I worked with multiple grade 12s and 13s that were non-technical. No knowledge in anything remotely technical. These people were good at internal processes, joining webexes, taking minute notes and getting other people to do their ask for them. They knew the political landscape well, but I could never figure out what value they actually gave the company. They seemed important because their calendars were always full with webexes and anytime they had meetings with their higher ups they had nice powerpoints to make it seem like they were doing actual work. How do these people get promoted to such high ranks? The people that did their work for them, or kept their heads down never got beyond grade 8, 10 on my team. New hires were never promoted beyond 4-6 for 4-5+ years until they either quit or got laid off.
11 replies (most recent on top)
The non-sales executive staff (engineering, support, etc.) are incompetent. They just don't know how to effectively manage a technical organization. They struggle to get the right people in the right positions. Frequently decisions are made based on personalities and relationships instead of capabilities and performance.
This is not intentional malfeasance. It is just incompetence. Cisco has lost the ability to effectively identify and differentiate top contributors from deadwood. Much of this is caused by more than a decade of poor HR practices. At this point there is little chance to recover from it. Cisco has entered Nortel mode, but still has a great world-wide sales force.
Operating in its current mode, I expect Cisco to collapse in less than a decade. It is going to be a painful journey on the way down.
I am not suggesting everyone needs to knows how to configure a router. But for shxt's sake they should know what the FCK a router is. Working a deal know where the Sr OD and VP have no idea about basic functions in our offerings and how they compare to other vendors. You cant be creditable to customers if you don't know what we sell. All the skills you mention below are out the door with all you can talk about is discount. Might as well go to the CarMax model and the price is the price. then we can get rid of all our expensive management
"having credibility and trust at CxO level, business acumen, commercial awareness, being able to negotiate strongly, building an internal network of people to call on, owning the number, etc. "
Probably because they have other skills that are more valued to the company then someone with basic technical knowledge. To a lay person, maybe these skills are not obvious but here are some: people skills, understanding company politics with a customer (believe it or not, it's not always the best technical solution that wins), having credibility and trust at CxO level, business acumen, commercial awareness, being able to negotiate strongly, building an internal network of people to call on, owning the number, etc.
Being technical is not rare and it's the same in every sector. When you go to buy a car, who do you think knows more about how the car works, the sales guy or the mechanic? Now ask yourself why the sales guy gets paid more? When you work this out, you'll have your answer.
It does not depend on what you know but who you know nowadays in Cisco for a promotion. There are so many dead wood directors / senior directors / vp / senior vp in Engineering especially in CSG. These guys all seem to come from the same village.
You couldn't be more accurate. For the last 10 yrs every OD in sales I have worked for couldn't tell you what we sold. And now they cant even run a forecast call. Totally lost on the value they bring. When they leave and go to partners they seem to last less than 6 months as value is measured in actually producing sales not hosting WebEx meetings. Cut the dead weight. If you don't know what a router is probably better to go be a greeter at Home Depot.
When people get STEM degrees and follow that by getting the latest certifications, they usually brand themselves as workhorses and order takers. Engineering and programming are problem-solving skills, but if you can't communicate, build relationships, and lead people to understand the "big picture," you're always going to be just another cog in the wheel. Oh, then there's the Peter Principle too.
Good boy network?
someone has been properly schooled!!!
Well said, Former Long Time Cisco Manager. Running any company requires workers who have a wide variety of skills. Before disparaging internal processes (aka "How we do business"), the original poster might consider that he or she doesn't fully understand why such processes exist in the first place.
Because that's their job, not yours.
Well a couple of things:
-
Not every role in the company is a technical role. Believe it or not there are other skills that are important even in a tech company.
-
You might be surprised at what technical skills people actually have that you know nothing about. Just because they are not doing "technical things" now doesn't mean they don't possess technical skills. You might be surprised to find that some of those you say have "zero technical skills" have undergrad or even grad degrees from MIT and if you actually tried to engage them in a technical discussion on their area of expertise would wipe the floor with you.
That being said there are plenty of people that have risen to levels that they have no business being in.
Though I'll turn the question around and ask: "Why are there people in people management roles, that have zero people management skills." Going back to your original question, would you rather have a manager who has awesome people management skills, mentors you, sets clear direction, shields you from the political bulls***, listens to his/her team and makes informed decisions, or a manager who is a hard core techie that has zero people skills, demeans his/her team for not being a smart as he/she is technically and generally sets you on a bad career path?
1.Relatives 2. Good boy network 3. Nationality (look at reports)