Why does IBM hire and retain so many leaders & mgrs who are clearly unqualified for the technical areas they oversee?
Many have no relevant experience, and their lack of competence is evident in their decisions...
I just do not get it.
No wander we have problems.
Lol, parasites
@a3 The Peter Principle is definitely at play in 21st century IBM, but it’s not the main issue. The main issue is that IBM now aggressively weeds out those with promise for performing at a higher level.
Formerly, IBM paid lip service to “wild ducks” and sometimes even valued them. Among the highest thin sliver of their technical talent pool, they tolerated people with established track records of being right unusually often when they spoke up against the product plan and corporate think du jour in thoughtful, reasoned ways.
These people are too highly regarded inside IBM to immediately discard without consequences. Now, senior execs instead slowly chisel these technical truth speakers loose from their foundations. Once execs have sullied the sterling reputations and reassigned one leadership role after another to ‘groom’ their younger pets (nothing personal; take a hit for the good of the company … that’s what good senior people do) they’re able to set up the former water walker for one assignment after another that has been crafted to force awkward failure. Now that the water walker’s spirit and reputation have been destroyed, it’s easy to topple them without any pushback from the general employee population who formerly admired or even revered this person.
IBM is now led by micromanagement from on high. Successful independent leaders are a severe threat to this new order. IBM needs middle management and technical leaders that enforce fine print edicts from above without question and with no room for even slight deviation. The wild ducks must be annihilated and all the rest assimilated.
Often at IBM as it is with other companies, it is who you know and who is sponsoring you to be promoted into management. Unfortunately working hard, technical skills, experience, and track record do not end up promoting you into management. I saw this firsthand, particularly with individuals who had less than 5 years with IBM
The friends and family plan as it's known.
@aa and how much profit (in dollars) have you generated for the IBM company for this quarter ?
Are you a reason for the failed results of Q2 2026 ?
What I said was that it's informative because earnings reports tell investors how management is performing, where expectations were missed, and what the company's challenges are going forward. Markets sometimes react sharply to new information—that doesn't mean the company is doomed forever.
@a6. Managers will say anything to keep you salf assured to avoid a mass exodus. With the 25% drop be sure there will be a mass ra coming
@a6
Enlighten us on how a 25% collapse is "informative".
Are you scratching your a-s and spewing sh-t ? or is your stupid AI tool writing sh-t for you ?
38 Badges and 167 Hours this year
@OP Yes the talent and skills shortage at IBM is a real problem. Most people I see do not understand industry or client dynamics, let alone our product portfolio. There’s an excessive amount of cheerleading for average outcomes. People are too scared to give others direct feedback. There’s an overall lack of business fundamentals that can really set us apart from other places.
@a1 yessah, it's the Indian DNA - they only hire Indians just like themselves.
Anyone else is sent to the "rejects" line.
It's a closed circle and often referred to as collusion.
@a6 and how many badges and Think40 hours do you have ?
My first line is top notch. He started as a supplemental and leads a team in 3 different Geos
Plus he is always encouraging us to upskill. Our team meeting today about the 25% drop was informative and I felt reassured things will be good
Because:
The Peter Principle is a management concept stating that in a hierarchical organization, employees tend to be promoted based on their success in current roles rather than their aptitude for higher ones. Consequently, workers are repeatedly promoted until they reach a position where they are no longer competent—their "level of incompetence".
Because an employee's competence in their baseline job is celebrated with advancement, this cycle continues indefinitely. However, the skills required for a lower-level job rarely match the demands of an advanced or managerial position. Once the individual reaches a role that exceeds their specific capabilities, their performance drops, and further promotions stop, trapping them on "Peter's plateau".
Over time, this flawed promotional process leads to widespread organizational inefficiency, as many essential posts become occupied by incapable individuals. To counter this, companies often need to reassess how they define success, evaluate leadership potential over technical skill, and create parallel career paths that reward experts without forcing them into management.
Check out roster in Albany. They get assigned to area crash it into ground. Rotate out. Rinse and repeat. No accountability
the DNA bro, it's the DNA