17 ms·

Employee happiness and business success are linked

690 points by benryon 7y ago

neonate 7y ago
http://archive.is/TErZI http://archive.is/TErZI
- xtracto 7y ago
  https://outline.com/vnwmK4 https://outline.com/vnwmK4
izzydata 7y ago
Amazon seems to be doing alright regardless.
- umvi 7y ago
  I know a lot of engineers that work for Amazon that are happy. Warehouse workers on the other hand...
  - throwawaysea 7y ago
    ...are experiencing pay and conditions that are vastly better than other warehouses. See https://quillette.com/2019/07/19/the-problem-with-tourist-journalism/ https://quillette.com/2019/07/19/the-problem-with-tourist-jo...
    - iwasakabukiman 7y ago
      I can’t tell if that’s sarcasm or not... That story was basically a plant from Amazon and Quillette is absolutely not a high quality news source.
      - throwawaysea 7y ago
        > That story was basically a plant from Amazon Evidence? > Quillette is absolutely not a high quality news source Really? I find their articles to be written well. They are respectful and balanced in their tone, and provide a lot of evidence for their points. Are you sure you don't just disagree with their centrist perspective? You've not actually offered any critique of this article.
        jkachmar 7y ago
        Quillette does not feature a centrist perspective. See Media Bias Fact Check’s overview, in which they’re considered “Right” and to feature pseudoscience and poor reporting [1]. Also see the Wikipedia page on Media Bias Fact Check for citations to show that they’re reputable [2]. See also AllSides' overview, in which they’re considered to “lean right” [3]. [1] https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/quillette/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/quillette/ [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Bias/Fact_Check https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Bias/Fact_Check [3] https://www.allsides.com/news-source/quillette-media-bias https://www.allsides.com/news-source/quillette-media-bias
        throwawaysea 7y ago
        Media Bias Fact Check is NOT reputable. Your own Wikipedia link says the following: > The Columbia Journalism Review describes Media Bias/Fact Check as an amateur attempt at categorizing media bias and Van Zandt as an "armchair media analyst." > The Poynter Institute notes, "Media Bias/Fact Check is a widely cited source for news stories and even studies about misinformation, despite the fact that its method is in no way scientific." I read through the Media Bias Fact check article on Quillette and it makes bold claims about Quillette having poor sourcing or featuring pseudoscience but it provides weak or cherry-picked examples from a much larger body of published articles. For example, it mentions 'hereditarianism' as pseudoscientific, even though there is peer-reviewed published research supporting it that is referenced in the Quillette article they are critiquing. It also tries to discredit Quillette based on association - it mentions a couple people who have written articles on Quillette and discusses _their_ reputation, rather than directly factually refuting specific points. If anything, this write-up on Media Bias Fact Check is itself super biased. AllSides is more reputable but they have also rated Quillette as Center for long periods of time previously. AllSides also mentions this about Quillette alongside their current "lean right" rating: > Worth noting: some on the team thought Quillette deserved a Center or Lean Left media bias rating. This is because Quillette features classically liberal arguments, but classically liberal ideas are now more commonly associated with the Right. Our confidence rating for Quillette's media bias rating is "Initial or Low." Also, AllSides's methodology is US-centric - which is different from centrism more broadly. > The AllSides Media Bias RatingTM reflects the average judgment of the American people. We don't use a convoluted mathematical or artificial intelligence model, but instead have regular people representing the broad spectrum of Americans blindly rate the bias of articles. That produces a fair, verifiable bias rating. Centrism also means neutral or truth-seeking to some people, whereas to others it refers to a relative position on a political spectrum. I find Quillette to be generally centrist in that it is neutral/truth-seeking because they are willing to take controversial positions and discuss them logically, in depth, with substantial evidence. By and large, Quillette features high quality articles and significant sourcing. No journalistic outlet is perfect and it wouldn't take me long to pull out examples in the NYT, WaPo, WSJ, or other big publications to try and paint a negative image of them as Media Bias Fact Check did. And to get back on point, no one has refuted what this particular article claims. Amazon has higher pay, better benefits, and better conditions than other warehouse jobs. There is even a comment in this very HN discussion from an Amazon warehouse worker that says "I'm part of the career choice program which pays for 95% of my college tuition, fees, and books for an IT program (which I chose)." And this isn't the only comment in this discussion from an Amazon warehouse worker. If there are claims otherwise, that other warehouse jobs are better, name them and cite evidence.
    - zemo 7y ago
      on twitter, @amazonnews tweeted a link to that and they got ratioed so hard that they deleted the tweet a few hours later. that is ... not a good piece.
      - throwawaysea 7y ago
        Can you critique the article's points or the author's experiences specifically? Talking about Twitter tropes like ratios is not substantive.
  - mrb 7y ago
    It's just one random data point but one of my personal friends said: «I still have many friends & family working in Amazon fulfillment centers across the country, and every single one of them says it’s the best job they’ve ever had.» https://twitter.com/chadloder/status/1154275824951943168 https://twitter.com/chadloder/status/1154275824951943168
    - nguoi 7y ago
      >I’m also sure that lots of folks don’t truly understand blue collar working conditions in other industries. I do agree with this. I briefly had a few blue collar jobs: it's hard for workers to assert their existing rights, culturally and legally.
  - MaxBarraclough 7y ago
    The overwork has been well reported, but the unpaid time spent in mandatory daily security checks, seems to get overlooked. Somehow, US courts decided that's allowed. Could've sworn UK courts came to a similar decision recently, but I can't find a source. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/2014/12/09/05c67c0c-7fb9-11e4-81fd-8c4814dfa9d7_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/2014/12/0...
  - Consultant32452 7y ago
    There's an Amazon warehouse near me. My neighbor works for USPS. Amazon is poaching tons of their employees and it's really hurting USPS because Amazon is so much better. If he wasn't holding out for one more year to get full retirement from USPS he would have jumped ship too. Instead, he's hoping to work for Amazon part time during retirement. I'm not suggesting that there aren't problems with Amazon warehouses, but I think a lot of the reaction is from highly educated wealthy liberal types who don't know what it's like to work hard labor jobs.
