• Tue news: Where do Harris and Trump stand on health policy? Medtronic renal denervation coverage. Canada less likely to have drug shortages? Wall Street wants CVS execution plan. Nektar manufacturing facility sale. See more on our front page

May I pose a philisophical question at this point?

Quote

Anonymous

Guest
With its new Gestapo-approved ranking system, (S1, S2, etc.) Merck is
informing their tenured employees that, "what you've done in the past
does not matter, and your tenure does not matter."

Overnight, the most experienced reps are under assault and told that
they no longer have the "compentencies" to sell pharmaceuticals. (Also
known as "bringing in lunch.")

Yet, at the same time, Merck is trying to whip even more productivity out
of their flogged and beaten down sales staff? That makes no sense at all...
Why would anyone of any intelligence, put out one iota of effort more than
is required??

If what I did yesterday (according to Merck) is of no consequence in my
evaluation, then why should what I do today even matter tomorrow...

Does anyone else out there get this absurdity??
 






Great post...in fact several were promoted to S3 that have never done anything and have had ample chances over the years! Many were comnsumate asskissers and slurped the koolaid like champs but cannot deliver when the chips are down. This right in your face account bullshit is one of the reasons but at the end of the day some contrived group of physicians with a slick name will abandon Merck like an old whore on a street! Look at how many of these S3's couldn't move a pill of Januvia when it was launched and all of the sudden they are leaders! Leaders are tested and proven in the fire and no half baked DCO with an MBA can make them successful leaders in the long run...and maybe Merck does not need great salesmen for the long run because there will not be one!
 








even the S3's arent doing anything of substance. We have a whole sales-force that is totally unmotivated and handcuffed. So, I cant figure out why we arent doing better? What a freakin joke
 




If Merck is making you feel betrayed, belittled, worthless, put-upon, and even angry enough to leave, Merck is accomplishing what it desires. Merck has long had a history of breaking relationships with its employees by the process of benign neglect and elimination from the clique. Those that were "in" yesterday or today are replaced by new kids tomorrow. Usually they are replaced after they have been milked for all they are worth. When Merck was tough to get in and tops in the industry, getting sound experience at Merck, a valuable commodity in a growing industry, was worth being tossed about by this system. Now that Merck is not any different than any other and the industry is dead, "this üse-em and lose-em" method is a fool's game and the fool is the employee. However it speaks volumes to the underlying arrogance that Merck is so famous for and there always will be those that will put up with anything just to be included.
 




Anonymous said:
If Merck is making you feel betrayed, belittled, worthless, put-upon, and even angry enough to leave, Merck is accomplishing what it desires. Merck has long had a history of breaking relationships with its employees by the process of benign neglect and elimination from the clique. Those that were "in" yesterday or today are replaced by new kids tomorrow. Usually they are replaced after they have been milked for all they are worth. When Merck was tough to get in and tops in the industry, getting sound experience at Merck, a valuable commodity in a growing industry, was worth being tossed about by this system. Now that Merck is not any different than any other and the industry is dead, "this üse-em and lose-em" method is a fool's game and the fool is the employee. However it speaks volumes to the underlying arrogance that Merck is so famous for and there always will be those that will put up with anything just to be included.
Click to expand...

Also very well put. Merck has been doing absurd things for about the past 15-16 years from my observations. The absurdity only seems to have gotten worse. I wouldn't believe it except for the fact that I've lived it in hopes it would get better. It continues to get worse.
 




Ever shrinking access,time and impact with customers. Collegues who are jockeying for your position. A manager who comes in for two days every month and spends every minute berating and brow beating your every move. A corporate culture were the axe can fall any minute and layoffs are always looming. Executive management that views you as a detriment rather than an asset and really, truly, deep down just doesn't respect or even like you or what you do. This movie will end badly.
 




Fifteen years it was rare for anyone to leave Merck except retirement. Then the management got used to high turn over. People became disposable. Managers never mentioned why someone was not at the sales meeting anymore, especially if the rep disagreed with them, moved on and got a better paying job. Slowly we as reps became numb and don't feel for anyone else except ourselves.
 








Merck has one goal with regard to its salespeople: Their resignation.

They will pressure, lie, cheat and do whatever necessary to make you want to leave.

Welcome to the New Merck.
 




Anonymous said:
Rather than feeling individuals becoming numb, perhaps Merck has found it better to hire shallower, less feeling people. Perhaps that's all that's out there?
Click to expand...

True, a definite change in tone. Less feeling, cold and out of touch with employees. Work, produce, get paid less, put up with the pressure or leave.
 








