Pharma VP Departed

[Ron Z]

Just learned that another VP in Pharma R&D has departed B+L over the summer. What is really happening up in ROC with our R&D force and why are people leaving? Are they being forced out?

Wasn't there recent actions to reward folks with new titles, etc as a means to encourage them to stay rather than jump ship? I guess this might not have worked.

What is really going on up in NYS?

 

[Anonymous]

Just learned that another VP in Pharma R&D has departed B+L over the summer. What is really happening up in ROC with our R&D force and why are people leaving? Are they being forced out?

Wasn't there recent actions to reward folks with new titles, etc as a means to encourage them to stay rather than jump ship? I guess this might not have worked.

What is really going on up in NYS?

Who was the VP that left?

 

[Anonymous]

Just learned that another VP in Pharma R&D has departed B+L over the summer. What is really happening up in ROC with our R&D force and why are people leaving? Are they being forced out?

Wasn't there recent actions to reward folks with new titles, etc as a means to encourage them to stay rather than jump ship? I guess this might not have worked.

What is really going on up in NYS?

It is much easier to jump ship when you have a job than when they sell off your division and the masses are cut loose. This is supposedly the scenario that is taking shape. The reason it has taken so long for this departure to get to us is that the persons involved all wish to remain anonymous (not rock the boat, as it were).

 

[Anonymous]

They are jumping ship just before the Division is sold? When are they selling the Pharma division?

Do you get a bigger bonus if you jump before it is sold or after it is sold?

 

[Anonymous]

They are jumping ship just before the Division is sold? When are they selling the Pharma division?

Do you get a bigger bonus if you jump before it is sold or after it is sold?

The VPs of R&D have all of the inside scoop about the short term future of this company. If they jump ship it tells you something.

I guess the key is who they replace them with. If they bring in the top minds in the field then they are looking to upgrade. If they bring in some "yes" men amateurs then they are just place holders waiting for the sale of the company.

 

[Anonymous]

Top minds in the field and taking a job at B&L is an oxymoron. They, by necessity, are mutually exclusive. You need to get schooled.

 

[Anonymous]

Just learned that another VP in Pharma R&D has departed B+L over the summer. What is really happening up in ROC with our R&D force and why are people leaving? Are they being forced out?

Wasn't there recent actions to reward folks with new titles, etc as a means to encourage them to stay rather than jump ship? I guess this might not have worked.

What is really going on up in NYS?

How did they inflate the titles? Did all of the Director's become VPs and all the managers become Directors?

Does that mean that the titles in the job postings at B&L that look like high level positions are really technician or administrative assistant jobs? It is probably not beneficial in the long run to institutionalize job titles that do not actually reflect the position or exaggerate the level of the position in the company. Lying on job titles or on resumes whether it comes from the company or from the individual is never considered ethical in the marketplace.

 

[Anonymous]

How did they inflate the titles? Did all of the Director's become VPs and all the managers become Directors?

Does that mean that the titles in the job postings at B&L that look like high level positions are really technician or administrative assistant jobs? It is probably not beneficial in the long run to institutionalize job titles that do not actually reflect the position or exaggerate the level of the position in the company. Lying on job titles or on resumes whether it comes from the company or from the individual is never considered ethical in the marketplace.

From an HR perspective, how else would you induce people to board a sinking ship that will be sold for scrap; give the janitors those titles and put them in those positions? This is just one desperate measure among many to make this thing look like it won't fall apart as soon as you drive it off the lot.

 

[Anonymous]

From an HR perspective, how else would you induce people to board a sinking ship that will be sold for scrap; give the janitors those titles and put them in those positions? This is just one desperate measure among many to make this thing look like it won't fall apart as soon as you drive it off the lot.

Inflating titles does save the company money in salaries. You can pay people less money if you give them a title instead. VP of the mail room. VP of Global Corporate Office cleaning. VP of Food carts and the VP of janitorial engineering make up the Board of Corpoarte Excellence on Catering the VPs of Global (fill in the blank).

 

[Anonymous]

What grade can you give Pharma R&D (the left Pharma VP) over the past 6 years? Did he or she add value to the company or did R&D take more resources than the return on investment?

Since they let the Pharma R&D VP go we probably know the answer to this question.

The next step is to bring in new leadership. But to turn things around it will take more than one man. Hopefully the new leader of R&D will search for some top quality talent and put them in critical sections of R&D.

Also, look very carefully at what went wrong over the last six years and fix what went wrong. Does the organization that was created make since? Are the leaders in charge of the various sections really the right people moving forward or should the company change personel and direction? Based on the companies short term needs are the peoples jobs in line with what is needed to keep this company afloat?

It is really time to take some bold moves with this company. The new CEO should be able to do it but he will need to hire a strong leadership team. Also, each leader of his team needs to hire the best leaders of each section that they can trust and will work diligently to get the company moving again. This is a good company and good leadership will lead to postive results with a bright future. Hopefully the CEO will really commit to creating the best organization with bright new talent that can make this thing a real turn around success.

