#orgstructure

Is this an eventually going to become OPOO 2.0?

If I was running a company, I too would just spend the majority of the time, shifting people around re-organizing restructuring the departments and hope eventually we would make money

I wouldn’t worry about the role responsibility confusion or ramp up time to get everybody knowledgeable about what they need to do I would just keep on shiftin

When will the organisational structure for lower levels be announced.
Waiting 7 weeks at this stage since the ccs sale went through.
Beyond ridiculous... as my team advised on townhall weeks ago that it would be announced shortly!!!

As part of flattening the organization, Managers and Senior Managers don’t have duties of people management. Directors are having them now. And thus they are now strictly technical. Do Managers and Senior Managers have to contribute now? In other words, do they now have to work on tasks like others on the team?

Will there be a reorganization where certain technology teams from brokerage and wealth management are moved to the enterprise ?

Saw this on fishbowl. Is this true “Any insight into the changes involving
Leads no longer being allowed to have direct reports (unless essentially grandfathered in) and ADs no longer allowed to have Leads reporting to them? What else can we expect?”

I assume most posters here are from the commercial side. Does anyone have insights into how things are going on the FEPOC side? Morale? VSP impacts? The organization became very top-heavy over the years, and I know a lot of VSP electees were MLT/SLT/ELT. However, there were also some seasoned "regular" employees with tons of technical and/or business knowledge who departed.

Just got mine invite for very early tomorrow from my boss I guess I’m out?

Can’t imagine that this whole company won’t be in TX in 3-5 years. Stop backfilling OKC jobs in OKC and let normal attrition handle 15% of the lift while targeting back office jobs for rolling relocation (IT, HR, Accounting, Legal). Geologists and Engineers will hang on longest as the “center of excellence” but eventually bye bye.

Proposed reorg to save Meg some time: Step 1. Merge P&O, G&LC and Technology into one business (2 EVPs can walk with all the entourage), merge C&P and T&S, get rid of EVP level positions for the rest of the org. Saves min £20m pa on the headcount with improved efficiency and accountability. Get rid of strategy function completely - it has been a failure. Strategy should be driven by BUL leadership and segment EVPs not central function..same for RC&S teams - its a testament to the weakness of the EVP that they still exist. Same for Ventures - no new businesses came out of it in 20 years of its existence so its an ego satisfying project for the execs but no real value generated and a distraction for the businesses.
Step 2. Get rid of functional organisation and organise by Business Unit structure, with clear P&L accountability. No central functions that do not feed directly into a specific P&L. Desperate measures for desperate times but company needs to put profits into the cornerstone of performance and current structure is way too broad to enable such focus. BULs will start cutting costs when they have full control over it.. Step 3. Very light exploration and central subsurface team which will enable new growth (outside of existing basins, otherwise driven from BUs). Any other ideas?

Something is happening. No clue what. But all associates were instructed to work from home tomorrow.
"We will discuss important organizational updates and critical information about our organization."

I am so excited about CS leading China!
Aren't you?!

RXM no longer reports to store manager as of March 1.

RXM will report directly to District Pharmacy Supervisor (performance, discipline, and evaluation/coaching all owned by DPS).

Dotted line reporting means the MGR and RXM are "true partners" as explained in documentation released today.

This means neither one is accountable to each other, and neither one has authority to enforce.

Great news for RXMs that didn't want to have an MGR for a boss.

Great news for an MGR that now has documented evidence they are no longer the accountable party for the pharmacy.

Don't be fooled with the 1 box speak, the HR policies regarding organization charts with respect to direct line reporting are very clear.

Store managers you are not in any way shape or form responsible or accountable for the pharmacy any longer.

Pharmacy managers you are in no way shape or form responsible or accountable for what happens on the front end.

Now totally divided.

Can anyone share any insight ? Whats coming
next?
Are they going to wait for the new guy or Alfanso going to make the decisions?

What do you think? Who holds the product vision now?

Do you guys think they will role out the retail territory managers all over? What areas have gone to it so far?

VP - endlesslya swashbuckling with engineered decks to ask for more budget for FTEs, consulging engagements (or stupid tech programs with fraudelent value cases that was pitched to them in exchange for a potential board seat down the line). Not accountable for performance and delivery

VP- reports to VP, responsible for procuring the decks for swashbucling and making budget ask justifications. Trying to fill CV to become VP1 in the next gig, only manages up. Not accountable for performance and delivery.

SD- responsible for owning the pretty decks used by VP1 & 2. Not accountable for performance and delivery and wont have any KPIs or OKRs. Only manages up while being responsible for maintaining the facade of leadership. Will threaten and retaliate on any dissent or suspicion of whistleblowing. Will do lots of stupid team events quarterly to provide bread and circus.

D- responsible for creating the decks. Not accountable or responsible for anything beyond managing upwards and keeping the facade up. Will invent BS performance metrics and play bad cop for ICs to keep the order. Just waiting for their SD promotion while not managing more than 3 direct reports.

