6 ms·
Turns out it didn‘t. Microsoft is beginning to get the same idea. The idea that you didn‘t really need a large overhead of management, DEI employees and fairne
by selfmodruntime 2y ago
Turns out it didn‘t. Microsoft is beginning to get the same idea.
The idea that you didn‘t really need a large overhead of management, DEI employees and fairness committees was true all along.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- Rinzler89 2y agoMost large tech companies especially those with entrenched monopolies(FAANGS & Friends) don't need the huge number of workers they've amassed in order to achieve the same product performance and profitability, but they over hired during the years of tech hype and zero interest rates, and now it's difficult to know which people are those pulling most of the weight in the org and which are disposable and just cashing in while only engaging in empire building and theatrics to look busy and important, so the layoffs tend to be more or less random, but it also doesn't affect their profitability even if they let some of the valuable people go through the random layoffs, since like I said, they're entrenched monopolies.
- digging 2y ago> The idea that you didn‘t really need a large overhead of management, DEI employees and fairness committees was true all along. Yes, and it's also true that you don't really need two lungs. That doesn't make it a good idea to have one removed.
- selfmodruntime 2y agoThe metaphor fits best if you make it an appendix. It may or may not provide some unspecified benefits, but there's marginal difference of having it removed. Sometimes it swells to an uncomfortable size, which is when you're best off cutting it out before it kills you.