Makes Amazon's 6% look wimpy by comparison. And for decades, GE was considered a model of how a business should be run and they were known to have an excellent leadership development philosophy/program. And their stock price did really well back then. I don't know what the point of all this is but Amazon is neither the first or even the worst offender of using PIP. And that a business can be "successful" over a period of decades while pipping 10% each year, so Amazon must be doing something wrong in how they created the culture they have now. TC 250k
This only works if they are willing to fire 10% at every level. Is there a PIP for 10% of c-level execs, 10% of SVPs, 10% VPs, 10% Sr. Directors, 10% Directors, 10%, Sr. Mgrs, 10% Mgrs?
But we also have learned that the GE model is a failure and created a bloated whale of mediocre results over time. Money or lots of money can sustain a company for some time. But, what has GE or IBM or any of the bloated “titans” done in the last idk decade or 3. They, like many firms of the last century fought for dominance through patent control, buying out those that are a threat, making it impossible for firms using the hardware or products to have any competition to shop. I mean is that what capitalism is? Get so big that you just play goalie for 100 years because of wealth…point being GE and even Amazon are not good examples of what is right nor should we promote that it’s ok. Sure cut low performers, but don’t hire to fire because of stupid quotas
The "GE model" isn't one thing. The company was seen as highly successful under Welch but less so in later years. You're conflating multiple decades-long eras together.
Lol Welch was a douche too. Great job in stifling innovation through wannabe MBA tactics.
TC or GTFO
Added
And how is GE doing today? Heartless policies kill once great companies like GE and IBM.
Again, like I'm saying with everyone else, GE's troubles became evident after Welch left. So GE's current performance is irrelevant to OP's point, whether you agree with him/her or not.
Welch policies set the stage for the slow downfall of the company. My comment is completely relevant.
Amazon's 6% URA quota is valid only for April 2021 - March 2022. Many previous years had a higher URA % quota. So no, Amazon is surely not more benevolent than the erstwhile GE.
Thanks, I didn't know, what were the quotas in the past and how does it get determined?
It's a bit more complex in practice. Groups that failed to meet URA would get it double in subsequent years. Groups that want to downsize stop hiring fresh pipmeat, and so that URA target basically accumulates to take an ADDITIONAL 6% every OLR. Some groups have URA by level and some treat in it as one big pool, meaning e.g. effectively 15% URA for L4 versus 8%.
GS and Morgan Stanley have same 5% fire every year target. It is done at all levels however.
This is irrelevant imo because the bank model is much more hierarchical and reliant on people leaving. Amazon employees over 2 million people and can't afford to hire and fire the entire fucking world
Yeah, everyone knows this. Most everyone also knows it is outdated at best, cruel and self-destructive at worst.
Jack Welch is extraordinarily overrated. He came up with a whole slew of management mumbo jumbo (6 sigma, tqm , etc.). He managed to pump the stock for a while then almost drove the company into the ground due to horrible decisions (GE Capital). The government eventually had to step in to bail them out.
dogshit leader. hopefully history will be unkind
He stepped down in 1991, but you're talking about unhedged risk exposure 17 years later during a global crisis that steamrolled the entire financial sector? Might want to get back to the Customer Service desk.
I don't even agree with OP here but everyone on Blind needs to take a logic class or something, which is sad. GE's currently shit performance happened in the past decade or so and Jack Welch ran the company from 1981 to 2000. In that time, GE was seen as an extremely successful company, top of the industry in multiple industries and it was *the* place to learn and grow. Everyone here is conflating Welch with the time a full decade after he left just to stick it to OP. Unless someone here actually has intimate knowledge of what happened in 1980-2000 (what was seen as a golden era whether rightly or wrongly), 2000-2010 (the in between time everyone is ignoring), and 2010-present (today's shit performance) - and I suspect no one here does - y'all are all just dramatically overreaching.
Welch’s legacy will be debated for decades but there are reasonable arguments that he set up the conditions that allowed GE to fail. It worked out during his tenure but that doesn’t mean things that happened after aren’t his fault. I’m not saying I subscribe to those arguments, but it’s not an unreasonable stance.
Maybe, but your narrative is way less compelling now that we've laid out the facts. The clearest explanation for GE's fall is GE Capital in the 2008 recession. Not hiring practices under a CEO who left ten years before any of GE's troubles became evident. It just feels like y'all are grasping for straws just to vent your frustration at Amazon. Which is deeply weird even though I don't like the URA/PIP stuff.
They both have the same rating on blind too!
GE was actually seen as a highly competitive (as in, high business acumen/success) company back then, regardless of your opinion on Amazon. Blind ratings in 2022 are irrelevant to OP's point since GE's good days have long since past in the years after Welch.