I don't understand how our org chart makes any sense. Why do so many people/groups report up to people that aren't really in their same area of work, or region for that matter? I can see cross-region reporting when it makes sense, but it doesn't always. Person/group A reports up to person/group B who does something else entirely. Meanwhile, there is a 100% related person/group C who does what A does and seems to be a logical fit. Why is this? I see it a lot.
7 replies (most recent on top)
@b2 me too! Can’t wait
BD gives impressive titles out like candy. We give “Senior” titles to recent college grads and have a ridiculous number of Directors and VPs. We have VPs reporting to VPs who report to VPs. Managers without direct reports are commonplace. At BD, the “Manager” title really doesn’t mean the person is a manager of people at all. Worse yet, I’ve known several Directors in my org who have no one reporting to them. How does that even happen! It’s laughable. Embarrassed to say I work at BD and can’t wait to get out!
@OP watch for layoffs in those situations. I’ve seen re-orgs that don’t make much sense, then those people were eventually laid off.
@a5 BDX in general, examples throughout the org
How can someone have a title of manger or sr manger and yet not have a single person underneath them? Who are they supposed to be managing??? Themselves???
Which org are you referring to?
@OP The problem is that the org chart is being designed by people who have never successfully run an organization. It doesn't prioritize skills or competence. Instead, it's shaped by the personal preferences of individuals with below-average leadership and organizational capabilities.