You have encountered a small, local business that has precisely the right attitude for CUSTOMER SERVICE - Something most outsourcing firms, inclusive of IBM, DO NOT KNOW OR UNDERSTAND.
My septic alarm went off yesterday. Called for service. $1200 same day, not too bad here in Florida. Would have been double in the Northeast. The float switch went and was stuck on, the pump burned itself out. Any other job and I might have done it myself!
I wrote earlier that some plumbers now have the same attitude as the Indians. Well these guys were great. One guy near retirement and a young kid in the 20s. A really nice kid, and you can tell he is sharp. But no chip on his shoulder, great interaction with the older guy and the customer. It's a small business with one truck and a woman to answer the phone. Busy all day long with emergency calls.
"It will not happen to me" until his boss gives him 15 min warnings! His co-workers will treat him like an "infectious" person! Very few (so called IBM co-worker) will come close to give him comfort and will erase him as fast as posible!!!
"In short, US IBMers are equally responsible for their own current IBM job insecurities"...
IMO they are going to move as much of IGS to India and other low cost locations as possiable, that will improve the "margins" related to resource costs.
It will however generate huge risk within multiple areas, brand reputation, operational and executive strategy risk areas related to revenue results, to name a few.
Now the problem is how to you integrate that manage to the margins and the associated ever important manage to the quarterly EPS estimate approach and interlock all the multiple GEO cross towers involved in globalized end to end execution.
This condition is a problem inherent within globalism and it can have a serious negative impact on both external customers as well as internal teams.
Maybe they can pull it off maybe they cannot, to do so requires leadership , not metrics driven management styles
It requires the ability to 'think out side of the box' and that is a rare quality.
It requires personal risk on the part of a manager, related to navigation through all the multiple redundant management layers of management and executives promoted based on apperence over functional ability and leadership quality, smooze, BS, metrics drivcen methdology, and as well, the most important ability is to be able to deal with all the 'tweaking' to meet the agendas, especially the management 'turf wars' that go on.
Sorry I missed this one Accountant. Agree with you entirely.
Fact is if they hived off Global Services the revenue would be about 1/2 and the net profit would be almost unchanged. And top management would have more time to focus on improving the profitable business. More like old IBM profitability ratios.
Alas, the dummies inhabiting those WS houses would cry NO REVENUE growth and trash the stock. I wish they would sell it in pieces. There should be willing buyers who want the revenue and who actually can run it with better margins. Sell it in Mumbai.
Well said! Let's skip the painful part of testing new services management, put the product oriented services back into product groups, and sell off the rest.
Then we'd have a firm with growing revenues, good profit and the ability to weather product innovation droughts.
Smaller but better for the investor, maybe increasing the dividend?
I had a co-worker who got 4 weeks pay after 10 years. They didn't count her time before IBM bought the company. The IBM lawyers knew you can't sue for more severance and since IBM doesn't care about their image anymore they cut her as cheaply as they could.
Perhaps IBM should sell its services busines to the Chinese, like they did the PC business. I fear the profits will never be good for IBM in this business.
I vote for new services management at big blue.
I fully, and absolutely, rate your post "johnnyrater" as a 5+ star.
IBM corporation taught me, never, ever, believe any thing, that a corporation "promises" an employee, always evaluate a corporation, by their actions, rather then what they state
epecially when they talk out of both sides of their mouths.
e.g "IBM Spirit initatives" designed to improve employee moral, at the same time they reduce benefits, reduce resources and implementing poorly thought out prior to implimentation , Global resource executive spasm initatives, that create huge issues in process execution disconnection areas, reduction in SLA levels, huge operational risk, and causing 60-80 hour work weeks on the part of the individuals left that know what they are doing, in-order to compensate for the gaps left by the ones that were "resourced actioned" to reduce redunancy and "balance skills".
sidebar: for some reason, the one's resourced actioned, to reduce redunancy and .balance skills, sometimes find them selves being recruited for contracting positions, doing the exact same thing at IBM not as a regular, but as a contractor.
For some reason at some executive and HR level, those redundancies and skill imbalances,that caused the "RA" to begin with, become non redundant, highly balanced and valuable skills in contractors, vs IBM regulars.
Trust no one.
Always look after yourself, if you do not, I assure you that no one will.
Last and foremost, if you stay at a corporation, and chronically bitch as to how they are constantly screwing you out of benefits and compensation and not rewarding your performance and execution, you stay there and are not proactive at doing something about it, e.g taking your skill sets, your knowledge base, your work ethic and then
selling it on the open job market to the highest bidder as value add to their business, and then telling IBM to go screw yourselves, then you have no one to blame, but yourself.
You may just find yourself making 35k a year net more than at IBM, receiving performance excellence awards, raises, bonuses, and raves from the executive VP levels as to how your superior execution is creating great value add for their business.
My best wishes on you finding a new job. I'm sure if you've been a contractor for any period of time, you've seen this before. It kind of goes with the territory.
There is a supposed goal for IBM to be 60/40 Employees/Contractors, so that they can let the contractors go, without touching the permanent employees. Obviously, they aren't always successful.
I remember about 15 years ago at a corporate outing (not IBM) there was a speaker who had a talk regarding how each of us would be our own employer in the future. About half of us thought this was crazy, while the other half of us thought it was a not so subtle hint by the company. In retrospect, that speaker was absolutely correct. It is more important than ever that we each watch out for our own employment.