#leadership

It looks like leadership announcements are starting to happen in the US downstream. More to come???

Hey MW and Executive Leadership,

Man up and address the turmoil and stress you all have caused the company since 2020. Employees are exhausted and morale has hit rock bottom and is still trying to dig lower. Bring some kind of positivity for employees and remember the country and people who have made Chevron successful in its long tenure. Offshoring is not patriotic or right. You have to have some bit of good voice left in your soul. Use SETH to right some wrongs and grow a spine.

Regarding the layoffs at Centene Corp., the real problem is management, not the boots-on-the-ground employees. There are too many layers of unnecessary management pulling in great salaries. Middle management is mediocre and exclusively focused on metrics and numbers, which is the exact reason we lost so many members—because the resulting quality is deficient and mediocre.

How can anyone focus on quality and caring for the member when they are forced to handle 60 calls daily, just trying to reach that arbitrary quota of 60 members a day? Leadership thinks that because they have a Microsoft pilot, everything is fixed, yet CM Hero remains an outdated piece of trash. I cannot fathom how much they paid for that imbecile piece of software that they are trying to promote.

The issue stems straight from middle management, where there is zero innovation. Moreover, when you look at the staffing mix—such as registered nurses with only two years of college and CNAs—can you expect them to think above and beyond? Many of them do not write English properly, which is plainly evident in the notes that they produce.

I've been at the bank long enough, and in enough different roles, to finally understand how the place actually rewards performance.

The reward for hard work isn't recognition. It isn't career growth. It isn't additional compensation. It's more work.

Not just any work, either. You get handed the complex, politically sensitive, high-risk initiatives that everyone else has quietly managed to avoid. The kind of work where failure has consequences, success is expected, and if you somehow pull it off, leadership thanks you by immediately assigning you the next impossible project.

Competence isn't rewarded here, it's exploited.

The irony is that the less capable you appear to be, the less you're expected to do. People who consistently fail to deliver, miss deadlines, or spend more time trying to hand off work than actually completing it somehow develop an impressive track record of failing upward. They become experts at managing perception instead of outcomes, while the people actually producing results are too busy carrying the organization to spend time marketing themselves.

Then there are the teams that seem to have won the organizational lottery. Small teams. Clearly defined responsibilities. Minimal scope creep. Leadership that actually protects their capacity instead of treating it like a public utility. Flexible delivery timelines. Dedicated administrative support. They get measured on exactly what they signed up to do.

The rest of us? Apparently our job description is simply "everything else." Need another critical program? Give it to the team that's already drowning. Another governance function? They'll figure it out. Production support? Add it. Executive requests? Sure. Regulatory deadlines? Why not? Twenty-four-hour operational oversight? Of course. After all, they've always found a way before.

Then leadership has the audacity to act surprised when capacity becomes an issue. The best part is pretending this is all accidental. It isn't.

Leadership has the reporting. They have the staffing numbers. They have the capacity plans. They sit through prioritization meetings. They review resource models. They approve organizational structures. They know exactly which teams have half the support and two or three times the responsibility. They know which groups are expected to supervise critical operations 24 hours a day, 365 days a year while simultaneously delivering strategic initiatives.

They're not uninformed. They're informed enough to know exactly what's happening and comfortable enough to let it continue. When you escalate the issue, you get the standard corporate script.

"Prioritize better."

"Focus on the highest-value work."

"Be more strategic."

"Challenge your assumptions."

As if no one has ever considered making a priority list.

You can spend weeks documenting workload, mapping every deliverable, demonstrating capacity with actual data, and proving mathematically that there aren't enough hours or people to accomplish everything being demanded. The response?

"We understand."

Translation: We have no intention of changing anything, but we'd appreciate it if you'd continue accomplishing the impossible so we don't have to explain the problem to someone above us.

The most frustrating part is that leadership often mistakes resilience for excess capacity. Every time a team sacrifices nights, weekends, vacations, morale, or retention to somehow meet another impossible deadline, leadership congratulates themselves on successful planning instead of recognizing they've just normalized another unsustainable expectation.

And so the cycle continues.

The competent become the organizational pack mules, carrying increasingly impossible loads because they've demonstrated they can survive them. The underperformers continue to enjoy manageable expectations because no one expects much from them anyway. Meanwhile, leadership points to another successful delivery as proof that the current operating model works, blissfully ignoring that it only works because a handful of people refuse to let the wheels come off.

At some point, you realize the system isn't broken.

It's functioning exactly as leadership designed it.
The people doing the work absorb the cost.
Leadership gets the credit.

And every year, everyone wonders why the people capable of carrying the organization eventually stop volunteering to do it.

Verizon needs to skip Hans/DEI 2.0 and announce Verizon 3.0.

Verizon 3.0 is going back Verizon 1.0 and motivate/reward performance on results and execution. Call Denny Strygal/Ivan.

It's impossible to execute with current Board and C-Suite Team.

Go back to skip levels and ask high owrformers what needs to be done.

