Key leaders seem to play favoritism and driven by politics rather; many are either related to management or friends, or have worked up their was as interns. So it appears leadership is intimidated to make changes occur and blame those in new roles that are brought in to be change leaders. Leaders often deflect failures onto the middle management layer or the actual workers hired to produce. The result is working in chaotic silo groups. The mindset is not strategic thinking, but reacting. When proactive thoughts are suggested those who try to do the right thing are bullied. There is no foundation or path set for product vision success and individual contributor success such as KPIs. The results of lack of product vision, no MVP, and constant resistance to change. Leadership lacks loyalty to their employees, and have no drive for true innovation. Key stakeholders that can influence change are not invited into, or incorporated in key corporate change meetings. This is NOT a software innovation group; rather their focus is on early to on-going sale of their devices. The software applications are not a source for minimization so software processes are not implemented for success (some pockets try agile, most perform waterfall but with lack of prioritization as performance is an on-going issues that keeps them several steps behind). The voice of customer is driven by external corporate level marketing mostly reflecting device usage experience, or influenced heavily by regional sales who want the user data to drive political choices. The Product Owners lack training in software (so thinking about scalability and factoring in scope of features is muted out in discussions), and most PO on that level are often arrogant, and can be hostile to new members. Most of HR is the leaderships watch-dog, not there for the employees, but serve as an extension of a tier of leadership or management that shields the upper management from truth, and serves a as means to bully or nit-pick on employees that are trying to do their job or innovate using the right methods. In addition existing employees that have been their since their early 20's and now in influential roles act and treat new talent or members with a sense of threat rather than a sense of community to collaborate (so a new building with better offices alone will not foster collaboration). There is also poor mentorship by managers who set you up with job title or description with no career plan, annual goals, and throw you into the fire without socializing the role. Leaders lack confidence in introducing new members or ideas to align with stakeholders; so when it comes time for performance reviews there are no guidelines with formal KPIs.