    - Jax2_Hannah 7y ago
      I can't speak for others, but I have never worked for a warehouse job until now, and it isn't as bad as I thought. I was considering working for UPS, but after recently giving birth, I couldn't lift the minimum weight they required for me. So I thought Amazon would be a viable option. I make more than I would at UPS, and it's very easy compared to it. I know because my husband works there. I honestly don't understand why some people would complain about Amazon but to get media attention. That's my opinion.
  - Matticus_Rex 7y ago
    Warehouse work sucks. Amazon's warehouse work is above average for warehouse work.
    - skyyler 7y ago
      By what metric? I have friends that have been working warehouses in Ohio since the early 2000s and they have vented frustrations to me about how Amazon is causing a race to the bottom for warehouse labor. I've heard a lot of horror stories about Amazon warehouses. I'm sure a lot of it is FUD or whatever, but it seems that even Walmart has better conditions.
      - hanniabu 7y ago
        Have you ever been in a real warehouse? One that's baking in the sun in the summer, no AC because it's too costly, probably 100 degrees inside, no ventilation, pallet dust everywhere and you get a nice inhale when something is moved on the floor, not being in a technologically present company where machines break constantly and you need to do a lot of manual work in these conditions lifting a 35lb box every 8-12 seconds for 12 hours....
        vernie 7y ago
        No true warehouse.
        hanniabu 7y ago
        This warehouse in specific that I'm referencing is operated by a Fortune 100 company.
        mjparrott 7y ago
        Yes, this was my first job as an 'employee' of a staffing company. They took $11/hour and gave me $7/hour to re-package and re-palletize boxes of P&G products. Literally we would open a box of 4 shampoo bottles, take the bottles out and then repackage then into a box of 6 bottles and stack them back up on a pallet. To open the boxes we put them on a conveyor belt that went through an oven to melt the glue on the box. I had to stand at the exit of the oven and grab the scalding hot glue and rip the tape off the boxes as fast as I possibly could. The scalding hot glue would stick to your hands while hot air was blowing in your face out of the oven. No AC. 8 hour shift 7 to 3 with no lunch break, only two 15 minute breaks to use the bathroom (couldn't go otherwise). No AC in the warehouse in the hot summer in the midwest. Another fun job was to re-palletize boxes. A forklift operator would lay an empty pallet on the ground, then put a row of 25 full pallets next to it in a long row. You had to unstack the 2nd pallet onto the empty one using a new stacking pattern that was more stable. Then the 2nd pallet would be empty. Repeat the process down the row as fast as you can go getting cuts on your hands from the cardboard boxes, leaning over your back lifting heavy boxes without AC in a hot warehouse.
- starpilot 7y ago
  And the entire gaming industry.
frobozz 7y ago
Ursine genes and woodland defecation also seem to correlate.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- xyzzyz 7y ago
  Yes, I am also shocked to learn that employees aren't happy in companies that aren't doing well. What's next, are you going to tell me that people who live in successful cities are happier than those in decaying ones?
  - dougmwne 7y ago
    I know that's in jest, but boy have I experienced that one. There's nothing like being surrounded by a whole city of people who've lost all hope to get you out of bed in the morning.
  - ggm 7y ago
    Actually, I have sometimes done what I think is my best work, in toxic work places. It was fleeting, but the mood at the time was "this place sucks, but boy, am I getting it on". Overall I agree there is a pope/catholic tree/forest moment here, but this is bell-curve overlap venn diagram stuff, the outliers are amusing, but not informative of the trend. tl;dr slacker finds life in toxic company can be fulfilling.
- brailsafe 7y ago
  At my last case, the company doing really well put a lot of stress on me to maintain. Overworked and undercompensated, I developed a terrible case of Ursine dementia in combination with Grizzly depression.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
robocat 7y ago
They did look at causation: "the authors cite studies of changes within individual firms and organisations which seem to show that improvements in employee morale precede gains in productivity, rather than the other way round." Many of us understand the other causation arrow (corporate unsuccess leads to unhappiness!)
- Jazgot 7y ago
  In some cases corporate unsuccess leeds to happiness. I've seen this in my case once. And hope that I'll not need to see this again.
  - TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago
    Does it go something like: when the company tanks due to mismanagement > shareholder value suffers > employees feel vindicated?
    - diminoten 7y ago
      I've seen it in the form of an employee desiring a negative outcome for the business because that outcome is tied to vengeance for another employee's perceived professional mistake. E.g., "I'm not going to help that team because they need to feel the pain of the decision I didn't like."
      - Jazgot 7y ago
        Sometimes you just don't have ability to help. You are only observer and fail makes you happy, because you predicted it and you tried to stop it. But no one was listening.
    - zorpner 7y ago
      I've seen a simpler version many times -- a chronically under-resourced group overworks itself until people leave and catastrophe strikes, and only then is it funded/etc.
- 7y ago
ph4 7y ago
Serious question, why post something for discussion if it's behind a paywall?
- tannerc 7y ago
  I'll bite because it's a reasonable question. I think linking to paywalled content is allowed because there are fairly easy ways around paywalls, but posting a roundabout directly goes (I believe) against HN policy. An example of how to get around the Economist paywall is already elsewhere in this thread.
  - Sonnol53 7y ago
    I use outline dot com to get around paywall :)
    - discordance 7y ago
      Works for The Economist but doesn't work for WSJ these days unfortunately. Anyone got a work around for WSJ?
      - de0xy 7y ago
        Put the WSJ link into any URL shortener, then put that link into outline.
  - tomhoward 7y ago
    > but posting a roundabout directly goes (I believe) against HN policy Not true; it has long been customary for people to share paywall workarounds in the comments, and the moderators welcome/encourage it.
    - tannerc 7y ago
      Comments yes, not as posts (possibly).
ergothus 7y ago
