Has there been a change in tone toward the employees or am I noticing it now? I feel talked down to when I read any corporate communication from my department or the larger company.
The retirement of the intranet is one example. People are asking thoughtful questions and the answers are a series of repeated pasted sentences of the same verbiage that doesn't address anyone's concerns nor is any information given.
13 replies (most recent on top)
Pearson isn't paying attention to the lessons that other companies are learning from the Great Resignation. The historical ways of treating employees isn't working and people leave for companies that pay and respect their employees. It's not only financial but people want to feel valued as work is the majority of lived hours. I
Pearson is stuck in the mindset of the Recession of 2008 where there was an endless supply of people desperate for any job so no need to offer anything.
The multiple job postings say it all. Times have changed and no offense to any of us but you are not going to get quality candidates to work here with that attitude. You are not going to keep seasoned people and what do you have then? A slide deck, some videos and a whole lot of deactivated.
I cannot speak for other parts of the organization but here in NA, our leadership (namely TB) is disengaged and apathetic towards the strife his employees are dealing with. He is a good example of someone who came up in products and publishing and still operates in that print book mindset. There is no acknowledgement of the current dysfunction nor any change in compensation approach or strategy. Inflation is at 7.5%. Let’s give everyone a 3% “cost of living” increase and pretend the house we’re all in isn’t burning down. People are exiting in droves and there’s no push to keep them or motivate the ones who are here to stay. Instead of inspirational leadership we get arrogance and apathy. Very sad.
@2exb+1fwE0U74 You are missing my point. Pearson has no real leadership development track. It's a survivor, tribe mentality.
@2exb+1fwE0U74 Contrary to that, I've seen plenty of management/business degree leaders here and they are literally the worst examples for people skills. They look at the humans alongside them and see lego bricks to build their empire and feel important.
@2slf+1fwE0U74 As for incompetent management, I agree. I saw a very insightful post here that made a great case for why management in this business is so poor. It's because most people came up through the field. There are no true professionally trained managers, who have gone through either business school and/or intensive internal development programs.
Publishing has sociology majors who have been over-promoted and control multi-million dollar budget lines.
Many companies out there have outstanding management talent identification and training programs. The problem is they are all in other industries. I know plenty of 32 year old kids running multi-million dollar enterprises who would run circles around anyone in publishing. And its not like these are ivy leaguers. I'm talking just state school grads.
Publishing has always been a merry-go round of hire and fire. Its really a horrible place to try to eek out a career. I was on that path until I was downsized. Leaving the industry for something totally different was a huge eye opener and it was the best thing that ever happened to me.
Publishing and technology are cutthroat as they get. Why do you think so many people on LinkedIn in those spaces have worked for 10-15 different companies in a 20 year span? I think it would be a terrible existence, but to each, their own.
There are great companies out there. None are in the business of ed tech or publishing.
1exp+1fwE0U74 I think their point may have been that talented people are sacrificed to keep incompetent management in place. I agree that the decisions must be cold and matter of fact. Not a role I would want.
This is bigger than Pearson but I believe companies shouldn't be so cavalier with people's lives while routinely expecting loyalty and dedication beyond the reasonable job duties.
@1mno+1fwE0U74 When they make layoff decisions the phrase "oh they are so talented," is never uttered. It is very matter of fact. Basically no one cares. If there is one thing I wish that more people would understand, its that these are cold and final decisions. There's no discussion about how good someone is/was. They are just shown the door and life goes on. Its Darwinism at its finest and not always fair.
I guess some of you were never fortunate enough to meet senior management, including product, sales, marketing and executive, over the past 20 plus years. It was a who's who of awful, unfriendly people. The ones who weren't awful were just flat-out dishonest. (Anyone remember the group at PCLS?).
When people are cashing nice bonus checks, its easy to overlook. What is going on now has always been there.
Publishing is a tough, cut-throat, dirty business, cloaked in virtue.
All you need to know is that when faced with the choice, they decided to under-fund bonuses and compensation and buy back stock instead.
I know many didn't like JF but I was able to ignore him and I recognized the company is kind of dead. AB would get the same treatment except his friend LF and especially AB want to prove something in a manner that is rooted in the 1980s.
The tone and the culture have changed. The employees are not happy and in POLS, the layoffs were devastating. We are losing talented individuals for incompetent management.
It's getting "retired" and employees will receive the information they need. No more informal chatter or collaborations. The ERGs are becoming one group within their specializations so no more regional groups. Social will be gone. Business will be on share point and announcements will come through e-mail. It is to control the corporate message and chill communication.
They're getting rid of NEO?