First we had to deal with our project team members being cut to improve our margins, but some of these new hires are rubbish. Lack of experience is one thing, but they are hiring people for Dynamics projects who have never even used the product. This is embarrassing, how are we supposed to explain this to our customers? But hey, I guess we're making more profits, right?
11 replies (most recent on top)
This is a corker... Technology Asset Studio (TAS) "DXC's strength is our people, our clients engage with DXC to utilize this knowledge" Oh really, why fii©K your people over then?
@2llu+19utSAWS - I can add to that woeful story about hotel cost preventing delivery of billable work. A whole team due to spend a week with a 'secure' public sector account, did not show as hotel cost were refused. PD was going spare at the end of the 'Turing floor'.
"I remember DXC refusing to pay £2K for premier inns for 3 DXC staff to undertake consultancy work (workshops, stakeholder meetings, review of business) over 5 days for a fee of £50K."
BS - This statement shows the real flaw with DXC - the abject performance of the sales/business/tech layer. The ones left in DXC are the self serving,old legacy offloaders.
The ones who at critical moments, always go missing / go on holiday / are too busy on other projects" (take your pick).
The reason you failed that 50K, was because someone else knew more than you - like how to use Zoom/Skype.
I've seen that also, middle management refusing work and allowing the client to talk them into do it their self at certain stage of the contract.
How is the client allowed to do work when they have given DXC a contract. Who is responsible for the quality of work, any further issues, profit.
Incompetent middle mangers who just sit on stuff and block need a talking to from Mike's as to why they are refusing profitable work when revenues are in decline.
If the client wants to do work themselves DXC should charge them regardless due to revenue loss.
I remember DXC refusing to pay £2K for premier inns for 3 DXC staff to undertake consultancy work (workshops, stakeholder meetings, review of business) over 5 days for a fee of £50K.
DXC's staff could see the value of the securing the deal because they could see the bigger picture beyond that and were even offering to car-share, stay at relatives and things they shouldn't have been offering DXC who had just awarded huge bonuses to the top table amid declining revenues.
In the end the client became frustrated waiting with DXC Management's malaise that it withdrew it proposal and offered it to a software consultancy who were only too pleased to have a big-name client on its books and they also went on to secure further work phases over 3 years. Client bother renewing its services contract with DXC.
DXC lost 50K revenue for what would have only been a week's work, and lost a further 3-year deal for an additional services contract. However, on the plus side, they saved a few thousand on travel expenses. So, you know, swings and roundabouts.
Hey, consider yourself lucky. When I went through the last round of WFR, not only did I have to deal with project team members being cut, but there were no replacements at all. So we had to just get on and do what we could with fewer people. On one occasion no-one even bothered to tell me. I turned up at the client site on Monday morning to find that 8 of the 12 people I was expected weren't there. At first I though it must be a traffic problem, but after a while I started trying to contact them - and all their phones were disconnected. Mailed my head of department to be told that all 8 had taken VR and gone, there wouldn't be any replacements, so I should re-plan the project.
Didn't need to replan the project, as the client kicked us out on the basis that we were failing to provide the resources that we'd committed to provide. Another great own goal by DXC UK.
Needless to say, I no longer work for DXC :)
Trouble is once you are publicly traded you are driven by the logic of Wall Street.
Any leadership team not prepared to bow to the contradiction of Wall Street demands is replaced.
The irony is that what investors want is to make money but that's no longer about the company just making sound business decisions and collecting profits from a job well done.
Even going private now would be fraught with problems because the replacement cash would come from a bunch of hard nosed bandits with an even harsher agenda.
In the company I work for, losing an experienced person is a big deal, as unless you replace with an experienced hire quickly (3 months it takes to replace) there is an increased risk to your customer relations and a potential impact on the service you deliver to the client. Service quality is our top priority.
Apparently, if you deliver a good piece of work, something really strange happens. The client comes back for more! Yes, I know - how mad is that? Building good client-relationships and keeping them takes time and hard work. Cutting experienced staff from high-risk projects that has, up to that point, maintained good client relations is a good way to damage your client relationship and likely damage the supplier's reputation too! Yet, DXC do it all the time. No risk assessment, no evaluation, just BANG! RIFF! GONE. Now lets see what the damage is under our new reactive management process.
I've seen lucrative pieces of work slip through DXC's fingers because they cut experienced PM's from their business despite letters being sent from the client to DXC Senior management to try and save a DXC role to no avail. Key resource doesn't mean anything, any more.
There is nothing wrong with using some inexperienced staff on a dynamics project, how else are they to learn? But they should be guided by experienced folk, otherwise you're just feeding your staff to the wolves.
Either DXC are in so much debt with so much cost that they have no choice or they lack the right leadership to know where these pinch points are and stop them from happening by embracing the core values they keep espousing.
The attitude of "don't worry, they'll pick it up as they go along" is like the guy who comes to clean your gutters because he's got his own ladder and knows how to throw muck all over the place leaving you to clean up the the sh1t. Not exactly 'Client Focussed' or 'Execution Excellence'
Why do big firms often forget what they did to make themselves that big in the first place. Its starts out as creativity and innovation with excellent customer focus. Ends up being boardroom gambling and focussing entirely on your shareholders over your clients and completely forgetting that your staff are (or were) your greatest asset.
+19utSAWS - agree started (along with latter days of CSC) with the disastrous leadership by Lawrie and the recovery from the bottom of the pile should be addressed and sorted out by Sal. Question is, is it too late or is there chance that the brand can recover.
DXC's name is mud in the industry now. For Dynamics projects, all the good people are long gone, and the community is small enough to we know NEVER to accept a DXC offer.
Good to hire new people and to teach / train them; nothing wrong with this but at the same time company (any) should not get rid of their existing experience staff / or ship the department to lower cost centre to save few $$$ in the short term.
If it is being done wrong then it shows unfairly the lack of professional by DXC as whole and on to the new hire's - they probably just blag and blag but in long term may wear down their confidence in selling DXC products / services and representing the company as best as possible.