6 ms·

> the techniques to manage the headcount people are different I would like to hear a little bit more about those techniques. The only one I am aware of is to

by mcherm 2y ago

> the techniques to manage the headcount people are different I would like to hear a little bit more about those techniques. The only one I am aware of is to make sure that you have promotions under your belt: The arm's-length people who plan layoffs know very little about the individual's other than their job title and rank. But this advice is hardly useful: it is extremely rare for an individual to have a choice of whether to be promoted or something different. What other techniques are you aware of?

roenxi 2y ago
Nothing magic or particularly reliable, but a few things stemming from the basics - layoffs happen because the accountants say there isn't enough money, and [Function X] seems to cost more than [Profit/Opportunity Y] that is assigned to it. Then a bunch of people have no job the next week. So to avoid being picked up in a layoff, it is helpful to talk to the accountants, figure out what Y is and what X you are in, and if the numbers aren't promising work to get re-categorised as a Z, increase Y or negotiate to change how things are measured. Most product teams are organised around the idea that someone tells them what to build, then they build it. That means they never talk to anyone who cares about profit. Short-circuiting that and being in people's ear about "is this going to secure income?" can be good for everyone. Is that sort of thing guaranteed to work? No, sometimes the hammer is too big and heavy to divert. But a lot of the time software people show no interest in whether the plans they are signing off on are going to be viewed as leading to more money. Eg, in the original article I see things like "Occasionally, the VP of Product would message me directly to ask if a feature was feasible to implement". Cool. The VP of product isn't politically aligned [0] to put old mate on profitable features. He is going to potentially put old mate on features that are hard to implement, moonshots or potentially get someone to stop bothering him. So old mate build up a reputation for technical excellence (aka on track to Staff Developer), but not a reputation for being essential to making the accountants happy. Eventually parts of the business that aren't under VP Product's control sack him. If an accountant thinks you are responsible for 1% of a companies revenue and your salary is less than that, your job is secure. Iron clad. Really have to screw up to get fired. So proactively talking to them and associating with things that push revenue up is a strategy. Negotiate to make it so. [0] If he's a good VP he will be, but that isn't something that can be assumed.
michaelt 2y ago
There are several types of layoffs: 1. The company-wide 5% layoff. Avoid this by making sure you're not in the bottom 5% of performers, and the people above you know it. 2. The shift-the-legacy-products-to-cheap-countries layoff. Avoid this by making sure you're working on products where you're fixing bugs and making improvements, not just keeping things ticking over. 3. The lay-off-the-entire-department layoff. Avoid this by working in departments that bring in more revenue than they cost, or at least have a good chance of commercial success; and in an area where the company's strategy calls for growth. 4. The lay-off-the-entire-office layoff. Not much you can do about this, except working at the head office, or a very large branch office where important projects are based. 5. The there's-just-no-money / entire-company-goes-out-of-business layoff. Not much you can do about this - but if things are heading in this direction, it's a good time to start sending out resumes and maybe getting the unemployment insurance on your car loan. Of course these are very risk-averse strategies. I've heard of some people having great success with the opposite strategies - some people say maintaining ancient legacy mainframes for banks is highly profitable. Others have told me the fastest way to get a senior title is a failing organisation, where senior people keep leaving. So none of these are hard-and-fast rules.
- ghaff 2y ago
  I generally agree with all that. You can absolutely be in the wrong place at the wrong time sometimes and there's not much you can do about it.
  - michaelt 2y ago
    Yes. When the first dot-com bubble burst, my father was working on semiconductor manufacturing machines. The machines worked fine. They worked just as well the day after Webvan went bankrupt as they did the day before. The business was cashflow positive, not some crazy gamble. But suddenly the chipmakers realised they had more capacity than they knew what to do with, and put growth plans on hold. At the same time, understandably, a lot of investors decided to get out of tech stocks. Even the largest boats rise and fall with the tides.
- JackFr 2y ago
mbb70 2y ago
I think it comes down to a previous discussion on HN, "don't just crush tickets". Crushing tickets gives you localized visibility and job security but doesn't help when your managers managers manager has to make cuts. But if you get name dropped for launching a big feature at the monthly all-hands, are getting added to higher level calls, or even chat up your managers manager at the off-site, that's the difference between being an Excel row and being a person.
- lovedaddy 2y ago
  This... And tell you what, the posts on linkedin and the blogs like this, where the take away is 'I got fired and next time I'll work LESS'. Really? Errr, might want to reconsider that strategy, unless you think that you are going to get binned no matter what, and just cruising until that happens is the solution. Just seems like a massively negative outcome. That, or they are going for the spiteful 'hopefully I convince everyone else to lower the standard, so others get sacked, or so I look good again'.
  - drzaiusx11 2y ago
    The point of the article isn't to just "work less", but rather that working above and beyond what you're contracted for in a large organization in the long run ultimately won't matter. The takeaway is that your "extra" efforts can be better spent elsewhere: family, personal projects, interviews for next gig, etc. The article makes it very clear that they're talking about large, 100+ staff companies; when you're just another interchangeable cog in the machine. Today it's seldom that the person doing the layoffs is also part of the day to day operations, hence the you're "just another row in an excel spreadsheet" call out. Anyone who thinks otherwise is deluding themselves by thinking at the boots-on-the-ground level (known individual/quantity, appreciated) instead of the macro COO/CFO costs tracking level (unknown individual/quantity, interchangeable.)
    - lovedaddy 2y ago
      Nah, its just them playing the victim. You can totally get noticed in a big company. Or overlooked in a small. Throwing in the towel and saying I'm not going to bother in the future... yeah I'd never be hiring you in the first place.

