4 ms·

FWIW, "culture of fear" hasn't been my experience at all, and as far as I know it isn't the experience of the people I work with. I can't speak for other teams/

FWIW, "culture of fear" hasn't been my experience at all, and as far as I know it isn't the experience of the people I work with. I can't speak for other teams/orgs (I work in the ML org) but in the years I've been here I could count on one hand the number of folks (at least among those I knew) who were let go. I don't worry or think about my job security; I think about building better software (and from what I can tell, the same could be said for my colleagues). The article really sensationalizes the culture deck for dramatic effect, IMHO. It's intimidating at first, but if you're good at your role and treat your colleagues with respect then (at least IME) you have nothing to worry about. The mood is collaborative, not confrontational – and I've never witnessed anyone being treated with anything but dignity and respect. Again, maybe different teams have their own "microclimates" – but that's been my experience. So yeah, my two cents is that the article sensationalizes things and deliberately leaves context out of other things. I really wanted to keep my distance from this thread, but it makes me really sad to see how successful the WSJ was in getting people to buy in to the picture they set out to paint. I'll say one more thing (at the risk of sounding like a mouthpiece, which I'm not): Netflix has been hands-down the best workplace I've experienced in my career so far. On the other hand, I've learned that I should view other "culture take-down" articles about tech companies with a degree of skepticism.

smt88 8y ago
Even if the scary culture deck isn't followed, a scary culture deck is an indicator of a bad culture...
- type_enthusiast 8y ago
  I wouldn't say the culture deck isn't followed. Just that it doesn't say what people in this thread seem to think it says. Have you looked at it? I wouldn't call it "scary". There's one section that's a little bit intimidating for a humble person who doesn't think of him/herself as a "rock star". I think that can cause impostor syndrome in many new hires. But it passes (at least for me), and the ability to trust any given colleague to do great work (and for them to trust you to do the same) is extraordinarily refreshing.
svat 8y ago
A few months ago, a good engineer who had left Netflix told someone I know that the reason was the work culture: specifically, she mentioned that there were team meetings where everyone was encouraged to say what they didn't like about others, in a public setting. More recently, this person I know brought it up when interviewing at Netflix (not wanting to work in such a culture), and was reassured by the hiring manager that no, such things do not happen, that all feedback/criticism is 1:1 and never in a public setting. Now, the article says > At some team dinners and lunches there are rounds of “real-time 360,” executives say, where everyone goes around and gives feedback and criticism about others at the table. What has your experience been? It seems likely to me this is actually true (as independently corroborated by both my friend's friend, and this article), and the manager denied it to a potential future employee, which seems not a very nice thing to do. And surely there's a selection bias at play: anyone who has a problem with such a culture (e.g. someone who doesn't want to be criticized in public as a matter of course, or someone who doesn't want to be fired one day unexpectedly) would leave, so by definition those who remain are those who are fine with such a culture and don't see it as a problem.
- jedberg 8y ago
  My personal experience was that the only time we went around giving feedback was when managers were meeting. It was never individual contributors, except one time when I specifically asked my team to give me feedback, but it was all one way. However, it was highly encouraged for ICs to give each other feedback in person one-on-one, and for ICs to give managers feedback (both their own and others they had to work with).
- gaius 8y ago
  she mentioned that there were team meetings where everyone was encouraged to say what they didn't like about others, in a public setting I have read that the Army Rangers have something like this, they call it the "beef circle". Everyone says a person who has annoyed them, then the two of you wrestle in the centre of the circle, then you shake hands and the matter is considered closed. But that's obv inappropriate for a corporate environment.
- type_enthusiast 8y ago

smt88 8y ago

Even if the scary culture deck isn't followed, a scary culture deck is an indicator of a bad culture...

type_enthusiast 8y ago
I wouldn't say the culture deck isn't followed. Just that it doesn't say what people in this thread seem to think it says. Have you looked at it? I wouldn't call it "scary". There's one section that's a little bit intimidating for a humble person who doesn't think of him/herself as a "rock star". I think that can cause impostor syndrome in many new hires. But it passes (at least for me), and the ability to trust any given colleague to do great work (and for them to trust you to do the same) is extraordinarily refreshing.

svat 8y ago

A few months ago, a good engineer who had left Netflix told someone I know that the reason was the work culture: specifically, she mentioned that there were team meetings where everyone was encouraged to say what they didn't like about others, in a public setting. More recently, this person I know brought it up when interviewing at Netflix (not wanting to work in such a culture), and was reassured by the hiring manager that no, such things do not happen, that all feedback/criticism is 1:1 and never in a public setting. Now, the article says > At some team dinners and lunches there are rounds of “real-time 360,” executives say, where everyone goes around and gives feedback and criticism about others at the table. What has your experience been? It seems likely to me this is actually true (as independently corroborated by both my friend's friend, and this article), and the manager denied it to a potential future employee, which seems not a very nice thing to do. And surely there's a selection bias at play: anyone who has a problem with such a culture (e.g. someone who doesn't want to be criticized in public as a matter of course, or someone who doesn't want to be fired one day unexpectedly) would leave, so by definition those who remain are those who are fine with such a culture and don't see it as a problem.

jedberg 8y ago
My personal experience was that the only time we went around giving feedback was when managers were meeting. It was never individual contributors, except one time when I specifically asked my team to give me feedback, but it was all one way. However, it was highly encouraged for ICs to give each other feedback in person one-on-one, and for ICs to give managers feedback (both their own and others they had to work with).
gaius 8y ago
she mentioned that there were team meetings where everyone was encouraged to say what they didn't like about others, in a public setting I have read that the Army Rangers have something like this, they call it the "beef circle". Everyone says a person who has annoyed them, then the two of you wrestle in the centre of the circle, then you shake hands and the matter is considered closed. But that's obv inappropriate for a corporate environment.
type_enthusiast 8y ago