5 ms·
I think most would agree more professionalism would be nice, in fact getting rid of a list of funny customer names (as employees suggested) would be more profes
by grey-area 6y ago
I think most would agree more professionalism would be nice, in fact getting rid of a list of funny customer names (as employees suggested) would be more professional, not less. But again, that's not really what the core disagreement is here - that's not IMO why people are quitting - it sounds like most of the company agrees that is a good idea.
They are quitting because the founders decided to assert their power nakedly and without restraint, to berate employees, shut down their organisation and discussions and attempt to dictate terms to them in a humiliating public way, that is to break the social contract between employee and employed. In doing that they declared that they alone decide the rules, they alone decide what is acceptable to say and what is not.
Every workplace has some subtle set of rules about behaviour but these rules are negotiated between employer and employee, and if as a manager you lose sight of that, you'll lose your best employees as they decide they don't really want you to decide everything about their waking hours without consulting you.
- digitaltrees 6y agoNone of this is how companies or teams work. Rules are not created through negotiations, at some point a leader makes a decision.
- zucker42 6y agoA "leader" makes a decision and the people under him decide whether to listen to that decision, to push back against that decision, or leave. So in reality, the company's direction is influenced by people both at the top and at the bottom of the totem pole. True leaders realize the importance of cultivating those underneath them, and adapting their direction to pushback or input.
- GavinMcG 6y agoAnd when there's a dramatic split on how to move forward, they apparently generously buy out the minority.
- klelatti 6y agoDo you always do exactly what your boss first tells you to do? You never negotiate a delivery date? Leaders make decisions but good leaders take account of the views of their teams.
- acmdas 6y agoSomehow negotiating a delivery date feels different from feeling free to use company resources to discuss outside politics...but I'm old fashioned, I know.
- stretchwithme 6y agoAgreed, especially if things are slipping BECAUSE of all the time lost to political battles.
- jrochkind1 6y agoIt wasn't "outside" politics though. It was discussion of things going on at the company, that the owners decided were "politics" that would be banned in the future.
- klelatti 6y agoI'm old fashioned enough to know that when you impose changes overnight that lead 1/3 of your staff to leave on the spot then maybe a little bit of consultation might have been a good idea.
- tomc1985 6y agoThe funny thing about leadership is that those under you hold more power than you, because it is up to them to accept your decision.
- stretchwithme 6y agoIn any marketplace, there are always people who decide not to deal with any given participant. That doesn't mean they have more or less power. There are still others to deal with. Sure, ending a relationship is disruptive. But moving on is perfectly feasible.
- tomc1985 6y agoI'm referring more to people -- leaders in a position of power and influence over those below them, like a CEO or manager. And the thought here is not novel -- it was taught to me as part of an Organizational Psychology class in b-school One's ability to lead is only as good as their ability to get followers to follow their lead. Hence why so many people use fear to keep others in line -- it's the easiest and simple way to ensure compliance
- bradleyjg 6y agoIn Political Science, Neustadt’s seminal Presidential Power (1960) makes the point that the President’s power is mostly exercised through persuasion.
- jkhdigital 6y agoYes, because B-school is exactly where people learn to become good leaders... please, tell me more ;-)
- tomc1985 6y agoKnowledge-wise my BS in global business isn't worth the paper its printed on, but it keeps the "you have to have a degree" assholes at bay Considering that most b-school students go on to become MBAs, I would hope they teach some leadership skills
- djrobstep 6y agoAmerica - land of freedom and democracy, where all are created equal... you must do exactly as your boss says without question though. The workplace is a magic alternate dimension where totalitarianism is suddenly good, for some reason.
- wutbrodo 6y ago> you must do exactly as your boss says without question though. You left off "if you want your boss to give you gobs of money every two weeks".
- barsonme 6y agoIt’s a two-way street, though. If you’re a half-decent software engineer there are tons of bosses willing to give you gobs of money. And smart bosses recognize that.
- wutbrodo 6y agoAbsolutely. But the idea that this is a "totalitarian" deficiency in the country's provision of negative rights is ludicrous.
- djrobstep 6y agoLet me guess: Your conception of "negative" rights includes the right to violate the negative liberty of others by positively attacking them in the name of property law enforcement?
- djrobstep 6y ago"Do what I say or I'll cut off your income, depriving you of food and shelter" is exactly the kind of authoritarianism I'm talking about.
- missedthecue 6y agoBasecamp isn't the only way on earth that these people can make an income
- inopinatus 6y agoManagers of high-performance teams recognise that they're not the talent; the job is to enable the talent. You are Brian Epstein, not John Lennon. Hire good people, give them goals, and the resources they need, then get the fuck out of their way. Let them make their own processes, rules, norms, even mistakes. Most organisations have a prevailing culture, so they'll operate in context anyway; create boundaries by application of Conway's law. Intervene by guidance and with pertinent and impertinent questions, not with directives and fiat. Authoritarianism is the death-knell of ingenuity.
