Starting to get some detail on this…
20% of MDs and 15% of directors were let go yesterday, compared to 4% of individual contributors. It appears the approach taken was by percent of the level vs a raw total. They wanted to cut out an entire layer of management. I’ve heard they want no more than 5 layers between the enterprise lead and individual contributors. Look at some of these org charts, MDs and directors have significantly more people reporting to them now.
It never made sense that so many MDs had up to 3 other MDs reporting to them.
Same ol game plan.. flatten then add another level when biz turns up. Problem is that some of those left are the real problem to driving value. Especially in Tech side..
I agree with the flatting but not the level to EC. I was a PL and 4 to EC and was impacted and my boss a MD was 3 to EC gone; the reaming staff got split in three and squeezed into other teams.
If you are a long-serving Director, this will make you think long and hard before you push to get promoted to MD. Biggest risk factor was being an MD without an organization beneath you that clearly called for an MD to lead it.
Don't worry, we'll find a new way to be inefficient. We have the same leaders who created previous org structure creating the new one, so eventually it'll be the same structure we are trying to get away from.
The plan overall was good. The big questions remain about the execution. If you are trying to aggressively flatten an organization it is really important to make sure the right people are elevated or removed. So far I am seeing a lot of hits and misses. A lot of people with no experience running large orgs just received a ton of new people and a mandate. Some of these could be good moves. Many will fail though and cause more churn.