by mcherm 2y ago

roenxi 2y ago

Nothing magic or particularly reliable, but a few things stemming from the basics - layoffs happen because the accountants say there isn't enough money, and [Function X] seems to cost more than [Profit/Opportunity Y] that is assigned to it. Then a bunch of people have no job the next week. So to avoid being picked up in a layoff, it is helpful to talk to the accountants, figure out what Y is and what X you are in, and if the numbers aren't promising work to get re-categorised as a Z, increase Y or negotiate to change how things are measured. Most product teams are organised around the idea that someone tells them what to build, then they build it. That means they never talk to anyone who cares about profit. Short-circuiting that and being in people's ear about "is this going to secure income?" can be good for everyone. Is that sort of thing guaranteed to work? No, sometimes the hammer is too big and heavy to divert. But a lot of the time software people show no interest in whether the plans they are signing off on are going to be viewed as leading to more money. Eg, in the original article I see things like "Occasionally, the VP of Product would message me directly to ask if a feature was feasible to implement". Cool. The VP of product isn't politically aligned [0] to put old mate on profitable features. He is going to potentially put old mate on features that are hard to implement, moonshots or potentially get someone to stop bothering him. So old mate build up a reputation for technical excellence (aka on track to Staff Developer), but not a reputation for being essential to making the accountants happy. Eventually parts of the business that aren't under VP Product's control sack him. If an accountant thinks you are responsible for 1% of a companies revenue and your salary is less than that, your job is secure. Iron clad. Really have to screw up to get fired. So proactively talking to them and associating with things that push revenue up is a strategy. Negotiate to make it so. [0] If he's a good VP he will be, but that isn't something that can be assumed.

michaelt 2y ago

There are several types of layoffs: 1. The company-wide 5% layoff. Avoid this by making sure you're not in the bottom 5% of performers, and the people above you know it. 2. The shift-the-legacy-products-to-cheap-countries layoff. Avoid this by making sure you're working on products where you're fixing bugs and making improvements, not just keeping things ticking over. 3. The lay-off-the-entire-department layoff. Avoid this by working in departments that bring in more revenue than they cost, or at least have a good chance of commercial success; and in an area where the company's strategy calls for growth. 4. The lay-off-the-entire-office layoff. Not much you can do about this, except working at the head office, or a very large branch office where important projects are based. 5. The there's-just-no-money / entire-company-goes-out-of-business layoff. Not much you can do about this - but if things are heading in this direction, it's a good time to start sending out resumes and maybe getting the unemployment insurance on your car loan. Of course these are very risk-averse strategies. I've heard of some people having great success with the opposite strategies - some people say maintaining ancient legacy mainframes for banks is highly profitable. Others have told me the fastest way to get a senior title is a failing organisation, where senior people keep leaving. So none of these are hard-and-fast rules.

ghaff 2y ago
I generally agree with all that. You can absolutely be in the wrong place at the wrong time sometimes and there's not much you can do about it.
- michaelt 2y ago
  Yes. When the first dot-com bubble burst, my father was working on semiconductor manufacturing machines. The machines worked fine. They worked just as well the day after Webvan went bankrupt as they did the day before. The business was cashflow positive, not some crazy gamble. But suddenly the chipmakers realised they had more capacity than they knew what to do with, and put growth plans on hold. At the same time, understandably, a lot of investors decided to get out of tech stocks. Even the largest boats rise and fall with the tides.
JackFr 2y ago

mbb70 2y ago

I think it comes down to a previous discussion on HN, "don't just crush tickets". Crushing tickets gives you localized visibility and job security but doesn't help when your managers managers manager has to make cuts. But if you get name dropped for launching a big feature at the monthly all-hands, are getting added to higher level calls, or even chat up your managers manager at the off-site, that's the difference between being an Excel row and being a person.

lovedaddy 2y ago
This... And tell you what, the posts on linkedin and the blogs like this, where the take away is 'I got fired and next time I'll work LESS'. Really? Errr, might want to reconsider that strategy, unless you think that you are going to get binned no matter what, and just cruising until that happens is the solution. Just seems like a massively negative outcome. That, or they are going for the spiteful 'hopefully I convince everyone else to lower the standard, so others get sacked, or so I look good again'.
- drzaiusx11 2y ago
  The point of the article isn't to just "work less", but rather that working above and beyond what you're contracted for in a large organization in the long run ultimately won't matter. The takeaway is that your "extra" efforts can be better spent elsewhere: family, personal projects, interviews for next gig, etc. The article makes it very clear that they're talking about large, 100+ staff companies; when you're just another interchangeable cog in the machine. Today it's seldom that the person doing the layoffs is also part of the day to day operations, hence the you're "just another row in an excel spreadsheet" call out. Anyone who thinks otherwise is deluding themselves by thinking at the boots-on-the-ground level (known individual/quantity, appreciated) instead of the macro COO/CFO costs tracking level (unknown individual/quantity, interchangeable.)
  - lovedaddy 2y ago
    Nah, its just them playing the victim. You can totally get noticed in a big company. Or overlooked in a small. Throwing in the towel and saying I'm not going to bother in the future... yeah I'd never be hiring you in the first place.