Intel’s Israeli fab in Kiryat Gat targeted in latest layoff round

[XYang2023]

"Intel plans to lay off employees at the site as well, primarily from middle management"

Intel’s Israeli fab in Kiryat Gat targeted in latest layoff round

The cost-cutting campaign expands beyond R&D as the plant loses long-standing protection.​

Intel Israel has experienced a series of shocks in recent years amid the company’s global crisis, including hundreds of layoffs and the closure of various operations. Until now, the Kiryat Gat plant had remained largely untouched. But Calcalist has learned that in the latest round of cuts, even this facility will no longer be immune. According to estimates, Intel plans to lay off employees at the site as well, primarily from middle management. The company declined to comment.

The significance of this move lies not only in another wave of layoffs but also in what it signals: a shift in management’s perception of its manufacturing facilities. No longer are they considered untouchable. New CEO Lip-Bu Tan, who took over earlier this year, has publicly emphasized the strategic importance of Intel’s manufacturing capabilities, as well as the company’s ambition to offer foundry services to other firms. But he’s also been clear about the need for innovation and restructuring.

Intel’s Israeli fab in Kiryat Gat targeted in latest layoff round | CTech

The cost-cutting campaign expands beyond R&D as the plant loses long-standing protection.

www.calcalistech.com

 

[user nl]

Tan's comments reveal (?) some of his leader ship style. As they say, leadership reveals the true personality of a CEO.

A somewhat sarcastic (somewhat cynical?) remark to some of his employees and for himself he (the best leader?) works best with the fewest people.

Perhaps Tan is best at place at his truest lifetime passion, funding startups?

Tan has signaled his intent to right-size Intel’s bloated workforce, which he believes has outgrown its operational efficiency. “I’ve been surprised to learn that, in recent years, the most important KPI for many managers at Intel has been the size of their teams. Going forward, this will not be the case. I’m a big believer in the philosophy that the best leaders get the most done with the fewest people,” Tan wrote in a letter to employees in April.
Since 2022, Intel has laid off more than 20,000 employees globally, and according to Tan’s plans, a similar number may be cut in the coming year.

 

[Xebec]

Tan's comments reveal (?) some of his leader ship style. As they say, leadership reveals the true personality of a CEO.

A somewhat sarcastic (somewhat cynical?) remark to some of his employees and for himself he (the best leader?) works best with the fewest people.

Perhaps Tan is best at place at his truest lifetime passion, funding startups?

Tan has signaled his intent to right-size Intel’s bloated workforce, which he believes has outgrown its operational efficiency. “I’ve been surprised to learn that, in recent years, the most important KPI for many managers at Intel has been the size of their teams. Going forward, this will not be the case. I’m a big believer in the philosophy that the best leaders get the most done with the fewest people,” Tan wrote in a letter to employees in April.
Since 2022, Intel has laid off more than 20,000 employees globally, and according to Tan’s plans, a similar number may be cut in the coming year.

I think he's signalling he prefers hands-on leaders. (Which can definitely inspire team members more than passive leaders, though at the risk of getting in the way of some star employees if they aren't careful).

 

[user nl]

I think he's signalling he prefers hands-on leaders. (Which can definitely inspire team members more than passive leaders, though at the risk of getting in the way of some star employees if they aren't careful).

Indeed, I like hands-on approach as well, not the Darwinian approach.

However, I'm no expert in leading a large company, but words do count, especially when things are bad, say existential. There are multiple stakeholders he needs to address.

Perhaps, some cultural issues and that he tries to project a "tough" leader image? Anyway, not my style how he seems to be trying somewhat sarcastically (?) to "sell his vision to Wall Street".

https://www.forbes.com/sites/tracyb...rtant-leadership-skill-according-to-research/

 

[count]

I agree that in general good leaders are more effective with fewer reports.

If you compare a team of 5 vs 50 people, with 5 people you can get to know every person on your team, their strengths and weaknesses, what motivates them, their communication style, you know what everyone is working on, and it's easy to keep everyone aligned.

With 50 people, all of that is pretty much impossible. You won't know what half of them are doing most of the time, you don't know any of them personally, it's harder to keep people motivated and on task.

I also think leaders need to be hands on.

I think this is the right call by Tan.

