SAIC and Leidos
Published by Dr. Beyster March 5th, 2013 in SAIC.This past week I read the news reports about SAIC selecting a new name — Leidos — for what will be the larger of the two companies when SAIC completes its planned split later this year. While I personally do not agree with splitting up the company, I can live with this new name. It’s not bad. I am glad, however, that the name SAIC will be retained for the smaller, technical services business.
– Bob
Bookmark to:
Dr. Beyster,
Retaining the SAIC name for one of the companies is one of the few things the management seem to have gotten right. Which you were still here to help put the interest of ourcustomers and the employees first.
This is a very significant move on behalf of the SAIC leadership. It really pushes the “new company” concept forward without the lingering aftertaste of status quo. Regrettably they should have completed the naming transformation.
I’m sure it’s really exciting to be at Leidos/SAIC – now that is has a solid 8 years worth of high-priority and high-visibility changes that really benefits not only the employees directly, but also benefits the customers.
I do not see how the changes since Beyster’s departure have benefited the employees or the customers. They have benefited Wall Street. I have been an employee of the company for almost 20 years. It is the only job I have had.
In the old days, a capable employee could build a portfolio of work within SAIC. We were free to market our ideas, and if someone wanted to pay for it, we could pursue it.
Now, that is not the case. I went from essentially running my own shop within a corperate structure where I was bringing in money to support me and one or two other people to working on someone elses large programs.
I have seen my benefits erode every year.
The bean counters have taken over SAIC. And now, I will be in Leidos, which makes people think of Lidos Pizza (in the DC area).
Josh: Thank you for the note. While I don’t agree with everything that SAIC’s management has decided in recent years, I do wish the company and its employees well. — Bob
Damian: I believe you’re right: SAIC is going to be an entirely new company (or, more accurately, two companies) after the split. I look forward to seeing how this experiment goes, though I am sorry to see that many good employees are being left behind in the process. — Bob
@David
I spent several years at SAIC AT&SG/IISBU and have friends there now. Comparing the overall corporate climate and benefits of when Dr Beyster was President versus what they are now, you’d actually see they’ve gotten better and/or increased.
In the old days things weren’t as great as you seem to think, and are nowhere as good as they are now. I certainly won’t mind getting into a discussion on specifics if we can keep it civil.
But, at least we agree on the pizza reference.
@ Dr Beyster
Finding and retaining quality personnel has remains easy to do.
David: Thank you for your post. While I know very little about SAIC’s inner workings these days, I do know that when I was there we provided our people with limitless opportunities to build their own businesses within the company. That was one of the reasons why we attracted and retained so many highly qualified people over the years, some of whom eventually did leave SAIC to start their own successful companies. And of course employee ownership was a big part of the equation too. — Bob
I recently left SAIC to join a small business. My main concern about the company’s direction is “energy,” namely being the human energy, emotions, and passion that deliver customer focus, innovation, and performance. SAIC’s greatest strength, and at times it’s greatest weakness was the fragmented pockets of bottoms up customer focused innovation. The company is now becoming top down/hierarchical and management driven, not employee driven. The recent executive decisions are confusing to the employees, corporate partners, and most importantly customers. However, the decisions do make sense to investors and executives who can now increase addressable opportunities that they previously could not pursue because of perceived OCI’s. In short, it feels like executives are making decisions so that they can make assumptions about future business opportunities that will allow growth projections to close. However, all these decisions make employees who were excited about entrepreneurship, and professional growth opportunities feel disenfranchised. If the employees made SAIC grow and flourish, and they’re now leaving, what will be the company’s new competitive advantage? I couldn’t answer this question in my own mind, but hopefully I’m wrong, and the answers are out there. It was hard to leave, but my time at SAIC gave me tremendous professional growth opportunities, and unfortunately a lot of amazing business lessons that are potentially destined for a Harvard Business School Case Study. I truly hope the operation is a success, and the patient survives. - Mike
Mike: I agree with you. The energy that SAIC used to have was quite strong. I am no longer there so I don’t know what the energy is like now. I do know that much of our strength as a company was due to our large size. — Bob
Dr Beyster
I’ve been with SAIC for over 21 years and am not particularly pleased with our last few years of “progress” since our going public. You had the right business concept. The current direction may lead to success for both companies but with terrible disruption, loss of identity, customer confusion, and loss of the employee commitment that was the original SAIC. All that was needed to keep the old SAIC going was continued good leadership, which evidently was/is lacking since you left.
