|
Post by slugworth008 on Jan 4, 2017 10:15:08 GMT -5
Yesterdays RLS milestone was his signing bonus....... LMAO - Very good one!
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Jan 4, 2017 10:17:30 GMT -5
sounds like a VP Of human resources? We Just Hired a Chief People Officer (Why You Should, Too) January 13, 2014 • 1,355 Likes • 273 Comments Last week, my company hit a great milestone on the talent front: we hired our first Chief People Officer. Granted, it’s a title with the potential of sounding a little precious, like the “Vice President of Happiness,” “Brand Evangelist,” “Digital Overlord” or other Silicon Valley labels that dress up what are really garden-variety gigs. But the Chief People Officer position isn’t a rote, phone-it-in role – nor is it a cutesy name for the traditional human resources function. It’s a strategic shift in how we think about people, culture and enterprise value over the long term at a company. It’s about redefining culture so it’s not jellybeans, Nerf guns and free lunch. At Reputation.com, we certainly like those things but candy and eats alone don’t drive enterprise value. In my mind, culture is actually about the three or four aspects that are unique to your company that can be leveraged into business success. Here are some of the other reasons we’re convinced we need a Chief People Officer (and why you do too): You need more than traditional HR, which centers on people, process and policies. These are important aspects and they need to get done. But a CPO’s focus should be on building culture – facilitating an environment that enables the best possible way of working. And while Human Resources falls under the Chief People Officer, calling the CPO an HR person is like thinking of your Chief Financial Officer as an accountant. They play in the same space but the strategic focus is completely different. A CPO will reset the definition of culture with you. Chief People Officers understand that culture doesn’t equal happiness. (Note: happiness can certainly be the byproduct of a great culture). But too often, we equate culture with lifestyle and perks, the ephemeral fun stuff that makes up the bulk of articles on companies with the “greatest cultures.” In reality, perks are the nice-to-haves. There’s nothing wrong with them but the foundation of a culture rests on business goals, not masseuses and organic meals made to order. It’s asking, what can we do to identify, attract and retain the talent we need to drive enterprise value? Chief People Officers focus on the culture trifecta: people, value and capacity. They know it’s about who is working for you, the value they generate for the business, and what’s needed to turn that value up to its full capacity. Is it revamping the recruiting process so you hire people who feel a strong affinity for your mission? Is it coaching managers on how to inspire and reward employees? Is it exiting leaders who leach toxicity into your workplace? What changes, large and small, can you make to get to that capacity?
|
|
|
Post by madog365 on Jan 4, 2017 10:18:02 GMT -5
I hope Dr. Tross consulted with Proboards Matt before making this decision to leave his executive job at Amgen. Apparently if MNKD doesn't announce a R/S within the next two weeks they will go bankrupt. Dr.Tross may not know this. In all fairness to Proboards Matt, he never said that not doing a R/S would cause the company to go bankrupt. You're putting words into his mouth. He said that allowing a move to the OTC would kill the company. That doesn't mean bankruptcy. The company has money for the next few months, but you better believe that trying to secure future financing from the OTC would be WAYYY worse than trying to do it from Nasdaq. I tend to agree with him. Take issue with his post if you want, but don't misquote him. Fair enough - he didn't say the word bankruptcy this time. In my mind saying something will kill a company is implying an impending bankruptcy if the conditions of his post are not met. Those conditions in this case are a R/S announcement within two weeks as the saving grace to bring the SP above $1. As i pointed out, this does not seem to be a concern for the new executive spearheading the HR organization who left a nice paying position at a big pharma powerhouse.
|
|
|
Post by liane on Jan 4, 2017 10:27:53 GMT -5
When I first saw the announcement, I thought maybe DeSisto. I was a little disappointed until I hit all the text about global expansion and another Amgen guy they had to woo... I close out with a REALLY BAD joke: How many CPO's does it take to make a Star Wars character? 3 (So I re-read it 3x; 1x. I cap'd bad 2x. I added cap'd really 3x. I bolded really) PS- has anyone ever really heard of a Chief People Officer before? Sounds like some corporate double speak- just call'em an HR person (although he seems to have a pretty good pedigree) I had never heard of a CPO before - maybe it's just the new generation.
