4 ms·
>You don't have to believe that every single employee at a company is productive or necessary to understand that you can't saddle your remaining employees, even
by midoridensha 4y ago
>You don't have to believe that every single employee at a company is productive or necessary to understand that you can't saddle your remaining employees, even if you picked the "right" ones, with the remaining workload.
This is exactly the problem with this thinking. A lot of people don't contribute as much as the top contributors, but if you remove them, suddenly the most productive people have to do their normal jobs plus all these other peoples' too. Then they're going to feel overworked and look for a better job elsewhere.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- tdeck 4y agoSometimes the most productive people are productive precisely because they can pick tasks that play their strengths and manage to ignore the rest. If they're suddenly forced to take on whatever shit work pops up, some of them aren't going to be as effective anymore.
- throwyawayyyy 4y agoThis is a very good point. An overworked, under resourced team is running just to stand still. There's no time to take a step back, consider what might be done differently. It just has to be done right now. It's a recipe for stagnation.
- rrwo 4y agoAnother problem is that the better employees can move to better jobs more easily. So when management becomes a problem, they'll move elsewhere, and that will inspire more employees to leave. You end up with the less productive employees remaining.