Microsoft Confessions: 'Deeply dysfunctional family'
By Joe Wilcox | Published February 5, 2010, 7:38 PM
The next former Microsoft employee story comes from someone I'll call Fred, which, of course, is not his real name. Fred took a job right out of college and might still work at Microsoft today, if not for the elimination of his group during layoffs last year. Like the former Microsoftie from the first post in this former employee "confession" series, Fred helplessly watched as the exciting and flexible workplace he joined bogged down in increasing layers of middle management.
When Microsoft hired Fred nine years ago, the company employed a little more than 47,000 people. When he was laid off in May 2009, the number was around 93,000. That number is for full-time employees and doesn't include contractors. According to Microsoft's fiscal 2010 10-K, the breakdown on June 30, 2009: "56,000 in the United States and 37,000 internationally. Of the total, 36,000 were in product research and development, 26,000 in sales and marketing, 17,000 in product support and consulting services, 5,000 in manufacturing and distribution, and 9,000 in general and administration."
How many more layers of middle management did Microsoft add when more than doubling headcount during the last decade -- before more than 5,000 layoffs? Fred has an answer for that.
As I explained yesterday, following the last round of Microsoft layoffs, I asked former employees to tell their stories. Responses came from recent departures and others long ago. No identities will be intentionally revealed, although I have verified each one. Fred understands that there is enough detail in his story for Microsoft to possibly identify him. But he is willing to take the risk (and hopefully not risk work elsewhere).
Fred's story is the second posted in this short series running for the next couple days. His account is first-hand, but I will string some other stories together as narrative for better readability and to protect identities.
Something is missing from Fred's story that I would like to encourage some commenters to fill in. Microsoft hiring and compensation follows a scale of levels. While I have some information about the levels and associated salaries, I would prefer some existing or former Microsoft employees pipe in with current salary information for level 63. I ask in hopes of generating discussion. If no one does, I'll later add the information to this introduction or in comments. Four years ago, WashTech News offered an excellent review of Microsoft's complicated compensation system.
Now for Fred's story:
I started with Microsoft in June 2001, right out of college (I received a BS in information technology from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute). I was hired as a level 59. My first role was with Microsoft Consulting Services as an IT Infrastructure Consultant based in the Mid-Atlantic region of the US. I stayed in that role for four years, traveling around the country (mostly on the East Coast, but with a few exceptions) to help large organizations design/plan/implement Microsoft technology -- mostly Windows desktops, Active Directory and Exchange. My clients included Fortune 100 companies in the retail, financial services, higher education and government sectors. Even a branch of the US military.In 2005, rather tired of the Monday-Friday travel schedule, I started searching for a new role. That June, I accepted a role in the MSDN & TechNet organization -- the part of the company responsible for communicating with developers and IT professionals. I was a level 61 at that point. Over the following four years, our business grew -- we were reaching millions of IT pros with high levels of customer satisfaction -- the team grew and my role grew as well. The role of the group was really one of audience marketing -- to take a post-sales approach to the dissemination of technical information, with the intent of making the job of IT professionals easier, and hopefully as a result making them more satisfied with Microsoft.
Unfortunately, over the course of reorg after reorg, our group got buried in an IT infrastructure group. We were 15 people doing audience marketing, as part of a larger group of 450 responsible for the Microsoft.com web infrastructure. Our group had proposed a number of times to be moved into a more appropriate organization, like global marketing, that was better aligned with our mission. But our management chain, which grew deeper with every reorg, resisted the idea of giving up headcount or budget.
At the time I was laid off in May 2009, I was a level 63. I had never received anything other than exemplary reviews (I received an "Exceeded" rating in the three consecutive review cycles leading up to the time I left.) The size of the company more than [doubled] in my eight years there. The number of managers between me and the CEO went from six to 10.
Processes became more bureaucratic and individuals were less empowered to take action. In fact, oftentimes the incentive structure encouraged individual contributors not to do the right thing, but just to do what they committed to in their review the year prior. In other words, if you committed to include Feature A in Windows, and half-way through the year you realized that was a bad thing for Windows and Microsoft customers, the incentive structure actively discouraged you from trying to kill the feature, because then you wouldn't have achieved your commitments. That sort of behavior just got easier and more engrained as the organizations grew.
Our entire group was laid off in two rounds. The first half were let go in January [2009]. Their roles were taken up by an outsourcing company based in India. The rest of us were let go four months later, and the remaining operation was outsourced. Four months after that, the majority of our work was dismantled. At the time I was laid off, I was given a choice of accepting a different role within the company, but it would have required my relocation, so I refused. My understanding is that I was the only member of the staff offered that chance (because of my technical background; the rest of the staff was purely marketing).
There's a part of me that can actually understand our group being laid off. An argument could reasonably be made that non-Microsoft employees can be just as effective at fulfilling our mission and could do so at a lower cost (though that's proving to not be true in the aftermath; it was a disaster). Some of the other people I knew around the company who were let go, though, made my jaw drop to the floor. While areas like Search and Zune continued to received astounding resources, areas focused on customer satisfaction and connection, evangelism, and program management were decimated.
One of the better examples where fat ended up cutting muscle, was someone like Steve Riley, who was a noted security expert and one of the best public faces Microsoft had to the IT Pro audience. He was the only person from his group let go. He never had anything other than stellar reviews, and [he] was one of the few people Microsoft had who could pack a ballroom and hold their attention for as long as he wanted. That one really shocked me.
To be honest, as much as I miss many of the individuals I worked with -- and the steady paycheck and benefits, which were always great -- I'm glad to not be a part of Microsoft any more. It bares very little resemblance in my mind to the company I joined 8 years ago. It's hard to describe the atmosphere of excitement and innovation that existed when I first started. But over time, that certainly diminished, seemingly in an inverse relationship to the size of the company.
The company as a whole seemed more and more focused on chasing competitors into any business where they might someday present a threat -- which to me always felt like ego on the part of SteveB [CEO Steve Ballmer]-- and seemed to completely lose sight of its core strengths and where it could deliver the most value to its customers (see the investment in Zune and Live Search as it correlates to Windows Vista).
If I had to sum up my feelings about the whole experience though, it really boils down to sadness and disappointment -- not over the loss of my job, which, for the most part I enjoyed, but am happy to move past, but rather over the failed efforts, missed opportunities and wasted potential of Microsoft as a whole. I've never met so many talented, passionate individuals. But it felt like everyone was part of a deeply dysfunctional family, and in the end, that dynamic trumped what could have been astounding achievements.
Other stories in this confessional series:
- 'Killed over politics'
- 'Poor worker bees'
- 'There were a ton of bozos'
- Why former Microsoft employees say Microsoft can't innovate
I'm still collecting stories. Please e-mail joewilcox at live dot com. Stories can be anonymous, but I will need to verify identity.

You could take and write stores like this about any top 100 company.
As corporations treat their employees more like a commodity and when they feel they have picked all they can from your brain they let you go.
Look at Apple:
The guy that invented the iPod sent the idea to his manager and they turned it down because they didn't see it. If that was the end of it there would never be a Apple iPod and iPhone.
I have heard and seen time and time again where someone will come up with a idea and then management dismiss it or take it as their own. I have with in my own company made many suggestions to improve something but was never given credit for it (aka great job thanks) or the review comity dismissed it.
Its funny how when a company wants something they say things like "We are a family here" and when your used up they say things like "We have hundreds of people willing to take your job".
Most of the big companies in the 19th and 20th centuries where made and started by people with little to no formal education. Necessity is the mother of invention. Most of the big inventions were not made by people with Phd's but in a few cases people that couldn't read.
Score: 1
|i agree with your response. But i also have another take on the matter of corporations.
Unlike the supreme courts moronic decision that would give corporations human rights just because corporations pay taxes like individual americans, it should not have endowed corporations with unalienable constitutional rights and freedom of speech..
my belief is that corporations are actually machines.
and everyone inside it are simply gears and cogs that make the machine function, producing services and or products, and generating revenue.
politics within the corporation are simply one of the dynamics attributed to the environment people create whether intentional or inadvertently.
Score: 1
|when the going is good for companies, they tend to hire more people than what is actually required.
then when the times become lean, they tend to fire those extra employees.
at best i think that microsoft should have cut back on wages, benefits and other compensation in order to keep much of its workforce employed. i am positive that all of the employees would have made these sacrifices in order to keep their brethren employed.
it is my hope that all the former employees find new positions, but these are terrible times for employment.
Score: 0
|I know at some point these interviews will start to talk about how Apple's cool factor and superior OS became a major thorn in the side of MS. I don't care how you slice it, Apple not to mention Google became too much for MS in the end. Apple is just pure awesomeness.
Score: -8
|These stories describe where I work today 100%. 95% of our 5 billion managers just want to move up. Everything is grinding to a halt. I don't know how any big businesses make money anymore.
Score: 5
|I have to say up front, that I have been a critic of Joe's as well, but this series of articles if very good, and does not show a bias as some here feel. It's meaningful and informative. It does show a business culture on decline. Not all large companies have this problem as some have stated. It's not a, “this is normal of any large company thing”, but a “this is normal for a large company that has a cancer in it”. Perhaps the management in MS will read and understand these articles and use it like a cure. Doubtful perhaps... as I still think as I stated in a previous JW article that Ballmer should go. I think it starts there.
Score: 5
|I agree with lazarus98. Ballmer needs to go and these stories prove it.
Score: 0
|Companies rot from the top.
Score: 0
|So this is my story, and I wanted to chime in with just a bit more.