|
|
|
Post by silentknight on Jan 4, 2017 10:28:48 GMT -5
In all fairness to Proboards Matt, he never said that not doing a R/S would cause the company to go bankrupt. You're putting words into his mouth. He said that allowing a move to the OTC would kill the company. That doesn't mean bankruptcy. The company has money for the next few months, but you better believe that trying to secure future financing from the OTC would be WAYYY worse than trying to do it from Nasdaq. I tend to agree with him. Take issue with his post if you want, but don't misquote him. Fair enough - he didn't say the word bankruptcy this time. In my mind saying something will kill a company is implying an impending bankruptcy if the conditions of his post are not met. Those conditions in this case are a R/S announcement within two weeks as the saving grace to bring the SP above $1. As i pointed out, this does not seem to be a concern for the new executive spearheading the HR organization who left a nice paying position at a big pharma powerhouse. Agreed, I don't think he is worried and I don't think Mike is worried. It's not their job to be worried about company finances. It's Matt's job as CFO/CEO as well as the Board of Directors. I'd rather that the commercial officer be concerned about sales and the human resources director be worried about personnel and less concerned about the company financials. If everyone does their job, including Matt, everything takes care of itself.
|
|
|
Post by dictatorsaurus on Jan 4, 2017 10:29:52 GMT -5
We have to be mindful that management was never concerned about the extremely low script count, the amazing relationship with SNY, the lack of advertising, the lack of patient awareness, the lack of physician awareness, the lack of partnerships...etc
The sky could be falling and management won't come out and acknowledge it. Why you ask? Because as with most higher ups in corporate America, the number one priority is to maintain power and hold on to their positions for as long as possible.
We should not constantly try to read between the lines and look for subliminal messages that don't exist. No one knows what happened between Dr. Tross and Amgen so we can't assume he moved to greener pastures.
The one and only thing that matters is sales and we all know how that well that's going.
|
|
|
Post by kc on Jan 4, 2017 10:33:33 GMT -5
Well anything is possible with MannKind. What makes this interesting is that Stuart Tross left Amgen very suddenly since they have not even replaced him on the Amgen Leadership page on their web site. Afrezza was still being used by SNY and Regeneron in a study in 2016 on the Praluent product. Now Sanofi and Regeneron have to stop selling their blockbuster drug Praluent or make a deal with Amgen. What is the date at Sanofi needs to make the final divorce payment to MannKind? Is that Around January 9th? Lets hope that the stars align in the right direction for MannKind.
|
|
|
Post by madog365 on Jan 4, 2017 10:38:06 GMT -5
Fair enough - he didn't say the word bankruptcy this time. In my mind saying something will kill a company is implying an impending bankruptcy if the conditions of his post are not met. Those conditions in this case are a R/S announcement within two weeks as the saving grace to bring the SP above $1. As i pointed out, this does not seem to be a concern for the new executive spearheading the HR organization who left a nice paying position at a big pharma powerhouse. Agreed, I don't think he is worried and I don't think Mike is worried. It's not their job to be worried about company finances. It's Matt's job as CFO/CEO as well as the Board of Directors. I'd rather that the commercial officer be concerned about sales and the human resources director be worried about personnel and less concerned about the company financials. If everyone does their job, including Matt, everything takes care of itself. Forget about their job functions for a second. On a personal level, would you join a company you thought was at risk of bankruptcy within 6 months?
|
|
|
Post by kc on Jan 4, 2017 10:40:00 GMT -5
Forget about their job functions for a second. On a personal level, would you join a company you thought was at risk of bankruptcy within 6 months? Bingo! big winner here. No you would not leave a job like that to go to a sinking ship.
