Thread regarding Staples Inc. layoffs

Senior Leadership Changes?

Have heard that there is going to be a big change in senior leadership announced in the next 2 weeks. Apparently Sycamore isn’t happy with the results to date at NAD and will be looking to make a series of changes so that the business can get back on track. Who do we think will be leaving this time?

by
| 3159 views | | 11 replies (last )
Post ID: @OP+15aaUais

11 replies (most recent on top)

There is no business essentials strategy. You’ll see little change with existing conditions. Poor leadership combined with a declining category in normal times (and one that has little value in the current state of the world). Sell more paper and that’s about it.

by
|
Post ID: @9wqo+15aaUais

Someone needs to look at Business Essentials. Very top heavy and does RQ drive any strategy or still work for the company. Haven’t heard anything from that category of any value since she took over and that business is bleeding out and not expected to come back at any real potential. All other categories at least present during Covid19

by
|
Post ID: @9lze+15aaUais

And what if Sycamore isn’t doing their job? Money hungry pigs!

by
|
Post ID: @6qhe+15aaUais

I think there is a fundamental lack of understanding how Sycamore or private equity works. They generally play the short or long game. Staples sold itself, literally went looking for a buyer. The company was profitable but desperate for change/innovation. This was not a traditional 'salvage from bankruptcy' scenario. Sycamore has taken billions in equity out of the company, made sweeping changes from top down. They also have a long term vision, if a leader cant deliver on their long term plan, they will be gone. There is really only one goal here, make money - as much as possible. All decisions are aimed around that. Sh–ty situation, but reality. If Sycamore doesn't feel the leader(s) they brought in are doing the job, they will get the boot.

by
|
Post ID: @6jmb+15aaUais

The problem with the current set of leaders is that they can’t grow businesses. They either try and fail miserably, or simply don’t bother and just focus on cutting ‘costs’, ie. people they aren’t friends with.

Being in Canada, it’s pretty sad to see some fantastic teams cut or changed significantly because MM doesn’t understand the value they have brought for years. But given she doesn’t have much of a track record in building businesses, it’s not too surprising. She’s more focused on keeping friends and cronies employed than people who actually make a difference. Too sad - the end is very much in sight.

by
|
Post ID: @5ynu+15aaUais

I believe Sycamore chose some great leaders.
I also believe Sycamore didn't have all the details they needed to inform the leaders.
Then, the strategy assumed that a halo would make new sub-brands billion-dollar entities atop of what was already grossed with SBP. The strategy also forced 'hard decisions" which rid the company of all the costly folks that had old ideas, like profit and growth... OK, forget it, they chose id–ts!

My bad!

by
|
Post ID: @2axx+15aaUais

CCO doesn’t have much of a track record since she joined. Declining sales, poor hiring decisions (see Canada), lack of collaboration and leadership skills, etc.

The challenge with Sycamore is that they picked a ‘B’ team to run the company and the business units. And ‘B’ team players can’t play in the majors - they just pull everyone down to the minors where they can cope and feel more comfortable.

by
|
Post ID: @2twk+15aaUais

Dumbest move was go to market.

by
|
Post ID: @2zgu+15aaUais

Who cares They’re all useless.

by
|
Post ID: @sdg+15aaUais

Re-IPO what would be the growth story to support it?
What's working? Sales down 30%?
How is the new private label range going?
How is the Commercial/sales chief performing?

by
|
Post ID: @iqm+15aaUais

Maybe they still want to an IPO this year, and SD says they shouldn’t?

by
|
Post ID: @pmf+15aaUais

Post a reply

: