#culture

I went back to work a few months ago, and what I’ve seen is heartbreaking and infuriating. Most of the team is gone, and the way it happened is outright unethical. The best people were put on PIPs and eliminated. How? Simple: the harder you work, the more mistakes you make and the more “productive” you appear so you get canned.

Now we’re left with people afraid to work hard, terrified of PIPs. Productivity has tanked, and the top talent, the people who could get another job in a heartbeat are already gone. Dell is the textbook example of what a company shouldn’t do. And they are dumping everything they can at us, like a stupid gorilla throwing his sh-t at the zoo, and in the end, they’ll probably tell us they can’t find talent and outsource our teams abroad.

The company went global, sure, but at the expense of employees under constant pressure, all for financial decisions. People on my team have emailed upper management about working conditions and treatment. Nothing. Upper management refuses to acknowledge the problem, yet they enforce return-to-office policies while they work from home. Meanwhile, some employees are still on payroll and haven’t touched their computers in ten months.

2025 has been brutal. My paycheck no longer covers my bills. While Wall Street celebrates record profits, the average employee is crushed. After 20+ years at Dell, I’ve never seen management fail so spectacularly at handling layoffs and treating people. I’m done. I’m looking for another job. I can’t watch this abuse continue.

Reposted from @bd+1kdx0h388, an on point post.

Read this article about the CEO of Waste Management, who regularly shows up to early-morning safety meetings, rides with frontline crews, and spends time in the field talking directly with employees and customers.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ceo-90-billion-waste-management-071200219.html

It made me wonder whether we’d ever see anything like that at Fidelity Investments. Would Abby Johnson meet with advisors or phone reps, sit in on client calls, or get out of the C-suite and actually see the business up close, instead of managing the firm through dashboards, executive briefings, and carefully scripted town halls?

Feels like two very different ideas of leadership. Curious how others see it.

https://x.com/The_TUC/status/2008145671535116525

Somebody legitimately wrote this paragraph and thought, "Yeah this makes total sense" and clicked send to the entire company. I get from this that mass layoffs will be coming before the 1/14 meeting (in particular the last line), but who knows.

"To grow boldly, we are launching our 2026 theme: “Transform as ONE.” I have chosen
this because true, sustainable transformation is not an individual pursuit; it is a shared
journey that requires us to be aligned in purpose, unified in action, and strengthened by collective ambition. Under this theme, we will pursue our directions of Exceed and Excel, Agility and Action, and Discover and Do through “One for All” Communication and
Collaboration. We must operate with the understanding that finding efficiencies is not
about doing more with less, but rather about doing better with purpose."

Imagine it’s 2030.

The wealth management industry has gone fully digital, fully personalized, and somehow still feels… human. Clients rebalance portfolios with a voice command. RIAs fully own the client experience, and their book of business. Account opening takes 90 seconds and a selfie.

At Edward Jones, a meeting is being scheduled to discuss forming a segment to accelerate the path to industry parity.

Allowing FAs to own their book is briefly considered as a way to slow attrition, until the ELT realizes that might require sharing economics. The idea is politely declined.

Edward Jones advisors are still praised for playing it safe, putting client goals at risk, but protecting GP deep pockets.

Associate pay has barely improved. Compensation decks are refreshed, grades are “recalibrated to the market,” and leadership celebrates low-single-digit increases as “competitive”. Associates who once believed their entire careers could be built at Edward Jones discover those careers aren’t being filled with opportunity, but with quiet, compounding regret.

The systems barely work, largely because leadership changed strategic direction five times in the last decade, then decided to pursue everything at once.

By 2030, competitors have built fully remote, national teams, pulling top talent from anywhere. Productivity is measured by outcomes, innovation, and client impact. Associates aren’t babysat. They thrive as a result.

At Edward Jones, all associates are required to be at their desk five days a week. Badge swipes are tracked. Keystrokes are counted. Reports are run. Leaders celebrate home-office presence as culture. A top candidate declines an offer because relocating to St. Louis or Tempe makes no sense for their family.

