| Topic Name: |
Why stay at hewitt? |
| Message Name: |
I Think It Won't |
| Date Posted: |
01/28/2006 |
| In Reply To: |
First, my guess is you are wrong about the "behind your back" bad reports. It might seem that way, but I'll get into that in a minute. I'd also like to hear examples of micro mangement.
Like any organization, we have some good managers and some bad ones. Knowing that I'll get flamed for this, I do think our managers are under a lot more stress than you realize.
I go to my BGM for resources that are critical and I'm told we can't afford them. I then have to go back to the project manager and explain that we have to find a way to make due with what we have. Some PMs at this point begin to "micro-manage" in an effort to help find efficiencies in how you are doing things. Again, this is the "good manager" in my opinion. It doesn't mean you like how it feels, but the reality is the PM has to stay on a lot of people to make sure they crank out as much work as possible because of our resource shortage.
I think it will get better because I don't think we will always be as pressured financially as we are now. I could very well be wrong, but I believe things will ease up in another year or so. when staffing is able to get where it needs to be, I think we'll see less micro-management.
As for the "behind your back" comments, I have a guess. Again, without examples I'm not sure. This could also tie back to the financial crisis we are in. At review time, we had to be much tougher on our ratings in order to stay in budget. So in some cases this mean we needed rank associates and make sure the very best got the very best raises. This might mean a "meets expectations" rating for someone doing a good job. I could see how this would feel there must be some "behind the back" stuff going on. Reality is I've seen manager go to bat for their associates only to lose the battle in the final calibrations.
Ok ... let the flames begin. |
| Message: |
"...when staffing is able to get to where it needs to be..."? How many associates need to quit in disgust or get RIF'd before our staffing is "where it needs to be"? As a staffing strategy, it sounds like the firm is making it up as they go along.
I think we will always be pressured financially as we are now. This is the new reality for us. Thanks to fierce competition in the a market we dominate, wage pressure from our associates in India (making North American associates too costly by default), and the infinite need to meet quarterly earnings targets for Wall St, we will ALWAYS be under this amount of pressure financially. This is the new current state of things for Hewitt; they may get worse when times really get tough, but they certainly won't get much better.
"...I believe things will ease up in another year or so...". I respectfully disagree. Hewitt will no longer exist in its current form a year from now, its current form being an independent publicly held company. By this time next year, we will be making preparations to integrate our operations with our new parent company, or we will have the majority of our stock held by a private equity firm and we'll be at the mercy of a VC.
Any marketable associate should have a Plan B, and maybe even a Plan C, ready. Have your resume up to date, start looking at jobs boards at other firms (don't limit yourself to Monster or CareerBuilder, look at job postings for Mercer, or Towers, or Accenture, or maybe even client firms you work on) to see what's available, and start networking at job fairs or maybe a professional trade group (like the group that sponsors the CEBS exams).
Hewitt may be tolerable for the short-term, but I wouldn't count on it for the long-term.
|
|