For whatever it's worth, I'm not bitter at all. I received a huge severance package, and I was working again within 3 weeks of being laid off. I now make more money than I did working at Microsoft, and I enjoy my job a lot more. In truth, getting laid off was one of the best things that ever happened to me. It was a windfall. I say this, however, merely to demonstrate that things worked out for me and I wasn't sharing my story in order to draw sympathy in any way. (Of course, many weren't nearly as lucky as I was. There are talented colleagues of mine still struggling to find full-time jobs a year later, and that pains me deeply.)
To the larger point though, underscored by @jeff_s and several others here, I chose to share my story in that hopes that it, combined with those told by many others, would underscore some of the serious problems within Microsoft. These are stories being told by people who were laid off, but also by those who left voluntarily. They paint a picture - an accurate one, I think - of a company that, sadly, is "successful" (in that they turn an enviable profit every year) in spite of itself. That's the part that really pains me - to think about what success would look like if Microsoft didn't continue to suffer from the weight of the organizational dysfunction hanging around its neck.
The sheer intellectual power to be found within Microsoft is staggering, but the potential is barely tapped because the final result of almost any major effort is so watered down - risks hedged in every possible way - that it bares little resemblance to anything that might be called innovation. Microsoft has become a camel - a horse built by committee. It's as textbook an absence of real leadership as any I've ever seen.
I hope through the addition of enough voices - from employees, shareholders, and most of customers - that the message gets through. But I can't say I'm terribly optimistic.
Score: 6
|I don't why some people are being defensive here. Why defend such a huge mega corporation, for being, well, a huge mega corporation?
The two stories posted by Joe so far seem honest and not bitter.
There's no doubt MS needs to get more agile, more efficient, more innovative. They're doing great financially (due to Office and Win 7, the usual cash cows). But they are facing a lot of competition on many fronts. They need to get their act together in a lot of ways.
These stories reveal weakness to MS's competitors, which can be taken advantage of. Indeed, Google has, with their innovation fostering, relatively non political working environment, in some cases luring bright minds from other organizations (like Microsoft - causing Ballmer to reportedly trow a chair in anger).
Score: 2
|ho-hum...
making a mountain out of a mole hill.
these issues about disgruntled employees and microsoft's operations are getting boring.....
Score: -9
|Do people really take bitter ex employees seriously? All these things are the same thing you read about other jobs where people are fired or laid off.
Score: -8
|Thing is, this guy does not sound bitter at all. He expressed no regrets about Microsoft. He merely expressed his observation of how Microsoft evolved over his time there - from (in his eyes) an exciting, innovative atmosphere to one buried in bureaucratic morass. And it's very credible, because it's rather common that when a company grows in size that quickly, the levels of middle management and ensuing politics gets rather thick, not just Microsoft.
But MS upper management should learn from this stuff - they are facing very stiff competition on many fronts, and they can't afford this level inefficiency.
Score: 7
|Joe I dont think that there is any doubt that 'Fred' can be identified within minutes by anyone in Microsoft who wishes to. I dont see this as a bitter commentary, rather this fits in with other sources to paint a picture of an organisation that is so big that the control systems are byzantine in their complexity and conservatism. I work in an organisation of 5,000 individuals and the politics end up being pretty much the same. Getting things done is like swimming in tar. Those that succeed tend to do so by the force of their will and determination, perhaps more than the validity of their ideas
Layoffs in any big organisation seem to me to be part dead wood clearing, part unfortunate collateral damage and part 'payback' by petty game playing managers who had their ideas and pet projects questioned by someone with brains and integrity but who didn't play the game. Now THAT is a bitter comment.
Score: 5
|These stories are great because believe it or not these stories do get back to Microsoft and someone high up will hear about it. The more they hear the more they begin to see the reality of their company. Sometimes when you're perched so high you cant see what's below, and vice versa. Another great thing about these stories is that all of these people do tell you what makes teams successful and what makes them fail; who are great managers and who are not. It's something everyone can learn from.
Score: 7
|These Ex Microsoft employees can always try to get a part time job at Wal-Mart unloading trucks and stocking shelves for just above minimum wage if they are so miserable. Maybe they could learn the true meaning of dysfunctional with a job like that or better yet no job and bills to pay.
Score: -13
|what, two, three? stories weren't enough, former Microsoft VP and some guy whom got fired, along with these other folks
christ man, betanews just gets worse as you continue writing Joe.
now we'll all have to deal with an onslaught on anon stories by scorned MS workers, yeah, because you'd never find butthurt folks from any other company they've previously worked for...
i wrote long ago, i agreed with these layoffs, they needed to happen and overall, Microsoft as a whole is better off, i welcome more layoffs actually, even seems this wanker who got fired thought it was a good ideas as well
i would agree perhaps Microsoft was a little dysfunctional, maybe that was a key objective in the layoffs? why not do a story about how Microsoft took the kinks out of the machine, in order to become a better company
but you won't write that, headline wouldn't draw any views now would it
Score: -17
|Maybe when we finally see some evidence that the layoffs of these people actually helped Microsoft, that story will be written. Until then I suggest you spend more time considering the words of these former employees and less time being a shameless Microsoft apologist.
Score: 7
|