This house needs to start the cleaning from the top. Senior management is so disconnected, so bias and incompetent. Looks like every move they make is against their own employees, not a move for improvement. They definitely need more healthier approach. And the common practice to promote people based on their connections and not their work needs to stop.
4 replies (most recent on top)
seems like f&r every 3 years does a layoff - 3 yrs back it was to regionalize the business and get closer to the customer in your region. mgmt decisions were autonomous for each region, americas, emea and asia. then now, the firm lays off 2000+ people and goes centralized back to london based mgmt. the senior exec levels are just reguritated into new roles. if a senior mgmt was incapable of running a group and you move that mgr into an equivalent same level role, what makes you think that mgr will do any better? the firm after all these years, believes mediocrity is exceeding!...so sad as our competitors continue to take market share and TR becomes the back-up source for answers
A lot of the problems with TR start with the Thomson family itself. The company exists to deliver that quarterly dividend and Management knows if they drop the ball even once they are out of there. That has made investment during a decade long bad business environment really tough. That is not to say that some of what they did invest in wasn't a boondoggle. For starters the synergies they thought they would find with Reuters never really materialized.
It was shocking to discover how the self-proclaimed "Answer Company" has so little direction or useful answers. They've invested heavily in marketing (pretty colors and words that sound good) and overlook the outdated/useless products and massive incompetencies that permeate through the organization. Advice to management: if it seems like that something isn't quite right, lift one finger and look into it. Fix your own internal problems by getting the right answers that you need.
I worked in a Thomson Reuters office where we saw redundancies handled with varying degrees of competence. In one memorable case, a low level of management was wiped out, with resultant redundancies. Only a year or so later it emerged that several of those roles were needed after all, with "new" positions to be filled. Plenty more that could be related but it was usually difficult to find out what was going on, the need for "confidentiality" being used as a means to keep everyone else in the dark.