- digitaltrees 6y agoIt’s one thing to solicit feedback and be open to the input of your team. It’s another, often ineffective, thing to let your team lead you. How would a leader make a decision when there are conflicting views or recommendations. Brian Epstein made lots of decisions without the bands opinion and many more when they disagreed.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- inopinatus 6y agoWell, here's the rub: I generally try to avoid saying "my team", because I don't regard them as possessions. I'll make N-way decisions between conflicting ideals when I'm invited to adjudicate, but refrain otherwise. My guidance would be to workshop apparently dissimilar preferences extensively, because 99% of the time there is a synthesis to be found, and creating a focus for conflict tends to encourage loud voices to get louder, drowning out alternatives. I'll treat any administrative decision-making as being on behalf of the team, i.e. as having been delegated the authority to do so from the members. I learned years ago that governing by consent of the governed is the only form of respectful leadership, and this extends to organisations and corporations, and it's never more apparent than when a manager switches jobs and people follow to the new gig because they liked working with you. The most important function, in this management style, is hiring, and in some organisations, talent acquisition has been half my workload. Regarding which I was once told, "hire people smarter than you"; the only issue with this maxim being the corollary, viz. that the CEO is, by induction, the company dunce.
- gls2ro 6y agoWhat I think it is missing here is a concept I discovered very late in my career, after a burnout which took me over 1 year to pass over: psychological contract. Which is defined as "Psychological contracts are defined by the relationship between an employer and an employee where there are unwritten mutual expectations for each side. A psychological contract is rather defined as a philosophy, not a formula or devised plan." So I don't know what happened at Basecamp but here is how breaking a psychological contract feel to the employee from my experience: A leader representing the company does something, an action, takes a decision. You, the employee, feel that a wrong was done to you, even if the rules, law and contract says the one who took the action has the right to do it. And in the beginning no amount of explanation about the action will alleaviate this feeling. Logically you will agree that they can do what they did, but emotionally (psychologically) at the end of every meeting or discussion you will still feel that somehow a wrong was done to you, a balance is unbalanced ... Shortly you lost the trust in the company that what they will do has your best interests at heart. It takes a big amount of effort and trying to put yourself in the shoes of your leader to try to understand how they got to that decision/action and if indeed was done in good faith you might overcome this. If not, then the best is to leave.
- angry_octet 6y agoThis is obviously wrong: decisions are negotiations. Rules are merely the next step in a continuous process. Rules change, participants change, environments change.
- Joeri 6y agoOk, so why do we accept that companies are run like autocracies, but we expect that societies are run like democracies? If we say that employees should be smart enough to autonomously do their jobs well, wouldn't their collective intelligence be better at running the business in its entirety? Why isn't it smarter and more financially sound to run a business like a democracy?
- predaking 6y agoYou should give "The Alliance" by Reid Hoffman a read. Excellent book - the first half, anyway - and I think it might give you a different perspective (or at least some food for thought).
- lettergram 6y agoMaybe the company did negotiate. Most of the company stayed. I know I’d rather work for basecamp now, because they agreed to knock out the BS at work. > you'll lose your best employees as they decide they don't really want you to decide everything about their waking hours without consulting you. the company is actually saying they want to not talk about anything outside of work. They don’t want you consulting them, they want you doing your job during work hours. That’s a pretty reasonable trade for money.
- hardwaregeek 6y agoDid they knock out the BS? Or did they just get dragged into a massively political and now massively open fight? What do you think the average productivity of a Basecamp employee is right now? Even after the dust settles, will you trust that DHH and Jason will keep their promise of no politics? What a company says about its culture and the reality are often quite different.
- fancyfish 6y agoExactly this. What people don’t realize is this move is hardly political. It’s all about building a better business. When work is a safe space free from political flame wars, employees can actually focus on the one thing they were hired to do, and be happier doing it: write code, manage projects, etc.
- nr2x 6y agoWith 1.5x more work for the remaining people they’ll need to be focused…or just find jobs that are 1x the work for same or better pay.
- brianwawok 6y agoOr just ship less features. I doubt basecanp is feature constrained right now.
- staticassertion 6y ago1.5x work today. Basecamp will backfill most of those roles, no? Honestly, a bunch of people quitting probably works out just fine for Basecamp.
- fighterpilot 6y agoI don't think we know why these people resigned, since the severance package was so generous that many of them may have just taken the excuse for a long holiday. I would count myself as someone who would simultaneously be thrilled with management's decision to ban political discussion at work but also quit to get the six months pay.
- MattRix 6y agoI mean most of then say explicitly that it’s because of this decision in their tweets. Would you really go out of your way to say something like that if you didn’t believe it?
- dylan604 6y agoIf it makes your interview for the next position go a little more smoothly on why you suddenly "abandoned" your job, then yes, I could easily see people taking a mere thirty seconds (if not less) to fire off a tweet.
- croh 6y ago> that is to break the social contract between employee and employed. Well actual contract is do your job and get paycheck. People try to ignore other stuff you do until it becomes mess. > In doing that they declared that they alone decide the rules, they alone decide what is acceptable to say and what is not. Well legally yes as long as they dont brek any law. If you read correctly they consult labour lawyer for their words > you'll lose your best employees as they decide they don't really want you to decide everything about their waking hours without consulting you You're honestly exaggerating situation. Nobody want you to consult with them for anything. They expect you to work in office hours.