3 ms·
I kind of see that, but it completely ignores the cost of hiring (financial and in lost productivity in the team that has to onboard the new hire) and the loss
by zelos 5y ago
I kind of see that, but it completely ignores the cost of hiring (financial and in lost productivity in the team that has to onboard the new hire) and the loss of knowledge and experience from firing as well.
- bathtub365 5y agoThat’s why you hire to fire. Then your shortest tenure employee is the one you know you’ll be terminating and minimal knowledge is lost. The only downside is that it’s disgusting, soulless behaviour.
- tsol 5y agoAlso a huge waste of time, money, and other resources.
- wongarsu 5y agoI could imagine Amazon finding some success with that strategy for their fulfillment workers (where those costs are low and team work isn't required), leading someone to mindlessly apply the same strategy everywhere else.
- wpietri 5y agoFor sure. It's a good example of POSIWID: The Purpose Of the System Is What It Does. If the system ignores things like financial costs and productivity, then the purpose of the system is something else. What it is good for in my view is making managers look and feel tough and establishing a culture of fear that is so necessary for hierarchical power structures. Power/status hierarchies are a common trait for most primates. So my shorthand for this sort of it-doesn't-make-sense situation is, "Primates gonna prime."
- vintermann 5y agoAmazon Primate
- mtoddsmith 5y agoI will never unsee this.
- schwarzmx 5y agoMy impression as a former SDE was that it's already accounted for. Hoards of new hires from college join each year and the hiring process is getting cheaper for that pipeline. I think they know that while increasing throughput in the hiring pipeline they're also letting in some low performers, so PIP is one mechanism to shed some weight.
- lokar 5y agoMany companies (not just Amazon) believe that employees at the low end of the curve are not simply contributing less, they see them as being actively negative. This is not just about their individual output, quality, etc, it's the impact on the overall org, culture and expectations. Not defending, just explaining.