The industry talks about scale, speed, and optionality.
Edward Jones talks about how great things will be once…

The competition is building for where clients are going.
Edward Jones is optimizing for where employees are sitting.

Imagine it’s 2030. Edward Jones introduces “Imagine it’s 2040”, a new campaign to reach market parity.

DC is at the helm and promises to outsource everything, generating record short term profits for GPs. “A penny saved is a penny earned”. Penny agrees.

With all the money that execs have burned on RTO, a new Global HQ, and the stock tanking because that’s all Stankey knows how to do, how are feeling about bonuses?

Are we going to be paying for RTO, new HQ, and our horrific work culture out of our bonuses?

Don't you all have your SIX SIGMA Black Belts!!!! Don't you all know how to code after 2020!!!! c'mon each initiative by Executive management have really delivered!!! You all can go into the ring with ANY color SIX SIGMA belt I am sure of it!!

Ever wonder what it feels like to work inside a corporation that’s shrinking, expanding, consolidating, offshoring, rebranding, cost‑optimizing, culture‑eroding, “thriving together,” recharging, refreshing, and “strategically transforming” all at once—while leadership insists everything is BAU and perfectly normal?

It’s like watching a building burn while someone in a branded polar fleece calmly assures you it’s “just a controlled enhancement to long‑term stability,” right before the ceiling collapses behind them.

And because it’s a new year, leadership has prepared a cheerful continuing resolution —delivered with the warmth of a broken space heater and the sincerity of a captured strongman awaiting arraignment for crimes against humanity:

“Expect increased toxicity, more layoffs, more offshoring, and steady gaslighting to brighten and warm your spirits.”

Truly inspiring. Afterall, nothing says fresh start like a forecast of cultural decay wrapped in corporate confetti and lightly dusted with the faint aroma of smoldering ethics.

But wait—leadership wants you to celebrate.
Yes, CELEBRATE!

So plaster on your best “I’m totally fine” smile and go take a few selfies and post on social media.

And don’t forget to hashtag your favorite EC member—you know, the one hiding behind “strategic pillars” like a kid playing corporate hide‑and‑seek. Extra credit if you catch them mid‑pose for their next phony empathy post, those perfectly curated LinkedIn masterpieces where they pretend to care about employee well‑being while quietly checking their bank statements and discreetly approving the next round of “optimization.”

Because nothing captures the modern corporate experience quite like being told to “embrace the journey” while knowing your organization is in a sharp nosedive.

Tray tables up, folks!

RTO so I can join teams calls all day. This sure makes a lot of sense.

If you feel someone is in a higher position who is not qualified. Speak up . Never do someone else’s job for them. Don’t bust your butt so the store manager can get paid a ton of $$$. Enough is enough.

lol all they do is have “meetings” about work other people do and then eat expensive food on the company dime and fly around

Why is it that the people that complain tend to be the worst performing?
Why is it the people that bash the company they work for are also adding the least value?

Honeywell success starts with each one of you. Be happy. Move the needle. Love the game. Rewire your mind.

And also - people in this forum need to stop being racially charged.

When are heads going to roll for the ev fiasco??

If 2024 and 2025 proved anything, it’s that forcing people into offices five days a week didn’t fix culture, didn’t improve performance, and didn’t magically make the stock take off. What it did do was burn people out, drain morale, and push good talent out the door.

As we head into the new year, leadership has a choice. Keep doubling down on a policy everyone knows isn’t working, or finally admit that flexibility, trust, and results matter more than badge swipes and presence reports.

People want to do good work. They want balance. They want to feel respected. That’s not radical, that’s the modern workforce. Companies that get this are winning. Companies that don’t are watching their best people leave.

If 2026 is just another year of pretending RTO equals culture, nothing will change. If leadership actually listens and resets to a realistic hybrid model, there’s still a chance to rebuild trust.

New year. New opportunity. Same question.

Are we going to keep repeating the mistake, or finally learn from it?

It’s honestly wild watching some of the loudest RTO cheerleaders and management bootlickers act like loyalty is going to save them. These are the same folks who defend every decision no matter how destructive, as if leadership is going to knight them for “service.”

Here’s the reality they don’t want to hear:

The company doesn’t love you back.
Being the loudest “yes” person has never saved anyone from a layoff here. If anything, history shows the opposite: the people who blindly go along with everything are usually the first considered “nonessential” because they bring nothing unique to the table.

And let’s be honest… a lot of the hardcore bootlickers aren’t exactly the strongest performers. They survive by attaching themselves to leadership and hoping that being overly obedient somehow equals value.

Spoiler: It doesn’t.

While they’re out here glazing every leadership move like it’s divine strategy, the rest of us have actual skills and can see the writing on the wall.

Bootlicking isn’t job security.
Competence is.
Flexibility is.
Retaining real talent is.

And none of that is reflected in the current path this company is on.

So maybe instead of worshipping the people who would cut them in a heartbeat, they should start advocating for the changes that would actually help everyone… including themselves.

There is a growing need to rebuild the IT organization from the ground up. The current structure appears unsustainable, largely due to internal dynamics that prioritize personal networks over objective talent evaluation. When hiring and project assignments are influenced by informal relationships rather than skill, capability, and proven performance, the long‑term stability of the organization is put at risk.
A core issue is the communication gap that arises when teams lack strong, shared comprehension of requirements in English, documentation, and escalation details. Even when individuals speak clearly, English comprehension and interpretation of complex technical or business requirements must be precise. When this breaks down (not clearly communicated), issues are not reported accurately, root causes are misunderstood, and projects drift off course. (This is occurring a lot and people are tired of reporting it)
This is especially critical for AI and advanced technology initiatives. (Ask Google and MS why they laid off AI team sets it is because of comprehension failures) These projects require highly specialized skill sets, rigorous communication, and a culture of accountability. Without the right mix of talent and leadership, these initiatives are likely to struggle or fail.
To succeed, the organization must ensure that:
• Roles are filled based on capability, not personal networks. (Not friends trying to get Greencards or needing a job for H1B placements)
• Project teams are diverse in skill, background, and perspective.
• Communication standards are enforced consistently across all teams. (Half the time most team members are not communicating issues in English to everyone this is where the breakdown is)
• Internal “clubs” or closed circles are dismantled in favor of transparent, merit‑based structures. (This needs to be done)
These observations are not directed at any specific group—they reflect systemic issues that can affect any organization. My goal is simple: I want to see Fiserv succeed, and that requires a strong, well‑structured, and talent‑aligned IT foundation.

Do you think they can ever bring back to me once great family sport of State Farm?

i was part of the old EMC Corp before it merged with DELL. It had nasty culture of its own so I do not think DELL is some unusual company in that regard. At EMC there was a distinct bro and ol' boys club culture + substantial bias emanating mainly from one very specific ethnic group which is well known for its intolerance of those who are not one of their own kind and lacked powerful connections. As soon as I moved from EMC Corp I saw a different world out there especially after i moved to a different industry. Feel very happy now, these nothing but distant memories - relics from a past I do not miss in the slightest.

Lets use a system that slows down the entire sales process. Lets use outdated software that a monkey manages. We now know the reason why we use salesforce. To slow you down. To create failure - where it did not exist. If you want to hinder a sales channel and further failure - introduce an operating system that runs like cr-p. Salesforce. Look, I get it, you want COR to fail, so you can turn it into AR. That's fine, it is what it is. Comp plan, bend over, promo's here today , gone tomorrow, brought back a month later, then gone again, oh wait bring it back again. Really. Really. Why in the world would you do that, unless you want failure. This was all thought out, tin hat and all. Just top it off with some HTP and sugar on top.

I am really going to miss those town halls with Charlie ‘Sharp as a Marble’. He was so inspirational when he took the canned questions from the Indians in the audience and answered them with utmost poise and professionalism. He and his big boys club will surely get a big bonus this year because of all the people they let down. Way to go Charlie, give yourself a pat on the back.

Has anyone had experience with having a meeting with the compliance investigation unit that can give me insight? We’ve had several on our team go through these meetings and end up fired due to our previous manager and it is making our region very nervous. A lot of it is due to changes in leadership and different preferences for documentation. The previous manager that has now left was…. special to say the least. Should those of us with these meetings be worried and start job searching?

Smart companies & their HR departments use Glassdoor to improve $ It doesn't appear Mutual actively uses the Glassdoor to improve $ Top companies can drive great results using Glassdoor the right way $ memo to our HR, implement this and watch MOA dramatically improve $ Check this out.

Glassdoor Team
Glassdoor Team | Author & Career Expert at Glassdoor | Jul 21, 2025

The best companies know that employer branding is make-or-break. The right approach can help you attract top talent, combat industry stereotypes, and build a workplace culture that actually retains people. The wrong approach? It makes you invisible to the candidates you want most. 

Leading companies are turning to Glassdoor not just for employee reviews, but as a strategic platform with real-time feedback and authentic talent engagement. Here's how three organizations are using the platform to transform their employer brand and attract the right people.

1. Closing the gap between perception and reality
   Capgemini, a global leader in consulting and technology services, wanted its Glassdoor presence to reflect the company’s positive employee experience more accurately. With a large volume of reviews across global locations, they saw an opportunity to better align internal culture with external perception and use that feedback to inform their long-term talent strategy. Key focus areas included increasing review response rates, strengthening the connection between the employee value proposition and day-to-day experience, and using data to identify areas for improvement.
   The company rolled out a required training program to ensure leaders could thoughtfully respond to reviews, with monthly check-ins to share best practices. They encouraged employees to leave reviews at key milestones like promotions or project completions, helping to surface a more representative view of life at Capgemini. Using Review Intelligence™, they analyzed sentiment across departments, locations, and roles on key topics like culture and DEI, and benchmarked those results against competitors. They also launched enhanced branding through the Employer Branding Hub for each global location, sharing localized employee stories, EVP content, and branding campaigns. 
   As a result, Capgemini’s global Glassdoor rating climbed from 3.2 to 4.0. Reviews began reflecting the impact of internal efforts, and the company strengthened its position as a talent destination — improving both hiring outcomes and employee engagement.

2. Building transparencyto overcome hiring hurdles 
   Equans UK, with nearly 15,000 employees in energy and services, faced serious skills shortages and high turnover in engineering. They needed to show they were a progressive employer that valued diversity and growth, particularly to retain apprentices and achieve gender balance in senior and operational roles.
   The company implemented a comprehensive employer branding strategy centered on their Glassdoor profile. They revamped their "Why Work With Us" section and featured their #ProudtoMakeitReal campaign spotlighting actual employees. Crucially, Equans increased its review response rate and acted on employee feedback, demonstrating genuine commitment to transparency and improvement. They paired this engagement with targeted Employer Branding Ads for their key demographics, including skilled trades and engineering.
   This multi-pronged approach delivered massive results, including 84% more unique visitors and 53% more page views across their Glassdoor and Indeed profiles. They also saw their overall Glassdoor rating jump by 0.6 points, solidifying their reputation as an employer of choice.

3. Attracting mission-driven talentwith targeted messaging
   Thomas J. Henry Law, one of the nation’s leading personal injury firms, needed more than just good attorneys — they wanted lawyers with integrity and determination who truly believed in their mission. Their existing methods weren't attracting this caliber of talent, so the firm took a different approach.
   They analyzed what their current employees loved most about working there, then crafted targeted messaging around DEI initiatives and career development. This refined content was integrated into their Employer Branding Hub and, crucially, their advertising strategy. The firm used custom messaging in "always on" Employer Branding Ads across Glassdoor, Indeed, and other sites in their candidates’ online journey, ensuring they stayed top-of-mind with qualified job seekers who shared their values.
   This strategic and sustained effort delivered impressive results: application rates more than doubled in three months, while cost per application dropped 37%. Their targeted approach showed that precise messaging attracted better-aligned talent more efficiently than broad recruitment tactics.
   The common thread: Authenticity drives results
   Candidates can spot inauthentic employer branding from miles away. These three companies crafted credible narratives that resonated with the right talent — and backed them up with real action. This solid foundation, built on genuine transparency and strategic consistency, led to results that speak for themselves: better candidates, lower costs, and stronger company cultures that actually retain top talent.
   Your next great hire is already researching employers online. Make sure they find the real you.

