Does anyone else feel like 3M prefers to hire managers with no experience for some inexplicable reason? Every single time we get a new one - and that's been happening quite often lately - they have no idea what they're doing. Does the job posting even ask for experience? Because it sure doesn't feel like it once they're on board.
16 replies (most recent on top)
What exactly is the contribution to the enterprise, either bottom line or top line, from the humongous number of middle managers that we have today ?
Do we really need a manager to nanny every 10-12 employees in 2024 ?
This is a tired complaint. Been this way forever in 3M. And to the person who said the Supervisor courses were mandatory prior to getting into mgmt - no they weren’t. I even recall being assigned to the weeklong training course and asking “why didn’t you teach me this stuff BEFORE I became a supv.”
The only thing that’s changed recently is that A3M first created a lot of new (meaningless) mgmt positions that got filled with newbies, and then the massive layoffs generated another set of mgmt positions to fill.
Our plant supervisor's and senior management doesn't know how to manage. You need to be present, make hard decisions on the spot, create solutions, coach and be personable with production workers, lead by example, show up with your workers, motivate, earn respect. We have none of that. We have the opposite of that. These basic things make good leaders. If you can't hack it then Bill needs to be accountable and remove these individuals and get people that can be competent. When most employees hate their job and think their boss is dogshit then perhaps you have some fundamental hiring issues.
No, no you dont. Our giraffe in asd accomplished nothing prior to making it to the vp ranks. Just kissed up while kicking down. Treats everyone like dirt and is d-mb as a box of rocks, but nobody will stand up to him.
Now theyre paying him to rehire all the sales people he fired . All he does is fail and they pay him to undo it just like roman and advance 3m!
Of course, 3M is only hiring college graduates as they can’t afford to pay anyone with experience. That’s why they laid off so many people last year. They needed to cut costs and people with experience are more costly, especially those grandfathered into the defined benefit pension that have long since phase out for new hires (and are now phasing out for everyone who is still unfortunate enough to still work there).
In my department (audit) all hiring of fresh college graduates. So u r correct that no experience is required. Otherwise everything is outsourced to ey because that’s where Asraf is headed next…
yes it's true , the managers in charge of EMEA -- AAD & IATD ---, are clueless, paid obscene salaries and yet don't know what the plan is, out of their depths , the work is slowing leaving and heading back to the U.S., and yet when we meet them in plant visits, they don't talk much as if you question them , they struggle to come back with any reply that makes sense.
This comment probably doesn’t fit this thread but 3M has been inbred in leadership for along time. Now they have thrown the baby out with the bath water and are putting people in major decision maker roles that don’t know the difference between tape and sandpaper. Glad I got the F out!
Back in the day, there were meaningful supervisory development training courses you had to take before being, or once you were a newbie supervisor. And you were tested out with leading a few people before being a supv. It's regrettable those practices were stopped.
That might be the most accurate description of how 3M works that I've ever seen on this board
Yes! Every manager has to be a manager for the first time. The trick is to make sure they are well coached and closely supervised through the transition. Also with the strong caveat that if the new manager proves themselves ill-suited to the role they are removed from management quickly with no shame.
Not every good, or even exceptional, individual contributor makes a good manager.
Let us not forget, HR stopped doing its job many years ago in terms of driving development opportunities and supporting employees at most levels. They’ve become lazy and reliant upon d-mbed down compliance training in lieu of meaningful employee engagement and development. HR is a key common denominator at the root of erosion and outright failures when It comes to pride of employment and true development of homegrown talent. Gibbons hiring another leader promising “world class” and “industry leading” has been a joke for many years, and a sign he and others have no plan beyond another flashy catchphrase on a PowerPoint slide.
The major flaw is * velocity of promotion* in management ranks, as compared to * velocity of promotion* for the technical folks , i.e. the working class in 3M.
In the former category , promotion pretty much occurs every 3 years till the level of Director or T6 equivalent. It is just like clockwork. Then it depends (in many cases) on how good a sycophant they are to get to a VP level or higher.
Hence in 10 years every Tom, Di-k and Susan gets to a Technical manager or T5 equivalent, provided they are able to" toe the line" and do the housework for upper management.
Meanwhile for the worker bees , every promotion till T5 takes 4 to 5 or even more and T5 almost always takes some kind of commercialization effort to get to that level. Otherwise career track stops at a T4A level, till an inevitable layoff awaits after the age of 50 or 55.
Thus 10 years for Technical manager in management track while 14 to 20 years for reaching T5 in technical track. After that, probably 3 to 5 % ever make it to T6 or T7.
Is anybody surprised why new folks are running to be a manager. There is simply very low probability of making any meaningful career progress in the technical track ! Ironical considering that 3M is a technology based materials science company.
Also no surprise that middle management is filled with folks who were utter failures at the bench and hence choose management track to get the next promotion! So many examples at 3M.
Many managers today face criticism for lacking the necessary experience, people skills, and leadership abilities. Several factors contribute to this issue:
Rapid Promotions: Often, individuals are promoted to managerial positions before they have fully developed the skills required for effective leadership. This phenomenon, known as the Peter Principle, suggests that employees rise to their level of incompetence. Inadequate Training: Many organizations fail to provide adequate training and development for new managers. Without proper guidance, these managers may rely on rigid, authoritarian methods rather than fostering a collaborative and supportive environment. Focus on Technical Skills: In many cases, promotions are based on technical expertise rather than leadership potential. While technical skills are important, they do not necessarily translate into effective people management.
Generational Shifts: The retirement of experienced Baby Boomers and the influx of younger, less experienced managers have created a leadership gap. This shift has left many organizations struggling to find leaders with the right mix of experience and people skills. Cultural Factors: Some organizational cultures prioritize results over relationships, leading managers to adopt a more authoritarian style. This approach can stifle creativity and reduce employee morale.
Addressing these issues requires a concerted effort to identify, train, and support potential leaders, ensuring they have the skills needed to lead effectively and empathetically.
My experience in Europe you need to be friend of the bosses/management/HR and vote far right
To be fair, everyone manager needs to be a manager for the first time at some point. Are you referring to more senior level management, like Directors, VPs or SVPs?