 

[Anonymous]

What grade can you give Pharma R&D (the left Pharma VP) over the past 6 years? Did he or she add value to the company or did R&D take more resources than the return on investment?

Since they let the Pharma R&D VP go we probably know the answer to this question.

The next step is to bring in new leadership. But to turn things around it will take more than one man. Hopefully the new leader of R&D will search for some top quality talent and put them in critical sections of R&D.

Also, look very carefully at what went wrong over the last six years and fix what went wrong. Does the organization that was created make since? Are the leaders in charge of the various sections really the right people moving forward or should the company change personel and direction? Based on the companies short term needs are the peoples jobs in line with what is needed to keep this company afloat?

It is really time to take some bold moves with this company. The new CEO should be able to do it but he will need to hire a strong leadership team. Also, each leader of his team needs to hire the best leaders of each section that they can trust and will work diligently to get the company moving again. This is a good company and good leadership will lead to postive results with a bright future. Hopefully the CEO will really commit to creating the best organization with bright new talent that can make this thing a real turn around success.

You are living in denial.

 

[Anonymous]

What grade can you give Pharma R&D (the left Pharma VP) over the past 6 years? Did he or she add value to the company or did R&D take more resources than the return on investment?

Since they let the Pharma R&D VP go we probably know the answer to this question.

The next step is to bring in new leadership. But to turn things around it will take more than one man. Hopefully the new leader of R&D will search for some top quality talent and put them in critical sections of R&D.

Also, look very carefully at what went wrong over the last six years and fix what went wrong. Does the organization that was created make since? Are the leaders in charge of the various sections really the right people moving forward or should the company change personel and direction? Based on the companies short term needs are the peoples jobs in line with what is needed to keep this company afloat?

It is really time to take some bold moves with this company. The new CEO should be able to do it but he will need to hire a strong leadership team. Also, each leader of his team needs to hire the best leaders of each section that they can trust and will work diligently to get the company moving again. This is a good company and good leadership will lead to postive results with a bright future. Hopefully the CEO will really commit to creating the best organization with bright new talent that can make this thing a real turn around success.

If they are going to sell off the Pharma Division then it does not matter much. However, since Pharma is not sold yet perhaps WP is stuck with it for a long, long time. If that is the case it would make since to do a complete review of every R&D position and make sure the right people are in the right jobs moving forward. Mid-management is very crutial to the success of executing directives and setting the correct strategy moving forward. Putting strong, competent mid-management in charge is needed to execute the objectives and bring new products to market.

 

[Anonymous]

sense... not since.

crucial... not crutial.

than... not then...

not typos people... The inability to spell simple words and use proper grammar are just two examples that are indicative of the low caliber personnel at this company. I see it in emails from managers, hear it on conference calls, read it in corporate communications and I wonder did anyone go to school here? High school, how about college maybe. It's pathetic. This organization is pathetic.

 

[Anonymous]

sense... not since.

crucial... not crutial.

than... not then...

not typos people... The inability to spell simple words and use proper grammar are just two examples that are indicative of the low caliber personnel at this company. I see it in emails from managers, hear it on conference calls, read it in corporate communications and I wonder did anyone go to school here? High school, how about college maybe. It's pathetic. This organization is pathetic.

Thats not fare, we all did go to skool.

 

[Anonymous]

sense... not since.

crucial... not crutial.

than... not then...

not typos people... The inability to spell simple words and use proper grammar are just two examples that are indicative of the low caliber personnel at this company. I see it in emails from managers, hear it on conference calls, read it in corporate communications and I wonder did anyone go to school here? High school, how about college maybe. It's pathetic. This organization is pathetic.

Funny, you are right about the first two but wrong about the third one. You should go back to school with your pathetic friends. When talking about a sequence of events then is used. If A happens then B will occur.

 

[Anonymous]

I'm not wrong. The first two were bad spelling from the previous post that were just so stupid I couldn't take it. The third example is something I see every day on CP or in company correspondence. I can't even count the number of times I have seen basic grammar misuse, not just accidental typos. I'm not being the typo nazi here, I don't care about typos and what not. It makes me wonder why they don't spell check before they send out a corporate email, but I'm talking about corporate communications from KK, PS, BC, and MP with blatantly bad English. They really do not know their basic proper usage of Than or Then, Your and You're, there or their, wont and won't, to and too, its and it's, possessive plurals, and the list goes on.

It's pathetic. How many times have I seen "we'll touch Basis" with you? It's not a typo. It's bases. As in Baseball. Touch the bases. I'll touch bases with you. This is what I'm talking about. These people in management here are stupid. Using stupid catch phrases they don't even understand the meaning to. Too many instances to recap. You know what I'm saying, other people have to see this stuff too?

 

[Anonymous]

I can't believe the energy and effort spent on critiquing other people's grammar. It's rampant throughout the industry and a by-product of "GenX" making their way into the business. Think of it as job security for us "baby boomers" since the majority of GenX learned to write on a cell phone. Seems like B&L folk should spend their time worrying about who will buy them and at what cost to its employees. Remember, no "k" in acquisition.