Leadership always says "nothing will change" when there's a coming re-org (employees, applying)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
[quote=wallbuilder;55656140]Heard this line so many times. C'mon. No one believes it. There are always winners and losers from re-orgs. Some people get promoted, others end up with a better or worse manager, sometimes people get laid off, other times its a rearranging of deck chairs on the Titanic.[/QUOTE]
Sometimes it's the flavor of the month organizational concept -- centralization for economies of scale, decentralization for faster decision making, and then back again.
Generally, management do not want people jumping ship until a seamless transition can be made.
Of course they say that. It's about trying to send a message that controls panic and unease more than anything. There's always a multi-year plan associated with layoffs that the average employee doesn't see. Losing a certain percentage of people is often inevitable.
It's not naive, and it's not malicious. It's attempting to have things change as little as possible, which is as much about the message as it is about the actions taking place.
....
I agree that it's trying to control panic and it's not malicious. However it is very much naïve because it doesn't control panic; it makes it worse. Because:
a. Everyone knows it's a lie and therefore believes that it must be the worst and can't trust management
and
b. It sends the statement that management doesn't have clue what the fall out will be.
It's just all around bad policy. Much better to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth like the old TV line goes. People will forgive ignorance if they believe you are telling them everything you know. They won't believe anything if they think you're lying to them.
[quote=Maddie104;55660570]
Quote:
Originally Posted by wallbuilder
Heard this line so many times. C'mon. No one believes it. There are always winners and losers from re-orgs. Some people get promoted, others end up with a better or worse manager, sometimes people get laid off, other times its a rearranging of deck chairs on the Titanic.[/QUOTE]
Sometimes it's the flavor of the month organizational concept -- centralization for economies of scale, decentralization for faster decision making, and then back again.
Generally, management do not want people jumping ship until a seamless transition can be made.
In DoD that was promotion fodder. Colonel A centralizes his command to get promoted. Then colonel B decentralizes to justify her promotion. Constant churn and chaos to provide promotion fodder.
Not silly. It happens all the times when an incompetent CEO doesn't know how to grow a business.
The fact that you're simplifying such a complex issue this much speaks to how incorrect you are.
Out of curiosity, how much management experience do you have?
If incentives are set up correctly and a CEO's bonuses is tied to the business growth, a CEO's incentive based pay increasing means the CEO is taking the correct action in growing the business. If layoffs are leading to increased profitability, the CEO is only seeing a higher pay because his/her pay is based on profitability.
If an executive's pay is growing, that means the business is growing from a macro level. People lower in a company don't like to hear that purely because top level business growth does often mean laying off people in the lower ranks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tnff
I agree that it's trying to control panic and it's not malicious. However it is very much naïve because it doesn't control panic; it makes it worse. Because:
a. Everyone knows it's a lie and therefore believes that it must be the worst and can't trust management
and
b. It sends the statement that management doesn't have clue what the fall out will be.
It's just all around bad policy. Much better to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth like the old TV line goes. People will forgive ignorance if they believe you are telling them everything you know. They won't believe anything if they think you're lying to them.
I understand what you're saying, but it's not that simple. Telling the truth does not mean people will respect and forgive you. People by and large don't care about the business as a whole. They care about their area, and their narrow job. If the truth is your specific job is not needed, and you need to change what you're doing, people take that personally, and will more often than not disagree with it. There are often cases where no matter what you do, someone will consider you incompetent, and will disagree with your decisions. The truth often IS nothing is going to change in the short term (which is how the message nearly always is given). Of course there will be long term change, but every restructuring I have gone through has seen change slowly over the course of 6 - 18 months or so. Saying 'nothing will change' is not saying you will be doing the same thing five years from now, it's saying change is going to be gradual, without completely uprooting people immediately.
Telling the whole truth is dangerous. Let's say the truth is the company is 10 years behind with technology, and 1/3 of the programmers are simply not needed. The work they are doing is slow and outdated, and they could be replaced with contract work and outsourced technology for 1/2 of the cost. That's the truth, and that's what's best for the business. That's not a great message to say to a staff.
The fact that you're simplifying such a complex issue this much speaks to how incorrect you are.
Out of curiosity, how much management experience do you have?
Or how many CEOs he knows personally.