I've seen these arguments repeatedly, yet I only see this mattering to those companies where employees have a relative level of power and choice (e.g. non-game industry programmers, etc). Elsewhere, the attitude appears to have remained: "use them as much as possible". Consider assistant managers at your local chain store. Pick a chain! Outside of a handful of companies that are well noted for their bucking of the trend, regardless of market, these employees will be used and abused, year after year. If my anecdotal experience is representative, the more they actually care about the job, the more they'll be abused. Managers get the same, and by the time you get to district or regional managers, they are mostly the people that survived the lower levels...where "survived" means "did the abusing" not "got burnt out and quit for greener pastures".
- b_tterc_p 7y ago
  Anything customer oriented tends to benefit
- nine_k 7y ago
  Why, this makes sense. In every industry, there are employees whose influence on the company success is outsized, and who are hard to hire or train. In software industry, they are experienced engineers and product managers. In a fashionable restaurant, they are experienced cooks. In an airforce, they are experienced pilots and repairmen. Etc. When these people are happy with their work, they achieve great results. When they are unhappy, they look for ways to conveniently jump ship, because they have a number of opportunities elsewhere waiting for them to become available. They are in short supply. Every boss has an incentive to keep these people content and loyal. OTOH every industry has positions for which supply is plentiful, compared to demand. Aspiring game developers without experience, dish washers, burger flippers, etc, can be readily hired, paid little, and easily fired, too. There is no incentive for their bosses to walk an extra mile to keep them happ, especially when pressing them a bit more yields an extra bit of performance, so they mostly aren't happy about their jobs.
  - asdfasgasdgasdg 7y ago
    Another hypothesis that equally well explains the data: employees at successful companies tend to be happy because the rising tide lifts (almost) all boats. Companies that are doing poorly will tend to look to cut staff, wages, and benefits, which could be a source of unhappiness. Etc. I don't really think the evidence presented here gives much reason to believe that seeking the well-being of your employees will do anything for the bottom line. OTOH, it's easy for me to believe that improving the top line will improve your employees' happiness.
ben_jones 7y ago
People are joking in this thread but I think the REALLY BIG problem is that a lot of American workers are increasingly internalizing their compensation needs above other needs like health, happiness, or social well being. When we should be concentrating on a lot of our personal issues, we kick the ball down the road saying "oh when I have more money" or "oh when my career progresses" when we would be much better served by acting on them immediately and with highest priority.
- bsanr2 7y ago
  Perhaps because so many Americans are financially insecure, and long-term health, happiness, and social concerns take a backseat to simply surviving the next month?
  - mjparrott 7y ago
    Getting out of the hole of "surviving to the next month" requires a few years of developing and investing in yourself to build a valued skillset. It's very hard to do when you don't have a clue about what that path can be. I took a lot longer to get to my current spot because I didn't know this path existed when I was younger because no one around me even knew this industry existed.
    - tuxxy 7y ago
      Come on, it's incredibly disingenuous to suggest that all folks living paycheck-to-paycheck don't have a valuable skill set. It's also incredibly offensive and elitist, too.
      - mjparrott 7y ago
        I didn't mean it that way. I meant to say that if you are asking yourself "what can I do to improve my situation" sometimes the answer is to invest in yourself! It isn't meant to be judgemental or to suggest there aren't other factors that influence what financial position you find yourself in. How about offering other suggestions as to what people can do to move away from 'paycheck to paycheck' situatins instead of calling other people names?
mapcars 7y ago
That is kinda obvious.
turk73 7y ago
No such thing as "employee happiness" in Big Healthcare. It's time Big Healthcare got broken up.
ThomPete 7y ago
Business success and employee happiness are better linked.
randyrand 7y ago
It's generally pretty clear that when a business is failing, the employees won't be very happy.
atian 7y ago
Businesses are systems of people. Those that affect people nonetheless affect the business. You are then in the realm of which organs the people can survive without.
samnwa 7y ago
It's the opposite. Business success (e.g. being able to pay people to work less hard and enjoy free lunches, etc) is linked to happiness.
mlthoughts2018 7y ago
It reminds me some of Peopleware, where an argument is made that through a focus on quality of output, the speed of production is actually faster than if you focus explicitly on the speed of production.
WheelsAtLarge 7y ago
I worked for a company where management tried hard to keep employees happy when it came to benefits and yet, for the most part, they/we were a miserable bunch. It seemed that it was never enough. I'm not saying that the benefits were extravagant but they were very good. I agree that a happy employee helps a company be better but you can't buy their happiness thru benefits. The way to do it complicated and it starts by hiring the right type of employee and defining the right company culture.
- danielvinson 7y ago
  Happiness isn’t just a factor of compensation, it’s also if people enjoy what they are working on, how they work, and the people around them.
- visarga 7y ago
  I think it's essential to put a moderate load and leave some space for creativity and new ideas to be tried out. I for one get tired of executing, sometimes I want to play out my own ideas.
lettergram 7y ago
My startup is working on identifying and maximizing happiness for this reason [1]. Largely the reason we believe this is the case, is because people tend to stay where they are happy. “Tribal knowledge” is the single most important thing an employee can bring to the table. It’s also only obtained through time at a given (or related company). At the same time, hiring and training a new employee is the single most expensive cost to a company. So identifying and keeping experienced employees really improves productivity and reduces costs. Which makes it much easier for a business to succeed. [1] https://metacortex.me/ https://metacortex.me/
- adfm 7y ago
  Take a look at the SMR/Glassdoor Culture 500 if you're interested in measuring company culture. https://sloanreview.mit.edu/culture500 https://sloanreview.mit.edu/culture500
pac39 7y ago
Now if only those in upper management and bean counter division got this memo.....
achenatx 7y ago
I use a book called "first break all the rules" It is also based on gallup data. They determined that employee happiness was not correlated to company success. They did find that the following questions in order were highly correlated to company success. 1. Do I know what is expected of me at work? 2. Do I have the materials and equipment I need to do my work right? 3. At work, do I have the opportunity to do what I do best every day? 4. In the last seven days, have I received recognition or praise for doing good work? 5. Does my supervisor, or someone at work, seem to care about me as a person? 6. Is there someone at work who encourages my development? 7. At work, do my opinions seem to count? 8. Does the mission/purpose of my company make me feel my job is important? 9. Are my co-workers committed to doing quality work? 10. Do I have a best friend at work? 11. In the last six months, has someone at work talked to me about my progress? 12. This last year, have I had opportunities at work to learn and grow?
