Lal did a recent interview and he described the previous leadership (Farr) as autocratic. Then he went on to say he was trying to retain talent (long gone) and attract talent (lol).
14 replies (most recent on top)
The s#xual harassment offender in that case was an HR leader
A recent se-ual harassment case says otherwise
Yaschuk vs. Emerson Electric Canada
Emerson failed to interview witnesses or preserve emails
Many of the Farr tribe were there solely due to relationships rather than performance (Pelch is prime example), so it is justified to clear the dead wood out
It’s like Lal scrapped the talent development programs from Emerson just like he scrapped Pelch.
Lal has no plan. Spent his whole career at Emerson and can fix it? No way. Anybody that worked with him for 30 years knows this new Lal is just an act
And those that didn’t were fired
“A large majority did not…”
Oh my God.
How many men acted this way?
What number is acceptable?
Zero. That’s the acceptable answer.
I can only speak for my own experience - a large majority did not do those things you suggest in the past 15 - 20 years or so. Several execs were fired for those reasons on the early 2000’s.
What is driving exclusion is the people that se-----y harass women, make racist jokes, hire men over women for leadership, make g-y and ethnic jokes.
By aggressively promoting diversity and inclusion Emerson is driving exclusion.
There is ZERO effort to retain talent and knowledge, or to recognize it.
These previous posters speak the truth.
They're not doing anything to retain talent. Emerging leaders are leaving in droves or looking to leave. They're attracting talent but they leave after 2-3 years because of lack of upward opportunities.
Emerson doesn’t want talent because it doesn’t need talent. It needs cogs for its wheels.
Talent dies from intellectual starvation. Mediocrity feasts.