Feedback on your manager. Will you be honest?

Quote
My manager admitted he knew exactly who wrote what. And our regional director feels this is OK or we should use an ombudsman. Sometimes stuff is not at a level for for ombudsman and its just for effective coaching that we dont want someone who has power over us knowing because they dont always take it well.
 




Anonymous said:
My manager admitted he knew exactly who wrote what. And our regional director feels this is OK or we should use an ombudsman. Sometimes stuff is not at a level for for ombudsman and its just for effective coaching that we dont want someone who has power over us knowing because they dont always take it well.
Click to expand...

I can tell you right now the Ombudsman is not going to do anything to help a sales rep. They are more interested in covering the company's rear end from a legal standpoint. It doesn't matter what proof you have. The Ombudsman will get off the phone with you and then call a lawyer to see if there is any potential liability and most of the time there won't be. It sucks but it's the truth.
 




I don't understand why you are all so cynical?
These surveys are honest. They want feedback to improve themselves.
They are anonymous. Retribution will never happen.
Be honest. Tell it like it is.
No manager will ever know. And if they do, they will thank you from the bottom of their hearts!! They are nice people. Trust them.
I did.
I am presently waiting for my unemployment check to come in the mail!!
 




"Will you be honest?"

Only if you're an idiot.

Don't believe a single thing you're told by management at Merck. Every story is written and told to benefit the company in some way. Management will stop at nothing to mislead you.
 




Here is my feedback. "Hey boss, you suck." This is universally true for all survey-takers and all survey-takers' bosses and it is a more efficient process than the one that Merck uses.
 








Honest positive feedback wanted. Honest negative feeback will start you on the road to a PIP.
I have seen it first hand. It is not worth it. Merck protects their managers. This plays out everyday in every Region for everyone to see.
 




Look at it this way. Our job is to sell, not to police our managers for their managers. Did they not select these managers properly or train these managers properly or have any idea what these managers do all year? If a manager sucks, they are probably a good idea to not give them honest feedback because it is pretty unlikely that they do not know it already. If a manager is as good as they ought to be, they either get the feedback they need on a regular basis because they invite it or any formal feedback system is not very necessary for them. Now Merck loves metrics. Is there any data on how many sub-par managers were set right by these surveys or how many irretrievably bad managers were let go as a result of these surveys? Ironically, it seems that the only metric related to these surveys seems to suggest that everyone thinks they are worthless. Since there is ample evidence that these surveys are not desired and are likely to boomerang negatively and there is no evidence that they serve the alleged purpose, who should be foolish enough to fill them in? Who would be naive enough to miss these surveys if they were gone?

Merck's approach to its personnel is similar to that of a 3rd-grade teacher and the babies in her charge. Snitches and brown-nosers are pets. Those that don't get on board to the system are doomed. God forbid you should ever think for yourself, you silly child. This dysfunctional culture Merck has created is bringing on its demise, survey or no survey.
 




Giving all the feedback we want to does not change the fact that Merck is not a corporation. It is a CULT.

I laugh every time I see our company nominate lifers to be change agents. How in the world can somebody who has never worked anywhere else have any context at all for process reengineering? It is like hiring Josef Goebbels in 1946 and asking him to "refine his message".

Jim Taggert is on the short list for CEO at Merck, not Hank Rearden. And, at least for now, markets define opportunity, not cults. Merck will not survive more than 10 additional years.

I listened to Ken Frasier opine about Apple's troubles in the late '80s and concluded that this fool has no business acumen at all, as his screed was self reflecting in a way that indicates that he has no business context, being totally ignorant of other industries.

Get off the ship while you still can.
 








Anonymous said:
Giving all the feedback we want to does not change the fact that Merck is not a corporation. It is a CULT.

I laugh every time I see our company nominate lifers to be change agents. How in the world can somebody who has never worked anywhere else have any context at all for process reengineering? It is like hiring Josef Goebbels in 1946 and asking him to "refine his message".

Jim Taggert is on the short list for CEO at Merck, not Hank Rearden. And, at least for now, markets define opportunity, not cults. Merck will not survive more than 10 additional years.

I listened to Ken Frasier opine about Apple's troubles in the late '80s and concluded that this fool has no business acumen at all, as his screed was self reflecting in a way that indicates that he has no business context, being totally ignorant of other industries.

Get off the ship while you still can.
Click to expand...

And to turn it around, Apple went back to excellence and creativity and vision - by getting rid of the losers that were leading Apple down the path to destruction. They brought back the single individual that personified the positive virtues that got Apple started and resurrected them. The very sort of leadership that was removed at Apple is indistinguishable from Gilmartin, Clark, and Frazier. Power-hungry losers like this do not sacrifice themselves for the good of the company by leaving voluntarily. Their idea of sacrifice is to lay off tens of thousands of innocent victims while the guilty elite pontificate and raise their own compensation. Shame on them for even thinking that they could ever participate in an Apple-like turn-around, let alone lead it.
 




