As always, Nike will be letting go of employees based on how much they get paid, not on how well they do their job. This will result in the best workers who've been earning a decent living for years getting the boot, while the lower-paid, not-so-great performers will stick around. It might save money for Nike in the short run, but it will turn into a real disaster in the long haul.
10 replies (most recent on top)
Anyone with "inconsistent" rating the past 3 years will be shown the door.
Anyone not willing to relocate and/or start 4/1 in office will be shown the door.
Those are the first 2 layers. Maybe 2-3% of the 5% total ?
Your position is on such an sga costing sheet but your performance data is not. It’s pure org cost and headcount. The people docs are held tightly by hr and decided on by your own management to meet a dollar and headcount target set by global. HR actions these changes and processes paperwork. Your management makes all decisions. If your management is told to cut ten heads and x dollars they decide who and what roles to fit the target. It’s not as sophisticated as you think. It’s HR after all.
You are H25,V16 on a macro-laden spreadsheet, nothing more.
It's not about keeping the best players. It's about keeping the cheapest B and C players to do a good enough job to keep the lights on. This isn't about excelling through amazing talent. Nike, like Apple, has transitioned into a churn and burn corporation producing perfectly fine but somewhat bland iterations of the same product year after year. We're not about innovating, it's about squeezing every last bit of margin out of our repetitive, boring products that a certain segment of the consumer base will keep buying. Institutional knowledge and experience is not valued when all your leaders are new to Nike and have none of that experience themselves. We are being led by technocrats, bankers and business consultants, so no one should be surprised if they are mostly operating through a lens of finance vs. talent.
I have seen low and mediocre performers get cut each round. Expensive heads such as P codes and above mean meaning older also cut. People who were demoted are cut. Then when it comes to putting people into org boxes is where favoritism rules. Favorites are picked and the younger by default cheaper the better. Nike likes to play moneyball. Get young and cheap hoping to find the next superstar. Think of it like a euro soccer team looking to find em young, play em hard and dump em when old and pricey. The riches of the hard work of course flow to the top pyramid scheme style.
@dbd+1qzQMRm4 brother short term decisions are the only thing that matter in end game capitalism for publically traded companies. Its a race to the bottom, no pragmatism involved. Love it or not, we have arrived and the looters are at the wheel.
You put all your faith into the broken performance rating system at Nike. That’s a joke if you have a bad manager who is just out there to get you.
Will you stop trying to put a logic to it? There are so many factors that are out of your control.
Plenty of people were laid off in December who were excellent employees and i doubt were better paid than others. It was a game of chess based on a future plan that likely won’t pan out again, and we will be rehiring next fall. Hopefully we will rehire some of them.
Some of the people we kept instead of the ones let go are even pi---d about the new roles they are In. Some of the people we let go had more experience and knowledge then 2 or 3 of the people we kept, combined.
We need to stop letting finance people run the show because looking only at the numbers are short term decisions and not based on what the company needs (product people).
This isn't really the whole story. High performers correlate with high earnings more often than not, which is what you see. Same goes for older, longer tenure employees. Most importantly cutting teams makes irrelevant whatever anyone's performance is. In all reorgs I've witnessed Nike has absolutely axed many poor performers, people on plans, etc., and appears to have used them to balance the scales with discrimination thresholds.
Point being, if you're more expensive than your peers, be more concerned. If you're young and pip'd you should have been looking in Dec. High performing median or lower earners are a great group to be part of to be frank.
As always? Have watched higher performing and higher paid employees being let go before?