3 ms·
Given that lousy managers would cause more people to quit, which we can reasonably suppose, wouldn't a system like this favor the lousiest managers? After a whi
by xorcist 5y ago
Given that lousy managers would cause more people to quit, which we can reasonably suppose, wouldn't a system like this favor the lousiest managers? After a while, you'd expect the organization to end up with the worst possible managers, and a steady employee churn rate?
As a selection process it sounds pretty much the worst one imaginary. However, these organizations seems to not only survive but prosper. There must be more to it than this.
- np- 5y agoMy theory is that they’re super successful in one area, so it probably doesn’t matter at all what the rest of the company is doing. Just one major successful project can float thousands of failed teams, due to the vast sums of money involved. I’m also positive the “golden goose” teams aren’t subject to the same kind of scrutiny and have more autonomy so they’re not subject to these kinds of policies
- whack 5y agoSee my other comment in this thread. Regretted attrition rates will indeed penalize managers, and weed out the lousiest managers. The article is only describing unregretted attrition rates.
- gentleman11 5y agoThat’s compatible with the “everyone cries at their desk here” reports from a few years ago