3 ms·
> Have none of you really worked at a company that introduced an overly ambitious rewards program and had to dial it back? Yes, and universally it resulted in
by syshum 8y ago
> Have none of you really worked at a company that introduced an overly ambitious rewards program and had to dial it back?
Yes, and universally it resulted in a mass exodus of good talent, I have experienced it 2 times in my career, every time most of the good talent was gone at other employers with in a year
>He was gaming the system to get above market pay.
lol, I always love when people believe that using a program exactly as it was designed is a "loop hole" or "gaming the system"..
No he was not gaming the system
>If you think someone came up with 30 truly novel and useful software patents in 2 years you might not have read enough software patents.
I am opposed to all software patents, however that does not change anything. The fact is to the company and the current legal climate around patents I can assure you each of those patents are worth more than the $$$ they where paying out.
>Has he worked in software before? Clearly he's never been in a management/leadership position where he actually has to balance the concerns of the company with his own ego.
Clearly you one of the bad managers that believe they are putting company concerns above all else and ends up hurting company due to their short sighted policies.
I bet you would be the type of manager that would outsource an entire dept, pat yourself on the back for the cost savings, and then jump ship as the company plummets of the cliff you created
- throwitaway2 8y ago> The fact is to the company and the current legal climate around patents I can assure you each of those patents are worth more than the $$$ they where paying out. That's utter nonsense. Most patents are absolutely worthless. Even the odd patent that you might find, where you can litigate still requires a risky and costly litigation process. It's more likely that the company paid too much money to generate too few valuable patents, which is why they scaled back the program. Now that they did find one that is somewhat valuable to them, they want it and they tasked this poor middle manager to get it. But they're also not willing to spend more than 25,000$ on it. So how can this patent be that valuable? It just isn't.
- syshum 8y agoCouple things 1. I assume that processes or advancements related to the patent actually do improve the business function or process, that alone probably makes the pay out worth it. I know a few companies that have process improvement programs where employees can earn more than the person in this story if they successfully submit an idea that does something to improve the companies process, reduce costs, etc. has nothing to do with patents 2. The value of software patents today is NOT to litigate against other companies, companies fill out their software and other IP today to protect themselves FROM litigation, if a company finds themselves on the wrong end of a litigation their own patent portfolio is ammo both offensively (counter-suite) and defensively
- ecpottinger 8y agoAgain, if the patent is so worthless, why spend so much effort to get it back?