Every town hall we hear the same message from the execs in that they go to all out global offices and meet ‘amazing’, ‘innovative’, ‘inspirational’, ‘hard working’ staff etc etc.
I can’t say that any of the execs I’ve seen on the town halls has given me the same impression or confidence, they might be hard working but who actually knows, so what oversight does the board have on their appointees and how good they are as it doesn’t seem to be much?
11 replies (most recent on top)
@k6 you tried to get hired recently mate?
Stop
stop
STOP
S T O P
STOP Bi--hing and get your CV/Resume updated and find a better employer, are you all that childish that you complain day after day, Month after Month , Year after Yeat and do nothing to change your circumstances?
Corporate vampires
@fv no moral integrity but lots of special sauce to unleash
@fv None
It is impossible to lead without moral integrity! Do you think our executives and our board of directors have any moral integrity?
@bq Like Thieves in the night
@bg
Do you have any idea what would be the trigger point for the board to say to RF enough is enough and sack him?
All the points you highlight are standard metrics and yet the board seems not to know or recognise this, which to my mind is beyond belief.
Either way, as other threads have mentioned, the execs seem to be very highly reward for absolutely no benefit whatsoever. Truly bizarre
DXC had restructured executive compensation to align more closely with performance. Raul's target was increased 250%, designed to 'incentivise long-term strategic execution and shareholder value creation'.
We know there has been a huge disconnect between performance and pay. Take the last fiscal year, for example: organic revenue declined -4.6%. Shareholders got 0% as DXC underperformed. Yet, Raul's compensation jumped a staggering 73% to $16.7M. Because despite the 'At risk' pay (the performance bit) failing, they did meet 1 metric for cash flow (200%) - due to high book to bill. The compensation allows for partial payment in such cases. The CEO and CFO received 'retention grants' that were front-loaded to lock in the leadership to 2028. Whoo-hoo, more money! the board's belief in the BS buzzwords about 'revitalized go-to-market execution' and 'cultural momentum' (whatever that means).
Shareholders do view this as misaligned with performance, since although the cash flow internally has been strong, the stock price has continued to fall through the floor, raising concerns over how rigorously performance is being rewarded.
The leadership might argue that its not about top-line growth, but about better margin discipline, the quality of contracts and financial engineering. They are good at manipulating the cash flow metric whilst allowing the others to fail, because they are too difficult to fix and why bother when you can get your bonus on shifting the deckchairs around? But that is not a sustainable model.
DXC is on a high-risk trajectory:
- Financial. Declining growth, Cash flow reliance on cost cutting and debt exposure;
- Strategic. Like what the h3ll is the strategy anyway? Innovation? Customer retention?
- Cybersecurity. If they still had people left who can prepare against AI threats; and
- Talent & Cultural risks. I keep reading on here 'all the good people have long gone'
No chance of a strategic sale in this condition. Not even Turtle wax and a new set of tyres can replace a clapped out old engine.
Its a narrow runway and the road is running out.
I'd suggest stop triggering bonuses at minus ten percent of target... That's actually a thing...
How can you pay the execs millions every year for delivering Negative growth. They have failed to grow DXC in the last 8 years.
Poor leaders taking big pay, just for holding town halls and sending out emails. Shame on you Execs who take employee pay for failure.
YOUR PAY SHOULD BE LINKED TO GROWTH!!!