Start with VCG groups.. learn why desoite having superior fiber in SFU/MDUs over 25 years.. broadband still under 50%.

Then attack Small Businesx and remove sales friction.

The Vz Culture and lack of empowerment and leadership talent will ensure competition continues to as$ kick Verizon in marketplace.

The only reason for promotion these days, outside of sponsored HiPos, is to replenish the PIP fodder at the bottom of the next CL rank group.

They need new non sponsored persons to focus downward pressure onto.

Why do some announce they are retiring but you can tell it seems forced? Does upper leadership tell these people they are being laid off and then lie to everyone about the real reason? I have seen this in at least 4 people in the last year. At first I thought confidence but it doesn’t make sense, especially with departure date. Anyone have insight? How is it legal to let someone say they are retiring when they are really being laid off?

Commonwealth Financial's chief digital officer has left the company shortly after its acquisition by LPL Financial. This departure follows recent layoffs impacting Commonwealth's back-office staff. While not directly linked, these events are typical after a large-scale merger. The acquisition, valued at $2.7 billion, combined LPL's extensive network with Commonwealth's advisor base. Industry observers note that such shifts in leadership and workforce are common post-acquisition.

https://www.investmentnews.com/independent-broker-dealers/as-layoffs-commence-commonwealths-digital-guru-jumps-ship/267533

AI is not a strategy

Every town hall, they ask us to trust leadership's vision. But vision doesn't pay the bills when half your team gets laid off. We've watched promises get walked back, strategies flip quarterly, and executives cash out while we scramble. So no, I'm done trusting leadership. I think they let us down one time too many for that.

I asked my director about project priorities and he said he'd check with his boss. Three days later, still no answer. It's managers all the way down, and nobody at the top knows anything either.

We keep getting vague emails about stuff like strategic alignment and zero details about layoffs, budgets, or direction. Basically, anything that truly matters. We're at the point where the grapevine is more reliable than any official channel. That's not a management style, that's damage control.

So many rounds of layoffs in just the last 12 months and zero strategic vision, nothing but cost-cutting bandaids. I've watched talented people walk and mediocre ones get promoted, absolutely no logic behind it. My job search started last week, and I'm not looking back.

Frank Bisignano left JPMorgan Chase, one of the nation's largest banks, after complaints about his behavior led the company's CEO to lose trust in him, according to a Wall Street Journal article.

When do we really need to fix the leadershit at this shitTel place to save employee layoffs ?

I am really tired and sick of this

JA posted on LinkedIn that Exploration is Back! Tell me how because I don’t see it from where I work wells in the upstream…..

Is he still selling pipe dreams so he can retire? Did he ever find anythind?

Saw the note about another sr leaders leaving in service enablement. Kinda makes me think those leaders have a sense of what's to come and are getting out early. Idk, I never was much of a fan of ZK, but kinda makes me nervous all of the people leaving.

head of growth and generosity leaving company, not being replaced. a bunch of people promoted from VP to SVP. in same email, layoffs announced. said this was done in the name of cost reduction yet with all the big title promotions, were there any real dollars saved? it's so tasteless to be rah rah let's celebrate promotions and then tell people they lost their jobs all in the same day.

we can build products, but can execs manage the business?

DW is a problem and needless firings will always be on the table so long as she's the one making creative decisions.

where did RM (Global Head of Technology Infrastructure) went?

I am guessing Brad got tired of three stooges and pulte. I wonder what other senior leader is leaving…

A TL just transferred to my store - dude has been with the company for 13 years and has been in 12 different stores. If that's not a red flag, I don't know what is. In his last store he went out on "stress leave" for three months because he said he couldn't "handle the job". If he couldn't handle it there then what makes store leadership think he can handle it here? He's currently on a PIP. He sits in the office on his phone all day. Pals around with his ATL, who also sits in the office with him and they watch Tiktoks together. Why do they keep these kind of people and oust the hard workers by changing their schedules and putting the teams entire work on those people that actually work instead of holding failed leadership accountable?

Im curious to know who tf thought it was a great idea to bring this pr--k onboard after doing dirt and GS and just destroy anything left of BNY

I think we’ve seen enough.

If that is even true. I know you people don't want a two class society at USBank but leadership caused this mess. If remote employees can be grandfathered then past employees should have been given a route to become remote too.

This feels like a textbook example of people believing their own narrative. Instead of meaningful transparency or honest discussion, it’s filled with self-congratulation and carefully crafted talking points.

There’s very little substantive information here. It’s just selective framing, unsupported claims, and messaging that doesn’t align with what many people are actually experiencing. Rather than acknowledging legitimate concerns or difficult realities, the focus seems to be on celebrating themselves and controlling the narrative.

Real leadership is measured by results and accountability, not by how enthusiastically you praise your own performance. At some point, the applause for yourselves has to give way to honest conversations backed by facts.

Me to Claude: should all these people lose their jobs?

Claude: “Thanks for the question. It would appear so.”

