Get rid of all the pointless presentation warriors. They contribute absolutely nothing to the bottom line. They regurgitate the same points over and over again in different fonts and with different pictures just so they have something to do. And they keep petting each other on their backs for it. We have nothing to lose by getting rid of them and a lot to gain.
16 replies (most recent on top)
I agree there are too many management layers. However, that is what happens when everyone thinks they deserve to get promoted. Even terrible employees say they deserve to get promoted. People who do bare minimum demand a promotion. Individual contributors demand a promotion. Then, they threaten to quit, complain to HR, complain to ER. Poof you get a promotion. Managers, directors, senior directors who don’t know how to lead. Now too many layers.
@2wks+1rzEvFOn I think you are underestimating just how many people don't get either support or advocacy currently.
If i report into my VP, i at least know the chain of command to the CEO is a lot more streamlined . Reporting to a manager who reports to a director who reports to a senior director who reports to a VP who reports to the C- SUITES is asinine , and is the reason we have so much bloat that goes unchecked. Awareness of function at the C suite level ensures teams that are actually making change aren’t cut because one LT kisses more a-s , they’re only cutting what is not profitable. It’s like a game of telephone we can only imagine how that message is changing from IC-VP. Clearly Nike is showing that we have failed at telephone
As a now retired pal of mine once said...You can't throw a rock around here without hitting a stinkin Director.
Is it important to know what your director does all day? Because if you were to report directly into a VP, I can guarantee that you will have no idea what they do all day. Just because your specific manager isn’t doing what you’d like/need them to do doesn’t mean that manager layers aren’t needed. Get rid of too many layers of people management and you’ll find that your ability to access support and advocacy for your own work will be greatly diminished.
@2lcg+1rzEvFOn It's not the deck-making I mind. It's the incompetence, the Director taking credit for all the work, the Director running meetings with other people's content and not even really understanding what they are speaking to, etc... etc...
Remember: Directors at Nike are only Managers, and poorly-prepared ones at that.
Hoping somehow my entire management chain gets their papers . We could report into our VP and they would know no difference. I don’t even know what my director does all day
So many people hating on managers making decks. And yet, you want funding? Deck! You want people to know what your team does? Deck! You want resources? Deck! You want to pitch a new strategy? Deck! Decks are not a manager problem, they are a NIKE problem. People are always complaining how how all their manager does is build decks, and yet decks are the only way anything gets done at this company. Don't hate the player. Hate the game.
@2iqo+1rzEvFOn You are out of your mind. Glad you are not in charge.... Can you imagine the amount of personal agendas that would be brought into that??? You have trust in your colleagues? Lol you are so naive! People may just nominate each other because they do not like a person.... This layoffs are business decision for cutting cost....
I’ve said it before I’ll say it again.
HR should survey each team and ask every employee, “Is there anyone on your team who doesn’t add value such that they’d be an appropriate candidate for a RIF? If so, why do you believe this?”
Some might worry this could turn into a popularity contest more than anything else. I disagree. I have a lot more faith and trust in my colleagues than that. All of us know who adds value and who mails it in through certain actions and behaviors.
While the process wouldn’t be perfect it couldn’t be any worse than the seemingly arbitrary methods currently used. It would require more work from HR but in the end they’d have more reliable, actionable data upon which to make personnel decisions. When one person provides negative feedback on a colleague that’s one thing. When five people all say “This person adds little value” and can articulate why, that becomes a clue.
This will never happen of course. Makes too much sense on too many levels. Not only would it help get rid of dead weight it would provide Nike with objective data points that could insulate it from lawsuits. “We didn’t get rid of you because you’re [insert favored discrimination claim here]. We got rid of you because multiple colleagues of yours didn’t seem to think you earn your paycheck.”
Nike talks a good game about fairness and egalitarianism but at the end of the day many layoff decisions don’t make much sense. There’s a better way but Nike isn’t a good or brave enough company to implement it.
@1wwp+1rzEvFOn We may be working in the same team! This is exactly my director! She gatekeeps every attempt and only allows anything she can take credit and create power points!
My Director pumps us for her deck info rhrn sells it up the chain, takes credit for our work, gatekeeps us. Keeps stealing things I create and passes them off as hers. Total waste.
Start with worthless teams like DEI, Sustainability, etc.
Depends on the orgs. Myself and all the directors I work with actually do a lot of actual work that without it, would grind the entire company to a halt. At least we have specialist tracks now that allows for IC's to get to higher pay bands. Just need to figure out how to get the rest of the company to respect those levels.
Should only be one manager of managers, everyone else has real work responsibilities that contribute directly to running the business. Bureaucracies only do one thing - grow … then re-org … then grow again. Is an incestuous self procreating cycle.
Amen to that.