I was naive enough to believe there would be some method to layoffs. Targeting lowest performers, targeting those who were the last to join, and stuff like that. I couldn't have been more wrong. Yes, some lowest performers were affected, but not all. Meanwhile, some of the best performers were also served their walking papers. The same goes for those who recently joined versus those who've been here for years or even decades. The only thing I was able to conclude is that nobody is safe and there is no rhyme or reason to layoffs, at least unless you're a person who only sees numbers and makes the decision based on that.
5 replies (most recent on top)
The embedded thinking, from years of knowing nothing but the “Citrix way” is staggering. My boss was more concerned about having teams spend their time to properly fill out jira issues with data than driving towards solutions that affect positive change.
“Small ball” thinking for those managers who’s only job has been at Citrix. They need more real-world experience bc they don’t know enough
They used a 4box quadrant method to create the list (value to org, potential to org)
And many incompetent managers in FTL and RDU still managed to show up their names as high value and high potential. 🤣🤣🤣
I find it hard to believe additional layoffs will happen in Q1. I believe the process for people that have been affected in countries where redundancy laws allow for a prolonged process will leave the company in Q1, but not additional people being affected. The ELT and managers in general seem to be in full fledged panic mode to try and keep as many of the people still there as possible. I do think there will be many more departures, but they will be of the voluntary kind. People that have lost faith and feel betrayed that use the hot job market to find another position.
I think the going private idea is interesting, it is something I have been wondering as well. Now if they do take the company private I think all bets are off, and there could be many more people laid off then
Here’s what I learned over the past few days “interviewing” people
- Sr Dir’s were given the “list” very late in the process. They could suggest corrections but had very little time to fight it
- Was told “it’s a complex equation” that was used to select people. It involved performance, team importance, salary ...
- They used a 4box quadrant method to create the list (value to org, potential to org)
- Each team was given a # to achieve. 15%, 10%... This was done by the bean counters.
- Good people were let go. This implies to me they had a “successful history and reputation” but if you’re not in the upper right quadrant (high value, high potential) you’re at risk, especially if highly paid
- Bain is not yet thru with analysis. Expect Q1 layoffs in Prod/Eng
- Bobby C is just there to execute plan, clear house and get back to the links. That’s why a ceo read his response in the gem. A normal ceo would never do that. Ever.
8’. Mgmt knows attrition is coming. If you heard Donna Kimmel speak, her answer on retention was a joke (great place to work, fun work environment). Expect nothing in terms of retention
Citrix is taking these drastic measures for a reason we yet understand. One belief is they are going “private”. Can’t wrap my head around this but was told by a VP.
Writing is on the wall. Explore your options
Hi,
110% can confirm.
I rather say the results are very unbalanced between high performers vs low performers.
Most of those that has been cut lose, I know as constantly high performers with high trust variables, the only thing I can think of is
- higher salary - company wants short terms gains. They mainly pick people based on cost (not output of work)
- Envy from the useless mid managers, they are pin pointed because they are potential threats to their own position.