9 ms·
Before the IBM apologists start commenting: I was an IBM employee a few years ago and I would never recommend it as a good place to work. You were constantly wo
by obtino 12y ago
Before the IBM apologists start commenting:
I was an IBM employee a few years ago and I would never recommend it as a good place to work. You were constantly worried about your job and there were cuts to basic resources all the time. It's not at all surprising to see this happen. IBM only cares about its shareholders and not its employees or customers.
- wil421 12y agoI'm pretty sure this is not unique to IBM most mega corporations have the same philosophies. It's not about the employees or even the product at times it's about the numbers and the shareholders.
- johnward 12y agoWorked for other megacorps including IBM. Can confirm.
- yuhong 12y agoPersonally, I want to focus on fixing the problems. That is why I mentioned the idea of making capital gain and income tax equal for example.
- seanmcdirmid 12y agoI've done a couple of internships for IBM in the last and work for Microsoft today. IBM felt much more corporate during my brief stints there, even in the research labs. Keep in mind IBM is an east coast company, not a more laid back west coast company. That might have something to do with it (or I'm just very biased).
- artsrc 12y agoSome say other things: > If you want me to do things only for ROI reasons, you should get out of this stock http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/mar/03/tim-cook-climate-change-sceptics-ditch-apple-shares http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/mar/03/tim-cook-...
- gtirloni 12y agoSurely "some" say other things. But they are outliers, not the average. The average is what impacts most people's lives.
- wyager 12y ago"IBM only cares about its shareholders and not its employees or customers." Do you mean "IBM has a finite amount of money and can therefore is subject to the realities of business"? I mean, what do you expect? Even if IBM was the most altruistic company in the entire world, they would still have to make concessions to the fact that it costs money to employ people.
- ihsw 12y agoRealities of business != random and arbitrary cuts This sounds like middle management is scrambling to meet budget objectives and they're throwing people out based on financial burden rather than actual performance issues. Yeah I get that people looking to retire and collect benefits are a significant cost centre, but in that case the company should just make it official policy that minimal benefits are offered (or no benefits at all) instead of pretending they're actually offering an attractive place to work.
- TeMPOraL 12y agoWe'd love if they do but they absolutely won't as long as they can get away with it. Those are the "realities of business". Fulfilling human needs not directly related to profits is a cost centre, and it always eventually gets reduced as much as it is possible.
- acveilleux 12y agoMiddle management never cuts jobs. I mean, they might do 1 or 2 out of 100. But they never do 20% across the board without a push from above. It's diametrically opposed to their own self-interest (having underlings to justify their position.)
- wyager 12y agoA 20% cut is not "arbitrary". It's clearly based on desperation.
- jweir 12y agoIBM has been spending billions buying back its own stock. This increases the earnings per share of stock as IBM's earnings drop. http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/10/28/us-ibm-buyback-idUSKBN0IH1U920141028 http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/10/28/us-ibm-buyback-idU...
- fletchowns 12y agoTo me it seems like if you care about your shareholders, you have to care about your employees and customers.
- TeMPOraL 12y agoYou absolutely don't have to. Those two are somewhat correlated, but practice shows the correlation is not that strong.
- coreyoconnor 12y agoI'm curious if the lag between change and impact is about equivalent to the tenure of a management employee.
- TeMPOraL 12y agoI'm pretty sure that's the case. This seems like an equilibrium point for the system.
- lisa_henderson 12y agoMore important is the average tenure of the shareholder. Much wealth now resides in organizations that do not play a traditional ownership role. Mutual funds need to rebalance, typically every month or every quarter. Pension funds and hedge funds are actively traded. Average share holding is now less than 2 years. Doing whats best for the shareholder means gutting the company and maximizing profits for the next 2 years. This is why the well run companies tend to be those where the founding family still holds a large block of shares -- they tend to think long term. And this would include IBM during its Golden Age.
- TeMPOraL 12y agoMy God. I didn't know that. No wonder corporations must focus on profit if shareholders keep flowing in and out, and each one treats their companies as abstract money-generating entities. I mean, we can call this "not playing a traditional ownership role" but I can't shake the feeling there's something deeply wrong with that. We're buildings piles of layers of abstraction and the most important people are the ones who are most separated from you, don't know or care about you at all, and yet they "own" you and can tell you what to do. How on Earth one is supposed to run a company like that? Also, didn't similar abstraction cause the housing market collapse in 2008? > This is why the well run companies tend to be those where the founding family still holds a large block of shares -- they tend to think long term. Yes, I've observed that too. That's why I tend to believe, say, Google when they talk about pro-bono plans much more than any other IT corp. That's why I believe Musk can and will pull off things he says while his competitors will lag behind - because he both has a vision and holds SpaceX in iron grip. He doesn't have to follow the market if he choses not to.
- AdamFernandez 12y agoIt's so ironic to me that some large corporations only focus on shareholders. Focusing on customer satisfaction, and product quality leads to greater sales more than anything else. A byproduct of this is...wait for it...higher value to shareholders!
- TylerE 12y agoThey are, in most cases, legally required to place shareholder value over all else.
- yuhong 12y agolegally required?
- BigChiefSmokem 12y agoNo that is a myth told by all investors to the people they invest in. However, good luck when the shareholders sue you to try to recover their loses. That's the real meaning of that threat.
- AdamFernandez 12y agoFocusing on the first two elements I mentioned is the best way to accomplish that. Shareholders should be saying 'please ignore us and focus on the other stuff'.
- untog 12y agoNo they aren't. Time to put that misconception to bed: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/harold-meyerson-the-myth-of-maximizing-shareholder-value/2014/02/11/00cdfb14-9336-11e3-84e1-27626c5ef5fb_story.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/harold-meyerson-the-m...
- sbierwagen 12y agoRelated: http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2011/11/28/maximizing-shareholder-value-the-dumbest-idea-in-the-world/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2011/11/28/maximizi... http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2013/10/why-the-maximizing-shareholder-value-theory-of-corporate-governance-is-bogus.html http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2013/10/why-the-maximizing-sh... http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2014/01/myth-maximizing-shareholder-value.html http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2014/01/myth-maximizing-share...
- porter 12y agoIf they actually cared about their shareholders then they'd also care about their employees and customers.
- eplanit 12y agoI don't disagree with you, but instead notice how dramatically it has changed. I began with IBM in the mid 1980s, at a time when they invested heavily in employees' education and development. In my 20s I had the support and encouragement of my management as I pursued graduate school in addition to the job. Plus, we had private offices then. IBM has changed, but so has the relationship between that generation of large companies (i.e. Intel, Motorola, AT&T, ...) everywhere and their employees.