4 ms·

> Getting rid of someone because of a fuck up is amateur leadership So you're saying that all these people who were mistakenly hired by Google and were now let

• lotsofpulp 3y ago
  Not at all. Ending someone's employment because they are predicted to be insufficiently beneficial to the organization is a different topic than terminating someone because they made a decision that turned out to be suboptimal, which may have been unreasonable to be able to forecast. It is possible that the suboptimal decision of overhearing was made in such a manner such that indicates the decision maker may not be beneficial to the organization, but not necessarily.
  • oblio 3y ago
    The amount of self loathing in display here is astounding. Or I guess, "temporarily embarrassed millionaire" syndrome? A hiring decision is a huge change in an employee's life. People uproot their lives, may have to move away from friends and family. They might need visas. For a big company CEO, getting fired changes basically nothing material. They still have millions of dollars, they most definitely aren't on a work visa. A rich, profitable company for sure can afford and should try to salvage every suboptimal hiring decision, at least once. Except for the CEO, that basically gets all the money and no real risk. A CEO will never starve, will never get kicked out of the country, etc.