|
|
|
Post by kball on Jan 4, 2017 10:46:27 GMT -5
MannKind Announces Key Addition to Its Executive Management Ranks VALENCIA, Calif., Jan. 04, 2017 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- MannKind Corporation (NASDAQ:MNKD) (TASE:MNKD) today announced that Stuart A. Tross, Ph.D., has joined the company as its Chief People Officer, with responsibilities for Human Resources, Information Technology and West Coast Facilities. Dr. Tross will be integral in accelerating the company's development into a world-class, global biopharmaceutical company centered on the value of its human capital. He will be reporting to Matthew Pfeffer, Chief Executive Officer, and will serve on MannKind's executive leadership team. Just glad they chose him over his less qualified brother Alba
|
|
|
Post by boomboom on Jan 4, 2017 10:53:10 GMT -5
Forget about their job functions for a second. On a personal level, would you join a company you thought was at risk of bankruptcy within 6 months? Bingo! big winner here. No you would not leave a job like that to go to a sinking ship. I almost agree with you here. Except when I put human nature into that equation. If the price is right, I think anyone would go into a sinking ship... "Stuart, we need you. Here is $1million. Here is another $1million in options. If this company succeeds, you will get accolades and more money. If it fails, it will be a great lesson learned on what not to do! and Oh well, you joined a sinking ship and it was not your fault that this company failed. You will easily find another job somewhere else with your experience" ^...so why the heck not join the sinking ship? With that said, I do not think that is how the conversation went. But just wanted to bring to light that it is not as rosey as you are making it out to be by calling this event a "big winner here" Still cant wait to see what Stuart can do. Good luck to him and Mike.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2017 11:04:58 GMT -5
sounds like a VP Of human resources? We Just Hired a Chief People Officer (Why You Should, Too) January 13, 2014 • 1,355 Likes • 273 Comments Last week, my company hit a great milestone on the talent front: we hired our first Chief People Officer. Granted, it’s a title with the potential of sounding a little precious, like the “Vice President of Happiness,” “Brand Evangelist,” “Digital Overlord” or other Silicon Valley labels that dress up what are really garden-variety gigs. But the Chief People Officer position isn’t a rote, phone-it-in role – nor is it a cutesy name for the traditional human resources function. It’s a strategic shift in how we think about people, culture and enterprise value over the long term at a company. It’s about redefining culture so it’s not jellybeans, Nerf guns and free lunch. At Reputation.com, we certainly like those things but candy and eats alone don’t drive enterprise value. In my mind, culture is actually about the three or four aspects that are unique to your company that can be leveraged into business success. Here are some of the other reasons we’re convinced we need a Chief People Officer (and why you do too): You need more than traditional HR, which centers on people, process and policies. These are important aspects and they need to get done. But a CPO’s focus should be on building culture – facilitating an environment that enables the best possible way of working. And while Human Resources falls under the Chief People Officer, calling the CPO an HR person is like thinking of your Chief Financial Officer as an accountant. They play in the same space but the strategic focus is completely different. A CPO will reset the definition of culture with you. Chief People Officers understand that culture doesn’t equal happiness. (Note: happiness can certainly be the byproduct of a great culture). But too often, we equate culture with lifestyle and perks, the ephemeral fun stuff that makes up the bulk of articles on companies with the “greatest cultures.” In reality, perks are the nice-to-haves. There’s nothing wrong with them but the foundation of a culture rests on business goals, not masseuses and organic meals made to order. It’s asking, what can we do to identify, attract and retain the talent we need to drive enterprise value? Chief People Officers focus on the culture trifecta: people, value and capacity. They know it’s about who is working for you, the value they generate for the business, and what’s needed to turn that value up to its full capacity. Is it revamping the recruiting process so you hire people who feel a strong affinity for your mission? Is it coaching managers on how to inspire and reward employees? Is it exiting leaders who leach toxicity into your workplace? What changes, large and small, can you make to get to that capacity? thats fancy for a tech company with boatloads of $$$ and high share price like FB, google and other tech companies. For mannkind, its still vp of human resources. reading on stock twits - some one commented we need a chief patients officer.. lol and I agree
|
|
|
Post by madog365 on Jan 4, 2017 11:05:27 GMT -5
Bingo! big winner here. No you would not leave a job like that to go to a sinking ship. I almost agree with you here. Except when I put human nature into that equation. If the price is right, I think anyone would go into a sinking ship... "Stuart, we need you. Here is $1million. Here is another $1million in options. If this company succeeds, you will get accolades and more money. If it fails, it will be a great lesson learned on what not to do! and Oh well, you joined a sinking ship and it was not your fault that this company failed. You will easily find another job somewhere else with your experience" ^...so why the heck not join the sinking ship? I knew the money angle would be next. I don't deny money plays a role in every hire, but: Options expire worthless if the company fails. So basically he is signing on for 6 months of salary and a signing bonus? Not to mention if the company fails a hit on your reputation which you have built at successful companies for your whole career. It's simply not logical to join unless you think the company will succeed. I'm sure he has plenty of other opportunities (along with staying at Amgen) that he decided were less attractive than making this move. It takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to ruin it. If you think about that, you'll do things differently. Warren Buffett
|
|
|
Post by mango on Jan 4, 2017 11:20:35 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by dg1111 on Jan 4, 2017 11:23:43 GMT -5
Mr. Tross's resume looks pretty impressive, but it only makes sense if they think the hire will help attract great salespeople fast. The company has limited cash and negligible revenue. I don't think another chief level position solves that. They probably could have hired 10+ salespeople for the cost of hiring him. I'd be glad to be wrong here.
On the positive side, he is the second senior leader to leave Amgen for Mannkind in the last year. Hopefully, they can pull some other good people over from Amgen to keep this ship afloat.
|
|