honcho thinks it makes sense, so f-ck off you do not agree?
Get out now!
There is no growth strategy and there never was. In the good old times, one could survive on WS by opportunism and acquisitions to hide the absence of organic growth. The company is braindead beyond repair. There is no more hope or energy on the floor to turn around the situation. Thugs are running the company to load their bank accounts.
However a few things are growing: unhappy employees and dissatisfied customers, employee alienation, legal cases, overhead, flawed internal processes and systems, trustworthiness of and respect for “leadership”, deception, etc
I am fed up and in survival mode. Ready to resign! And that is exactly what these clowns want.
there certainly is a growth strategy - unfortunately it only applies to Mike2 and his Accenture leadership team and their salaries - with no reference to DXC results!