
IBM Just Committed Cultural and Creative Suicide - nevatiaritika
https://www.inc.com/geoffrey-james/ibm-just-committed-cultural-and-creative-suicide.html
======
fred_is_fred
This is simply a way to do a layoff and better yet for the accountants the
folks least likely to move are the ones with kids/families, which also happen
to be the ones who are earning at their highest. 25 year olds can move on
short notice, 45 year olds cannot, but its illegal to fire everyone who's over
30.

The article is also correct, talent is leaving. When you announce something
stupid like this, only 2 types of people remain: a) lifers and b) people who
lack the network or talent to find something else. When all you have left is
types A and B you get stagnation at best and decline at worst.

~~~
wilhow
You are missing the 3rd type of people who remain. Idiots who felt a
sentimental loyalty to the brand, who is not giving up hope that IBM just
might rise again to the way it was in the old days.

------
hn_throwaway_99
The first paragraphs of this article are so nakedly biased that it's hard to
take the rest seriously:

> IBM's financial performance has shown steady improvement ever since the
> mid-'90s, when the internet made "work from home" practical, using tools
> that IBM pioneered, like email, groupware, and Web conferencing.

> IBM hasn't had an unprofitable year since 1994, and its revenue per share
> has more tripled since then.

This makes it sound like IBM is doing great, instead of mentioning that IBM's
revenue has fallen for _twenty_ straight quarters, when other large tech
companies have been booming.

> During that period, IBM has created more innovation than any other company.
> In 2016 alone, IBM filed more patents than Google, Apple, and Microsoft
> combined.

Equating number of patents filed with "innovation" is absurd. IBM files a ton
of patents because they are in the patent licensing business.

~~~
HelloNurse
You might be right about technical and financial IBM performance, but this
article is about remote working:

1) Bias in favor of IBM strengthens the "friendly" criticism in the article.

2) IBM is (was) actually committed, since the '90s, to providing collaboration
tools that facilitate remote working and distributed teams. Do you remember
Lotus Notes?

~~~
shermanyo
> Do you remember Lotus Notes?

 _looks at dock icon_

Unfortunately, yes :P

------
tritium
I'm going to speculate wildly, and declare that IBM has several serious self-
driving-car-related engagements that it must commit to, while exiting other
engagements that involve stagnant technologies.

It's migrating away from some existing specialized staff, to make room to
onboard other staff with different skills as part of a play to attack a set of
problems that will be kind of a big deal.

IBM doesn't typically do a lot of real things directly. They operate in the
B2B realm. They exited personal computing when mobile devices emerged, and
have since focused on what we now term as AI/ML.

Everyone knows there's an avalanche afoot, with huge chunks of the job market
hanging in the balance, depending on what gets automated the hardest, first.
All signs point to trucking, motor freight, and last mile shipping. IBM has
probably set its gaze upon that territory, and will probably handle tech
support for some big well-known conglomerates over the next few decades, with
a hand in that area, assisting safe bets that can afford their price.

Don't act like Watson hasn't been a thing. This shift probably has deeper
meaning.

------
ojosilva
I don't think the author knows what motivated IBM to make the change and just
tries to make it look like IBM is Yahoo! Yahoo was a failing company trying
desperately to reboot its revenue and culture. IBM on the other hand is an
extremely successful enterprise that nurtures a company culture that has
become a legend of its own. IBM has so far succeeded morphing into different
shapes and forms to adapt to a very competitive market and ever shifting
technology paradigms. Why assume, with such passionate and condescending
arguments, that IBM does not know what it's doing?

~~~
m-j-fox
I don't know much about IBM except that they made Intel and Microsoft
successful. And I read that Mythical Month Man book.

I'll bite: why assume that IBM does know what it's doing?

~~~
crb002
40% work remote? It's a mass layoff in sheep's clothing.

------
chmaynard
IBM management badly wants to achieve the kind of financial success enjoyed by
tech companies like Apple that have never encouraged remote work. Employee
morale at IBM is already low because of previous mass layoffs, so maybe
management has decided this is a good time to clean house again.

I agree with the author that this policy change could drastically alter their
corporate culture in unexpected ways. Depending on how this plays out in the
next few months, I might decide to reduce or eliminate my investment in IBM
common stock.

