Thread regarding Intel Corp. layoffs

Do you trust and/or admire your (13000) manager(s)? Intel seems to be full of bad managers! [part2]

Do you trust and/or admire your (13000) manager(s)? Intel seems to be full of bad managers! [part2]

Managers are NOT in INTEL to protect the people, working bees, and, per say, any (even USA) "Democracy"!

They are in INTEL primarily to protect BOD, VPs, SLMs, and stinky FLMs (90% corrupt ones) Hierarchy (however it is disastrous)! ;-)

They are there to PROTECT PROFIT, you, ordinary people, sheep for slaughtering!

They are (very) weak characters, and HR, in-line with them, are there/INTEL to ensure that THE INTEREST of these c_o_c_@-roaches, infested the company and their masters, are protected.

All these philosophy, introduced by these roaches (13000 managers + HR + Legal), should be overwritten by consilium of psychiatrists , which these professionals MUST lock most of them in Mental Institutions! :-)

YES, this is The ONLY/RIGHT approach! :-)

Time Will Tell

by
| 1849 views | | 10 replies (last ) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+MGFWH1s

10 replies (most recent on top)

"Trust?"

TRUST NO ONE!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1xlb+MGFWH1s

When you no longer trust SLM, GM, VP, SVP and then you got the San Jose State educated clown in the corner, got to ask why you trust or have any hope that the future Has anything . So happy I parted ways with that circus ACT

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1wag+MGFWH1s

I trust my flm a bit. I trust SLM less. TLM I trust even less. And so on and in CEO, I have no trust left.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1swp+MGFWH1s

Good/excellent replies. Very much like them. Unfortunately, all replies show the degradation/decay of once great company, which not so while ago ruled The CPU World. NOT anymore!

I also got the idea, a while ago... The Point of NO Return is passed, in 2015, with the first ACT.

We are just mute witnesses to what will happen in Y2018/Y2019. To falling knife.

Never catch a falling knife! :-(

Time Will Tell

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1amv+MGFWH1s

The end is near for the cherade.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1mnu+MGFWH1s

It starts at the top, when you had brilliance at the top it was a virtuous cycle that bred great leaders and management for the first few decades.

My managers the last ten years would never be considered role models of manager nor mentor. Little more than a slave driver.. is all they were or aloof self serving.

It has been a down hill virtuous cycle from CRB, to PSO to the bottom of the technical CEO heap with the pride of San Jose State, what an idiot.

Look at the clowns he had brought along from TMG and external. Is it any surprises you find little leadership, mentoring or any development within the Intel management.

Sad end to this once great company, but maybe appropriate give the lineage of the current CEO, failures of TMG.

Management doesn't tell a straight story to investors nor their own employees, pretty much the story you get from management is a reflection of their integrity and honesty.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1wxm+MGFWH1s

@pyd - Exactly. Most radical cultural shifts require a radical change in circumstances. Intel is too big an insular ship for anyone or anything to (quickly) direct a major new direction. It will sadly take years before anyone in power realizes the core of the problem, and by then it will likely be too late.

@1jf - good summary; I just don't see the change you hope for ever happening.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @qox+MGFWH1s

Great summary / essay from ljf. I definitely do not think Intel can change quickly enough to compete with the remarkably different external environment as compared to 15 - 20 years ago. Cultural changes inside companies are not so different from cultural changes in society, very difficult to go back to good times.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @pyd+MGFWH1s

The pronlem is the selection and retention philosophy for management shifted over time. 20 years back bosses used to be valued more on expertise in their discipline which was usually a technical one tied directly to developing products. Most of the top bosses were also highly skilled in a technical field and could differentiate when an effort fails because it was risky vs. The team or person or boss lacked the required skills. Thus, the leadership generally was selected by competency and ability to learn from mistakes. Gradually it seems the top leadership skill of differentiating degraded. Eventually it became apparent any smell of failure would get you fired regardless of your competency or ability to learn. You can't learn if every mistake gets you removed. Net result is the managers and reams that avoid risk and shift blame thrive while those taking risks but inevitably get delayed or tangled in a mess get eliminated before they can learn. For icing on the cake many with no technical expertise form HR for example have expanded power to deselect someone for minor offenses like being grumpy or skipping an1-1 regardless of the circumstances or level of technical genius that person has. I don't know exactly how this evolution happened but really name calling the 13000 bosses who are just dealing with the sad reality of their lot in life is over simplified. Not that it isn't a sad situation, I agree with that but maybe somehow we can change things back to a less superficial fear of failure/blame shift culture to a learning and product competency culture.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ljf+MGFWH1s

OP, Intel managers do not protect BK, they only protect themselves. Some are really indecent human being. Indian manager is the worst.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @htk+MGFWH1s

Post a reply

: