Is it me or are there way too many VP's at IBM. Do we need 4 levels of VPs? You will never see the company flatten management levels - instead they bring out the pink slips to the real people who keep the company running - then once they make their headcount numbers - they begin the process of re-hiring so they can pay a recent graduate half or less what an experienced professional gets - except what they don't see is that this recurring cycle is the reason for IBM's poor performance quarter after quarter, year after year. Which is why IBM hates dealing severance in countries like Canada, Germany, France etc where real labour laws exist. Why do you think there were little to no RA's in those countries last year? Collocation is one way to reduce headcount in those countries - force them into the office and a 2 hour commute - make them unhappy so they quit.
7 replies (most recent on top)
I came on as part of an acquisition and I was astounded at how many people got paid and otherwise rewarded on these large deals. It seems the game is not to perform as an individual contributor, but, to find your way onto a massive team s---ing on the right test at the right time.
Not to mention nowadays they have VPs reporting to VPs and also in some instances two level of SVPs...
Absolutely brilliant ! We can only hope the lone rower swims ashore and leaves the management group to row the boat themselves. Most likely they'll seek the advise of hired consultants from Bain & Company. After their analysis, they'll recommend that the management team sinks the boat and swims ashore where Warren Buffet will be waiting to supply wet towels.
Middle management bloat and over-processed fluff keeps IBM at the bottom.
This explains it all...
https://www.slideshare.net/mobile/izzyimmune/ibm-team-race
Agreed @trl.
Ginni and co. survived the annual meeting of Apr/24 in return for a dividend hike? How much lower will the bar go?
Ginni and co. get undeserved get-out-of-jail-free cards each time the media tries clumsily to compare IBM to a ship making a wide turn, or to a conglomerate with more businesses than I can spell. In the meanwhile opportunists game the stock with news and rumors.
The future of IBM is in the hands of its shareholders. Real change will happen if the media would instead compare Ginni with the new heads at Microsoft or Google.
You just figured out the management heavy aspect of IBM. It has been that way for years. They have VPs , Directors and managers managing teams of 4 or less. Merge those team and kill of 2 overpaid useless people.