For such an exciting, growing business it is still very much figuring itself out and is, in many ways, archaic and inefficient despite performing as well as it does. The two things the business struggles with are technology & facilities and brain drain.
The entire office-based business having to work from home during COVID should force Lidl to “fail forwards” on the former point, as will the new head office. As things were, working flexibly was scarcely an option (usually a business culture thing, but in part due to antiquated business systems that limit remote access) and the Wimbledon facilities, while well located, are pretty tired and have been outgrown.
Whilst Tolworth isn’t as accessible, the new head office has been so long in the detailed planning that it can’t fail to be good. The future here is much brighter and shouldn’t deter anyone from applying. That said, the situation beforehand wasn’t good and people applying need to be aware of that if it features in their expectations.
Then there are the reasons why Lidl has a retention/fluctuation problem, which in head office stems from two things
Firstly, there is a two-class society, dictated by your entry into the business. Beyond a certain point, usually quite early down the graduate route, you unlock a package to go with your salary (private healthcare, work phone, car etc etc) without discernible difference in job role (managers still do tasks in most cases, which is bizarre) from a direct entry Assistant Team manager who gets none of these benefits.
At manager level, salary is incredibly attractive/retentive which makes it difficult to leave without worsening yourself financially. Rotation doesn’t solve it, as people stay and comfortably ride the carousel in whatever job they land in next.
This results in an immovable, well paid cohort of graduate entry (with some exceptions, but not many) colleague blocking the way up for others just as talented due to Lidl’s lean structure. Those below the glass ceiling then have to side-step within the business (which can take months), be lucky in a restructure, or leave altogether.
Secondly, this is compounded by a real internal talent recognition deficiency. There is a real tendency to make your team’s “best player” a “team captain” without considering the entire talent pool; there are inevitably colleagues with a broader skill base who may be better suited at the next level up than your best employee at that job is.
I have seen too many talented, respected colleagues with excellent skills well suited to a leadership position be passed over a more rough-around-the-edges colleague who happened to be good at what they did at a non-management level, who simply aren’t management material. The result is the Peter Principle being played out and talented colleagues getting frustrated and walking away.
There are good people in the business who are the absolute opposite of this and when you work with them, it’s a breath of fresh air. Yet, depressingly, they are not the rule.
