Wondering how many others believe their work is duplicative or isn’t really necessary? If yes, wondering what type of work you’re doing (if comfortable to share at a high level)?
Our group does front line quality and it IS duplicative and at the end of the day it doesn’t change much for WF. I believe I see a great deal of duplicative or not impactful work around the bank, but maybe my vision is skewed.
Anyone else experiencing the same? W
Approximately 90% of my days is saying something along the lines of " We can do that, but it's throw away work/money".
5% is my boss, their boss, and their boss second guessing me and me justifying that I know what I am doing (after all, they are paying me to have an opinion).
4% is filing and managing exceptions around the first 2 points.
By this perspective my job is doing nothing, professionally.
Since WF has been under pressure we have taken a "look over your shoulder" attitude about risk identification and improvement. Problem is when the process is just wrong having controls or monitoring for errors after the fact doesn't work. The auto repossession process that was outsourced worked perfectly. Problem is we allowed active service members cars to be repossessed which is against the law. Risk Management that works is on point out in front of the business execution. RCSA will never achieve that.
Post ID: @uds+1nqUBXws
Paranoid much?
Laughable that you think CS is conjuring up posts on a layoff site to see what jobs to terminate. He wants to get rid of absolutely everyone who was at WF before he was and those who aren't obedient to him.
Charlie’s job is incredibly redundant.
Chuckles, your vision IS skewed.
And your post is beneath even you.
What a desperate attempt to unearth more people to add to your find-a-way-to-terminate list.
Operations work so not duplicative.
In our business we have managers who do quality, a QA team, a QC team and some other QA team who monitors us because a small part of our work is offshored to India. And now evidence control reviews who look at some of the same things. Sorry to say it is annoying but we’re too busy fending off risk and audit. And ironically regardless of our quality results from any of those teams, it doesn’t change that risk and audit also review us as well.
Post ID: @zaj+1nqUBXws
No. I understand the differences and the RMF very well. You can’t equate QA and QC to duplicative because they are by intended design - to be different.
Today, there are in fact truly duplicative QA functions that review the same thing. And the real risk (in addition to employees feeling like their work doesn’t matter) is with duplication comes increased risk potential for inconsistent output in how that item was considered for review and subsequently rated. I’ve seen this risk realized over and over from my prior role/life so it does happen.
Post ID: @dos+1nqUBXws
OP here. Thank you. It feels to me that it’s more than ever and no one cares when you raise the concern.
I thought the RCSA workshop process would expose some of redundancies but haven’t seen any changes to the duplicative work.
Most of this just sounds like function areas are not informed or comprehend Wells Fargo Risk Framework. This redundant roles are necessary (QA_QC) controls that must be executed outside of the process to mitigate the risk of the process aligned activities quality controlling themselves. You think your role is redundant but it's how wells fargo evidences to audit, examiners, and regulators their risk is effectively managed and governed appropriately
I get tired of filing TPS reports
@vch+1nqUBXws, no....your reply is odd. The OP was wondering about this and we answered.
Some of these posts seem “odd.” Why call out your own group for being redundant?
I'm in Issue Management, part of front-line control. The amount of duplicative review on-going is beyond anything I've ever seen before. I've never felt like my work mattered so little in my entire career. And there is nothing we can do to improve the situation, leadership is far too busy to even care or understand. And they need us to exist for them to exist so no matter how redundant our work is, the message is just to keep doing it.
I am on a team that was put together as a support team for my department. But, the work we do isn't impactful and is just a collection of mindless task that nobody else wants to do and isn't high on anybody's priority list. I mean if you don't do it it would take a while, if ever, for someone to notice.
Everyone on my team was redeployed after our original positions were eliminated. We were moved to this department because it was underperforming and supposedly understaffed. A lot of changes to leadership have happened. So, I sit around twiddling my thumbs most days trying to find ways to be useful.
My entire job basically exists to tell people they made a copy/paste error on their CHG.
No idea why we still exist other than ITIL says we should.
Frontline call monitoring in Auto Finance.✋🏼
100% the work can be done by the business. They MAYBE need us as a regulatory oversight, but the frontline supervisors who deal with the rank and file on the phones ALREADY monitor their people. We’re unnecessary. The whole QM group is window dressing. If AI can replace any functions, start with us.
Contributing to duplicate work is the reduction of all work to tasks w/o context. Zero meetings to design/strategize/review because this is not Agile enough. Any attempts to plan out work and document processes for future use apparently has no merit.
So round and round we go, seeing the same work over and over as if everything is a new experience that we never saw before.
If WF was in charge of our education system, none of us would graduate. We'd all be living in a perpetual freshman year.
Yep, in risk.
At any given time, could be 5 from of us from different teams reviewing same or similar information but ultimately looking to cover risk.
It’s a hard sell to explain to the business owners. And half the time you know they don’t buy it but are too busy to fight it.