Do the direct managers have a say in which exact employee to cut or are they just handed a list of names and have to just execute without making any choices. How does it go about?
8 replies (most recent on top)
@es by this logic, manager are always safe. The people really need to go is these middle management.
@a4 The managers don't get a list they make the list.
Here is how it goes when SAP (or other company) decides to layoff people:
CEO or Board decide a number (globally)
Then HR and L1 break it down by locations.
Each local HR gets a number of employees to layoff
L2, L3 break it down by profile (Dev, ST, PO, Project Managers..etc)
Then HR and N+2 break down the number by teams
Then direct managers put names
For example, a direct manager of a team will be asked to fire 2 Devs and 3 STs then he will decide which Devs and STs will go and give HR: 2 Dev names et 3 ST names.
This is how it's implemented in Product teams.
@a4 list of names decided by whom then. L1, L2, L3, L4 ?…
@OP If your direct manager does not like you, you are fu cked anyway. At SAP, managers hold the power of life or death over their reports. They can promote someone or make someone irrelevant and give bad performance reviews. Besides some s-xual allegations, managers cannot be fired. And even if there are such allegations, some of them continue to grow because the HR supports employees who are supported by their manager. So have a good relationship with your manager and also a good one with their manager and so on. Do what you need to and play politics here. Your work does not matter anyway all that matters is how much your management like you.
L1 determines if they wish to involve L2. L2 decides if they want to include L3. L3 makes a decision on whether to engage L4. This pattern continues. However, one thing is absolutely certain: employees who engage in office politics are rarely terminated, regardless of their work performance or achievement of goals. Conversely, those who diligently work and meet their objectives may still face dismissal.
Thus, the only rational approach for employees to maintain their relevance at SAP is to engage in the politics of the company. This strategy helps them avoid termination. It also facilitates annual promotions accompanied by substantial salary increases. Historically, this approach has led to the distribution of significant equity (MOVE SAP) to them. Furthermore, it allows them to demonstrate their "loyalty" to management and SAP executives.
In this organization, loyalty is prioritized over customer satisfaction. It is unfortunate, but in recent years, many diligent colleagues I know have shifted their focus from their actual work to navigating the political landscape, as they have come to understand that this is the sole path to advancement at SAP and job security.
In my experience, some L2 managers are given wide latitude by uninformed L1s (uninformed as to individual performance on the L2's team) to select employees for layoffs so I have witnessed top performers targeted for no obvious reason other than they were more competent than the manager or had not seemed completely aligned with the manager's poor ideas. It is astonishing to see a celebrated and inspiring manager of managers laid off when they were much better, by all manner of measures, than anyone else on the team - but that is why it is vital to be political at SAP.
Which level decide the list? L1? L2? L3?
AFAIK they are handed a list.
Managers cannot make many decisions anymore. See the salary raises, which were determined by an algorithm based on the performance ratings, with very little leeway for managers.