 

[siliconbruh999]

Even 10 person is fine but 20-30 is not

 

[Xebec]

Even 10 person is fine but 20-30 is not

I was thinking 11 is OK, but not 14

 

[count]

There has been a lot of research on the topic, and the consensus is something like 4-8. I think 10 is probably too many people to be directly managing effectively.

 

[MKWVentures]

by all metrics, Intel had 40-60K too many employees. The organizations are really bloated with 5 people doing work and 5 people making power points on progress and plans.
Intel will be much BETTER and much HAPPIER with less people... Less Party Planning committees, Less Assistants to the Regional manager, Less steering committees to discuss agenda for focus team on defining the pre-meeting.

Start with less people, now see what you can do

NOTE: this is for product groups mainly. In Fabs, each person is leveraged by billions in equipment so cutting heads if there is even a trivial impact to productivity is not wise.

 

[Barnsley]

Intel get the heads up on the latest activities in the region?

 

[siliconbruh999]

by all metrics, Intel had 40-60K too many employees. The organizations are really bloated with 5 people doing work and 5 people making power points on progress and plans.
Intel will be much BETTER and much HAPPIER with less people... Less Party Planning committees, Less Assistants to the Regional manager, Less steering committees to discuss agenda for focus team on defining the pre-meeting.

You are basing this on what headcount?

If you are basing it on 120K headcount than I would agree approx 80-85K is the right number for them they are currently 108K so approx 20K-25K would seem right.

Start with less people, now see what you can do

NOTE: this is for product groups mainly. In Fabs, each person is leveraged by billions in equipment so cutting heads if there is even a trivial impact to productivity is not wise.

Yup Fabs shouldn't be touched except for maybe some managers.

 

[count]

The way a lot of companies arrive at their head count numbers is they look at the best in class competitors and come up with some metrics. But the truth is it's not always comparable.

I think Intel is looking over at TSMC and what their headcount numbers look like to arrive at what they think Intel's headcount numbers should look like but I think that's kind of a backwards approach.

 

[BruceA]

The way a lot of companies arrive at their head count numbers is they look at the best in class competitors and come up with some metrics. But the truth is it's not always comparable.

I think Intel is looking over at TSMC and what their headcount numbers look like to arrive at what they think Intel's headcount numbers should look like but I think that's kind of a backwards approach.

It’s an easy exercise to add up AMD and TSMC and then adjust based on wafers and fabs and numbers rig product lines.

What the monkey math misses is that one company runs like a disciplined order following top down military and the other is a $hit show.

LBT needs to fix the culture and then resize. It will be a disaster if you resize without explicit change in culture

 

[Artificer60]

​

The significance of this move lies not only in another wave of layoffs but also in what it signals: a shift in management’s perception of its manufacturing facilities. No longer are they considered untouchable.

I don't have a clue where the author of this article got this impression. The fabs took a hit in Gelsingers last layoff as well.

 

[Artificer60]

The way a lot of companies arrive at their head count numbers is they look at the best in class competitors and come up with some metrics. But the truth is it's not always comparable.

I think Intel is looking over at TSMC and what their headcount numbers look like to arrive at what they think Intel's headcount numbers should look like but I think that's kind of a backwards approach.

Exactly. From what I can tell Intel relies way too much on manual input to keep things running in the fabs. They need to develop the automated systems that TSMC has before they can significantly reduce headcount in the fabs, but it doesn't sound like that is what is going to happen here. I fear this could turn ugly.

 

[BruceA]

Exactly. From what I can tell Intel relies way too much on manual input to keep things running in the fabs. They need to develop the automated systems that TSMC has before they can significantly reduce headcount in the fabs, but it doesn't sound like that is what is going to happen here. I fear this could turn ugly.

You been and work in am Intel and TSMC fab to really know?

 

[count]

It’s an easy exercise to add up AMD and TSMC and then adjust based on wafers and fabs and numbers rig product lines.

What the monkey math misses is that one company runs like a disciplined order following top down military and the other is a $hit show.

LBT needs to fix the culture and then resize. It will be a disaster if you resize without explicit change in culture

Yeah exactly, you need to figure out headcount needs from bottom up. Problem is if you don't trust your managers that becomes impossible.

As you said, culture needs to be fixed first, but culture is really hard to change.

 

[Artificer60]

You been and work in am Intel and TSMC fab to really know?

Nope, my info is second hand. I have spoken to people who have had discussions with the analysts brought in to help benchmark Intel against TSMC. Take that for whatever it is worth.