4 ms·

I see the idea, but you can take everything too far. To the entire company and to all investors? Every day? Really? That's borderline fascist surveillance regim

I see the idea, but you can take everything too far. To the entire company and to all investors? Every day? Really? That's borderline fascist surveillance regime.

FraaJad 17y ago
The proof is in the pudding. Is Kayak keeping their customers happy. Are the investors happy and of course are the employees happy? If the answer is yes, then the approach works. Fascism is a strong word for a novel approach to customer service. If this approach stops working then they will try something else. This is not an ideology, you know.
- thomas11 17y ago
  I didn't intend to say the method is fascist, just that it reminds of practices that were and are employed by fascist regimes. If everyone's happy, then there's of course no reason to complain. I just don't see how employees could be happy under a system like this, but to each his own.
  - robfitz 17y ago
    Part of their job is to write reasonable responses to customer inquiries. That's the output of their working time, for which they are paid. Saying that should be private is like saying someone's code check-ins should be private. And if we assume people are good rather than bad, it's a chance to show off, without ego, a particularly good response and/or responder. That gives them a morale boost from knowing their boss and co-workers saw them doing a good job in a natural environment, and it motivates co-workers to do a similarly admirable side.
  - anamax 17y ago
    > I didn't intend to say the method is fascist, just that it reminds of practices that were and are employed by fascist regimes. Fascists also wore pants, drove cars, ate sausage, drank beer, etc. While customers may have privacy concerns and expectations regarding their interaction with a company, employee interaction with customers is not an employee-privacy issue. Remember, employees are being paid to interact with customers. The company is liable and responsible for those interactions so it's absurd to argue that the company has limited access to those interactions because of employee privacy. BTW - The purpose of a company is NOT to keep employees happy. Doing so may be useful, but that's different.

I see the idea, but you can take everything too far. To the entire company and to all investors? Every day? Really? That's borderline fascist surveillance regime.

FraaJad 17y ago

The proof is in the pudding. Is Kayak keeping their customers happy. Are the investors happy and of course are the employees happy? If the answer is yes, then the approach works. Fascism is a strong word for a novel approach to customer service. If this approach stops working then they will try something else. This is not an ideology, you know.

thomas11 17y ago
I didn't intend to say the method is fascist, just that it reminds of practices that were and are employed by fascist regimes. If everyone's happy, then there's of course no reason to complain. I just don't see how employees could be happy under a system like this, but to each his own.
- robfitz 17y ago
  Part of their job is to write reasonable responses to customer inquiries. That's the output of their working time, for which they are paid. Saying that should be private is like saying someone's code check-ins should be private. And if we assume people are good rather than bad, it's a chance to show off, without ego, a particularly good response and/or responder. That gives them a morale boost from knowing their boss and co-workers saw them doing a good job in a natural environment, and it motivates co-workers to do a similarly admirable side.
- anamax 17y ago
  > I didn't intend to say the method is fascist, just that it reminds of practices that were and are employed by fascist regimes. Fascists also wore pants, drove cars, ate sausage, drank beer, etc. While customers may have privacy concerns and expectations regarding their interaction with a company, employee interaction with customers is not an employee-privacy issue. Remember, employees are being paid to interact with customers. The company is liable and responsible for those interactions so it's absurd to argue that the company has limited access to those interactions because of employee privacy. BTW - The purpose of a company is NOT to keep employees happy. Doing so may be useful, but that's different.