4 ms·
>Laying off randomly and not low performers Low performers? By what metric? And your metric sucks, that's because a single metric is meaningless, even 10 metri
by free652 3y ago
>Laying off randomly and not low performers
Low performers? By what metric? And your metric sucks, that's because a single metric is meaningless, even 10 metrics are useless.
Did you do over 200 CLs a year? 10000 LoC? 10-20 design docs? 10 product launches? CL comments, reviews, bug fixed, filed?
Sure you can identify outliers, but the baseline is not exactly very telling.
In my other companies layoffs were always random.
- blindriver 3y agoStriving to cut low performers and sometimes getting it wrong is orders of magnitude better than randomly cutting people, gutting high performers, and ruining confidence to other high performers that working hard will be appreciated. So yes, it doesn't matter which metric you want to use, but use something that is directionally correct with being a low performer, and get rid of those people. You might get some wrong but for the most part, people will be happier that the coasters and stragglers are gone.