3 ms·

I love this point: "The tech industry layoffs are basically an instance of social contagion, in which companies imitate what others are doing." I really wish f

I love this point: "The tech industry layoffs are basically an instance of social contagion, in which companies imitate what others are doing." I really wish for a less supine tech press. I've not seen any of these titans of industry being held accountable for the apparent major mistakes of overhiring. And I'm not even talking actual consequences here; these people will surely get bonuses for this. I'd just like to see some hard questions being asked and answered.

MiscIdeaMaker99 4y ago
I would love to see the capitalists held accountable for the way they treat their workers, but I believe their decisions are primarily dictated by profits, regardless of what they say. Hard questions can surely be asked, but once you weed through all of the empty narrative, you pretty much end up with the reason: extracting profits.
- s1artibartfast 4y ago
  It is hard to find anyone who honestly suggests it is otherwise. It was never about the workers. Layoffs are because companies think the workers cost more than they make. Everything else is just bickering over why they think this.
- wpietri 4y ago
  Even there, I think there can be usefully hard questions. Because I suspect what the CEOs are focused on is not the long-term profits that come from building healthy companies, but the short-term profits that come from juicing the numbers in ways that look good to the market on a day-to-day basis.
broast 4y ago
Do we have any evidence that the over-hiring was a mistake? Could companies not have seen the free money and decided to beef up their staff for short term gains in their roadmap, with the knowledge and intention that they will likely be cutting later while getting to keep all that intellectual output? I don't see why we put this past them.
- wpietri 4y ago
  Another question I'd ask is: why can't the find something useful to do with these people in the meantime? Downturns are definitionally temporary. Can managers really find no way to prepare for the coming good times? Or is there no way to use those staff to gain ground while everybody else is retreating? Workers are getting blamed by many for (claimed) low productivity. But why isn't that seen as a managerial failure? Isn't it better to have the same number of people and use them much better than a smaller number of people that are just as poorly used?
  - s1artibartfast 4y ago
    >Isn't it better to have the same number of people and use them much better than a smaller number of people that are just as poorly used? Of course! But that is much easier said than done. If it was as simple as just telling managers find a use that will make money, everyone would do that instead.
    - wpietri 4y ago
      Alas, probably not. A great example here is the NUMMI plant. In brief, Totota was kicking the collective asses of US carmakers. The techniques were not a trade secret; indeed, Toyota was happy to teach anybody. As part of that, they did a joint venture with GM called NUMMI, so they could show how they implemented core principles like "respect for people" and "continuous improvement". And it worked! Using the same building and most of the same people, it went from being one of the worst GM plants to one of the best. Did GM learn anything? Hell no. Because GM executives valued other things more than productivity and quality and worker happiness. For the curious, this American Life did a great radio story about it: https://www.thisamericanlife.org/561/nummi-2015 https://www.thisamericanlife.org/561/nummi-2015
      - Tempest1981 4y ago
        Thanks for the recommendation. This GM/automotive documentary was also interesting: "American Factory" https://www.imdb.com/title/tt9351980/ https://www.imdb.com/title/tt9351980/ (Don't be put off by the dramatized trailer)
yucky 4y ago
> I love this point: "The tech industry layoffs are basically an instance of social contagion, in which companies imitate what others are doing." Is there any evidence at all of this though? There appears to be a lot of copycat articles and comments on social calling the layoffs copycat behavior, which is a bit ironic. Meanwhile, everyone of these companies laying people off is worth considerably less than a year ago and what was supposed to be a quick ending to the conflict in Ukraine has turned into a precursor for a larger sale war that may last for years, no doubt having a significant impact on economic growth.
jmyeet 4y ago
You're exactly right. The research has shown that these layoffs are performative, meant to boost profits and/or share price right before bonus season and any "savings", which largely aren't real because of layoff costs, lost value from those employees and the acquisition costs of new employees in the next hiring wave, just go to dividends and/or share buybacks anyway. If CEOs really were taking "full responsibility", Zuckerberg (as one example) would be facing some pretty hard questions about spending tens of billions on the metaverse (which no one wants and has no path to recoup that "investment"), which is many multiples of any supposed savings from Meta's layoffs.
raincom 4y ago
Over-hiring was an instance of social contagion, too!!
- phendrenad2 4y ago
  It's social contagion all the way down. A lot of people have noted that small tech companies tend to imitate Google. But I think that Google is now looking at the state of the industry and trying to get ahead of trends too (reactive rather than a market maker). So it causes this amplification loop where big tech copies small tech, who are copying big tech.

