4 ms·
How do you define productivity in this context? Musk style LOC? How many features you shipped? Let's pick one of the more sensible ones - features you shipped.
by blinkingled 4y ago
How do you define productivity in this context? Musk style LOC? How many features you shipped? Let's pick one of the more sensible ones - features you shipped. Who defines those features - is top level management responsible for the product vision, overall strategy that then middle management turns into features?
For companies like MAANG that are already hugely successful and have hit a wall so to speak, they don't need low level productivity before they need top level strategy and vision. Apple is a good example of their management priorities being clear - they seem to know what works and where to go next quarter and their middle management also seems capable enough to turn that into products/features and make their Engineers' lives simpler so they can be productive delivering on it.
For every 10k+ layoff assuming that it's the lackey low level guys the aren't productive that needed to be laid off is not only inaccurate (lots of greatly productive Googlers have been let go for example) but also unfairly cuts a whole lot of slack for the greater financial burden on the company folks up top that are in charge of strategy and vision. After all they are also the same people that hired the people who are laid of - directly or indirectly.
- treis 4y agoAre you arguing that productivity, however defined, isn't down at these companies?
- wpietri 4y agoI think you have missed most of blinkingled's point, and I encourage you to address it fully.
- treis 4y agoThere's no point in debating the meaning of productivity unless someone claims it's neutral or up. If they're willing to make that claim then it might be worth that debate. Otherwise, it's a pointless side track.
- wpietri 4y agoI disagree that it it is pointless. But clearly asking you to address it is, so I'll tap out here.
- notfromhere 4y agoIf you're using productivity to justify firing people, but then you proceed to avoid discussing how is calculated, you can't use it as a justification. There's no clear way to measure employee productivity in a white collar job. So claiming "productivity is down" with no objective evidence, is just groupthink.
- Apocryphon 4y agoOkay, I’ll stand in for the previous commenters. I will argue it went up, simply because the insane stock market valuations, which led these companies to overhire because clearly business demand was up as well, no? Then it is up to you to prove these companies wrong for believing their productivity to be up.
- blinkingled 4y agoNo I am pointing out that you are ignoring how it is defined and the fact that it needs to be defined within the context of organizational strategy and vision before usefully claiming it is up or down. Google's problem for example is NOT that they are unable to sell more ads because their programmers are not productive - it's that they lack the vision to take the company from ad based to diversified and profitable in other areas which they have badly failed to do while still hiring ton of people and then laying them off. That's not productivity problem - it's a strategy/vision and bad hiring practices problem. Even if it meant that somehow you could hack the productivity metric to show it was reduced in some light - it doesn't mean jack when you are productive doing things that don't help your revenues.