Not surprising that management missed the mark big time again.
Anyone else think that?
3 replies (most recent on top)
Whart were others expecting for management to “hit the mark”? I’m not standing up for them, just wondering what others think they should have done? Me personally, cant see why the CEO didn’t have to reduce his SVP ranks by one. One of those compensation wise is probably equivalent to laying off 14 worker level folks. Second, still way too many VP’s left, a VP should be able to manage multiple functions and have a breadth of 100 people….but our BD guy has like 25 total, our investor guy like 20, so we probably ended up with twice the VP level we need. Then pockets at the Sr Manager level seemed OK but not others….we have two sr managers in planning, really??? Each only has like 4 or 5 total people. Kudos to the rare Vp that did it right like CDO. HR, Legal, Finance, most OPS functions didn’t do cr-p.
Well of course they did. It’s hard to implement truly meaningful change through middle management and below layoffs. It needs a completely fresh set of eyes from the highest level within HR and operations. Without this, there will be latent nepotism, favoritism and protectionism allowed to surface during each round of layoffs. Look at BP - it’s only now, with the appointment of an external CEO that they have any hope of changing course. The last several internal appointments were not successful. Similarly, while OVV is led by those that have come up through the system true change will be impossible.
This place is a bigger clusterphuk than ever lol…I can’t wait until these VPs are at each others throats, which is going to take approximately 6 weeks