3 ms·
So has anyone asked DHH and Jason whether the result was the catastrophic disaster portrayed here? My job consists of talking to people who own, buy, and sell c
by iainctduncan 6y ago
So has anyone asked DHH and Jason whether the result was the catastrophic disaster portrayed here? My job consists of talking to people who own, buy, and sell companies, and in my experience on 50+ transactions, there are many, many cases where "non-regrettable attrition" (as they call it) is exactly what they want. In a well run company (technically I mean), people should not be all that hard to swap out. Personally, and guessing, I doubt they wanted it to quite this high, just based on the size of the payout. But I'd bet dollars to donuts they were hoping for 20-25% to take the money and leave, or they would not have made it so attractive.
- vntok 6y agoCorrect. This was amazingly handled, in my opinion. No one loses face in this story, yet the company has successfully managed to eject -in a very short time and a controlled way- the people it considers the worst. And the company has advertised for free, thanks to mass media, that it will readily pay top dollar for people who seek to spend their workhours... you know, actually working.
- iainctduncan 6y agoReflecting on this, I realized when I was CTO at a company that needed a culture reset when I arrived (not of happiness, but of accountability for software that actually worked), I had 20% non-regrettable attrition on the eng. team, so not too far off 1/3 really. 3 months later quality was better and the rest of the team were happier too, because putting out bug fires in production every day is very stressful. Sure people are your company, but that means people are your company problems too....