Strategy and Planning org changes

Discussion in 'Pfizer IT' started by Anonymous, Sep 3, 2012 at 1:37 PM.

Tags: Add Tags
  1. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    So JC has a few more direct reports, and the department is now called Stategy and Planning. Anyone have insights into any additional changes, like actually picking a new name?
     

  2. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    Is there a reason JC gets always to lead these fluffy (useless?) groups?
     
  3. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    Can anybody possibly provide even just 2-3 concrete examples of strategic vision that JC has provided Pfizer that truly turned out to even a.) get implemented and b.) actually provide value? And when I say value I mean either 1) increased employee satisfaction or productivity improvements or 2.) increased shareholder value?

    I too am sick of glorious titles like "Strategy and Planning" - the last thing Pfizer needs is more of either. What they need in IT are leaders who grasp the limits of technology, who can articulate an actionable game plan, and who have the hard skills to pull it off in a reasonable time frame.

    JC has to be looking back on his career at Pfizer as nothing more than "almost maybe". I foresee nothing but new rounds of PPT creation with pretty bubble cloud drawings, a lot of wispy pontifications about "future" state - more "off site" pow-wows with the supposed leadership "teams" and precious little useful ideas. Everybody goes running around all consumed in a state of "virtual" busy convincing themselves what they are doing is important - while the staff just shrugs their shoulders and waits for the next big "idea" to come out of the scared little think tank.

    Bold ideas that stick - things that can get done and will improve IT - missions that people can believe in. Details, details, details. None of these things ever seems to come out of people self-absorbed in achieving a higher zen state of "strategy".
     
  4. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    Between this post and a later one there is a lot of truth. This group could really add value, but we're so busy being busy we don't get anything done. I've never seen so many useless and overlapping assessments. And you can tell the asessments are junk because they don't catch some of the biggest problems that we all know exist. And of course we need endless status reports on how we are doing in executing our assessments.
     
  5. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    Now we are talking. A large amount of busy and nothing gets done. When will they learn?
     
  6. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    From the great Windows Programmer Matt Pietrek - check out the blurb about "Dead Horses" - http://www.wheaty.net/fun_stuff.htm - and then think about this Strategy Group.
     
  7. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    i don't understand how a guy's (JC) entire organization can be decimated yet he still survives. where is the accountability? were the groups under him eliminated because they were a bad idea to begin with by BCG or was the person who in charge of them lacking the necessary the leadership, experience, foresight, and vision to leverage and present to the CIO the processes and capabilities that those groups were intended to create?
     
  8. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    I believe this is at least the 3rd team in a row that gets dismantled on his watch, yet JC gets to live another day. Another proof that accountability is not a word BT LT is familiar with.
    They’ll keep him around until he will retire and in the meantime they’ll fire a dozen more Managers instead.



    That's not how this works. JC is never gonna rock the boat, so he's perfect for JK. Ever since JK and his team took over, BT became a back-office operation and nobody expects big things to come from BT - thank you JK and Co.