MiscIdeaMaker99 4y ago

I would love to see the capitalists held accountable for the way they treat their workers, but I believe their decisions are primarily dictated by profits, regardless of what they say. Hard questions can surely be asked, but once you weed through all of the empty narrative, you pretty much end up with the reason: extracting profits.

s1artibartfast 4y ago
It is hard to find anyone who honestly suggests it is otherwise. It was never about the workers. Layoffs are because companies think the workers cost more than they make. Everything else is just bickering over why they think this.
wpietri 4y ago
Even there, I think there can be usefully hard questions. Because I suspect what the CEOs are focused on is not the long-term profits that come from building healthy companies, but the short-term profits that come from juicing the numbers in ways that look good to the market on a day-to-day basis.

broast 4y ago

Do we have any evidence that the over-hiring was a mistake? Could companies not have seen the free money and decided to beef up their staff for short term gains in their roadmap, with the knowledge and intention that they will likely be cutting later while getting to keep all that intellectual output? I don't see why we put this past them.

wpietri 4y ago
Another question I'd ask is: why can't the find something useful to do with these people in the meantime? Downturns are definitionally temporary. Can managers really find no way to prepare for the coming good times? Or is there no way to use those staff to gain ground while everybody else is retreating? Workers are getting blamed by many for (claimed) low productivity. But why isn't that seen as a managerial failure? Isn't it better to have the same number of people and use them much better than a smaller number of people that are just as poorly used?
- s1artibartfast 4y ago
  >Isn't it better to have the same number of people and use them much better than a smaller number of people that are just as poorly used? Of course! But that is much easier said than done. If it was as simple as just telling managers find a use that will make money, everyone would do that instead.
  - wpietri 4y ago
    Alas, probably not. A great example here is the NUMMI plant. In brief, Totota was kicking the collective asses of US carmakers. The techniques were not a trade secret; indeed, Toyota was happy to teach anybody. As part of that, they did a joint venture with GM called NUMMI, so they could show how they implemented core principles like "respect for people" and "continuous improvement". And it worked! Using the same building and most of the same people, it went from being one of the worst GM plants to one of the best. Did GM learn anything? Hell no. Because GM executives valued other things more than productivity and quality and worker happiness. For the curious, this American Life did a great radio story about it: https://www.thisamericanlife.org/561/nummi-2015 https://www.thisamericanlife.org/561/nummi-2015
    - Tempest1981 4y ago
      Thanks for the recommendation. This GM/automotive documentary was also interesting: "American Factory" https://www.imdb.com/title/tt9351980/ https://www.imdb.com/title/tt9351980/ (Don't be put off by the dramatized trailer)

yucky 4y ago

> I love this point: "The tech industry layoffs are basically an instance of social contagion, in which companies imitate what others are doing." Is there any evidence at all of this though? There appears to be a lot of copycat articles and comments on social calling the layoffs copycat behavior, which is a bit ironic. Meanwhile, everyone of these companies laying people off is worth considerably less than a year ago and what was supposed to be a quick ending to the conflict in Ukraine has turned into a precursor for a larger sale war that may last for years, no doubt having a significant impact on economic growth.

jmyeet 4y ago

You're exactly right. The research has shown that these layoffs are performative, meant to boost profits and/or share price right before bonus season and any "savings", which largely aren't real because of layoff costs, lost value from those employees and the acquisition costs of new employees in the next hiring wave, just go to dividends and/or share buybacks anyway. If CEOs really were taking "full responsibility", Zuckerberg (as one example) would be facing some pretty hard questions about spending tens of billions on the metaverse (which no one wants and has no path to recoup that "investment"), which is many multiples of any supposed savings from Meta's layoffs.

raincom 4y ago

Over-hiring was an instance of social contagion, too!!

phendrenad2 4y ago
It's social contagion all the way down. A lot of people have noted that small tech companies tend to imitate Google. But I think that Google is now looking at the state of the industry and trying to get ahead of trends too (reactive rather than a market maker). So it causes this amplification loop where big tech copies small tech, who are copying big tech.