4 ms·

Wait let me guess, the CEO is taking full responsibility but with no actual consequences?

charcircuit 4y ago
Why should he face consequences? Instead he should focus on learning from the mistake so that the company can try to avoid making the same mistake again. Punishing him isn't going to solve any of the company's problems.
- Redsquare 4y ago
  When you need to cull 28% of the headcount it signifies a huge fail over many many months, not just a one off miscalculation
  - nibbleshifter 4y ago
    In many cases I suspect there isn't any need beyond attempting to show shareholders that you are doing "something". A lot of these layoffs will be net negatives for the companies.
  - charcircuit 4y ago
    One miscalculation can result in them over hiring. Are you suggesting they should have instead every month lay off a few people depending on how the current environment looks instead of 28% at once?
    - Retric 4y ago
      Natural attrition can cut headcount. Large layoffs are a sign of incompetence.
      - shepik 4y ago
        FANGM all did layoffs. And many other companies as well. That they are all incompetent can't be the explanation.
        Retric 4y ago
        Sure it is. Google for example increased headcount by 24% in a year and cut it 6% in the next year, a clear sign they made a bad decision. Further in Google’s case they have plenty of money to pay these people until headcount naturally shrinks, but they don’t have anything useful enough for them to do that waiting and avoiding a large severance package is cheaper.
        shepik 4y ago
        > avoiding a large severance package is cheaper. it sounds like greed, not incompetence. I just do not believe in a worldview where almost all CEOs of large tech companies are incompetent. Whatever the explanation for layoffs is, incompetence ain't it.
        Retric 4y ago
        Greed would still try and avoid the need for a layoff because they are quite expensive. Google’s 6+ weeks salary + 6 months health insurance isn’t cheap.
    - Redsquare 4y ago
      No I am suggesting that they clearly over hired over a long period of time. Surely they recalculated over that period of time...if not then that sums the incompetence up
  - marcinzm 4y ago
    The blunt truth is that layoffs are not really failures from a business perspective. Employees and their employment don't really matter independent of other things. Could be the symptom of a mistake or could just be a failed bet but that's all. It's just a question of risk, reward and cost. Not a question of people. If the layoffs targets low performing employees or departments then it's actually a business win. If you don't like that then consider pushing for unions, government regulations or join an employee co-op. However many people don't like that option because they prefer to not risk the massive compensation packages that big tech gives them. I'm reminded of the Street Fighter quote: "For you, the day Bison graced your village was the most important day of your life. But for me... it was Tuesday."
  - itronitron 4y ago
    Yeah, if I was on one of the core teams I'd be quite annoyed at having given a big chunk of my time bringing coworkers on board just to see them laid off.
- Buttons840 4y ago
  You're right. The deeper issue here is that we do not live in a meritocracy. People are frustrated. Digging into why the CEO gets another chance eventually leads us to these larger societal issues.
Redsquare 4y ago
"I must do better, and I will."....why does he get a second chance
- mritchie712 4y ago
  you don't believe in 2nd chances? people make mistakes, you usually have to make them before you learn from them.
  - jzb 4y ago
    His mistake cost 28% of the company their jobs. Usually mistakes of that magnitude get you fired. Unless you’re the CEO. Then other people get fired and have to deal with the consequences, you play sad for a few days then go play with piles of cash.
    - croes 4y ago
      How do you know it's because of mistakes? Since when are markets totally predictable? More than once inferior products and services get investor money and good ones fail to receive any funding.
carabiner 4y ago
Has someone made a layoff notice bingo card yet? "Full responsibility" should be the free square.
- stackbutterflow 4y ago
  "It's the hardest decision I've had to make" "We will work harder"
  - lelanthran 4y ago
    "Mistakes were made" "Challenges were encountered" "Building a Stronger Company"
    - noisy_boy 4y ago
      "Amazing/incredible talent" "Amazing/incredible journey" "No way reflect" "Local laws"
pigtailgirl 4y ago
-- linkedin: "Søren Bramer Schmidt CEO - We're hiring! Join us @Prisma" - "take full responsibility PS, We're hiring!!!!" --
- OJFord 4y ago
  It's not at all uncommon in restructuring to be both (doing a lot of) hiring & firing - the current filled roles are out of whack with where you want to be, and not things you can transition people between because the skills/qualifications are different or whatever. E.g. if Microsoft decided to sunset its incredible GitHub journey, it would probably find itself with too many web developers. If it got out of Xboxes, too many embedded. If it went full remote, too many office managers and IT.
  - orra 4y ago
    Of course developers can be transitioned to do other types of development. Occam's Razor says: or the companies just want to rehire new people at lower pay.
    - OJFord 4y ago
      Many of these headline grabbing layoffs are primarily back office roles. And what you say simply isn't true anyway - I even studied EE, but all my professional experience is on the web, I would have a long ramp up to be productive on an embedded team. I probably shouldn't even be hired for a grad position on such a team, a fresh graduate would have better memory of domain-specific stuff. What Occam's razor actually says is that in the face of multiple possible explanations, the simpler one is the more likely one. Your suggested explanation seems a more complicated conspiracy than simply not needing/being able to afford people to me.
    - ljm 4y ago
      Depends on the laws in your country. In the UK for example, if you make a position redundant and then immediately rehire for it, the laid off employee can take you to an employment tribunal for unfair dismissal, as the redundancy wasn’t genuine. Given that redundancy is a more complicated legal process it’s unlikely you’d use it for this purpose.
berjin 4y ago
At least they didn't host a rock concert for worlds richest elites the night before.
- wdb 4y ago
  Who did that?!?
  - boeingUH60 4y ago
    Microsoft https://www.pcmag.com/news/as-layoffs-loomed-microsoft-execs-took-in-private-sting-concert-in-davos https://www.pcmag.com/news/as-layoffs-loomed-microsoft-execs...
  - SomaticPirate 4y ago
    Microsoft paid Sting to perform the night before their layoffs https://www.theregister.com/AMP/2023/01/20/microsoft_sting_davos/ https://www.theregister.com/AMP/2023/01/20/microsoft_sting_d...
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
danabrams 4y ago
He gets to learn from his mistake while 28% of his company is held accountable for the company’s lack of productivity. What’s so complicated about that?

