did we need a new committee to manage leading performance? did anyone actually understand what NH was blithering about in the TH? did he mean that our targets will now all have a performance wedge on top in order to be a “valued contributor?”
6 replies (most recent on top)
We need a new committee to move all the jobs to Manila and Buenos Aires!
This will be yet another metric manipulated to promote high-pots and relatives.
The problem with LP is that as usual we I over-engineered this. We have so much useless cr4p that gets in the way of work. And there is no interest in getting rid of it because, as was noted with the LP example that NH owns, people in high places have a vested interest in keeping some of this stuff going.
We have been struggling with LP for five years now and our competitive position not only greatly lags our outlandish S&P500 target, we are among the worst of our direct competitors. NH invented LP so he is having his feet held to the fire to fix our terrible performance or he will be shown the door just like PB.
OP, this 'new committee' (which is either redundant, or pointless, or both) sounds like either 1) a place for high-pots to be exposed to how the company runs (a precursor to management promotions), or 2) a place to park returning expats or failed BU managers in anticipation of their arm-twisted retirements later this year. Take a close look at the membership and I bet you see a few of each.
Business plan isn’t enough but we don’t know where the competition will be and the competitive performance trajectory isn’t baesd in reality