If IBM is such a terrible place to work then why not just go somewhere else. That's what shareholders do. If we don't like an investment we dump it and move on. If it loses money and our confidence falls we cut our losses. Everyone will say how difficult it is to find another job in this economy - but some employees have hung on for a decade while they complain what a #$%$ place IBM is. There's no excuse for that. If you can't find another job in a few years then the problem is you not the company.
If the shareholders are happy - and they are - then who cares what the employees think. And to those who point to stock buybacks and financial engineering; that is exactly what IBM should be doing. I would say they represent their shareholders' interests better than almost any other company. Employees are just like wrenches and hammers. There's a Home Depot every few miles and they have tons of wrenches and hammers.
So stop complaining and plan your own future instead of counting on IBM.
except that IBM has a long tradition of complaining employees ... i worked there for 32 years and did very well ...
but there were always complainers .. it was very obvious that they went from cradle to IBM with no idea how
the rest of the world operates ....
I have long been a champion of IBM. It is a great and iconic company with a proven history of seminal computer science. I remain confident that over the long term, IBM will not only adapt and adjust to emerging trends, but also define & drive them. Cloud computing is but one area that comes to mind.
However, the main threat over the long term is the employee issue. IBM has a problem with internal culture. It's not enough to pay a decent salary. IBM needs to focus on the total happiness index. It's worth the investment to buy employees coffee, food, throw parties, and morale building off-site events. Stop nickel & diming employees with gimmicks like paying matching 401k once a year.
The fact is, Silicon Valley competitors "lavish" their employees. Google, Apple, Microsoft, Twitter, SalesForce, and SAP all have significant Bay Area presence with cutting edge culture. This increasingly attracts the best & brightest, especially the youngest, which is important in rounding out product features & functionality. Remember, IBM is competing against these companies.
Don't get me wrong. IBM spends $6 billion annually on R&D. It is a vast organization. It has lots of superb talent. But it really needs a cultural makeover. It needs to win the hearts & minds of the entire workforce. If it doesn't, long term problems will emerge & indeed threaten the viability of a great American company that is now a great global company.
Fingers crossed. We'll see short term volatility, but I think IBM will get it right long term.
Problem is they can't afford it. Revenue per employee at places like Google is 5X greater than IBM. Compaq had that problem. A young dedicated workforce. parties all the time. Product announcements with popular rock bands. Indoor fireworks. First class air travel for all flights over 3 hours. Refrigerators stocked with snacks and free coke machines everywhere. Then when margins tightened everything collapsed. Fee soft drinks alone for 10,000 employees cost $10million annually. IBM has 50X as many employees. They just don't have $500million extra lying around for free soft drinks. And that's just one tiny little example. I realize Google has playgrounds and lounges and all that Silicon Valley stuff. Employees come to work barefooted in shorts and they ride skateboards around the halls. But trust me - it always ends eventually. IBM just does not have the latitude to waste that kind of money.
lawns all cut. No more to cut since its not the growing season here in the northeast. I'm not whining Went for a job at McDonalds. I got beat out by an experienced server. She knows what to do. I'm now applying for a job at a barbershop, sweeping up hair. They asked me if I have broom. I told them yes and I'll bring it in Monday. I got the job!!! I think !!! I also have to bring in coffee. Its a prerequisite for a "newbie".
equating selling stock to quitting to work somewhere else is total rubbish! IBM put's its plants in remote places just exactly so it is difficult to move to a better job. That way they can pay below standard rates and dump on the employees at will. It's a heck of a lot easier to sell some stock than it is to pull your kids out of school, get your wife to quit her job, sell your house , leave your friends and move thousands of miles on your own nickel.
Maybe I should clarify: I know situations where outside consultants have sold IBM projects for $50k and outsource them to India for $10k. But for IBM it's still cheaper than maintaining the headcount necessary to cover the projects. Problem is that the company is currently burdened with the lowest revenue per head ratio in the industry. So they need to cut cut cut cut cut until they get back in line with their competitors. And the remaining employees need to learn to work competitively.
nice of you to clarify but people here have got to get with it. Realistically and its obvious , IBM has to cut. Ten years ago IBM had 350,000 employees and growingt. In the year before Gerstner there were 400.000 employees. Now we have 450,000 employees? Give me a break. Cut, and the ones remaining, re-invent yourself or go out and do something else for some other company. jand2357 , I might just exceed your thumbs down count.
Your last sentence makes perfect sense, everything above it is bilge water. Some employees is my favorite here, some. Wow, about 2,900 by count now. And jobs? HAHAHA - what jobs. In this wonderful economy, jobs at Burger King and, your valued Home Depot, perhaps but they do not pay very well, do they? I am glad I do not work for YOU. A valued employee in your firm would never walk in the door in the first place.
"If the shareholders are happy - and they are - then who cares what the employees think." -- That is the problem. Because the employees care and they are fed up. Most of whom have planned very well for their future, saved, put kids through college, own homes, and all the rest. The problem is that IBM no longer values some employees as they once did. It is not so bad for the new folks, but the people who have been around for awhile are #$%$ and rightfully so. They take the brunt of the cost cutting, longer hours with no compensation, layoffs and job eliminations. IBM shows no loyalty yet expects undying loyalty in return. So this "you are lucky you have a job" #$%$ has reached it's pinnacle and you will see IBMers leaving, retiring and worse of all, giving up on IBM.
The problem is that IBM no longer values some employees as they once did.
fair enough and it would be an item of concern IF there were other companies who value their
employees , but those days have passed ... as far as concern for employees
The shareholders may be happy to see the next quarter results as a result of current cuts, but low and poor employee morale among the survivors of this cycle cuts = lowered productivity and dis-incentivization = poor company performance in subsequent quarters = steady decline in the company = lowered shareholder value in the long term = unhappy shareholders down the road. Unless you're a day trader interested in short-term gain, the happy smirks will not last too long in subsequent quarters.
The problem is - Can IBM depend on Made in China and Made in India? Does that generate happy customers?
If yes, that's fine. Who care North America IBMers?
If not, unhappy employees - low quality products - screwed customers - ?
Where does share holder's money come from? not from customers?