Why should he face consequences? Instead he should focus on learning from the mistake so that the company can try to avoid making the same mistake again. Punishing him isn't going to solve any of the company's problems.

Redsquare 4y ago
When you need to cull 28% of the headcount it signifies a huge fail over many many months, not just a one off miscalculation
- nibbleshifter 4y ago
  In many cases I suspect there isn't any need beyond attempting to show shareholders that you are doing "something". A lot of these layoffs will be net negatives for the companies.
- charcircuit 4y ago
  One miscalculation can result in them over hiring. Are you suggesting they should have instead every month lay off a few people depending on how the current environment looks instead of 28% at once?
  - Retric 4y ago
    Natural attrition can cut headcount. Large layoffs are a sign of incompetence.
    - shepik 4y ago
      FANGM all did layoffs. And many other companies as well. That they are all incompetent can't be the explanation.
      - Retric 4y ago
        Sure it is. Google for example increased headcount by 24% in a year and cut it 6% in the next year, a clear sign they made a bad decision. Further in Google’s case they have plenty of money to pay these people until headcount naturally shrinks, but they don’t have anything useful enough for them to do that waiting and avoiding a large severance package is cheaper.
        shepik 4y ago
        > avoiding a large severance package is cheaper. it sounds like greed, not incompetence. I just do not believe in a worldview where almost all CEOs of large tech companies are incompetent. Whatever the explanation for layoffs is, incompetence ain't it.
        Retric 4y ago
        Greed would still try and avoid the need for a layoff because they are quite expensive. Google’s 6+ weeks salary + 6 months health insurance isn’t cheap.
  - Redsquare 4y ago
    No I am suggesting that they clearly over hired over a long period of time. Surely they recalculated over that period of time...if not then that sums the incompetence up
- marcinzm 4y ago
  The blunt truth is that layoffs are not really failures from a business perspective. Employees and their employment don't really matter independent of other things. Could be the symptom of a mistake or could just be a failed bet but that's all. It's just a question of risk, reward and cost. Not a question of people. If the layoffs targets low performing employees or departments then it's actually a business win. If you don't like that then consider pushing for unions, government regulations or join an employee co-op. However many people don't like that option because they prefer to not risk the massive compensation packages that big tech gives them. I'm reminded of the Street Fighter quote: "For you, the day Bison graced your village was the most important day of your life. But for me... it was Tuesday."
- itronitron 4y ago
  Yeah, if I was on one of the core teams I'd be quite annoyed at having given a big chunk of my time bringing coworkers on board just to see them laid off.
Buttons840 4y ago
You're right. The deeper issue here is that we do not live in a meritocracy. People are frustrated. Digging into why the CEO gets another chance eventually leads us to these larger societal issues.