- geichel 7y ago
  "Can know all the math in the 'verse but take a boat in the air that you don't love?" ― Joss Whedon
- odonnellryan 7y ago
  Fitting title. I remember close to 10 years ago I proposed a lot of these ideas on my company as a low level manager. I was only asked "how old are you?" And told "your paycheck is us telling you you're doing a good job." Aha
- jypepin 7y ago
  it seems to me that most of those questions should influence positively employee happiness.
  - karmelapple 7y ago
    It does seem like it would correlate, but one might also think free food would contribute to it, too. These points help focus on precisely what kinds of things to perhaps focus on to contribute to happiness in certain ways. I’ve read the book, and it’s a good one.
simonebrunozzi 7y ago
https://outline.com/vnwmK4 https://outline.com/vnwmK4
erikig 7y ago
Linked as in causation or as in correlation?
wb14123 7y ago
I think business success makes employee happy.
ourcat 7y ago
"Founder passion" is everything. And nothing you ever do will be as successful as something you're passionate about.
LoSboccacc 7y ago
can't read the article because limits. do that provide some source with the claim? doesn't appear to be that the fortune 500 are particularly happy places to be and would love to see that list correlated with Glassdoor votes.
- visarga 7y ago
  > can't read the article because limits. I often get annoyed at such articles. If they don't want to share, then don't clog Hacker News, reddit and search engines with your amputated text! There are plenty of sources. Same problem for JSTOR articles.
- anonytrary 7y ago
  I haven't read an economist article in months and it still gives me limits. Something tells me the limits are bullshit and they just want an annoying paywall by default.
lcuff 7y ago
The fact that this idea is deemed worthy of an article in the Economist, and then hits the front page of HN is, IMHO, a sad statement on the current quality of thinking about how to run companies. It's hard for me to summon anything but 'duh' in response to the headline. For intelligent commentary, give me Peter Drucker's "The Effective Executive".
lightedman 7y ago
It's a shame YC/HN can't find an article that doesn't require signing-up to read. Given the huge amount of articles that require registration to read, and given HN's supposed freedom of information bend, this seems incomprehensible. Why can't the mods find a more usable article? Are you that bereft of resources? How about instead of whining about forcefully-conversant people like myself, you actually allow the conversation to happen with an article that we can all read? That's the point of this site, and if the mods can't allow that, they should step down in favor of someone that can step up to the job. In before dang and stcb only highlight this comment as 'why people are toxic' while ignoring why they themselves are adding to the toxicity. If either of you are actually REAL about your site rules, you'll e-mail me explaining why, or you'll talk here. Only cowards try to hide behind rules without a solid and concise explanation of why they exist.
cromat3 7y ago
AKA water is wet.
Double_a_92 7y ago
Now the question is how they are linked. Does the business become successful because you make your employees happy, OR can you afford to make them happy by having a business that runs well?
beck03076 7y ago
According to Gallup, highly experienced teams can experience a 20% lift in productivity. If an employee’s output is X, you can take this to (X)*120% by focusing on employee happiness. To put this in perspective, if a 5 member team experienced a 20% increase in productivity, there will be enough additional output that a sixth employee might contribute, but without the additional pay. In this scenario, an organisation’s savings can be connected to 1 employee’s salary in a 5 member team. Also, take into consideration the additional revenue generated. If a 500 employee company saw a 20% boost in productivity, it will mean an output of 600 employees at the hiring cost of 500.
nabla9 7y ago
The connection to profitability by industry is interesting: manufacturing 0.42 finance 0.22 retail 0.14 services 0.10 Correlation coefficient < 0.20 is very weak correlation. It would be interesting to see how it correlates with value added. I hypothesize that low in value added businesses like retail or manual assembly in manufacturing, you can't increase profits radically by increasing worker satisfaction. In higher value added sectors like like aircraft manufacturing cough Boeing cough the correlation is probably much higher than 0.42.
- beck03076 7y ago
  You are right. These sectors have higher impacts on profitability by increasing employee engagement. Computer Software, Internet, Information Technology and Services, Marketing and Advertising, Health, Wellness and Fitness
- mrfredward 7y ago
  I notice the correlation coefficients there are lowest for retail and services, industries I tend to think of as crappy to work in. That makes me wonder...are companies behaving rationally and only optimizing for happiness where it matters, or is there a statistical artifact here where they can't find a correlation in industries where every company's workers are miserable.
xtat 7y ago
You might be surprised how many otherwise skilled and well meaning people would argue against this in their own companies, especially prevalent in the bay area.
maehwasu 7y ago
This seems intuitively obvious, and I say this as a former business owner. However, the causality is backwards (as I’d expect from economists). If things are going well, it usually means you have a monopoly of some kind, which means high margins, which means that it’s easy and important to keep your people happy (including stimulating/challenging them with non-rote work). It’s when things go south that it all starts to get ugly for everyone. The causality likely goes the other direction: successful businesses can afford to create better employee environments. If your business sucks, you’ll likely run out of money if you try to first make employees happy and then let that happiness iterate you to success.
known 7y ago
Due to self-actualization in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs#Self-actualization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs#...
jpswade 7y ago
How do you measure happiness anyway? When I started in a management role, I set out to make sure my team members were happy. As time goes on, oddly enough, you realise that happiness is not chief among the qualities that make for a well functioning team. I found it is more about an equilibrium or balance. People don't always have to be happy, they have to be motivated.
minusSeven 7y ago
Could someone transcribe the article here? The website wants me to subscribe.

