4 ms·

I don't really get why layoffs mean that the company was not managed correctly. Let's say you believe you have an opportunity that will double the value of the

I don't really get why layoffs mean that the company was not managed correctly. Let's say you believe you have an opportunity that will double the value of the company, with a 30% probability, or cost the company 10% of it's value. This means it has an expected value of +21%. This is pretty good, and exactly the sort of thing shareholders want from their management. So you increase headcount and pursue the opportunity. In the 70% scenario when that doesn't work, you have to downsize. Failure is not just possible, it's probable. That doesn't mean that the CEO mismanaged...they may have, I don't know the Dropbox details. But in the scenario where they haven't mismanaged, what do you want? Do you want companies to never take these risks in the first place?

cma256 2y ago
> I don't really get why layoffs mean that the company was not managed correctly. Probably the part where they very directly attributed the layoff to mismanagement. > We’ve heard from many of you that our organizational structure has become overly complex, with excess layers of management slowing us down. > [We're] designing a flatter, more efficient team structure overall.
Draiken 2y ago
When they hire as part of the push for that 30% chance, are they telling them that they have a 70% chance of being laid-off if the bet doesn't pay out? If it's "just a bet" and not mismanagement, then we should tell people that, shouldn't we? The reality is that these bets are only bets for the people getting hired/laid off, and they don't even know they are betting in the first place. Even worse because we're not talking about simply losing money here. Losing a job is many times a life changing event in real people's lives. It's not like someone betting on a stock. That's why there should be consequences for the ones making those decisions. They get the most rewards, but none of the punishment. How's that fair in any shape or form?
- qeternity 2y ago
  I don't know the answer to this, but I don't think it really matters. Employees have responsibility to due diligence their employers. But at the end of the day, employment is at will. It's a risk we all take.

cma256 2y ago

> I don't really get why layoffs mean that the company was not managed correctly. Probably the part where they very directly attributed the layoff to mismanagement. > We’ve heard from many of you that our organizational structure has become overly complex, with excess layers of management slowing us down. > [We're] designing a flatter, more efficient team structure overall.

Draiken 2y ago

When they hire as part of the push for that 30% chance, are they telling them that they have a 70% chance of being laid-off if the bet doesn't pay out? If it's "just a bet" and not mismanagement, then we should tell people that, shouldn't we? The reality is that these bets are only bets for the people getting hired/laid off, and they don't even know they are betting in the first place. Even worse because we're not talking about simply losing money here. Losing a job is many times a life changing event in real people's lives. It's not like someone betting on a stock. That's why there should be consequences for the ones making those decisions. They get the most rewards, but none of the punishment. How's that fair in any shape or form?

qeternity 2y ago
I don't know the answer to this, but I don't think it really matters. Employees have responsibility to due diligence their employers. But at the end of the day, employment is at will. It's a risk we all take.