4 ms·

> If you do three years worth of hiring in one single year, eventually you need to pause Yep, a lot of demand (for tech labor) was pulled forward. The other as

> If you do three years worth of hiring in one single year, eventually you need to pause Yep, a lot of demand (for tech labor) was pulled forward. The other aspect to consider for the last year or so is that some higher up folks who make decisions to hire people seem to have become convinced that AI is going to (or already is) enable them to get by with fewer engineering heads.

jldugger 2y ago
But maximizing shareholder value isn't about "just getting by" it's about optimizing the mix of labor, management and assets to the point that paying to increase any of those variables is break-even. In that case, "AI makes engineers more productive" should lead to more hiring not layoffs. My suspicion is that the reality is that interest rates are having the intended effect of curbing demand and rather than admit you need to layoff people to match weak demand (and expensive capital), you can tell shareholders a story about AI that doesn't cause them to panic.
- UncleOxidant 2y ago
  > you can tell shareholders a story about AI that doesn't cause them to panic. Anecdotally I'm hearing that this is the story they're telling inside as a reason they're doing less hiring. > "AI makes engineers more productive" should lead to more hiring not layoffs. I'm not sure that follows. If you're a bean counter and you start thinking that maybe you'll be able to cut the engineering budget by 30% ("because AI") then that's going to be very tempting. It's not unlike the offshoring craze that started about 15 years ago. The MBAs then said "Hey, we could pay 1/2 of what we're paying now for the same engineering function" and they started offshoring willy-nilly. Then a year or two later when things weren't working they wondered why, but by then the MBA had moved on to the next company to initiate an offshoring program.
  - jldugger 2y ago
    > Anecdotally I'm hearing that this is the story they're telling inside as a reason they're doing less hiring. Well, you dont tell shareholders something different than what you say internally. That would be _material_.

jldugger 2y ago

But maximizing shareholder value isn't about "just getting by" it's about optimizing the mix of labor, management and assets to the point that paying to increase any of those variables is break-even. In that case, "AI makes engineers more productive" should lead to more hiring not layoffs. My suspicion is that the reality is that interest rates are having the intended effect of curbing demand and rather than admit you need to layoff people to match weak demand (and expensive capital), you can tell shareholders a story about AI that doesn't cause them to panic.

UncleOxidant 2y ago
> you can tell shareholders a story about AI that doesn't cause them to panic. Anecdotally I'm hearing that this is the story they're telling inside as a reason they're doing less hiring. > "AI makes engineers more productive" should lead to more hiring not layoffs. I'm not sure that follows. If you're a bean counter and you start thinking that maybe you'll be able to cut the engineering budget by 30% ("because AI") then that's going to be very tempting. It's not unlike the offshoring craze that started about 15 years ago. The MBAs then said "Hey, we could pay 1/2 of what we're paying now for the same engineering function" and they started offshoring willy-nilly. Then a year or two later when things weren't working they wondered why, but by then the MBA had moved on to the next company to initiate an offshoring program.
- jldugger 2y ago
  > Anecdotally I'm hearing that this is the story they're telling inside as a reason they're doing less hiring. Well, you dont tell shareholders something different than what you say internally. That would be _material_.