-
Q: if SSL4 is used for ISP, won't that discourage trying new jobs? A: the employee owns their own career. You should meet with both managers and make sure you won't be at risk for SL4. Analysis: this is BS. The managers won't know this year's focal guidelines until the end of the year. They won't know how strict distribution is going to be. They won't know if they are going to recommend SL3 and be forced to give SL4 in the focal session.
-
Q: are we done with ISP? Will there be a round 2? A: there will be no "company wide" round 2 ISP. Analysis: this seems like a dodge. Why the "company wide" qualifier? If there is a round 2 of "non-company-wide" ISP's, an honest answer would be "yes there will be a round 2, but it will not be company wide."
-
Q: are you happy with the execution of ACT? A: the way we handled ISP's was a mistake. We don't want to prolong it, but same day was too harsh.
-
Also, we were surprised what was going on with FOCAL messages. The way some FLM's were handling stock messages was not quite what we expected. Proper handling of these messages was a key assumption of our ACT design.
-
Q: considering the rigid, formulaic approach, do you think your senior leaders were properly empowered to run their businesses? A: All of MCM were involved in the design. The next level down didn't have much say. We told them it was "based on the Focal YOU delivered" so that they were indirectly empowered. When they told them this they didn't realize the "rocks" they were going to find in the stock messages.
-
Trump: BK said he only wanted to "engage" but once they found out it was about more they cancelled. IMO he knew it was a fund raiser and was a supporter, and once it became public he cancelled and made up this BS about engagement. By the way, BK was looking a little orange in the open forum.
5 replies (most recent on top)
That Open Forum reeked of what a toxic culture of mistrust, politics, doublespeak and every-man-for-himself-ness that Intel has become.
As far as the Trump thing goes, get over it already. Geez, your hatred and intolerance is blinding you like crazy
Agree with your interpretations. The other thing I will add:
Q: what's the "real@" criteria for layoff? Last year was 2 bad years, this year was only one."
A: (my words) he basically said that they designed the criteria to meet a certain headcount. So since they got rid of so many low performers last year, they had to cut deeper this year with the more stringent criteria to meet the number of heads they wanted to cut. He also said there would be no real consistency, the formula/criteria depends on the number of heads they need to cut.
Focal guidelines explicitly say "new at job " is acceptable reason to get ssl4. How do you challenge that?!? Even if you are doing great new mgr could give you ssl4 and show this as justification
Confirm the guy at the top is a short a few neurons.
Really as a lifer didn't test assumptions and get feedback on the methodology.
He said earlier he expected some screw ups and they would fix it. So how and what fixes did he do? NOTHING
BK GOT NO CLUE. New strategy, new products and new 10nm are all BUSTED