Sick of hearing oblivious excuses from leadership and execs. What IBM really needs is a revolution, and not exactly an evolution.
11 replies (most recent on top)
IBM needs a Revolution, not an Evolution? The answer has been staring in their brain-dead faces for decades - simply return to old man Watson's core principles that went out the window starting with John Akers.
Can confirm.
Who cares.
Nobody is interested in IBM
Remember a few years back when activist investors at Starboard shared detailed ways to improve Olive Garden? We need something like that. Outsiders who aren’t lifers can help IBM be less insular and grow.
Agree with both @1vqh and @1coc around:
All managers should have technical knowledge if they are managing technical people.
This also applies to Sales org as we are supposedly in the tech industry. The problem is, many management layers are not technical at all and they really have no idea what's happening in the market. Subsequently when they interview for new/redeployment hires, they get wrong people in too. This is causing very bad never ending cycle.
"All managers should have technical knowledge if they are managing technical people."
I agree with that. My management does not even understand what I do, let alone understand the products I support. They know the names of the products, but that is the extent of it.
First line managers(FLM) should be held accountable for incompetence and should be fired right away. All managers should have technical knowledge if they are managing technical people. All FLMs should be asked to re-interview with IBM and those who will not pass should be RA'd.
"this town needs an en--a!!" -The Joker
AK is trying to exploit Gerstner’s strategy (enterprise), but his execution lacks urgency and that is ki----g him. Until the layers of management get 1/2’ed you cannot expect change. Managers know there are no consequences for poor decisions and lack of playing well with others. Just look at the multiple cloud strategies. Defending your territory even though it’s not in IBM’s strategic interest still is quite rewarding and the managers know it. Bake some consequences into their performance plans and you will see really meaningful change. Gerstner got the management reporting levels down to 7. That would be an easy objective to aim for. Make every band 10 and above reapply for their jobs, and only hold open 1/2 of todays number. The folks who don’t make the cut get reassigned to band 9 jobs or get PIP’ed What’s good for the goose is good for the gander
This was identified way back in 2001 by Lou Gerstner. Check this article: https://stratechery.com/2017/microsofts-monopoly-hangover/
What happened ? Palmisano. Apres moi le deluge
What it really needs is a reduction and change in upper management. Problem solved. We are tired of the lies and hypes.