I’m wondering if anyone out there knows what the profile was of the Feb 15 layoffs. I’ve heard different targets mentioned here like:
people who tried to do the right thing for cisco and the customer got hit, if you questioned your manager, tried to ask for help or actually challenged them, you either got pip or on LR list, message is clear, just smile like an id--t and kiss up, hope they get replaced cause our leadership is horrible, part DEI , part pet projects, hardly anyone who deserves the director role gets it.
You guys commenting on this being bottom performance are probably the same im@exiles that hide in product management causing the demise of this company or are non customer facing people as evidenced by your very un-informed comments without facts, probably cx. We managed to avoid this cut but all the top performers for what’s left of the DC/CISG business worldwide were cut whilst the extremely poor “management” and anyone who said yes all the time to them somehow survived. This included a number of multiple consistent sales champions and a number of multi-time chairman’s club winners. They were also higher grades and the highest paid as they delivered consistently. They also have had RM and Director levels gone as well. The finance plebs just drew a line through the most expensive resources to replace them with god knows what if anything. Some who remained were 20-30% of their number over a number of years and should have gone. Astoundingly we also let go three of the main goto guys who beat Juniper and Arista apparently go and am I sure they will all be turning up at places that will continue to accelerate the demise of this company in this space. The ELT are too busy with their woke agenda replacing more experienced people with the AI fairy story, failed security continuing and massive multi-million dollar continued payments for failure.
@3dnq+1s5fupjv, so true!! I am with you. A few years back, I also carried a target on my back because I was in a group in San Jose that from VP, directors, to engineers, everyone wipes their bottoms with their left hands except me.
Criteria were built with various factors as always but I know a 25yr, never anything but positive results (RSUs, great pulse scores, known as a go-to person, etc) employee that filed a verified ethics violation on a Sr. Dir. and….. they’re gone! Poof. Lesson: keep your mouth shut and find another job if you don’t like it here. The boys protect the boys.
In my particular area it was a combo of age and how much the person made. In the materials I got, my VP only let go of folks 50+. And I was a bit above middle of grade...but had shifted to support of a bit smaller partner ...so thus was considered expendable. Plus, a couple of years ago I was told I had a target on my back due to a particular situation as well.
@1zqp+1s5fupjv - can confirm the bottom 25% exposed. Nothing to do with comp.
On my observation your salary is the most important key, if you own a higher pay and not the favor guy by your higher manager then you need find your way out of the mud pit.
The bottom 20% were on the radar.
As far as I can see, if you are one of those in the routing group and don't wipe your bottom with your left hand, then you are targeted. The other criteria is that even you wipe your bottom with the left hand but didn't come from the same village as your director or VP, then you are also targeted.
LR is mostly a numbers game, it got least to do with individual and skills. Anyone can be caught... If you are, gather your marbles and skills, take a brake, rethink strategy and move on. You will, always always find a better outcome though it could take some time and appear rocky at times. There is a life outside Cisco - Guaranteed.
There was no profile per se. It was based on those making the decisions perception of your value to the business or some political alignment (saving people they liked). I know of many "low visibility" high performers tied to poorly performing accounts that were let go. There were old guys, with medium performance at best, in expensive states that are still there. As I have been in the decision making seat in the past, it is largely subjective unless someone is glaringly a low performer.