Why are these execs so delusional? The message could not be more clear: pump all your data into our systems so our AI and India teams can cut your jobs. Also, get your a-s in an office even if that means you're staring at a wall.

Cut the execs, watch us perform better without them.

BNY leadership loves talking about “virtue” the way marketing teams love talking about “transformation” — loudly, frequently, and with zero connection to reality.

Our CEO reminds LinkedIn followers that he’s a proud New Yorker of 25+ years, as if residency somehow translates into leadership credibility.

Our Global Head of Wealth and Investments performs the humble‑origins monologue while pocketing compensation that could fund a small college like his alma mater.

And the COO? He champions mentoring interns while spending most of his career perfecting the art of shuttering facilities and escorting experienced employees out the door.

It’s remarkable how consistently these executives wrap themselves in altruistic, philanthropic language while employees experience the exact opposite.

If this is “leadership by example,” then the example seems to be: say one thing publicly, do the opposite internally, and hope no one notices.

But employees do notice — hence the monthly mutinies on this forum.

The workforce isn’t rejecting their virtues; it’s rejecting the performance. Because nothing erodes culture faster than leaders who preach stewardship while actively dismantling and failing to communicate honestly and transparently with the very people they claim to serve.

Wonder if DO is bringing any more people that Frontier wanted to can. He brings over these people that sit there and say Hi to a team one time. Be like im going to be engaged once a month and then you never see them again. Oh look another meeting with leadership turnover. Guess someone exceeded their KPI on word salads. DO should focus more on the actual employees instead of not understanding sales and long winded speeches.

It’s interesting to see hiring leaders into high-level roles with fully remote. Is this acceptable?

This is right out of Ginni's tired playbook " One quarter does not define a company. Progress is never perfect or linear. But the future is ours to win"

Arvind, read your own headline back. “Company culture was too slow to change.” Not “I set a strategy that leaned on debt-funded acquisitions for five years.” Not “I ki-led a working deployment focus six months ago and had to rebuild it under pressure.” Not “I chased a stock price number instead of asking whether the growth underneath it was real.” Culture. As if the culture is some ambient weather system that happens to a company, instead of the direct, measurable output of what leadership rewards, funds, and tolerates.
Here’s what “culture” actually means when a CEO says it out loud: it means employees. It means the people three, four, five levels below you, absorbing blame for decisions they didn’t make and couldn’t have stopped. You don’t get to spend years building a strategy on acquisitions and mainframe timing, watch the props come due at the same time, and then, when the market notices, hand the bill to “culture.” Culture doesn’t sign off on M&A. Culture doesn’t set the incentive plan. Culture doesn’t decide which function gets ki-led in January and rebuilt in July. You do.
And the board’s own language makes this worse, not better: confident in the strategy, but will “hold leadership accountable for execution.” Read that twice. The strategy stays untouchable. Execution is the only thing on the table, and execution is exactly the layer where the people with the least power to change the strategy live. That’s not accountability. That’s a firewall, built to make sure the decisions at the top never have to answer for the results at the top.
So here’s the honest question, asked directly, not through a euphemism about culture: why is it always easier to say “we faltered” as a company than to say “I got this wrong” as the person who ran it? Why is the sentence “culture was too slow” acceptable in a headline, while the sentence “I ki-led a function I should have left alone” never makes it into one? If you were confident enough to reshuffle the entire org on a six-month clock, be confident enough to put your own name on the outcome instead of a word that conveniently has no face and no bonus attached to it.
Own it, you said. So own it. Not the culture. You

The mess we're in is because of incompetent leaders. They got their positions through connections, not skill. And it shows.

Micromanagement and fear tactics will continue... the main goal is to push people out and force them to quit. It is no secret what the management is doing, change people's roles to unrealistic expectations in order to save money and to make the company look profitable on paper so they could off load it to another buyer. For years they have refused to provide employees with a clear Job Description while they shout at every meeting that the role and expectations have changed. They are waiting for people to adjust into their new and force upon role so that they could use the legal claws to bypass liability for changing employee roles without their consent. This is unlawful and unethical. No wonder why people are not performing their best because nor only they dont have capable leaders, they feel like they are being conned by their leaders...

Well said, @x0+1kvzddfk0.

It's been a few weeks, but I've finally calmed down. When I first heard the news my body felt weak, I couldn't sleep because this visionary was gone.

To have these indefinite rolling layoffs going on already for a year and probably continuing for few more years. What a morally bankrupt leadership void of any care for their employees. Also notice how this repugnant disgusting selfish behavior has been normalized and everyone has accepted it as common and ordinary. But it's nothing like it.

Not sure I understand how this happened. I’ve only been here 5 years, but the Sport Research Lab seems to have crazy low morale. A lot of people are abusing the workplace complaints system to attack bosses and colleagues. It didn’t always seem like this. Now leadership is doing these silly culture exercises to try and solve this huge problem because everyone is afraid of being targeted by their own co-workers.

Is it like this in other departments? Because it’s really bad over here in NSRL.