What do you think? Let’s discuss.
My vote: Definitely yes, again.
17 replies (most recent on top)
Whether HT will get rid of this BU?
The verdict is in -- ESG was very very far below the line of doom. Many divisions were, but ESG was low and showed over 50% loss. Sorry to all who care there, those are the facts.
HT scooped up Symantec with spare couch-cushion money just to pad his software trophy shelf. Investing in ancient legacy products? Yeah, that was never on the menu. So go ahead and savor those RSUs while you can, before you get graciously shown the door.
"Is Hock Tan aware?"
The reason Hock call them franchises instead of business units is to make the point that they are their own businesses run by their own GM w a ton of discretion, like a McDonalds franchise. Hock gives them HC #s and profit margin targets to meet, how or whether they do is up to them to succeed or fail. Therefore, no, Hock not aware nor care about all the mgmt buddy nepo system in ESG, sorry. That's RollerBoy the GM.
Is Hock Tan aware of the incompetency of ESG Management Team including Leadership, Directors and Managers?
Is it Lack of Innovation or Not enough focus on customer needs because of which ESG continues losing customers or Internal politics or anything else? AI helps Engineering teams so the engineers can enjoy their time while they enjoy their days.
Symantec and Carbon Black have already lost the brand reputation they once carried. Rest and Vest while it lasts.
@nw Totally agree on the redundant manager point. ESG could borrow Amazon’s layoff criteria to weed out these managers:
- Managers reporting into other managers at the same level.
- Managers with less than half their direct reports in the same location.
- Managers with fewer than 8 direct reports.
- Managers who are remote employees themselves.
The GM of ESG should really take a hard look at the managers under the directors, since directors will always try to protect the ones they’re tight with. And keep an eye on recent org changes, because reporting lines can get shuffled around just to help certain managers dodge these criteria.
Leadership take responsibility for themselves? Tell me where on earth in any company or any government etc that ever happens. As if they'd just fall on their sword call themselves failures and quit? As if that would save the soldiers from getting RIFd? No, leaders have to be MADE accountable by someone, they'll never TAKE responsibility.
Who cares while I’m resting and vesting and collecting tons of RSUs and doing less 😄
When will leadership take responsibility for the declining revenue, the loss of customers, and the failure of making aggregators successful? Why is the impact falling on employees rather than on the leaders who got us into this situation?
C.R.E.A.M. get the money
Dollar, dollar bill, y'all
My only wish is to see more lay off hitting Managers and Directors that are doing nothing , hiding behind engineers and using them as a shield to survive longer for the sake of rest and vest.
So much hate OP. Get a life.
@ch ESG senior management is basically a cartel that takes care of each other all the time. I’ve never heard of any director or above being impacted in layoffs, except when someone went against the cartel or company policies.
Meanwhile, there are plenty of redundant managers in ESG who either have just a few reports or only/mainly remote reports. But they’re safe because they’re tight with the directors. And that’s why engineers end up paying the price for revenue drops and management’s incompetence.
Yes
The engineers are bearing the consequences of ESG management’s incompetence. So absolutely yes, ESG will be below the line of doom again. I can’t imagine how d-mb customers would be if they actually decide to renew their contracts with the aggregators.
It is time to dismantle the entire group.
Now that you have your expected answer, time to retreat back to your parents basement and play with your xbox.
100% yes.