The party has long been over. "Me too" products, less and less access to prescribers, generic competition, "patent cliff" coming with no $5 billion drugs to replace lost revenue. Is it any wonder that the sales force is now a liability, not an asset? As such, why would Merck treat their reps with care and respect? Instead their goal is to suck the blood out of you, and are happy to see you quit.

Best to keep nose clean, go with the flow, and ride this out until your number is up (unless you want to leave now, on your own). I suspect this will inevitably be over for all us, as contract sales forces can take over 100%. No need for "in house" sales force.
 








Anonymous said:
Merck has one goal with regard to its salespeople: Their resignation.

They will pressure, lie, cheat and do whatever necessary to make you want to leave.

Welcome to the New Merck.
Click to expand...

great post...truer words were never spoken...anyone rep who feels secure at Merck is kidding themselves...Merck wants people out now!!
 




Oh yeah, mama will lie which I find very disheartening. If mama lies to me, what bigger lies do we have going on? I believe the fact that sales reps are viewed as a liability by our management is spot on. It validates the way we are managed and treated. It is nothing like the way field sales was treated back in the day. Our newer people have no idea. I'm hanging on with all my might to make retirement next year.
 




Anonymous said:
Oh yeah, mama will lie which I find very disheartening. If mama lies to me, what bigger lies do we have going on? I believe the fact that sales reps are viewed as a liability by our management is spot on. It validates the way we are managed and treated. It is nothing like the way field sales was treated back in the day. Our newer people have no idea. I'm hanging on with all my might to make retirement next year.
Click to expand...

Make it to ten and just chuck it. Anyone who is over ten and pushing to stay needs a psychiatrist....get a life somewhere else.
 




Anonymous said:
If Merck is making you feel betrayed, belittled, worthless, put-upon, and even angry enough to leave, Merck is accomplishing what it desires. Merck has long had a history of breaking relationships with its employees by the process of benign neglect and elimination from the clique. Those that were "in" yesterday or today are replaced by new kids tomorrow. Usually they are replaced after they have been milked for all they are worth. When Merck was tough to get in and tops in the industry, getting sound experience at Merck, a valuable commodity in a growing industry, was worth being tossed about by this system. Now that Merck is not any different than any other and the industry is dead, "this üse-em and lose-em" method is a fool's game and the fool is the employee. However it speaks volumes to the underlying arrogance that Merck is so famous for and there always will be those that will put up with anything just to be included.
Click to expand...

Does management feel betrayed, belittled, worthless, put-upon, and even angry enough to leave like so many reps? They have easier times getting new jobs. Why don't they leave like they want the reps to leave? It's a fools game all around.
 




They have even more incentive to stay until they get fired. Stock grants, stock options all need to be vested over time. And if the Directors canned all their cronies, who would they talk to and use to cascade down all the nonsense. Cuts always mean get rid of the little guy first so that "pain" numbers can be shown to Wall Street. Cut compensation 10% across the board and the number of voluntary resignations would shoot up and the sharing the budget pain would be more fair and taken far better. Those that can do better would get gone and those that cannot would have little to moan about. Picking and choosing the weakest of the weak to make numbers makes no sense. For the amount of work to be done, people are needed. Too many man-hours are now being spent just wondering if next week will be their last. Who in their right mind is going to work their ass off under those circumstances. If you lay people off it says that you have too many bad people; if you cut pay, it means you don't have enough money. Which is it? If it is the former, why is management seemingly blameless? If it is the latter, explain to me the exhorbitant pay for senior management.
 




Anonymous said:
They have even more incentive to stay until they get fired. Stock grants, stock options all need to be vested over time. And if the Directors canned all their cronies, who would they talk to and use to cascade down all the nonsense. Cuts always mean get rid of the little guy first so that "pain" numbers can be shown to Wall Street. Cut compensation 10% across the board and the number of voluntary resignations would shoot up and the sharing the budget pain would be more fair and taken far better. Those that can do better would get gone and those that cannot would have little to moan about. Picking and choosing the weakest of the weak to make numbers makes no sense. For the amount of work to be done, people are needed. Too many man-hours are now being spent just wondering if next week will be their last. Who in their right mind is going to work their ass off under those circumstances. If you lay people off it says that you have too many bad people; if you cut pay, it means you don't have enough money. Which is it? If it is the former, why is management seemingly blameless? If it is the latter, explain to me the exhorbitant pay for senior management.
Click to expand...

Perhaps an anonymous letter expounding these points to Mr. Fraser would be valuable?
 




Top Bottom
Back
Quote