Can someone explain why Adidas over uses the “Director” title. It is a joke. On the one side you have people with more than 15 years and mature leaders as directors. On the other side you have newbies and opportunists with less than 8 years in the industry. What message are you sending? Also look at which gender gets to this role faster - no surprises!
5 replies (most recent on top)
Because they are not looking for competent people but yes men who are not going to threaten their positions.
Something fishy is going on in Pacific. Ever since the announcement of Steve Castledine’s departure (GM) and the “has been olympians” takeover, they’re dropping like flies. Unethical and baseless dismissals, strategical push outs - the list goes on. The whole cluster is an absolute f*cking shambles, beyond repair.
Pacific will NEVER adapt to global protocols and procedures - they are too used to getting their own way.
The HR team is the worst of the pack. They continue to fail at the most basic hiring/firing procedures . Instances of accidentally offering successful candidates salaries/relocation packages beyond their banding, one talent acquisition member took off on non-approved/non communicated leave for 3 weeks and went AWOL - completely uncontactable. The same person also completely abandoned the hiring process and framework for the WHOLE of Pacific during the summer casual hiring period, ultimately requiring a colleague from Dubai to be flown over on an STA to sort out the sht show. The aforementioned TA manager then returned and resigned but was later asked by the former Snr HR Director (good riddance) to stay on an additional month. She then created more fckery than she was worth and was asked to leave without completing the additional month of service.
I could divulge more and more and more but that would require too much energy being wasted.
In summary, everyone is out for blood in this market and I can only see the new leader (for lack of a better term) sticking it in the blender for another round of sh*t flinging.
Can we really do a third party audit on all the travel and entertainment that some markets are doing. It’s one thing to bring people together for a purpose or learning( even MDE/ DDE is hardly in person anymore) and another thing to have parties and pomp and show in order to talk about market performance. One of the reasons why random people want to become directors and above is due to these frills. We need to cut in these wasteful expenditures before letting go of people.
Why stop at Directors? Have you seen some of the VPs and SVPs in markets?
Look at Emerging Markets and what an incestuous he-l hole it has become still reeling under the legacy of Martin Shankland. Even the current MD was MS’s pick and while he has charisma, most of his team lacks substance and moreover character. His HR has no credibility, she only took the job to travel the world, he appointed a child man to an important SVP role with no prior experience in the region, made his blue eyed failed Olympian as the GM of another important market where her charm won’t work and numbers will have to talk. Not to forget a salesman who is his GM of the biggest cluster, another of Martin’s minion whose entire team is of dimwits riding on the regions growth. It’s rotten from the top, no wonder these immature incapable PowerPoint monkeys are appointing kids as Directors, who else will even listen to them, let alone nod their heads to their tall claims! We need to start investing in IQ and character tests from the top.
Do you think anyone cares about performance or meritocracy? They will offload work on a few high performers while promoting their minions.