Since the Carlyle buyout and the IPO, there has been a series of cost cutting efforts that seem to focus on improving the P&L in time for each quarterly earnings announcement. Over the last few years, we've had:
* a (poorly executed) move to hoteling that killed any sense of team cohesion.
* reduction in the 401(k) (Actually, the previous program was a 10% profit share, now it is a 6% match that only pays out if you are still employed at the firm at the end of the year)
* Reduction in health insurance (a switch to high-deductible plans)
* Watering down the 360 degree assessment process to one that amounts to little more than a checklist.
*(They even got rid of all plants in the offices as a way to save money)
Every couple of years, management tries to dramatically shift the organization with the promise that This Time Is Different. There have been switches back and forth between functional and market aligned structures. There was the One Firm push to integrate the commercial and government businesses ("we are one firm, we can work together"), followed by the split of the two halves ("we were really two separate businesses, with different models and cultures"), and the attempt to recreate a commercial business ("This time will be different").
When I started, the firm's culture, reputation as a premium brand, and benefits were the big draws. I don't think any of them are particularly notable anymore.
Over the last year there have been a bunch of efforts that are hard to look at with an unjaded eye -- the "Ed talks" are the firm's take on Ted talks (having a senior vice president give a speech while walking around on a stage really doesn't capture the whole Ted experience); knock-offs of Shark Tank, and superficial talk of innovation fill our email boxes along with videos of our new president's "Connect Tour." Some employees are paid to try and build excitement on Yammer. A lot of effort goes into what one might call "influence operations" to convince employees that management is on their side.
