3 ms·
A lot of the bloat is at the top. How many executives, VPs, directors, high level managers, etc. are part of this?
by bmitc 4y ago
A lot of the bloat is at the top. How many executives, VPs, directors, high level managers, etc. are part of this?
- mikeg8 4y agoBloat can be all over the place, it’s not exclusive to the top of org charts
- bmitc 4y agoBloat at the top, whether people, process, or organizational bloat, has an amplification effect that isn’t found at the bottom.
- Salgat 4y agoIt's a trap companies can easily find themselves in. If you're looking to cut costs, the first thing the C-Suite will look at is all the workers that aren't adding immediate business value, so you cut them first; simple and easy. Then as tech debt and issues pile up, you, as management, figure that your first approach to figuring out what's going wrong is to hire managers and consultants to understand why your workers aren't as productive as before. Unfortunately all of these middle managers just create more burden on workers as they are micromanaged and sent to meetings more by managers looking to justify their existence. Of course these managers will say whatever the C-Suite wants to hear to keep their jobs, so more blame is pushed onto the lowest level, more managers are hired to try to make them more productive, and a vicious cycle continues.
- PragmaticPulp 4y agoGenerally layoffs include management cuts as well. There are far more employees than executives, though. Think about how many employees are in the org chart under a single VP. Numerically you can’t get appreciable cost reductions by reducing management alone.
- mythhouse 4y agoprbobaly not a whole from the layoffs i've seen at 2 of my employers.
- bdotdub 4y agoclassic IC answer source: I'm an IC
- bmitc 4y agoIs there a position there?
- root_axis 4y agoThose are the people making the layoff decisions...