Heard that Chevron might be going Exxon way and implement Stack Ranking. How does it work? Does it mean bottom 10% or people they don't like are let go every year?

How can a company genuinely expect employees to be happy, productive, or incintivised to do a good job when nobody feels safe from having their job taken away at a moments notice? Or when promotions are MIA and raises are comical?

Regarding the current leadership structure and task delegation within CRT.

At present, many (though not all) Team Leads appear to spend the majority of their time performing minimal administrative tasks, such as returning scorecards, while routinely delegating their more complex and time-consuming responsibilities to senior reviewers. These senior reviewers are expected to take on duties that align more closely with Team Lead responsibilities, yet they receive no increase in compensation, for this additional workload.

This practice has created an imbalance where experienced reviewers are effectively performing leadership-level tasks while being paid significantly less. It has also contributed to frustration and decreased morale among those who are consistently relied upon to carry the workload without support or acknowledgment.

Additionally, CRT appears to be significantly overstaffed with both Team Leads and reviewers. As a result, meaningful work has diminished, and employees are increasingly being assigned tasks that offer little value to production goals. This inefficiency not only wastes company resources but also undermines productivity and engagement.

These issues suggest a need to reevaluate staffing levels, role expectations, and compensation alignment within CRT. Addressing these concerns would help restore fairness, accountability, and operational effectiveness.

It’s crazy to see that someone who knows the company inside and out and has years of experience can be let go just like a newbie. How did we get to a place where tenure and expertise don’t matter at all?

I came across this article this morning that leads with, "Why Is CDW Not Exciting?
Despite the more favorable entry price, we don't have much confidence in CDW."

They cite three reasons: 1) Sales growth over the last 3 years; 2) Sales growth projections are slim; and 3) EPS growth has stalled.

Over the last two years, the stock price is down over $85 per share, with $48 of that over the last 6 months.

While certainly the market is tough, but CDW was always able outperform the market. That ended in early '23 when our run of 8-10 declining quarters started.

We've laid off about 1,500 people over the last 2+ years and the decline in coworker count has had no positive impact on our trajectory.

There has to be a new plan implemented and soon, because what we are doing is clearly not working.

If you were asked, what would be your recommendation to get things back on track?

https://stockstory.org/us/stocks/nasdaq/cdw/news/buy-or-sell/3-reasons-to-sell-cdw-and-1-stock-to-buy-instead-2

Phillips 66 is in serious trouble, and it’s no longer honest to pretend otherwise. Over the past four years, not a single major initiative has produced a durable, repeatable positive outcome. Some have shown short-term gains on paper, but none have proven sustainable.

The acquisition of DCP Midstream itself was not inherently the problem. The mistake was allowing leadership and operating philosophies from a joint-venture culture where compromises, exceptions, and optics were often tolerated to take control of a legacy enterprise built on accountability, discipline, and execution.

The result has been a leadership model that prioritizes messaging over outcomes and reaction over strategy. Propaganda and internal campaigns may shape narratives, but markets, performance, and attrition do not lie. A company with world-class people and assets is being managed like a short-term experiment rather than a long-term enterprise.

What makes this especially concerning is the pattern: frequent pivots, walk-backs, and directional changes that signal a lack of conviction and operational understanding. This is not innovation, it is instability. Accountability is routinely deferred, while experienced people and institutional knowledge leave at a startling pace.

At some point, shareholders and long-tenured employees alike have to confront reality. Talent loss, cultural erosion, and repeated course corrections are not coincidences; they are symptoms. Cynicism is not the problem here, it is a rational response to sustained underperformance.