The only times I’ve seen a company truly suffer under an “incompetent” CEO is when there is a rubber stamp board and no activist investors. Otherwise there are usually checks and balances in place.
I understand what you're saying, but it's not that simple. Telling the truth does not mean people will respect and forgive you. People by and large don't care about the business as a whole. They care about their area, and their narrow job. If the truth is your specific job is not needed, and you need to change what you're doing, people take that personally, and will more often than not disagree with it. There are often cases where no matter what you do, someone will consider you incompetent, and will disagree with your decisions. The truth often IS nothing is going to change in the short term (which is how the message nearly always is given). Of course there will be long term change, but every restructuring I have gone through has seen change slowly over the course of 6 - 18 months or so. Saying 'nothing will change' is not saying you will be doing the same thing five years from now, it's saying change is going to be gradual, without completely uprooting people immediately.
All very true.
Change is inevitable. Everybody in the working world is doing something different from the way they did it 15 years ago, and it will be different in other ways in another 15 years. The difference may be physical location, reporting structure, technology, business processes or basic responsibilities, but there are going to be difference.
Hopefully management doesn't actually say nothing will change. A much more nuanced answer is required in all cases, and definitely so when there is a merger, reorg, expansion, or financial issue. The real answer in virtually all cases is along the line of what Lekrii posted. Something similar to:
For the moment, it is business as usual. As management reviews the situation and understands business needs, the organization will respond appropriately.
This really means that products or services will be added or deleted, geographic areas will get more or fewer resources, technology will be invested in or dumped, revenues will increase or decrease, and every single one of these options requires a management response.
Change is inevitable. Everybody in the working world is doing something different from the way they did it 15 years ago, and it will be different in other ways in another 15 years. The difference may be physical location, reporting structure, technology, business processes or basic responsibilities, but there are going to be difference.
Hopefully management doesn't actually say nothing will change. A much more nuanced answer is required in all cases, and definitely so when there is a merger, reorg, expansion, or financial issue. The real answer in virtually all cases is along the line of what Lekrii posted. Something similar to:
For the moment, it is business as usual. As management reviews the situation and understands business needs, the organization will respond appropriately.
This really means that products or services will be added or deleted, geographic areas will get more or fewer resources, technology will be invested in or dumped, revenues will increase or decrease, and every single one of these options requires a management response.
Theres good change and bad change. Just because change is made doesn't mean its the RIGHT change. Ive always lived by the creed "if it aint broke don't fix it"
Theres Many idiots out there that just make changes to make changes to justify their positions and their decisions and changes are 100 PERCENT WRONG
Layoffs happen when the CEO wants a bigger bonus check and doesn't know how to grow the business.
You don't do layoffs then because it will cost you money in severence, increased Unemployment insurance costs, etc. Just let everyone know there are no pay raises, limited promotions, no increases in time off, and work quotas are going up. Then people will leave voluntarily. If there are certain people you want to make sure stay, they are the ones that get the promotions which raise their pay even if their job stays the same.
Competent CEO's know how to grow their bonus check through growing the business.
Not always, and your point is not logical.
With the very best execs around, retail will continue to drastically SHRINK. So a retail exec whose chain shrinks less than average is doing a stellar job, and deserves a huge compensation package.
Many chains will fail, in the next decade, with great management.
Theres good change and bad change. Just because change is made doesn't mean its the RIGHT change. Ive always lived by the creed "if it aint broke don't fix it"
Sometimes that is the correct advice, but it is very reactive rather than proactive. Sears and Barnes & Noble (and Toys'r'us, and Circuit City, and Radio Shack, and regional general merchandise chains...) operated by the creed "if it ain't broke don't fix it". They were both dominant in their respective fields, and I am sure that the executives in charge of their passive response to Walmart & Amazon are wishing they had done some fixing before their companies started to head south.
Quote:
Theres Many idiots out there that just make changes to make changes to justify their positions and their decisions and changes are 100 PERCENT WRONG
Sure, with millions of people across the country in managerial roles, some are going to be idiots. Others are going to be geniuses. Most are going to be somewhere in the middle. The art is in determining which is which, and you have erroneously decided, without sufficient evidence or experience, that virtually all are idiots.
By the way, your spelling and grammar are particularly poor today. I have seen your writing, and I know you can do better than this most recent post.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