Redsquare 4y ago

"I must do better, and I will."....why does he get a second chance

mritchie712 4y ago
you don't believe in 2nd chances? people make mistakes, you usually have to make them before you learn from them.
- jzb 4y ago
  His mistake cost 28% of the company their jobs. Usually mistakes of that magnitude get you fired. Unless you’re the CEO. Then other people get fired and have to deal with the consequences, you play sad for a few days then go play with piles of cash.
  - croes 4y ago
    How do you know it's because of mistakes? Since when are markets totally predictable? More than once inferior products and services get investor money and good ones fail to receive any funding.

carabiner 4y ago

Has someone made a layoff notice bingo card yet? "Full responsibility" should be the free square.

stackbutterflow 4y ago
"It's the hardest decision I've had to make" "We will work harder"
- lelanthran 4y ago
  "Mistakes were made" "Challenges were encountered" "Building a Stronger Company"
  - noisy_boy 4y ago
    "Amazing/incredible talent" "Amazing/incredible journey" "No way reflect" "Local laws"

pigtailgirl 4y ago

-- linkedin: "Søren Bramer Schmidt CEO - We're hiring! Join us @Prisma" - "take full responsibility PS, We're hiring!!!!" --

OJFord 4y ago
It's not at all uncommon in restructuring to be both (doing a lot of) hiring & firing - the current filled roles are out of whack with where you want to be, and not things you can transition people between because the skills/qualifications are different or whatever. E.g. if Microsoft decided to sunset its incredible GitHub journey, it would probably find itself with too many web developers. If it got out of Xboxes, too many embedded. If it went full remote, too many office managers and IT.
- orra 4y ago
  Of course developers can be transitioned to do other types of development. Occam's Razor says: or the companies just want to rehire new people at lower pay.
  - OJFord 4y ago
    Many of these headline grabbing layoffs are primarily back office roles. And what you say simply isn't true anyway - I even studied EE, but all my professional experience is on the web, I would have a long ramp up to be productive on an embedded team. I probably shouldn't even be hired for a grad position on such a team, a fresh graduate would have better memory of domain-specific stuff. What Occam's razor actually says is that in the face of multiple possible explanations, the simpler one is the more likely one. Your suggested explanation seems a more complicated conspiracy than simply not needing/being able to afford people to me.
  - ljm 4y ago
    Depends on the laws in your country. In the UK for example, if you make a position redundant and then immediately rehire for it, the laid off employee can take you to an employment tribunal for unfair dismissal, as the redundancy wasn’t genuine. Given that redundancy is a more complicated legal process it’s unlikely you’d use it for this purpose.

berjin 4y ago

At least they didn't host a rock concert for worlds richest elites the night before.

wdb 4y ago
Who did that?!?
- boeingUH60 4y ago
  Microsoft https://www.pcmag.com/news/as-layoffs-loomed-microsoft-execs-took-in-private-sting-concert-in-davos https://www.pcmag.com/news/as-layoffs-loomed-microsoft-execs...
- SomaticPirate 4y ago
  Microsoft paid Sting to perform the night before their layoffs https://www.theregister.com/AMP/2023/01/20/microsoft_sting_davos/ https://www.theregister.com/AMP/2023/01/20/microsoft_sting_d...
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

danabrams 4y ago

He gets to learn from his mistake while 28% of his company is held accountable for the company’s lack of productivity. What’s so complicated about that?