I’ve been with SAIC for over 25 years and have worked closely with several people (who have been there even longer) for all those years. I was so enthused about the employee ownership and entrepreneurial spirit that was SAIC when I started and it made me really excited about my contribution to the company. I read Dr. Beyster’s book The SAIC Solution after we had gone public and longed for the “good ol’ days.” By the way, I remember most and worked for many of the people cited in the book and when I started we still had some JRB letterhead in the office!
Since SAIC has gone public, it seems that all that matters is what is said on Wall St. and how the stock will react. Of course, the checks and balances that have been put in place to be SEC and GAAP correct are all necessary to run a sound business but the corporate bureaucracy and project management administrative requirements have become so burdensome (although the Leidos goal for the future is to minimize that - we’ll see.)
With that said, I started buying SAIC stock in 1987 through the ESPP and when it became available through the 401k. I just stopped buying when the announcement of the company split came out.
What will happen with this split, only the future will tell. I truly hope this is a brilliant move by our board and management and that SAIC and Leidos will both prosper in a great way. (I still have 2 years of college tuition to pay and my 401K has 50% equity in company stock!)
Cathy: I feel for you. I don’t know what’s going to happen with the company, but I’m not very optimistic at this moment. I did notice that the stock price has been inching up over the past couple of months so that at least is good news. — Bob
Ed: Thank you for your post on my blog. As you know, I do not think splitting up the company is a good idea, but they didn’t ask my opinion about it. It will be interesting to see how everything shakes out over the next year. — Bob
Dr. Beyster,
I’ve been an SAIC employee now for 34 years. It has been my first and only job. Up until recently, I’ve felt it was a fantastic company. I remember that while you were at the helm, you repeatedly said that one of the primary purposes of the company was to offer technical people a secure place to do interesting work of national importance. Employees were rewarded for entrepreneurship. Profits were important, but secondary. (By the way, do you have any references to this, perhaps published in “SAIC News” or some other place?)
That has all changed now–employees have become a secondary consideration. The entire culture of the company has changed, and not for the better. All the things that made SAIC a special company have been dropped, in favor of policies that make it “just another company”.
After 30 years in the Navy, I retired and worked the next 15 years for SAIC. When I was recuited by SAIC, I was impressed by what I saw and heard and by those whom I met. I signed on eagerly and immediately. When I retired from SAIC, I left a company that I no longer recognized. As soon as Dr. Beyster stepped down, everything changed.
Sadly, I agree with what David has observed. Regrettably, David’s paragraph 2 comments are on target and should to be addressed.
Bob
I whole heartedly agree that splitting up SAIC is a mistake
However, at the time the decision was made to take SAIC public I thought that was a gigantic mistake and still feel that way today
Working at SAIC for 33 years as an Employee Owner provided the greatest experience of my career
Along with many other entrepreneurial Employee Owners, I derived immense satisfaction from trying to assist you in building a company renown for its dedication to helping the country.
We concentrated on Nationally Important Programs (even to the point of doing it at a small loss as you so aptly emphasized at our 1976 stock holders meeting at the La Valencia).
The unique settings for some of our most productive discussions, such as Botsfords on Friday afternoon or the Jack-in the-Box games at the Sports Arena, also contributed to the generation of some great technology and business enterprises
You provided us with a technologist’s Camelot going (I’ve referred to it in this manner for many years) that the Wall Street Analysts can neither understand nor appreciate
Keep the ideas following and regards to Betty
Dick Fitzer
a.foley: I am sorry to hear that things have changed so much at SAIC. It is difficult for me to watch all this from the sidelines. — Bob
David: Thank you for your note, and congratulations on your 34 years with the company. That is a great accomplishment, and I for one appreciate your service. You are right. When I founded the company, I wanted to create a place where talented scientists and researchers could do interesting work of national importance. The emphasis was on providing innovative solutions to our customers at a reasonable price. Profit was never our number one priority, at least not while I was in charge. This is explained in great detail in my book The SAIC Solution, the second edition of which we will publish within a few months. — Bob