690 points by benryon 7y ago

neonate 7y ago

http://archive.is/TErZI http://archive.is/TErZI

xtracto 7y ago
https://outline.com/vnwmK4 https://outline.com/vnwmK4

izzydata 7y ago

Amazon seems to be doing alright regardless.

umvi 7y ago
I know a lot of engineers that work for Amazon that are happy. Warehouse workers on the other hand...
- throwawaysea 7y ago
  ...are experiencing pay and conditions that are vastly better than other warehouses. See https://quillette.com/2019/07/19/the-problem-with-tourist-journalism/ https://quillette.com/2019/07/19/the-problem-with-tourist-jo...
  - iwasakabukiman 7y ago
    I can’t tell if that’s sarcasm or not... That story was basically a plant from Amazon and Quillette is absolutely not a high quality news source.
    - throwawaysea 7y ago
      > That story was basically a plant from Amazon Evidence? > Quillette is absolutely not a high quality news source Really? I find their articles to be written well. They are respectful and balanced in their tone, and provide a lot of evidence for their points. Are you sure you don't just disagree with their centrist perspective? You've not actually offered any critique of this article.
      - jkachmar 7y ago
        Quillette does not feature a centrist perspective. See Media Bias Fact Check’s overview, in which they’re considered “Right” and to feature pseudoscience and poor reporting [1]. Also see the Wikipedia page on Media Bias Fact Check for citations to show that they’re reputable [2]. See also AllSides' overview, in which they’re considered to “lean right” [3]. [1] https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/quillette/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/quillette/ [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Bias/Fact_Check https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Bias/Fact_Check [3] https://www.allsides.com/news-source/quillette-media-bias https://www.allsides.com/news-source/quillette-media-bias
        throwawaysea 7y ago
        Media Bias Fact Check is NOT reputable. Your own Wikipedia link says the following: > The Columbia Journalism Review describes Media Bias/Fact Check as an amateur attempt at categorizing media bias and Van Zandt as an "armchair media analyst." > The Poynter Institute notes, "Media Bias/Fact Check is a widely cited source for news stories and even studies about misinformation, despite the fact that its method is in no way scientific." I read through the Media Bias Fact check article on Quillette and it makes bold claims about Quillette having poor sourcing or featuring pseudoscience but it provides weak or cherry-picked examples from a much larger body of published articles. For example, it mentions 'hereditarianism' as pseudoscientific, even though there is peer-reviewed published research supporting it that is referenced in the Quillette article they are critiquing. It also tries to discredit Quillette based on association - it mentions a couple people who have written articles on Quillette and discusses _their_ reputation, rather than directly factually refuting specific points. If anything, this write-up on Media Bias Fact Check is itself super biased. AllSides is more reputable but they have also rated Quillette as Center for long periods of time previously. AllSides also mentions this about Quillette alongside their current "lean right" rating: > Worth noting: some on the team thought Quillette deserved a Center or Lean Left media bias rating. This is because Quillette features classically liberal arguments, but classically liberal ideas are now more commonly associated with the Right. Our confidence rating for Quillette's media bias rating is "Initial or Low." Also, AllSides's methodology is US-centric - which is different from centrism more broadly. > The AllSides Media Bias RatingTM reflects the average judgment of the American people. We don't use a convoluted mathematical or artificial intelligence model, but instead have regular people representing the broad spectrum of Americans blindly rate the bias of articles. That produces a fair, verifiable bias rating. Centrism also means neutral or truth-seeking to some people, whereas to others it refers to a relative position on a political spectrum. I find Quillette to be generally centrist in that it is neutral/truth-seeking because they are willing to take controversial positions and discuss them logically, in depth, with substantial evidence. By and large, Quillette features high quality articles and significant sourcing. No journalistic outlet is perfect and it wouldn't take me long to pull out examples in the NYT, WaPo, WSJ, or other big publications to try and paint a negative image of them as Media Bias Fact Check did. And to get back on point, no one has refuted what this particular article claims. Amazon has higher pay, better benefits, and better conditions than other warehouse jobs. There is even a comment in this very HN discussion from an Amazon warehouse worker that says "I'm part of the career choice program which pays for 95% of my college tuition, fees, and books for an IT program (which I chose)." And this isn't the only comment in this discussion from an Amazon warehouse worker. If there are claims otherwise, that other warehouse jobs are better, name them and cite evidence.
  - zemo 7y ago
    on twitter, @amazonnews tweeted a link to that and they got ratioed so hard that they deleted the tweet a few hours later. that is ... not a good piece.
    - throwawaysea 7y ago
      Can you critique the article's points or the author's experiences specifically? Talking about Twitter tropes like ratios is not substantive.
- mrb 7y ago
  It's just one random data point but one of my personal friends said: «I still have many friends & family working in Amazon fulfillment centers across the country, and every single one of them says it’s the best job they’ve ever had.» https://twitter.com/chadloder/status/1154275824951943168 https://twitter.com/chadloder/status/1154275824951943168
  - nguoi 7y ago
    >I’m also sure that lots of folks don’t truly understand blue collar working conditions in other industries. I do agree with this. I briefly had a few blue collar jobs: it's hard for workers to assert their existing rights, culturally and legally.
- MaxBarraclough 7y ago
  The overwork has been well reported, but the unpaid time spent in mandatory daily security checks, seems to get overlooked. Somehow, US courts decided that's allowed. Could've sworn UK courts came to a similar decision recently, but I can't find a source. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/2014/12/09/05c67c0c-7fb9-11e4-81fd-8c4814dfa9d7_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/2014/12/0...
- Consultant32452 7y ago
  There's an Amazon warehouse near me. My neighbor works for USPS. Amazon is poaching tons of their employees and it's really hurting USPS because Amazon is so much better. If he wasn't holding out for one more year to get full retirement from USPS he would have jumped ship too. Instead, he's hoping to work for Amazon part time during retirement. I'm not suggesting that there aren't problems with Amazon warehouses, but I think a lot of the reaction is from highly educated wealthy liberal types who don't know what it's like to work hard labor jobs.
  - Jax2_Hannah 7y ago
    I can't speak for others, but I have never worked for a warehouse job until now, and it isn't as bad as I thought. I was considering working for UPS, but after recently giving birth, I couldn't lift the minimum weight they required for me. So I thought Amazon would be a viable option. I make more than I would at UPS, and it's very easy compared to it. I know because my husband works there. I honestly don't understand why some people would complain about Amazon but to get media attention. That's my opinion.
- Matticus_Rex 7y ago
  Warehouse work sucks. Amazon's warehouse work is above average for warehouse work.
  - skyyler 7y ago
    By what metric? I have friends that have been working warehouses in Ohio since the early 2000s and they have vented frustrations to me about how Amazon is causing a race to the bottom for warehouse labor. I've heard a lot of horror stories about Amazon warehouses. I'm sure a lot of it is FUD or whatever, but it seems that even Walmart has better conditions.
    - hanniabu 7y ago
      Have you ever been in a real warehouse? One that's baking in the sun in the summer, no AC because it's too costly, probably 100 degrees inside, no ventilation, pallet dust everywhere and you get a nice inhale when something is moved on the floor, not being in a technologically present company where machines break constantly and you need to do a lot of manual work in these conditions lifting a 35lb box every 8-12 seconds for 12 hours....
      - vernie 7y ago
        No true warehouse.
        hanniabu 7y ago
        This warehouse in specific that I'm referencing is operated by a Fortune 100 company.
      - mjparrott 7y ago
        Yes, this was my first job as an 'employee' of a staffing company. They took $11/hour and gave me $7/hour to re-package and re-palletize boxes of P&G products. Literally we would open a box of 4 shampoo bottles, take the bottles out and then repackage then into a box of 6 bottles and stack them back up on a pallet. To open the boxes we put them on a conveyor belt that went through an oven to melt the glue on the box. I had to stand at the exit of the oven and grab the scalding hot glue and rip the tape off the boxes as fast as I possibly could. The scalding hot glue would stick to your hands while hot air was blowing in your face out of the oven. No AC. 8 hour shift 7 to 3 with no lunch break, only two 15 minute breaks to use the bathroom (couldn't go otherwise). No AC in the warehouse in the hot summer in the midwest. Another fun job was to re-palletize boxes. A forklift operator would lay an empty pallet on the ground, then put a row of 25 full pallets next to it in a long row. You had to unstack the 2nd pallet onto the empty one using a new stacking pattern that was more stable. Then the 2nd pallet would be empty. Repeat the process down the row as fast as you can go getting cuts on your hands from the cardboard boxes, leaning over your back lifting heavy boxes without AC in a hot warehouse.
starpilot 7y ago
And the entire gaming industry.

frobozz 7y ago

Ursine genes and woodland defecation also seem to correlate.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
xyzzyz 7y ago
Yes, I am also shocked to learn that employees aren't happy in companies that aren't doing well. What's next, are you going to tell me that people who live in successful cities are happier than those in decaying ones?
- dougmwne 7y ago
  I know that's in jest, but boy have I experienced that one. There's nothing like being surrounded by a whole city of people who've lost all hope to get you out of bed in the morning.
- ggm 7y ago
  Actually, I have sometimes done what I think is my best work, in toxic work places. It was fleeting, but the mood at the time was "this place sucks, but boy, am I getting it on". Overall I agree there is a pope/catholic tree/forest moment here, but this is bell-curve overlap venn diagram stuff, the outliers are amusing, but not informative of the trend. tl;dr slacker finds life in toxic company can be fulfilling.
brailsafe 7y ago
At my last case, the company doing really well put a lot of stress on me to maintain. Overworked and undercompensated, I developed a terrible case of Ursine dementia in combination with Grizzly depression.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

robocat 7y ago

They did look at causation: "the authors cite studies of changes within individual firms and organisations which seem to show that improvements in employee morale precede gains in productivity, rather than the other way round." Many of us understand the other causation arrow (corporate unsuccess leads to unhappiness!)

Jazgot 7y ago
In some cases corporate unsuccess leeds to happiness. I've seen this in my case once. And hope that I'll not need to see this again.
- TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago
  Does it go something like: when the company tanks due to mismanagement > shareholder value suffers > employees feel vindicated?
  - diminoten 7y ago
    I've seen it in the form of an employee desiring a negative outcome for the business because that outcome is tied to vengeance for another employee's perceived professional mistake. E.g., "I'm not going to help that team because they need to feel the pain of the decision I didn't like."
    - Jazgot 7y ago
      Sometimes you just don't have ability to help. You are only observer and fail makes you happy, because you predicted it and you tried to stop it. But no one was listening.
  - zorpner 7y ago
    I've seen a simpler version many times -- a chronically under-resourced group overworks itself until people leave and catastrophe strikes, and only then is it funded/etc.
7y ago

ph4 7y ago

Serious question, why post something for discussion if it's behind a paywall?

tannerc 7y ago
I'll bite because it's a reasonable question. I think linking to paywalled content is allowed because there are fairly easy ways around paywalls, but posting a roundabout directly goes (I believe) against HN policy. An example of how to get around the Economist paywall is already elsewhere in this thread.
- Sonnol53 7y ago
  I use outline dot com to get around paywall :)
  - discordance 7y ago
    Works for The Economist but doesn't work for WSJ these days unfortunately. Anyone got a work around for WSJ?
    - de0xy 7y ago
      Put the WSJ link into any URL shortener, then put that link into outline.
- tomhoward 7y ago
  > but posting a roundabout directly goes (I believe) against HN policy Not true; it has long been customary for people to share paywall workarounds in the comments, and the moderators welcome/encourage it.
  - tannerc 7y ago
    Comments yes, not as posts (possibly).

ergothus 7y ago

I've seen these arguments repeatedly, yet I only see this mattering to those companies where employees have a relative level of power and choice (e.g. non-game industry programmers, etc). Elsewhere, the attitude appears to have remained: "use them as much as possible". Consider assistant managers at your local chain store. Pick a chain! Outside of a handful of companies that are well noted for their bucking of the trend, regardless of market, these employees will be used and abused, year after year. If my anecdotal experience is representative, the more they actually care about the job, the more they'll be abused. Managers get the same, and by the time you get to district or regional managers, they are mostly the people that survived the lower levels...where "survived" means "did the abusing" not "got burnt out and quit for greener pastures".

b_tterc_p 7y ago
Anything customer oriented tends to benefit
nine_k 7y ago
Why, this makes sense. In every industry, there are employees whose influence on the company success is outsized, and who are hard to hire or train. In software industry, they are experienced engineers and product managers. In a fashionable restaurant, they are experienced cooks. In an airforce, they are experienced pilots and repairmen. Etc. When these people are happy with their work, they achieve great results. When they are unhappy, they look for ways to conveniently jump ship, because they have a number of opportunities elsewhere waiting for them to become available. They are in short supply. Every boss has an incentive to keep these people content and loyal. OTOH every industry has positions for which supply is plentiful, compared to demand. Aspiring game developers without experience, dish washers, burger flippers, etc, can be readily hired, paid little, and easily fired, too. There is no incentive for their bosses to walk an extra mile to keep them happ, especially when pressing them a bit more yields an extra bit of performance, so they mostly aren't happy about their jobs.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 7y ago
  Another hypothesis that equally well explains the data: employees at successful companies tend to be happy because the rising tide lifts (almost) all boats. Companies that are doing poorly will tend to look to cut staff, wages, and benefits, which could be a source of unhappiness. Etc. I don't really think the evidence presented here gives much reason to believe that seeking the well-being of your employees will do anything for the bottom line. OTOH, it's easy for me to believe that improving the top line will improve your employees' happiness.

ben_jones 7y ago

People are joking in this thread but I think the REALLY BIG problem is that a lot of American workers are increasingly internalizing their compensation needs above other needs like health, happiness, or social well being. When we should be concentrating on a lot of our personal issues, we kick the ball down the road saying "oh when I have more money" or "oh when my career progresses" when we would be much better served by acting on them immediately and with highest priority.

bsanr2 7y ago
Perhaps because so many Americans are financially insecure, and long-term health, happiness, and social concerns take a backseat to simply surviving the next month?
- mjparrott 7y ago
  Getting out of the hole of "surviving to the next month" requires a few years of developing and investing in yourself to build a valued skillset. It's very hard to do when you don't have a clue about what that path can be. I took a lot longer to get to my current spot because I didn't know this path existed when I was younger because no one around me even knew this industry existed.
  - tuxxy 7y ago
    Come on, it's incredibly disingenuous to suggest that all folks living paycheck-to-paycheck don't have a valuable skill set. It's also incredibly offensive and elitist, too.
    - mjparrott 7y ago
      I didn't mean it that way. I meant to say that if you are asking yourself "what can I do to improve my situation" sometimes the answer is to invest in yourself! It isn't meant to be judgemental or to suggest there aren't other factors that influence what financial position you find yourself in. How about offering other suggestions as to what people can do to move away from 'paycheck to paycheck' situatins instead of calling other people names?

mapcars 7y ago

That is kinda obvious.

turk73 7y ago

No such thing as "employee happiness" in Big Healthcare. It's time Big Healthcare got broken up.

ThomPete 7y ago

Business success and employee happiness are better linked.

randyrand 7y ago

It's generally pretty clear that when a business is failing, the employees won't be very happy.

atian 7y ago

Businesses are systems of people. Those that affect people nonetheless affect the business. You are then in the realm of which organs the people can survive without.

samnwa 7y ago

It's the opposite. Business success (e.g. being able to pay people to work less hard and enjoy free lunches, etc) is linked to happiness.

mlthoughts2018 7y ago

It reminds me some of Peopleware, where an argument is made that through a focus on quality of output, the speed of production is actually faster than if you focus explicitly on the speed of production.

WheelsAtLarge 7y ago

I worked for a company where management tried hard to keep employees happy when it came to benefits and yet, for the most part, they/we were a miserable bunch. It seemed that it was never enough. I'm not saying that the benefits were extravagant but they were very good. I agree that a happy employee helps a company be better but you can't buy their happiness thru benefits. The way to do it complicated and it starts by hiring the right type of employee and defining the right company culture.

danielvinson 7y ago
Happiness isn’t just a factor of compensation, it’s also if people enjoy what they are working on, how they work, and the people around them.
visarga 7y ago
I think it's essential to put a moderate load and leave some space for creativity and new ideas to be tried out. I for one get tired of executing, sometimes I want to play out my own ideas.

lettergram 7y ago

My startup is working on identifying and maximizing happiness for this reason [1]. Largely the reason we believe this is the case, is because people tend to stay where they are happy. “Tribal knowledge” is the single most important thing an employee can bring to the table. It’s also only obtained through time at a given (or related company). At the same time, hiring and training a new employee is the single most expensive cost to a company. So identifying and keeping experienced employees really improves productivity and reduces costs. Which makes it much easier for a business to succeed. [1] https://metacortex.me/ https://metacortex.me/

adfm 7y ago
Take a look at the SMR/Glassdoor Culture 500 if you're interested in measuring company culture. https://sloanreview.mit.edu/culture500 https://sloanreview.mit.edu/culture500

pac39 7y ago

Now if only those in upper management and bean counter division got this memo.....

