Thread regarding IBM layoffs

Are we getting better?

Everybody was clamoring to get rid of Ginni. Well, she's been gone for months now. Are we a better company yet? How many improvements have happened since she left? Or could it be that IBM's problems are much deeper and require a much more comprehensive solution than just replacing the CEO?

by
| 2627 views | | 18 replies (last )
Post ID: @OP+1alNJldl

18 replies (most recent on top)

@1fkv+1alNJldl

Agree with you about cutting management in half. But for sure this is not what we are seeing right now... I am CC&S org, and I see more management coming day after day and less and less actual workers (billable resources). So the disaster is on going and accelerating.

by
|
Post ID: @2fkk+1alNJldl

IBM has a fundamental problem and it’s very very poor management. When Gerstner took over, one of the first things he did was make every manager interview for their job again. He only hired back 50% of those interviewed, and 50% had to go back to the rank of “general” employee and got off the management chain. IBM under Ginni and Sam before her has let management expand at least 2x from Gerstner days, and we are right where we were when Gerstner took over. If AK wants to be effective, he needs to address management and their total lack of job performance. He bought a new strategy (Redhat) with all that comes with it (employees and managers). He now needs to nuke legacy IBM managers and over lapping employees. It will not be pretty, but if he wants to save IBM, it needs to be done ASAP. New IBM will be smaller, but with 1/2 the management reporting chains. Some legacy IBM’ers will fit right in under Redhat management, but that will be mostly in the cognitive / AI area. GTS will be spun off and most likely sold (go read about HPE’s services spin off and you know where IBM is heading on this one. They are purely copying HPE’s play). GBS will be greatly downsized and focused on partnerships, and 6-10 industries. Everything else will be disposed of. Systems will go to mainframe focus primarily. Yes some Power and Intel will bleed in, but only if the enterprise customers insist. Cognitive will be Redhat on steroids with a side of application modernization (almost exclusively mainframe focused) and AI / Hybrid cloud thrown in. Everything else will be disposed of. Like it or don’t, but that is where the future lies. New IBM will emerge as a 45 billion dollar company with enterprise customer focus. NOTE all of this happens only if you get your management team correct AK has a lot of work ahead of him, as he has not really addressed the management layers and their bureaucracy. That’s the Achilles heal of IBM and most major corporations who are in trouble. Poor management execution.

by
|
Post ID: @1fkv+1alNJldl

Amusing to see people expecting major improvement just because CEO got replaced with another senior exec who was instrumental in where IBM is today. Also, people mistakenly think CEO (including Ginni) feels the need for dramatic change. Absolutely not. IBM is where it is because CEO (and rest of IBM executives) wanted it there. Nothing of substance will change. Try to make a quick buck and get out.

by
|
Post ID: @ihr+1alNJldl

@xqf+1alNJldl this is so true plus ibm would offer better pay (inflation adjusted) to new clg grads but wouldn't do that for current employees.

It's like they're telling us we don't care about you with their actions.

Ibm is going to have massive problems retaining anyone once the job market bounces back.

by
|
Post ID: @nms+1alNJldl

To make any company better, it has to provide best and world class services/solutions to the client. To provide, such solutions, they must be created by creative minds and top talents. To hire such talent at all levels, they have to pay good salaries and bonuses. Now you know why IBM can't hire such people, that's the MAIN reason for their failure.

PS: no hikes since last 2 years. On top of that 100 bluepoints yearly bonus. Such a shame. I have masters in Computer Science from a well know university from the US. All other co–workers have already gone to FAANG who joined with me in the jump start batch. So IBM is left with 25–30$/hr coop/interns who will do job of experienced people. No one is hear to guide them or improve them. When I joined IBM, it was my dream company. I turned down a Tesla offer to work for IBM Watson. Now Watson is merely a joke. As a result of all these, I am also leaving soon. Started interviewing since last 15 days. 3–4 on going interviews. Hopefully, will get out of this c––p soon.

So, changing CEO doesn't help. They have to evenly distributes bonuses and hikes from top management to jr employees. If you cannot boost your employees morale or company image, no one would be able to stay and make good products.

Realty is FAANG doesn't contain I of IBM. No one in the industry gives a shjt about IBM experience.

by
|
Post ID: @xqf+1alNJldl

Nothing will change until you remove the legacy leadership and management. It's just an anchor of a different color.

by
|
Post ID: @kmj+1alNJldl

The damage she caused may be too much for IBM to recover from.

by
|
Post ID: @urc+1alNJldl

LOL. The only thing without Ginni is that the grave digging slowed down..

by
|
Post ID: @lzv+1alNJldl

Until they change the CFO and move Operations out from under finance to actually enable the business on strategic execution not much will actually change.

by
|
Post ID: @fds+1alNJldl

IBM can't even get high school kids to stay. Something very wrong :D

by
|
Post ID: @qnd+1alNJldl

There is overall issue in IBM , not only about Ginni.Products , employee skills all are far below than market average. Clients do not trust IBM anymore. try to leave as tomorrow could be too late.

by
|
Post ID: @jck+1alNJldl

IBM has been in decline for 20 years. It takes time to reverse that even with good visionary leadership. Which IBM does not have.

by
|
Post ID: @bxu+1alNJldl

NewCo has a chance to break free from the bloat and run leaner.
Some of the internal processes take longer than the implementation.
That's when you know you're doing it wrong as a company.

by
|
Post ID: @cwc+1alNJldl

Start by replacing the geriatric club BOD. Having board members that are C-levels at clients and can influence deals is good, having ones that were C-levels but retired 20 years ago not so much.

by
|
Post ID: @qek+1alNJldl

The CFO still running the show, and the rest is smoke and mirrors.

by
|
Post ID: @sra+1alNJldl

Well first, ibm stuck with Ginni for so long that she destroyed product culture altogether.
Maybe ibm wasn't rhat good in 2011 but they were ahead of competition in many emerging fields like ai.

Second, the big red hat deal that GR wanted made sure ibm cannot get out of the 'dividend' stock loop anymore as they have limited money to invest and cant take anymore debt for R&D. Look at the research division right now compared to 2011. Only one good thing out of it is quantum.

Also, AK has been with IBm for 30 yrs which is a huge mistake to make him ceo.
He has kept ELT intact from GR era. They dont have any responsibilities when product fails and are here to milk bonuses.

by
|
Post ID: @miv+1alNJldl

Yeah, that last AK e-mail was really pathetic, wasn't it?

by
|
Post ID: @xbb+1alNJldl

No improvement.

One cannot simply grade their own report card and call it a win-win. At the end of the day Wall Street says it all.

by
|
Post ID: @azh+1alNJldl

Post a reply

: