4 ms·

http://blogs.valvesoftware.com/economics/why-valve-or-what-do-we-need-corporations-for-and-how-does-valves-management-structure-fit-into-todays-corporate-world/

http://blogs.valvesoftware.com/economics/why-valve-or-what-do-we-need-corporations-for-and-how-does-valves-management-structure-fit-into-todays-corporate-world/ http://blogs.valvesoftware.com/economics/why-valve-or-what-d... Here the same person was much more positive about the system (easy to understand he is not, at least not to me), wonder were he was telling the truth. http://blogs.valvesoftware.com/abrash/valve-how-i-got-here-what-its-like-and-what-im-doing-2/ http://blogs.valvesoftware.com/abrash/valve-how-i-got-here-w... Also Michael Abrash thinks it is a swell place to work for - I guess if you have something to say within such a company then the experience is way better.

acdha 8y ago
Re:Abrash, I think that highlights a big challenge: someone who is that well respected, and a founder, will probably be fine no matter what. The people who need the system to support them are the ones without that kind of social capital, and this can be true without any intent — it’s so easy for those social cues to work subconsciously.
jancsika 8y ago
> Here the same person was much more positive about the system (easy to understand he is not, at least not to me), wonder were he was telling the truth. I don't think I understand what you mean. Here's the relevant passage from your link wrt bonuses: > [Before writing more in this, especially regarding Valve, I shall need to become better acquainted with the peer-review based process of determining bonuses. Watch this space!] That's from August, 2012 on an internal blog. The external interview he gave where he calls the review process "very complicated" is from February, 2013. So let's recap: * A reasonable person joining Valve after reading the Aug. 2012 blog would be worried because their "economist-in-residence" is publicly reserving judgment on the peer-reviewed bonus system * A reasonable person joining Valve after reading the Feb. 2013 interview would be worried because their "economist-in-residence" is characterizing the peer-reviewed bonus system as "very complicated" to a reporter * A reasonable person joining Valve after reading the Aug. 2012 blog and the Feb. 2013 interview would be very worried because their "economist-in-residence" moved from reserving judgment on an internal blog to criticizing the bonus system in a public interview At the very least, I see no discrepancies in what Veroufakis said in Aug and Feb that would lead you to conclude he wasn't telling the truth in one of those links. What am I missing?
- MichaelMoser123 8y ago
  i read it as an examination of a boss-less system 'that works'. For an individual (prospective employee) the question of how much you get and if its worth it is central, for him as a person examining the larger scheme of things it is less central. to quote: "The tantalising thought arose, during my musings, that this organisational structure may be as scalable as a market mechanism (assuming that the right technologies are in hand, ensuring transparency and low communications’ costs within the company). There is one important aspect of Valve that I did not focus on: the link between its horizontal management structure and its ‘vertical’ ownership structure. Valve is a private company owned mostly by few individuals. In that sense, it is an enlightened oligarchy: an oligarchy in that it is owned by a few and enlightened in that those few are not using their property rights to boss people around ... " blah blah blah.

acdha 8y ago

Re:Abrash, I think that highlights a big challenge: someone who is that well respected, and a founder, will probably be fine no matter what. The people who need the system to support them are the ones without that kind of social capital, and this can be true without any intent — it’s so easy for those social cues to work subconsciously.

jancsika 8y ago

> Here the same person was much more positive about the system (easy to understand he is not, at least not to me), wonder were he was telling the truth. I don't think I understand what you mean. Here's the relevant passage from your link wrt bonuses: > [Before writing more in this, especially regarding Valve, I shall need to become better acquainted with the peer-review based process of determining bonuses. Watch this space!] That's from August, 2012 on an internal blog. The external interview he gave where he calls the review process "very complicated" is from February, 2013. So let's recap: * A reasonable person joining Valve after reading the Aug. 2012 blog would be worried because their "economist-in-residence" is publicly reserving judgment on the peer-reviewed bonus system * A reasonable person joining Valve after reading the Feb. 2013 interview would be worried because their "economist-in-residence" is characterizing the peer-reviewed bonus system as "very complicated" to a reporter * A reasonable person joining Valve after reading the Aug. 2012 blog and the Feb. 2013 interview would be very worried because their "economist-in-residence" moved from reserving judgment on an internal blog to criticizing the bonus system in a public interview At the very least, I see no discrepancies in what Veroufakis said in Aug and Feb that would lead you to conclude he wasn't telling the truth in one of those links. What am I missing?

MichaelMoser123 8y ago
i read it as an examination of a boss-less system 'that works'. For an individual (prospective employee) the question of how much you get and if its worth it is central, for him as a person examining the larger scheme of things it is less central. to quote: "The tantalising thought arose, during my musings, that this organisational structure may be as scalable as a market mechanism (assuming that the right technologies are in hand, ensuring transparency and low communications’ costs within the company). There is one important aspect of Valve that I did not focus on: the link between its horizontal management structure and its ‘vertical’ ownership structure. Valve is a private company owned mostly by few individuals. In that sense, it is an enlightened oligarchy: an oligarchy in that it is owned by a few and enlightened in that those few are not using their property rights to boss people around ... " blah blah blah.