TechGrrl
Space Cadet
Re: IT Layoffs-Insight into Management
What a timely article in the August 17th issue of Business Week:
We're Overled and Undermanaged
Here's some key paragraphs which I think are particularly relevant to this thread:
If the decree had come down to cut the 10% least performing members of the organization, and then hunkering down to keep working with a smaller workforce until the economy turned around and new hiring could take place, I would have no problem with this. And, you know what, if that were explained up front, I would venture to guess that the rest of the workgroup would accept and understand the business reality. In general, the peers of the poor performers know who they are, because they have to cover for them every day. I know that when I had to make someone 'available to the marketplace', their peers would often come up and say, "thank you".
But even 'poor performers' are deserving of being treated with dignity and respect. Some people are simply square pegs in round holes. Finding them a square hole may work. Some people don't fit at UPS; it's not for the faint of heart. And some people just aren't competent, but it shouldn't have taken 20+ years to figure that out.
What a timely article in the August 17th issue of Business Week:
We're Overled and Undermanaged
Here's some key paragraphs which I think are particularly relevant to this thread:
"Unfortunately, detached leaders tend to be more concerned with impressing outsiders than managing within. A case in point: downsizing—decreeing the firing of thousands while ignoring the effect on morale. A robust company is not a collection of leftover "human resources." It's a community of engaged human beings.
Until this past year, when things collapsed, most downsizing took place at profitable companies that didn't happen to meet Wall Street's expectations. How could legions of employees suddenly be "redundant," as if they weren't needed in the first place? Where is the judgment—the wisdom to balance the financial community's demands with the company's long-term needs? And what was left after such leaders departed with their bonuses? All too often, out the door with fired employees went the heart and soul of a business.
American enterprise, so admired around the globe, was not built by currently fashionable "heroic" leadership but with leaders tangibly engaged in managing—and without today's bonuses, I might add."
Not sure who the CIO and CEO are trying to impress by giving the keys to the kingdom to IBM and Accenture. But turning over key facets of the business to outsiders simply demonstrates that the CIO, CEO, and the rest of the Management Committee simply lack the skills to manage this part of the business effectively. My observations over the years is that the operations managers have never understood what IT does, or how it needs to be managed for best effect. IE and the Beancounters in particular never 'got' the fact that you can't manage IT like a feeder operation. So the Management Committee was ripe for the BS that IBM and Accenture were selling. The CIO, who should know better, is really a beancounter, so he went along.Until this past year, when things collapsed, most downsizing took place at profitable companies that didn't happen to meet Wall Street's expectations. How could legions of employees suddenly be "redundant," as if they weren't needed in the first place? Where is the judgment—the wisdom to balance the financial community's demands with the company's long-term needs? And what was left after such leaders departed with their bonuses? All too often, out the door with fired employees went the heart and soul of a business.
American enterprise, so admired around the globe, was not built by currently fashionable "heroic" leadership but with leaders tangibly engaged in managing—and without today's bonuses, I might add."
If the decree had come down to cut the 10% least performing members of the organization, and then hunkering down to keep working with a smaller workforce until the economy turned around and new hiring could take place, I would have no problem with this. And, you know what, if that were explained up front, I would venture to guess that the rest of the workgroup would accept and understand the business reality. In general, the peers of the poor performers know who they are, because they have to cover for them every day. I know that when I had to make someone 'available to the marketplace', their peers would often come up and say, "thank you".
But even 'poor performers' are deserving of being treated with dignity and respect. Some people are simply square pegs in round holes. Finding them a square hole may work. Some people don't fit at UPS; it's not for the faint of heart. And some people just aren't competent, but it shouldn't have taken 20+ years to figure that out.
and by serving the MASTER hoping to survive for .... may be 
