4 ms·

It feels like the author of this is an corporate lifer who isn't comfortable with being actually responsible for product performance, or without being able to s

by lukev 16y ago

It feels like the author of this is an corporate lifer who isn't comfortable with being actually responsible for product performance, or without being able to shelter behind hide-bound processes. Some process is needed, sure, but large companies are far more likely to be held back by overly rigid processes and lack of agility than lack of process. If anything, this makes me more impressed with Netflix, that they've managed to maintain a more startup-like culture despite being a huge company. It's not for all employees, sure, and it's absolutely within this guy's rights to find a position more comfortable for him. But after reading this I'm even more inclined to invest in Netflix. Once a company solidifies its processes and acquires parasitic employees, it's well past middle age and is unlikely to do anything remarkable.

philwelch 16y ago
It feels like you didn't critically read the review, and are just trying to impose your own interpretation on top of it. Processes and lack of agility come into place in a mature company as risk-aversion. If the company is scared to fuck up, they introduce processes to prevent fuckups, even though those processes also dampen remarkable innovations. Judging from the Glassdoor review, Netflix's firing strategy has the same effect--individual employees don't want to fuck up, so individual employees adopt a risk-averse cover-your-ass strategy, which also happens to dampen remarkable innovations. A culture like that has the same lack of agility and infestation from parasitic lifers, they just happen to add heaps of politics, stress, and unhappiness on top of it.
- lukev 16y ago
  Except that everything I've read about Netflix indicates that they're not risk-averse. They seem to be innovating in just the right areas. And yeah, I may be reading into it, since I have some frustration with large, process ridden organizations right now. I'm just saying, this is only one guy's take.
  - alnayyir 16y ago
    This isn't the right place for you to project your frustrations and prejudices.
  - yannickt 16y ago
    "I'm just saying, this is only one guy's take." There are many other negative reviews of Netflix on Glassdoor. I am sure that some people are happy to work there, but I don't think someone would take the time to write such a lengthy and well-worded review if there was no truth to it.
    - treeface 16y ago
      >I don't think someone would take the time.. Of course they would. There are an infinite number of scenarios that could lead to somebody posting an entirely fabricated review, regardless of its length or well-wordedness. However, I agree that there is probably at least some truth to this.
  - billswift 16y ago
    It's not only just one guys take, but there is nothing there but pretty vague generalities. I didn't see a single specific claim, everything was about "processes" in general. And a 20% annual turnover actually isn't unusual for a large, public facing company.
  - philwelch 16y ago
    Netflix's executives are probably not risk-averse (on account of not necessarily being subject to the same culture of fear), so the company's strategy isn't risk-averse. Everyday operations could easily be another question. Of course, for Netflix's business model, they don't actually need risk-taking and innovation at the lower levels, just the ability to fill a defined role as well as possible. Netflix mails and streams video content to people, and if they want to do something else, it'll only be because the executives decide to do it. They seem to hire specialists rather than generalists, fire people when their specialties aren't needed anymore, and so forth. It's categorically different from something like Microsoft or Google, where they hire generalists and have ways (although, to be fair, often politicized ones) to generate multiple product lines in parallel and where creative initiative and risk-taking at the lower levels is a part of that process. Netflix is way more top-down than that.

by lukev 16y ago

philwelch 16y ago

It feels like you didn't critically read the review, and are just trying to impose your own interpretation on top of it. Processes and lack of agility come into place in a mature company as risk-aversion. If the company is scared to fuck up, they introduce processes to prevent fuckups, even though those processes also dampen remarkable innovations. Judging from the Glassdoor review, Netflix's firing strategy has the same effect--individual employees don't want to fuck up, so individual employees adopt a risk-averse cover-your-ass strategy, which also happens to dampen remarkable innovations. A culture like that has the same lack of agility and infestation from parasitic lifers, they just happen to add heaps of politics, stress, and unhappiness on top of it.

lukev 16y ago
Except that everything I've read about Netflix indicates that they're not risk-averse. They seem to be innovating in just the right areas. And yeah, I may be reading into it, since I have some frustration with large, process ridden organizations right now. I'm just saying, this is only one guy's take.
- alnayyir 16y ago
  This isn't the right place for you to project your frustrations and prejudices.
- yannickt 16y ago
  "I'm just saying, this is only one guy's take." There are many other negative reviews of Netflix on Glassdoor. I am sure that some people are happy to work there, but I don't think someone would take the time to write such a lengthy and well-worded review if there was no truth to it.
  - treeface 16y ago
    >I don't think someone would take the time.. Of course they would. There are an infinite number of scenarios that could lead to somebody posting an entirely fabricated review, regardless of its length or well-wordedness. However, I agree that there is probably at least some truth to this.
- billswift 16y ago
  It's not only just one guys take, but there is nothing there but pretty vague generalities. I didn't see a single specific claim, everything was about "processes" in general. And a 20% annual turnover actually isn't unusual for a large, public facing company.
- philwelch 16y ago
  Netflix's executives are probably not risk-averse (on account of not necessarily being subject to the same culture of fear), so the company's strategy isn't risk-averse. Everyday operations could easily be another question. Of course, for Netflix's business model, they don't actually need risk-taking and innovation at the lower levels, just the ability to fill a defined role as well as possible. Netflix mails and streams video content to people, and if they want to do something else, it'll only be because the executives decide to do it. They seem to hire specialists rather than generalists, fire people when their specialties aren't needed anymore, and so forth. It's categorically different from something like Microsoft or Google, where they hire generalists and have ways (although, to be fair, often politicized ones) to generate multiple product lines in parallel and where creative initiative and risk-taking at the lower levels is a part of that process. Netflix is way more top-down than that.