M- very rare creature at nike, manager level work is done by Directors.

P- invented director role to keep pay levels without the headcount to keep people. will do mostly what D does, doing decks without being accountable for anything or owning anything. will be scapegoated for performance if they stay in role more than 2 years.

L- baseline IC, responsible for doing analyst work to create data for the above. Owns everything without owning it. accountable for everything without influence. May have to do excel flipping on a 30 hour basis.

anything below- congrats for failing at corporate, you are essentially a glorified exec assistant. Will be asked to deliver everything from planning events to procuring merch. will be held accountable and responsible for everything. Performance expectations would be at the sky and will always be scapegoated. will be thrown around from role to role until they call it quits. only chance of moving upwards is finding a D to su-k up to that will eventually promote them as they become indispensible for their ego.

Real work will be done in southeast asia, real value will be generated by partners who sell the real work created in southeast asia. None of the above have any influence or impact on the outcomes as they exist for theathre. Occasional product hits or media sensations created by external agencies keep the ship floating.

In general, can contractors be positioned to lead teams within organizations?

Literally, 400-500 people report into her/her directs. Some of her direct D's have 40-50 people by themselves. What exactly is she delivering for Citi? DCRM? That's a joke - the data concerns are not resolved by her team. Her data concern team, led by her MD Donna G, are glorified p;roject managers setting up meetings for others to resolve the problems. Why do they need so many people? Reference data? That by itself is a joke at Citi considering that security master central itself has so many issues with data accuracy. At smaller firms, her team alone would make up 50% of the org. This is highway robbery.

Sycamore does it differently. Tomorrows operations call will reveal the new structure

Sprinted to this page once the email came out 🤣🤣🤣

Is the DEG group (In CNIO/Network Operations under SVP-Corey Anthony) moving to AFO (Under SVP-Chris Altomari) soon??? Overheard some chatter about that being a reality come 2/1/2026.

Sooner or later it’s happening.

Single-Family, for example, was already top-heavy before the layoffs, and it’s even more bloated now. Rather than streamline, the organization has added layers: senior directors on top of directors, who sit above senior managers, who oversee managers, some of whom have as few as 3 direct reports.
This structure raises a clear question: Why are there so many layers of leadership for such lean teams? The result is diluted accountability, duplicated oversight, and a culture where decisions are filtered through too many hands, often slowing down delivery and hiding ownership. With the number of associates left, there shouldn’t be this much layers. For what?

I’m confused on what’s happening.

Are all leaders in the company expected to be hybrid roles now?
For grades 16+, are those remote roles being eliminated?
Or were these layoffs this week just certain org decisions?

Can someone clarify the moves made this week?

There is a severe imbalance in the manager-to-employee ratio across departments. Airport teams are often unable to take time off because the company claims it cannot afford management coverage, despite having a small number of managers overseeing hundreds of employees. Meanwhile, other departments operate with two to three managers supervising teams of only six to eight employees. This disparity reflects ineffective leadership and fundamental HR mismanagement. A more responsible approach would be for senior leaders to actively evaluate each department’s structure and reallocate resources appropriately, rather than continuing to expend company funds on unnecessary and misaligned management roles.

Many pieces moving in the business channel, but what do you think the next steps will be?

R2B dissolved and absorbed by B2B
B2B dissolved and absorbed by V2B, R2B, I2B
B2B and R2B dissolved and absorbed by V2B and I2B
Something else

What org changes to expect in TIS?

Some rumors say there won’t be any at all, others say it’ll be offered across multiple orgs before layoffs hit. Can anyone actually confirm which is true?

Looks like there are more calls. 12:30 and 1:00. Just labeled touch base and from Sr. Dir. Anyone else have any thoughts on what this might be? I’m thinking explanation of what’s going on followed by the new org structure?

Are y’all hearing about the “spans and layers” conversation? Am being told demotions are on the cards as well? Is there no bottom?

For the SVPs and VPs that were notified, what happens to their roles? Do they just get replaced with someone new? Do their teams get moved under other SVPs or VPs?

With the SVP changes today, both in the business & finance…. I can’t help but to ask myself, how are they deciding who is being let go? These shifts imply that the new leaders do not know their org structure…. Who is good/ who isn’t etc.

All we can do now is, not let our nerves get the best of us. Today just proves that layoffs will be 1. financial 2. Strategic and not personal and reflective of your abilities.

I hope everyone can get some rest after today and realize there is nothing that you can do it. Out of our hands so should be out of our minds.

Did Directors and L7s take the brunt, or were L5 to L6 ICs hit just as hard across digital and merch?

This is tough. Anyone knows which orgs were affected the most?

Do we think they are changing the reporting structure for admins to a higher amount of leaders per person? If your an admin, and you have a open role (vp, SVp or sr) are you getting let go too?