Dan Zelem?

wow...all of a sudden? 4 weeks? what is happening in IT?

 

They’re undoing their mistakes He was a questionable leader who did what he wanted. Good riddens! Hopefully SM will be next.

 

farewell to Agam as well, I hear...

 

Yes, Agam leaving of his own volition
not so with Landy

 

Landy was let go?

 

yes

 

heard that Landy was escorted out, John Linskey was also fired this week...when Steve Sorensen will leave ?

 

I think you mean "good RIDDANCE".

 

OMG - what is happening in IT? Mcguigan and Sorenson rumored to be on the way out as well... Zelem gone for credo violation? Glad I left jnj when I did.

 

Di

 

Did Dan Zelem get the ax for a credo violation? What goes around comes around.

 

Next up - Jennifer Blanchard.

 

There were very obvious conflict of interest issues with all these folks who were let go. Many folks in IT were aware but those who voiced concerns had their positions “eliminated”. I guess that was the way things operated in the org they all came from. DZ was a bully and had created a culture of fear in IT and there were many folks who looked the other way to protect their jobs. I hear one of the eliminated VPs had communicated with executive leadership after leaving their concerns for those left behind. It had become a very dysfunctional environment and while there has been progress made there is still a ways to go.

 

the Credo survey process, in theory, assumes that this type of negative culture would be prevented or at least quickly corrected - makes you wonder if we are heavily invested in a Credo process that is marginally effective or totally ineffective...

 

The credo process in recent years is totally ineffective. Associates are convinced they can be identified and are not willing to risk their job so no one is really honest or truthful. IT has been a toxic environment since SM came in and brought along his friends. There is no respect of leadership because they are not competent or trustworthy. For most, it has become just survival till they can either retire or find another job.

 

The credo responses are absolutely identifiable and in the last version(s) they've even indicated they intend to link to Oursource. They've also started sending out additional identifiable survey based on triggers like job searches. They are taking notes from the Google/Facebooks and trying to create their own algorithms.

The credo surveys are also changed year to year so that declines in any given measures aren't traceable.

 

So if I'm.understanding this.... J&J is intentionally lying about a survey being anonymous which is asking us how we feel about a Credo which states we as a company are "honest" & have "integrity"?

MIND BLOWN

 

unfortunately yes on the tracking, sad but true, the changing Credo - moving target is new information to me but it makes total sense, the survey should be exactly the same every year, it used to be but management apparently has slowly wiggled out of accountability, the company is nothing like it used to be (colder culture now) so it is 100% logical that Credo scores should be trending down if the metrics (questions) were not changing. Management claims no results available for smaller departments, what do you think? The threat of tracking itself helps to boost scores, as opposed to true feelings.

 

these credo changes are reflective of overall changes in the IT culture. Bringing in people from the outside who “know better” has been the trend over the past few years and pushing out the culture that made JnJ great has been very clear. These newer IT execs do not have the IT experience they needed to drive the change and they brought in their friends many of whom have NO Technology background and are very poor leaders overall. The new culture is intimidation and bullying and combine that with questionable vendor relationships you have a very toxic/dysfunctional environment. The sad part is many associates are not doing what is right, what the credo stood for, because they are afraid of losing their jobs They have seen other highly respected long term leaders pushed out because they challenged what they thought to be unethical. There is a lot at risk.

 

They can track and identify you. They can look at smaller groups.

Whether they choose to do it or share the results are the questions you need to be asking. Whether they are transparent and honest about it is another.

Like elsewhere, JNJ has become a stew of people who believe in personal / tribal protectionism is more important than business results or ethical behavior. Senior leaders protect their friends or cohorts.

AG justified the off label selling of Rx, McNeil justified meeting the plants declines, etc etc. 'Good' people questioned politely and respectfully, but leaders are threatened by facts and standards. They then use the performance review process (calibration / the How) and restructures to maneuver out people they see as the problem. They can tell themselves that the severance package fills in and makes their choices ok.

JNJ is a Corp just like any other. The credo has been flipped on its head for almost two decades. As long as they pay what they say they will and it is better than other options for jobs, you should stay.... Just don't be blinded by the credo mumbo jumbo...