Thread regarding DXC Technology layoffs

I like where you are going with that idea: banning leaders from a licence to operate companies if they show no corporate responsibility to the well being of their staff, the environment, accounting regulations, disparity from their pay to employees, bonus oh Jed to performance and only when that performance is equally shared with the people who made it happen, laws of the lands, ethics, employment laws and social responsibilities.

No more fines and court cases, just ban the irresponsible id--ts.

The owners may walk away with millions but do they walk away with their heads held high knowing full well that in return for their millions, DXC are going to ruin the business that they set up and built. That they are leaving loyal and committed staff behind in the sh--. Anyone that sells their company to DXC is as bad as ML. They should be banned from having another company as they obviously have no sense of responsibility for anyone else.

A number of senior managers were very aware of the lack of integration and tried to form some kind of culture brigade to get the staff of the acquired companies into DXC quicker. But they were told to stop wasting delivery time on people things, as there are teams out there whose job it was to intergrate such teams. But they were all cut.

The staff of these acquired companies were given access to DXC tools (which was like giving a rusty hammer to a brain surgeon). The staff politely asked for DXC's 'every tool is a hammer' classroom training and were told 'no.' Training had been cut and the transformation budget didn't have training in it anyway, so shut and go away.

So they requested that their servers be joined to the DXC domain network. This was then done on the cheap via a raspberry pi which invariable caused errors because of incompatibility, lack of nodes and load-balancing monkeys; mesh, spokes, hubs and datacentres in places where the sun takes an extra 7 second to reach and were supported by specially trained hamsters - cos the support staff had all been cut.

So the staff asked for DXC processes to help understand 'how things are done around here'. But they processes were half a powerpoint and an out of date 2009 procedure because process investment, analysis and busienss architecture had been cut to waste on consultants who had better clip-art but no substance.

So the acquired company decided to just try and do everything themselves with their own staff. But they couldn't because their staff had now been cut!

Then the people who had been doing all the cutting were cut together with their bosses, their colleagues, staff, people they had ever spoken on the telephone, their phones, laptops - all cut; the offices they worked in and the electricity that powered it - all cut; their datacentres cut ; the countries they operated in - all cut.

Successful? Not in a million years.

1. The business owners of the acquired don't care. They walked out with their millions.

2. Once the acquired employees start to sniff the rotting carcass of DXC, they are gone.

3. Once the clients (the real target of the acquisition) start to sniff the carcass and see key employees leave, they too try to get out.

4. I was employed by UXC Eclipse, which was acquired (by then CSC) in 2016 and fully integrated into DXC in July 2017. Given the staff departures (Dynamics AX consulting; the real value is the consulting staff), it's debatable that the acquisition was anything more than a total disaster.

Acquisitions are just Mikey's way of hoodwinking the shareholders into thinking business is on the up.

I have yet to see any long-term successful acquisitions. I think we've had some successful divestitures, but it seems that once DXC gets their hooks into a company and start integrating them into the "DXC Way" (as defined by severe cost cutting, layoffs, and letting key talent go), then it seems to die on the vine once all the useful innovation and profits are s---ed dry.

Successfully in improving DXC brand and range ideally but all acquistions (regardless of who) do get merged quite a bit within parent company and then integrated down the line. Question is how good is the outcome say 2 years down the line.