Management training

Quote
anonymous said:
To answer your question, there is no formalized training of any kind for the managers. There is a course, which is s a JOKE, called Great Supervision, that is mandatory in some divisions. Other than that, just like all employees, they are given a few days of "coaching" by their manager and then cut loose to figure it all out. This is not only in sales, but all management positions. I have often asked why we do not spend more efforts on training and have been told on numerous occasions that senior management does not value training. They feel it is a waste of time. "That's why we try to hire people with experience and proven track records." Well, guess what, just because someone has been an above average KAE or SME for a couple of years does not mean they are management material. It does not mean they have the capacity or wherewithal to actual lead a team. The same goes in all operations positions! This company does not hire leaders, they hire managers and lackeys. That's why we have to depend on buying other labs and the insurance companies to be the henchmen to tell their participating providers who they have to use!
Click to expand...

"Waste of money" is just code for CHEAP! Which labcorp is very cheap. They pay for it somewhere, believe me. In turnover, lost revenue, lawsuits etc.
 












anonymous said:
Cost of doing business is their approach.
Click to expand...

Maybe so.. But, fact is training managers in a proper way is not a waste of time. In doing so, it would probably allow Labcorp to attract and retain talented people while increasing revenue with less turnover. And less HR issues. I highly doubt anyone at Labcorp did a cost cost/benefit analysis (not that they know what that is or has anybody on the payroll to do so) to determine this both short term and long term. Some jackass who sold in the field 20 years ago and has no pulse on what is going on today, probably just says "it's a waste of time".. Cost of doing business works 2 ways - short term and long term. Labcorp is always short..
 






anonymous said:
Maybe so.. But, fact is training managers in a proper way is not a waste of time. In doing so, it would probably allow Labcorp to attract and retain talented people while increasing revenue with less turnover. And less HR issues. I highly doubt anyone at Labcorp did a cost cost/benefit analysis (not that they know what that is or has anybody on the payroll to do so) to determine this both short term and long term. Some jackass who sold in the field 20 years ago and has no pulse on what is going on today, probably just says "it's a waste of time".. Cost of doing business works 2 ways - short term and long term. Labcorp is always short..
Click to expand...

Labcorp rarely grooms their own managers. Even if they do, they don't train them. They typically hire personnel from the outside that had professional training at another medical company.
 












anonymous said:
This company treats you like trash. Managers are nothing but bullies.
Click to expand...

Spot on analysis.. This company thinks a top down management style works in today's business climate. It just doesn't. It will take something bad to happen to Labcorp to change its culture. When you only have one major competitor it is hard as a company to be proactive and change things when no one can knock them off. Their philosophy is you need us more then we need you. And why shouldn't they think that? Only quest can actually compete with them and they are not doing well. Competition solves a lot of problems which is exactly why there are monopoly laws in place. price, salaries, and employee treatment will greatly benefit from competition. When and how that happens who knows but the government has broken up other companies in the past for less. Call your local state rep's and get the ball rolling.
 






anonymous said:
This company treats you like trash. Managers are nothing but bullies.
Click to expand...

Labcorp's business model is flawed and the culture of Labcorp is built for losers. Ever see the people working there? They look so weathered and worn down, who wants that kind of life for a fucking LAB who couldn't care less about you!
 






anonymous said:
Spot on analysis.. This company thinks a top down management style works in today's business climate. It just doesn't. It will take something bad to happen to Labcorp to change its culture. When you only have one major competitor it is hard as a company to be proactive and change things when no one can knock them off. Their philosophy is you need us more then we need you. And why shouldn't they think that? Only quest can actually compete with them and they are not doing well. Competition solves a lot of problems which is exactly why there are monopoly laws in place. price, salaries, and employee treatment will greatly benefit from competition. When and how that happens who knows but the government has broken up other companies in the past for less. Call your local state rep's and get the ball rolling.
Click to expand...

Get real.
 












anonymous said:
Would appear Wall Street does not agree.
Click to expand...

Wall Street? Are you actually serious? Wall Street is filled with losers too who basically created the housing market collapse and so many investment banks either became insolvent or had to get bailed out by a checkbook that was already 14 trillion in debt (the government). I wouldn't base what Wall Street thinks as pertinent information. Like I said, built for losers! It is unsustainable.
 


















anonymous said:
Wall Street? Are you actually serious? Wall Street is filled with losers too who basically created the housing market collapse and so many investment banks either became insolvent or had to get bailed out by a checkbook that was already 14 trillion in debt (the government). I wouldn't base what Wall Street thinks as pertinent information. Like I said, built for losers! It is unsustainable.
Click to expand...

Like it or not, that is the yardstick....
 












anonymous said:
Don't have to be a genius to realize your path to change is not the correct one. You sound like a Bernie Sanders supporter.
Click to expand...

The path I laid out is based on capitalistic principles not socialism or Bernie sanders.. I support trump actually. Yeah it would be government intervention but nobody supporting capitalism cried when the government bailed out GM, Chrysler and all the banks in 08'. What is the correct path then? Typically the consumer can dictate the market such as a comsumer buying a product or service. In the case of the lab business, doctors offices don't even tell the patient where their specimen is going. A monopoly is a socialistic principle not capitalistic. In reality, insurance companies should allow all labs to be apart of a network equally where the fees are the same and they should let the consumer pick the lab they want so the "free market" is dictated by the consumer.. Where the company actually has to work for their business through service, cost, and marketing etc. As of now it is a corrupt system where labs probably pay off insurance execs to be come the "preferred" or sole providers" with tiered cost structures for each lab, eliminating the patients choice. If Bernie is for letting a patient choose equally, then sure I would support that..
 












anonymous said:
The path I laid out is based on capitalistic principles not socialism or Bernie sanders.. I support trump actually. Yeah it would be government intervention but nobody supporting capitalism cried when the government bailed out GM, Chrysler and all the banks in 08'. What is the correct path then? Typically the consumer can dictate the market such as a comsumer buying a product or service. In the case of the lab business, doctors offices don't even tell the patient where their specimen is going. A monopoly is a socialistic principle not capitalistic. In reality, insurance companies should allow all labs to be apart of a network equally where the fees are the same and they should let the consumer pick the lab they want so the "free market" is dictated by the consumer.. Where the company actually has to work for their business through service, cost, and marketing etc. As of now it is a corrupt system where labs probably pay off insurance execs to be come the "preferred" or sole providers" with tiered cost structures for each lab, eliminating the patients choice. If Bernie is for letting a patient choose equally, then sure I would support that..
Click to expand...

I don't know about Bernie or all of that but it's not just Labcorp, all labs try and do this. The lab business is pretty shady.. 80% of the tests ordered can be done by any lab at similar cost. The difference is molecular pathology and high level assays. That will be Labcorp's bread and butter for years to come. Hospital reference work is almost done at cost, insurance companies have Labcorp in deals that are almost done at cost to keep volume up but somewhere along the line the bubble will burst. And the layoffs will have to occur. There was only only one lab that may have been able to become another national lab (theranos) but they will probably be out of business in 2 years, if not sooner, with their falsifying results. Some things you just can't come back from
 






Top Bottom
Back
Quote