3 ms·
> a decent company will […] Having worked for a bunch of decent companies in the past, the only consistent pattern I’ve seen is “A decent company will be put o
by Shish2k 4y ago
> a decent company will […]
Having worked for a bunch of decent companies in the past, the only consistent pattern I’ve seen is “A decent company will be put out of business by a similar but more-willing-to-cut-corners company”. Thanks, capitalism ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- notacoward 4y agoAs a veteran of ten startups and three larger companies, I don't think this is necessarily true. Companies that fail to provide a good work environment often pay a penalty in lost knowledge, hiring/training costs, internal dissension, etc. Continuity and familiarity can bring tangible benefits in addition to just feeling good. It might well be true that the benefits of being decent are outweighed by other factors, but it doesn't mean they're absent or negative. Also, the portrayal of hiring workers from cheaper locales as an unqualified negative is quite flawed. Bad for the incumbents, perhaps, but good for the new entrants. Many might say that increasing the role of merit vs. accidents of birth in hiring is a good thing. Who's to say that the "decent" company is the one perpetuating global inequity?