5 ms·

How is that supposed to help team morale? Perhaps it's just me talking, but I like my work. I like my co-workers. I have no kids nor debt, and I would be prett

by ldd 9y ago

How is that supposed to help team morale? Perhaps it's just me talking, but I like my work. I like my co-workers. I have no kids nor debt, and I would be pretty sad working at a place that says that they want to fire quickly. The hiring process sucks, and employees are human beings. Perhaps you mean to say that you should be fully transparent when someone underperforms? If that's the case, I would agree with you. No need to beat around the bushes, just be honest.

freehunter 9y ago
If you're firing quick and firing often, yeah you're going to have bad morale. If you're firing quickly, learning from the experience, and then making sure you never have to fire again, the morale won't be an issue. Firing quickly doesn't mean fire someone for their first offense, it means as soon as you realize the person will never be a good employee, don't waste time trying to fix the unfixable.
thwarted 9y ago
Not firing quickly means you fire slow. Which means the person who should be let go continues to stick around and potentially cause problems for the rest of the people. This can be just as sad, if not more so, for the other employees who are impacted by what the person who should be fired continues to do. Firing quickly doesn't mean not to offer regular feedback, or not letting people improve, or not setting expectations well, or not being transparent. It means that it's better to rip the bandaid off instead of picking at it weeks or month ignoring the employee with the hope that things will turn around.
- ldd 9y ago
  Oh well, in that case it kinds of makes sense, as long as you are also transparent during the hiring process that this is the state of affairs in your company. I guess I jumped to conclusions too quickly, but I can see how firing fast could maybe work paired with regular feedback to avoid surprises. I don't think it could work for everyone (particularly parents with young children), but under certain circumstances what you say probably makes sense.
  - thwarted 9y ago
    If you are concerned about the impact of firing an employee with other financial responsibilities (not sure why specifically having young children factors into it anymore than any other responsibility), that is solved with a severance package, which is often still cheaper than keeping an underperforming or toxic employee around.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
solatic 9y ago
As TFA states, firing quickly fails when you abruptly fire people seemingly for no cause, and works when you set clear measurement goals with deadlines and show that the person being fired isn't meeting the standard. In short, that being fired quickly should never be a surprise to anyone involved, and should be a relief. If founders are quickly firing employees who are popular then the founders are doing something wrong, and hopefully have inculcated the kind of culture that allows them to hear negative feedback on the firing. If founders continue to fire rashly then it's a bad sign for the company in general.

by ldd 9y ago

freehunter 9y ago

If you're firing quick and firing often, yeah you're going to have bad morale. If you're firing quickly, learning from the experience, and then making sure you never have to fire again, the morale won't be an issue. Firing quickly doesn't mean fire someone for their first offense, it means as soon as you realize the person will never be a good employee, don't waste time trying to fix the unfixable.

thwarted 9y ago

Not firing quickly means you fire slow. Which means the person who should be let go continues to stick around and potentially cause problems for the rest of the people. This can be just as sad, if not more so, for the other employees who are impacted by what the person who should be fired continues to do. Firing quickly doesn't mean not to offer regular feedback, or not letting people improve, or not setting expectations well, or not being transparent. It means that it's better to rip the bandaid off instead of picking at it weeks or month ignoring the employee with the hope that things will turn around.

ldd 9y ago
Oh well, in that case it kinds of makes sense, as long as you are also transparent during the hiring process that this is the state of affairs in your company. I guess I jumped to conclusions too quickly, but I can see how firing fast could maybe work paired with regular feedback to avoid surprises. I don't think it could work for everyone (particularly parents with young children), but under certain circumstances what you say probably makes sense.
- thwarted 9y ago
  If you are concerned about the impact of firing an employee with other financial responsibilities (not sure why specifically having young children factors into it anymore than any other responsibility), that is solved with a severance package, which is often still cheaper than keeping an underperforming or toxic employee around.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

solatic 9y ago

As TFA states, firing quickly fails when you abruptly fire people seemingly for no cause, and works when you set clear measurement goals with deadlines and show that the person being fired isn't meeting the standard. In short, that being fired quickly should never be a surprise to anyone involved, and should be a relief. If founders are quickly firing employees who are popular then the founders are doing something wrong, and hopefully have inculcated the kind of culture that allows them to hear negative feedback on the firing. If founders continue to fire rashly then it's a bad sign for the company in general.