Anonymous said:
And to turn it around, Apple went back to excellence and creativity and vision - by getting rid of the losers that were leading Apple down the path to destruction. They brought back the single individual that personified the positive virtues that got Apple started and resurrected them. The very sort of leadership that was removed at Apple is indistinguishable from Gilmartin, Clark, and Frazier. Power-hungry losers like this do not sacrifice themselves for the good of the company by leaving voluntarily. Their idea of sacrifice is to lay off tens of thousands of innocent victims while the guilty elite pontificate and raise their own compensation. Shame on them for even thinking that they could ever participate in an Apple-like turn-around, let alone lead it.
Click to expand...

So true. I am not into personal worshiping. But there is no aura around the recent crop of Merck CEOs that radiate vision and leadership. We did have those in the 80's and early 90's. Nothing since Gilmartin, et al. I have seen all of them on stage over three decades at national meetings and I should know.
 




Here is the truth about surveys--find out for yourself if they are anonymous. It is easy.
They have a due date. Do NOT return it.
In due time you will be prompted again and again to fill it out and return it as they have not received YOUR survey. Anonymous??? NOT!!
Worked for me just as I described above.
 




Well, I turned mine in and was honest..and it didnt affect me one bit...and it wasnt all nice either! got the same notice...go figure...anybody can find out anything...but at some point you have to have some kind of spine!
 








Anonymous said:
Well, I turned mine in and was honest..and it didnt affect me one bit...and it wasnt all nice either! got the same notice...go figure...anybody can find out anything...but at some point you have to have some kind of spine!
Click to expand...

Agree. Dont criticize again if you cant be honest with this feedback. No reply is an affirmative for everything is humming, sweet and groovy. Top management sees it and says super manager.
 




Top management expects a huge response number AND a positive response. With the dynamics of power so twisted in favor of management, with general morale so low, and with no expectation of actual confidentiality, a large no-response would be taken as a negative vote. Same as voter turnout is when there are no popular options in an election. Worst thing you can do is to lie and turn in an undeserved favorable response. You'll get no credit for it as an individual. They're not searching for ass-kissers; they're looking for trouble-makers.
 




Or look for an identifying code somewhere on the survey, or on the envelope.

One year we pretty much did not send it in. At the end of the next district meeting and when we were very tired, our manager surprised us with the same survey. Since it was past 5 pm and we were also quite hungry and with him standing there pretending to be non-threatening, we completed it in a hurry. The funny thing is he said aloud why we were so suspicious of Mother Merck.
 




Look, if your boss is a disaster and can't honor a spirit of confidentiality, is there any long term benefit in providing your boss with honest feedback. He will be gone just after you are gone. And while you are here, your life will continue to suck. Answer scrupulously every answer either perfectly neutral or evey answer perfectly superb. Either way, if the survey reviewers are using any statistical screening methods at all, your survey response ought to be rejected. If they are not applying any validity screening method to the results, the results are not useful anyway and the survey is pure fluff. This survey is a game and yet another phony manifestation of a phony company. Merck seriously does not care about your opinion. They want reasons to get rid of people (that would be anyone that reports into anyone else, including your manager) as cheaply as possible. Unless you are stuck here, why wouldn't you want to get as much money as possible to get out? And if you are stuck here, Merck will soon use that to their advantage even more. So the best option if you have options is to get out. And if that survey is the vehicle, all the better.

Is the survey a serious threat? Or an opportunity?

"Please, Brer Fox, please don't throw me into the briar patch."
 




Anonymous said:
What I find most interesting is that in 2009 our RDM let his reps know which questions would score him and my CTM in the survey. So what's the point of having a survey if you are going to scare the reps into gaming the system? Shows how stupid the trust and value scores are. Doctors only fill out the survey to get the $$. They give just about everyone glorious scores because like most pharma reps they are whores too.
Click to expand...

Thats right my little bitches. That is how the big dog gets paid. Suck my trust and value hard.
 




Similar threads

Stakeholder Feedback for DCO's?
Replies
12
Views
1K
Merck
Anonymous
Most threading and worst manager ever
Replies
82
Views
25K
Merck
anonymous
Communication Email From Manager To Come Soon
Replies
2
Views
2K
Merck
anonymous
Inappropriate comment by manager
Replies
16
Views
6K
Merck
anonymous
Former Merck manager Stephanie R
Replies
2
Views
2K
Merck
anonymous
Top Bottom
Back
Quote