achenatx 7y ago

I use a book called "first break all the rules" It is also based on gallup data. They determined that employee happiness was not correlated to company success. They did find that the following questions in order were highly correlated to company success. 1. Do I know what is expected of me at work? 2. Do I have the materials and equipment I need to do my work right? 3. At work, do I have the opportunity to do what I do best every day? 4. In the last seven days, have I received recognition or praise for doing good work? 5. Does my supervisor, or someone at work, seem to care about me as a person? 6. Is there someone at work who encourages my development? 7. At work, do my opinions seem to count? 8. Does the mission/purpose of my company make me feel my job is important? 9. Are my co-workers committed to doing quality work? 10. Do I have a best friend at work? 11. In the last six months, has someone at work talked to me about my progress? 12. This last year, have I had opportunities at work to learn and grow?

geichel 7y ago
"Can know all the math in the 'verse but take a boat in the air that you don't love?" ― Joss Whedon
odonnellryan 7y ago
Fitting title. I remember close to 10 years ago I proposed a lot of these ideas on my company as a low level manager. I was only asked "how old are you?" And told "your paycheck is us telling you you're doing a good job." Aha
jypepin 7y ago
it seems to me that most of those questions should influence positively employee happiness.
- karmelapple 7y ago
  It does seem like it would correlate, but one might also think free food would contribute to it, too. These points help focus on precisely what kinds of things to perhaps focus on to contribute to happiness in certain ways. I’ve read the book, and it’s a good one.

simonebrunozzi 7y ago

https://outline.com/vnwmK4 https://outline.com/vnwmK4

erikig 7y ago

Linked as in causation or as in correlation?

wb14123 7y ago

I think business success makes employee happy.

ourcat 7y ago

"Founder passion" is everything. And nothing you ever do will be as successful as something you're passionate about.

LoSboccacc 7y ago

can't read the article because limits. do that provide some source with the claim? doesn't appear to be that the fortune 500 are particularly happy places to be and would love to see that list correlated with Glassdoor votes.

visarga 7y ago
> can't read the article because limits. I often get annoyed at such articles. If they don't want to share, then don't clog Hacker News, reddit and search engines with your amputated text! There are plenty of sources. Same problem for JSTOR articles.
anonytrary 7y ago
I haven't read an economist article in months and it still gives me limits. Something tells me the limits are bullshit and they just want an annoying paywall by default.

lcuff 7y ago

The fact that this idea is deemed worthy of an article in the Economist, and then hits the front page of HN is, IMHO, a sad statement on the current quality of thinking about how to run companies. It's hard for me to summon anything but 'duh' in response to the headline. For intelligent commentary, give me Peter Drucker's "The Effective Executive".

lightedman 7y ago

It's a shame YC/HN can't find an article that doesn't require signing-up to read. Given the huge amount of articles that require registration to read, and given HN's supposed freedom of information bend, this seems incomprehensible. Why can't the mods find a more usable article? Are you that bereft of resources? How about instead of whining about forcefully-conversant people like myself, you actually allow the conversation to happen with an article that we can all read? That's the point of this site, and if the mods can't allow that, they should step down in favor of someone that can step up to the job. In before dang and stcb only highlight this comment as 'why people are toxic' while ignoring why they themselves are adding to the toxicity. If either of you are actually REAL about your site rules, you'll e-mail me explaining why, or you'll talk here. Only cowards try to hide behind rules without a solid and concise explanation of why they exist.

cromat3 7y ago

AKA water is wet.

Double_a_92 7y ago

Now the question is how they are linked. Does the business become successful because you make your employees happy, OR can you afford to make them happy by having a business that runs well?

beck03076 7y ago

According to Gallup, highly experienced teams can experience a 20% lift in productivity. If an employee’s output is X, you can take this to (X)*120% by focusing on employee happiness. To put this in perspective, if a 5 member team experienced a 20% increase in productivity, there will be enough additional output that a sixth employee might contribute, but without the additional pay. In this scenario, an organisation’s savings can be connected to 1 employee’s salary in a 5 member team. Also, take into consideration the additional revenue generated. If a 500 employee company saw a 20% boost in productivity, it will mean an output of 600 employees at the hiring cost of 500.

nabla9 7y ago

The connection to profitability by industry is interesting: manufacturing 0.42 finance 0.22 retail 0.14 services 0.10 Correlation coefficient < 0.20 is very weak correlation. It would be interesting to see how it correlates with value added. I hypothesize that low in value added businesses like retail or manual assembly in manufacturing, you can't increase profits radically by increasing worker satisfaction. In higher value added sectors like like aircraft manufacturing cough Boeing cough the correlation is probably much higher than 0.42.

beck03076 7y ago
You are right. These sectors have higher impacts on profitability by increasing employee engagement. Computer Software, Internet, Information Technology and Services, Marketing and Advertising, Health, Wellness and Fitness
mrfredward 7y ago
I notice the correlation coefficients there are lowest for retail and services, industries I tend to think of as crappy to work in. That makes me wonder...are companies behaving rationally and only optimizing for happiness where it matters, or is there a statistical artifact here where they can't find a correlation in industries where every company's workers are miserable.

xtat 7y ago

You might be surprised how many otherwise skilled and well meaning people would argue against this in their own companies, especially prevalent in the bay area.

maehwasu 7y ago

This seems intuitively obvious, and I say this as a former business owner. However, the causality is backwards (as I’d expect from economists). If things are going well, it usually means you have a monopoly of some kind, which means high margins, which means that it’s easy and important to keep your people happy (including stimulating/challenging them with non-rote work). It’s when things go south that it all starts to get ugly for everyone. The causality likely goes the other direction: successful businesses can afford to create better employee environments. If your business sucks, you’ll likely run out of money if you try to first make employees happy and then let that happiness iterate you to success.

known 7y ago

Due to self-actualization in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs#Self-actualization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs#...

jpswade 7y ago

How do you measure happiness anyway? When I started in a management role, I set out to make sure my team members were happy. As time goes on, oddly enough, you realise that happiness is not chief among the qualities that make for a well functioning team. I found it is more about an equilibrium or balance. People don't always have to be happy, they have to be motivated.

minusSeven 7y ago

Could someone transcribe the article here? The website wants me to subscribe.