41–50 of 118 posts
I haven't worked for them, but I work with 2 former IBM Engineers in Austin... both of them say the same weird things.. like, you can't get two monitors (when one asked, he was declined, then his boss pulled an old CRT out of a closet and gave it too him... a 640x480 CRT from what must have been 184 years ago) ... And other weird tales that just seem antithetical to a tech company..
Is it me or is this move seemingly initiated by female executives that want to project power in order to compensate for the perception that they are less dedicated to work because of their sex? Given a sample size of two, I would avoid working for anyone named Melissa.
Marissa Mayer did the same thing shortly after getting to Yahoo. I think the results there speak for themselves. There's never a case where a move like this will boost morale or attract/keep top talent. IMO moves like this are all about showing dominance and being a "person of action." It's corporate politics showmanship at the expense of results.
> I think the results there speak for themselves 151% stock increase? Nearly double market cap?
A theory among some employees is that IBM is using co-location as a downsizing effort. I hope it's not an accurate theory. Downsizing this way means your most self-motivated, productive employees are likely to leave long before those who drive to the office because they feel they have no other choice. Like Best Buy and Yahoo at the points at which they decided to co-locate, IBM is a business that needs to do somethin…
But don't worry, IBM has tens of thousands of strap hangers who've been surviving layoffs for decades.
The bottom line will get brighter. The future of the company will get darker. It's the Jack Welch school of management.
Marissa Mayer did the same thing shortly after getting to Yahoo. I think the results there speak for themselves. There's never a case where a move like this will boost morale or attract/keep top talent. IMO moves like this are all about showing dominance and being a "person of action." It's corporate politics showmanship at the expense of results.
> I think the results there speak for themselves 151% stock increase? Nearly double market cap?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree. I think this is first step to separate out people who are unwilling to relocate. Next they will look at the work they are doing, if deemed non-critical I assume they will be first to go.
I mean, isn't that the case with any job? So sure, this might be an extra consideration when the time for layoffs comes around. My intention was not saying that nothing changed; emphasis on colocation is definitely a real thing. But IBM is not "ending remote work", as the headline says (it should be changed to the actual article title, which is more reasonable). It is most certainly allowed.
I agree IBM will most likely lose good remote workers but for company of IBM size individual super performers are not critical to their financial well being.
That must be the same secret recipe that quartered[1] GILT's value in less than 10 years!
[1] Gilt Groupe at one point valued at $1B, sold to HBC for $250M - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilt_Groupe
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I think the results there speak for themselves 151% stock increase? Nearly double market cap?
are you seriously arguing Mayer's tenure was a success? Every major decision she had her fingerprints on (sumly, tumblr, etc) turned out to be massive, expensive failures. Lots of external factors go into stock price so I would argue stock price alone is not a good indicator of leadership.
Marissa Mayer did the same thing shortly after getting to Yahoo. I think the results there speak for themselves. There's never a case where a move like this will boost morale or attract/keep top talent. IMO moves like this are all about showing dominance and being a "person of action." It's corporate politics showmanship at the expense of results.
> I think the results there speak for themselves 151% stock increase? Nearly double market cap?
IBM is so weird. I haven't worked for them, but I work with 2 former IBM Engineers in Austin... both of them say the same weird things.. like, you can't get two monitors (when one asked, he was declined, then his boss pulled an old CRT out of a closet and gave it too him... a 640x480 CRT from what must have been 184 years ago) ... And other weird tales that just seem antithetical to a tech company..
Having said that, I could write books about the complete Twilight Zone that is IBM Services. Don't worry, I'll stick with writing invoices in stead ;)