Pros
Within the organizations I supported and worked, I was constantly surrounded by educated professionals. Most companies have several "dead weight" employees; however I did not see many of these individuals in IBM. It seemed that most made a fair attempt to carry their weight and contribute to the team. In addition, those that were labeled as being unproductive were either encouraged to increase performance or they were part of the regular resource actions (layoffs). Thus, by having competent workers surrounding you, the overwhelming work load seemed a bit lighter... a bit. Secondly, general management does care about employee work-life balance. If anyone tries to tell you that IBM pressured them into compromising family life in favor of work schedule, question their motives. Of course, the executive work load is much greater than lower-level, and they at times, have work-life balance issues - but are well compensated for it.
Cons
In some organizations, there is a tendancy to 'stay the course' among lower-level employees. New initiatives and strategic changes were seen as temporary 'fire-drills' that would go away if ignored long enough. This type of attitude enables poor response to competition in the market and a general disalusion from sales and BPs as the the consideration IBM gives to their cause. When a new executive is appointed to make changes within an organization, those changes come slowly, or not at all. Furthermore, an employee looking to distinguish his/herself from the pack needs to seriously network. There is no 'automatic' climb to the top with hard work... even if you immediate management recognizes your talents. You MUST reach beyond your organization and network, network, network. Finally, with layoffs the workload does not diminish, but is reassigned. There was a period of 2 years as my 'expected actions' rose 400% due to assuming others' work as they were let go.
