TG Management has inserted an additional layer of leadership that appears to have little ownership or long-term stake in GIC. Many operate as if they are in “retirement mode,” optimizing for minimal risk rather than meaningful outcomes.
Direction does not just shift frequently — it is unstable to the point of being incoherent. Priorities change daily, sometimes within the same day, with decisions reversing 180 degrees despite prior input from those actually doing the work. Ground feedback is not just ignored; it is often shut down. Raising better alternatives is more likely to get you criticized than supported. There is no room for healthy debate because leadership assumes it already has the right answers.
The culture has deteriorated from collaboration to self-preservation. Teams no longer work together toward shared outcomes. Instead, there is a pervasive “you go first” mindset — where individuals hesitate to act, waiting for others to make mistakes that can later be highlighted. Psychological safety is effectively gone. Suggesting improvements or trying to do the right thing carries disproportionate personal risk.
Senior leaders do not enable their teams; they overload and expose them, often setting them up to fail. Everything is treated as top priority, timelines are consistently unrealistic, and no additional resources are provided. Expectations are set without regard for feasibility, creating situations where failure becomes almost inevitable. Work is piled on reactively, with little consideration for execution capacity or quality, and the consequences of these decisions are borne by the teams on the ground.
At the top, there is a noticeable absence of clear direction. Leadership lacks a grounded understanding of the technologies they are pushing, yet continues to champion them with misplaced confidence. There is a tendency to chase trends and overpromise outcomes, even when these solutions are not fit for purpose. The gap between leadership perception and on-the-ground reality is wide — and growing.