Phillips 66 does not have a people problem or an asset problem. It has a leadership problem. Until that is acknowledged, the unraveling will continue, regardless of how polished the messaging becomes.

“When the story feels good enough, evidence becomes optional.”

It’s become rather clear what’s happening. The company is deliberately creating a hostile and miserable environment to pressure people into quitting on their own. Between impossible workloads and a culture of constant fear, people are breaking. If you’re feeling this pressure, know that it’s a tactic, and you’re not alone.

I'm still not convinced Dan is a bad thing for this place. I think it'll just take some time and pain to get where he needs to be to see the positives. I could be wrong, but I'd rather wait to make my judgement than make it right away and proceed to stress over things I can't change.

I never thought I’d feel this way, but when the next round comes, I’ll be happy to step forward if given an opportunity. That’s how worn down Cisco has made me.

If so, how??

The Working better, together Amplify article has been out for three weeks and has 6 total likes. I wonder if anyone making these decisions takes note of how wildly unpopular the new policies are. Does anyone know who really pushed for this policy? Anybody part of those meetings?

Crazy thing is it didn't used to be this way. In the days of yore when we were all happily remote little worker bees, we were content if not happy. Dell felt like a people-focused organization, at the very least. We were given latitude to do our own thing, expectations were normal and not overly ambitious, and the individual contributors had a certain degree of confidence in leadership.

Sure, Dell had the very-normal corporate issue of constant change, but the change was navigable. Then suddenly, everything began to change and the water began to boil. It started slowly-people being "encouraged" to use the office. The remote activities quietly disappeared. Does anybody remember the May the 4th Zoom AHOD in 2021 where a bunch of leadership dressed up as Star Wars characters? Stuff like that was objectively fun, and made work feel a bit less like work. That sort of fun just up and disappeared to be replaced with increased unreasonable expectations like suddenly everybody had to commute 10 hours a week to sit on zoom calls that they were perfectly content with and capable of sitting on at home.

Then, the layoffs began, as did a constant state of employment anxiety that has persisted to this day. Then we all received a total of 24 business-hours notice that hybrid was going away and we were all full-time onsite, or face the consequences. Except, there were none really. The layoffs continued to be completely random across the board, if anything affecting the in-office folks more than those that persisted with staying remote.

The result? Everybody who is left (and smart) has quiet quite HARD. I'm personally remote, and work maybe 2 hours a day and still get everything done. The rest of my workday is spent at the gym or with my laptop open while I play video games. And my numbers have never been better.

The thing that objectively takes the most of the time out of my day is trying to come up with 5 stupid questions to ask this stupid chat bot we're training to take over our jobs eventually, because if I don't that's the only thing that actually gets me in trouble with leadership. It's not my Teams' status being yellow for 5 hours a day, or my quote output, or my lack of desire to pursue cUlTuRe and CoLlAbOrAtIoN by driving 15 hours per week, it's my lack of desire to justify Dell's stupid investment into incompetent AI tools that add no objective value to anybody.

I know it sounds like hyperbole when you hear about folks talking about "Dell has changed." Though in reality, Dell actually has changed in a lot of ways, and every, single, one of those changes have been for the worse. And they get away with it because we flipped from an employee's market to an employer's market with the post-Covid tech crash in 2022ish that we still haven't recovered from.

It just really su-ks.

This needed a thread of its own. The OP is @ez+1kdne2h4c.

Why? No one is masochist forever, right?

Everything at my location has slowed down so much that tasks which took an hour now take two. To make it worse, the new hires we're getting don't seem to want to learn how things are done. I'm not trying to blame anyone, but I'm curious if this is a general problem across the company or if my store was just unlucky. Is this what it's like everywhere?

Everything here is dictated by how leadership thinks analysts will react. We’re always responding, never setting a direction of our own, and it shows in every rushed decision. Instead of building something solid long term, we just keep sprinting after the next headline to keep Wall Street happy.