3 ms·

Hm. Why create this environment where the people with the most options will preferentially be induced to leave? Also the impact on the company project seems les

by jey 2y ago

Hm. Why create this environment where the people with the most options will preferentially be induced to leave? Also the impact on the company project seems less predictable. Aside from avoiding the extreme difficulty involved in doing layoffs and choosing folks to let go, what are the upsides of this approach? EDIT: I see that my take was wrong and too narrow. Thanks to everyone who replied.

dullcrisp 2y ago
Enough rounds of layoffs and I bet that would happen anyway, but across the whole company.
vkou 2y ago
> Hm. Why create this environment where the people with the most options will preferentially be induced to leave? Because the alternatives are all worse, and also result in the same thing.
throwaway13337 2y ago
I feel like this is a cynical take on an admitedly hard reality. It's becoming a meme here in response to these creative fires so I'd like to give a different perspective. I can say from my own experience that when you hate your job, you're usually not very productive, either. Maybe selecting for people who want out is more efficient than it seems. The take that only those who can get a new job will take the offer implies that people working there are only there because of a calculation that involves money and nothing else. I don't think it's realistic and I hope others don't live in that world - it sounds pretty miserable. In a non-cynical world, a great exit package would allow those that wanted to do something else to do so. Those that wanted to keep at it - because they're engaged with their work - would have colleagues that also want to be there. The company would have a happier, more productive culture. Everyone wins. It might be that there is an element of this calculation wherein low performers stay, but those people are definitely more desperate than most at FAANG.
- User23 2y ago
  If an exit package increases your agency, then take it! If an exit package doesn't increase your agency, then increase your agency in your current role!
danso 2y ago
> Aside from avoiding the extreme difficulty involved in doing layoffs and choosing folks to let go Preventing massive emotional turmoil and political conflict sounds like a pretty huge upside, I'd even go so far as to argue that it's precisely the reason why everyone would prefer this situation. What alternative approaches are you thinking about that have more upsides?
- jey 2y ago
  That's true. I happily concede!

by jey 2y ago

dullcrisp 2y ago

Enough rounds of layoffs and I bet that would happen anyway, but across the whole company.

vkou 2y ago

> Hm. Why create this environment where the people with the most options will preferentially be induced to leave? Because the alternatives are all worse, and also result in the same thing.

throwaway13337 2y ago

I feel like this is a cynical take on an admitedly hard reality. It's becoming a meme here in response to these creative fires so I'd like to give a different perspective. I can say from my own experience that when you hate your job, you're usually not very productive, either. Maybe selecting for people who want out is more efficient than it seems. The take that only those who can get a new job will take the offer implies that people working there are only there because of a calculation that involves money and nothing else. I don't think it's realistic and I hope others don't live in that world - it sounds pretty miserable. In a non-cynical world, a great exit package would allow those that wanted to do something else to do so. Those that wanted to keep at it - because they're engaged with their work - would have colleagues that also want to be there. The company would have a happier, more productive culture. Everyone wins. It might be that there is an element of this calculation wherein low performers stay, but those people are definitely more desperate than most at FAANG.

User23 2y ago
If an exit package increases your agency, then take it! If an exit package doesn't increase your agency, then increase your agency in your current role!

danso 2y ago

> Aside from avoiding the extreme difficulty involved in doing layoffs and choosing folks to let go Preventing massive emotional turmoil and political conflict sounds like a pretty huge upside, I'd even go so far as to argue that it's precisely the reason why everyone would prefer this situation. What alternative approaches are you thinking about that have more upsides?

jey 2y ago
That's true. I happily concede!