Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

IBM has decided to co-locate its US marketing department

qz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 118 posts

Re: IBM has decided to co-locate its US marketing department

#61

Post by dkersten »

geodel wrote: post #40
throw2016 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am sure many of us know or have known people who browse facebook, twitter and youtube at work all day. Anecdotal evidence or the actions of of a tiny minority is hardly helpful to any meaningful discussion and can be used to 'close down' any initiative.

It might be anecdotal which I doubt but then how do we know this is action of tiny minority. I should add I do work from home certain times but I take it as privilege rather than a right to work whenever it is convenient to me.

It might be anecdotal which I doubt

Is it "a short account of a particular incident or event, especially of an interesting or amusing nature"?

Its an account of "in my experience" or "the people I know do this" -- its not hard facts obtained through the scientific method (ie controlling for other factors and for biases). That makes it, by definition, anecdotal.

Re: IBM has decided to co-locate its US marketing department

#62

Post by coredog64 »

krona wrote: post #54
jmcdiesel wrote: post #41

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..

IBM isn't a tech company. It's a brand with an impressive marketing department that sells experiences, not products. The rest of it (the stuff you don't see unless you get close enough) is an accumulation of spaghetti acquired in an ad hoc and aimless fashion.

At my previous employer, we were evaluating solutions from IBM, TIBCO, and Oracle. The IBM solution was cheaper and met our needs. In the end, our VP nixed them with the statement of "I don't really want to support IBM software." The feeling was unanimous across the team.

Re: IBM has decided to co-locate its US marketing department

#63

Post by S_A_P »

IBM is a failed services company. Ive been a subcontractor for 2 projects run by IBM. Both fiascos of mismanagement. The project management at IBM had an incredible churn rate. On the first project, they were kicked off for completely failing to deliver. The second project had them completely marginalized. The sad thing is that it was another "big 4" consulting company that took over, who was only slightly less incompetent. I really have trouble understanding the big 4 consulting model. It mainly seems to consist of the following:

1) plant 2-300% of the consultants on site that are necessary 2) create an enormous amount of power point slides that look impressive but mainly say nothing 3) outsource the real work to India or cheap labor 4) deliver 25% of the requirements in 300% of the time

Re: IBM has decided to co-locate its US marketing department

#64

Post by simpleProMan123 »

codingdave wrote: post #5

This isn't universal - a good friend of mine works for a team that is getting shipped off to IBM as part of a merger, and told to apply for the new IBM jobs if they want to keep working there. Ignoring the ugliness of that situation for the moment, he specifically asked about this news of remote work ending as it relates to how coding jobs would be impacted, and was told that the jobs he was applying for were intende…

Every time I've found myself needing to ask, or had teammates who needed to ask the question "Is my job safe beyond the next month?" the answer has been "no."

Re: IBM has decided to co-locate its US marketing department

#65

Post by markbnj »

spcelzrd wrote: post #44
padobson wrote: post #14

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…

It's the best way to get a large amount of your workforce to leave voluntarily. No workforce reduction paperwork. No severance packages. Yahoo did it. Nokia did it. In fact, the companies who pull this trick are almost all shrinking and past their prime. 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 w…

Did you read the article though? They are offering 90 days to make the decision, and a month's severance (miserly, imo, but they're offering it). As mentioned in the piece this wouldn't be a very manageable or predictable way to reduce headcount. It's much more likely the motives are exactly what the company said the motives are: they feel like they will be more effective working together. I would likely be one of the employees who said goodbye rather than move, and I don't think this is ultimately a good decision, but neither do I think it's necessary to dig for hidden motives and agendas.

Re: IBM has decided to co-locate its US marketing department

#66

Post by archeantus »

I am remote, and have been for the last 3.5 yrs. As a software developer I find that the times I am least productive are when I need to work in an office. It is loud and distractions are everywhere. People stop by your desk to chat and ask for things, you inevitably get roped into ping-pong or foosball games, you take way longer lunches because that is what everyone else seems to be doing. The list goes on.

I am always glad to get home from the office so I can focus and get work done in peace. It may not be the case for all roles, but for software development I think (motivated and diligent) remote workers are way more productive, and can provide a much better ROI for their employers.

Re: IBM has decided to co-locate its US marketing department

#67

Post by briandear »

jasonwatkinspdx wrote: post #49
devopsproject wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think the results there speak for themselves 151% stock increase? Nearly double market cap?

I find the enthusiasm for tearing down Mayer gross, but to be clear: subtract the value of the alibaba stock and all that disappears.

Would it be less gross if she were not a woman? When other CEOs make decisions that ruin a company, they get critized too. Steve Balmer was a frequent object of ridicule. Other women execs such as Sandberg aren't treated badly -- the enthusiasm for tearing Mayer down comes from the fact that she was lauded as some kind of exceptional executive when she was really just a lot of high minded talk backed by questionable decisions and a slew of pointless acquisitions at ridiculous prices. She was positioned as some kind of ultra-woman when she was just mediocre at best (within the Yahoo context.) In my mind, Mayer earned every cent of criticism and someone like Sandberg has earned every cent of praise.

Re: IBM has decided to co-locate its US marketing department

#69

Post by organsnyder »

markbnj wrote: post #65
spcelzrd wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the best way to get a large amount of your workforce to leave voluntarily. No workforce reduction paperwork. No severance packages. Yahoo did it. Nokia did it. In fact, the companies who pull this trick are almost all shrinking and past their prime. 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 w…

Did you read the article though? They are offering 90 days to make the decision, and a month's severance (miserly, imo, but they're offering it). As mentioned in the piece this wouldn't be a very manageable or predictable way to reduce headcount. It's much more likely the motives are exactly what the company said the motives are: they feel like they will be more effective working together. I would likely be one of th…

A month's severance is a lot cheaper than paying for unemployment benefits.

Re: IBM has decided to co-locate its US marketing department

#70

Post by geodel »

halbritt wrote: post #58
geodel wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It might be anecdotal which I doubt but then how do we know this is action of tiny minority. I should add I do work from home certain times but I take it as privilege rather than a right to work whenever it is convenient to me.

Your employer is making more money off of your work output than they're paying you. I think you may be confused about who may be the privileged one in the relationship.

I also need to evaluate the alternatives to see how viable they are. Once legal, financial etc constraints are added I just do not see upper hand in bargaining.

Just to add I am in somewhat IBM like situation described here. A lot of us here are in similar predicament to move or to leave.

Post reply on HN