Business continuity? The “Nike intelligence center”? Emergency management? Literally millions are being WASTED in payroll and opex with people getting paid to twiddle their thumbs, while people who actually do work are getting decimated.
21 replies (most recent on top)
Why do you need a director to lead the NIC at all? It’s completely outsourced.
@142 lol, CM leading the NIC is probably sweating bullets. You know that guy won’t be able to hold a job anywhere else. He’s gotta hang on to this paycheck.
@zm disgusting because they’re calling you out and exposing you?
My favorite thing about physical security is that it’s lead by a scrawny whiny little diva - IB. Yaaaas Queen.
.. and now the NIC will reply to every other thread until it’s on the second page again.
Disgusting posts like this never happened here before tech found this forum.
IB and the security team are safe. They do a great job of “escort” ing our executives for the big overseas events. Just making sure everyone gets home safe ..
Divest of the whole thing. It’s security theater. It has no value and they know it. Just another team throwing offsites.
Why doesn’t Nike just outsource physical security to a provider completely?
The “security” team of contractors who ride their lame little motor scooters on the trails. They don’t secure sh-t. They can’t even write a parking ticket.
“The Global Department” LOLOL
What is techops? This org doesn't exist since jul 2025
@ch Nike will never be able to hire or retain the talent, or allocate the funds required to build a resilient multi-cloud strategy. in fact most places can't, and most places shouldn't.
It's typically a fool's errand but there are plenty of consultants that will tell you otherwise.
If AWS is down nobody will care if nike is down.
@cb : Fairenough: Nike is not a tech company whose core mission is to build internal software tools or products. New tools and technologies emerge every few years, and the landscape evolves quickly. By the time a tool is fully established, another one enters the market, prompting teams to start building or adopting something new again.
They need to focus on what primary goal of the team and org, This Team cant generate single penny as revenue from .com if there is any major AWS outage. They will just sit and watch for AWS twitter/news release.
@aa Ironically that project to replace splunk had the vast majority of it's R&D in India. No surprise that nothing came to fruition there. If you have ever had the pleasure of working with offshore teams you know how difficult it is to get anything done. I would argue that those senior engineers that you're calling out were given a fairly impossible task. Even worse, it sounds like VA is going to double down on the move to ITC though. Offshore work is great for some things. For something as ambitious as replacing splunk, consider it doomed from the start.
@c5 they report to the same Sr. Director…
@aa I am from techOps , and I agree with the insane amount of time spent on “automation” and actually stepping away from the day to day operations to resolve issues , I am biased about engineering callouts about support , they are DevOps and they are ultimately responsible for their code, it’s a conundrum though - either hire folks who are technically sound and then they will lose interest in solving day to day operations or hire folks who are good for L1/L2 support are not good for troubleshooting outside of their comfort zone, and the team that can act as a bridge is busy automating alerts…
It's working. Eating our own.
Amazing how more and more people are comfortable grabbing a megaphone and showing how they no NOTHING about ANYTHING. Fear of being terminated creating into their minds. Meanwhile the Veeps maintain their $500k salaries and stock option packages.
The so called Resilience team has consumed significant time and resources with little tangible return. For example, they spent over three years building an internal tool intended to replace Splunk an effort involving at least 6–7 senior engineers yet the outcome has been ineffective and difficult to justify.
Now we see a similar pattern with the Reliability team. Despite the name, their role during outages appears largely limited to paging engineering teams, rather than actively driving resolution or improving system resilience. This raises a valid question why is there a need for multiple layers of leadership senior directors, directors, and managers to oversee a function with such limited operational impact?
If Tech Ops leadership were to objectively evaluate the outcomes delivered by these teams over the past 4–5 years, it would likely reveal a substantial misallocation of resources, amounting to millions in spend without commensurate value.
Yes - get rid of resilience, Nike direct stores is already very impressed by lack of support from engineering, their 1 stop shop that can solve less complex issues is L1/L2 (part of resilience) but let’s get rid of it - and completely disconnect from business, that’s the end goal of engineering / product it seems to be running their own agenda instead of companies requirements…