3 ms·

The memo also says they're eliminating a lot of middle management tiers which has been a theme for a lot of companies recently. It's also been a theme historica

by tootie 5mo ago

The memo also says they're eliminating a lot of middle management tiers which has been a theme for a lot of companies recently. It's also been a theme historically. Really has nothing to do with AI. It's just the classic executive view that they are paying people who sit in meetings and write emails instead of writing code. Blissfully unaware that meetings and emails are how big organizations function.

DaSHacka 5mo ago
> Blissfully unaware that meetings and emails are how big organizations function. I don't know, I've seen more big organizations that have a dysfunctional amount of middle management and "meetings about meetings" than ones that truly benefit from that culture.
- drw85 5mo ago
  I worked for some large corps and they all had one thing in common. Tons of middle management that makes no decisions what so ever. Everytime you ask a question, they delegate, until you end up at person 1 again and they just can't decide anything. It's like they all have decision paralysis.
- tootie 5mo ago
  Meetings about meetings are frequently mandatory steps to navigate internal politics. Frame your questions, gather allies, hone your message. It's how you don't waste the time of very busy people that you need things from. Besides, the alternative is fewer managers dealing with 20+ reports and not knowing what anyone is doing. Institutional inertia can be frustrating, but it's also necessary to avoid chaos.
siva7 5mo ago
Your argument doesn't make sense. They literally explained why they are doing it. They are looking to remove who can't or won't keep up with ai. That can be managers but also engineers. That's what most companies right now are doing.
- array_key_first 5mo ago
  Right but naturally that's not actually why they're doing it. In actuality, it's a layoff - they did not go through and analyze which employees are "keeping up" and which aren't, don't be so naive. This, like virtually all layoffs, is for economic reasons. Of course you can't say that because that reflects poorly on your growth and makes your investors uneasy and yadda yadda yadda. But what do investors like? Hm? AI! Oh! Oh!!! This is strategic, you see, so we can use even more AI, yes yes that's right mhm.
  - siva7 5mo ago
    > they did not go through and analyze which employees are "keeping up" and which aren't, don't be so naive. they do on the org level. that's not news for anyone who has worked at upper mgmt level in corporations. rule no.1 is you keep your mouth shut about anything there. and of course it's for economic reasons.. it's a business, not a charity to provide lifelong employment for employees who aren't aligned to mgmt goals. Mgmt tells stories depending on who asks. Levels below execute them (by identifying those who aren't aligned).

by tootie 5mo ago

DaSHacka 5mo ago

> Blissfully unaware that meetings and emails are how big organizations function. I don't know, I've seen more big organizations that have a dysfunctional amount of middle management and "meetings about meetings" than ones that truly benefit from that culture.

drw85 5mo ago
I worked for some large corps and they all had one thing in common. Tons of middle management that makes no decisions what so ever. Everytime you ask a question, they delegate, until you end up at person 1 again and they just can't decide anything. It's like they all have decision paralysis.
tootie 5mo ago
Meetings about meetings are frequently mandatory steps to navigate internal politics. Frame your questions, gather allies, hone your message. It's how you don't waste the time of very busy people that you need things from. Besides, the alternative is fewer managers dealing with 20+ reports and not knowing what anyone is doing. Institutional inertia can be frustrating, but it's also necessary to avoid chaos.

siva7 5mo ago

Your argument doesn't make sense. They literally explained why they are doing it. They are looking to remove who can't or won't keep up with ai. That can be managers but also engineers. That's what most companies right now are doing.

array_key_first 5mo ago
Right but naturally that's not actually why they're doing it. In actuality, it's a layoff - they did not go through and analyze which employees are "keeping up" and which aren't, don't be so naive. This, like virtually all layoffs, is for economic reasons. Of course you can't say that because that reflects poorly on your growth and makes your investors uneasy and yadda yadda yadda. But what do investors like? Hm? AI! Oh! Oh!!! This is strategic, you see, so we can use even more AI, yes yes that's right mhm.
- siva7 5mo ago
  > they did not go through and analyze which employees are "keeping up" and which aren't, don't be so naive. they do on the org level. that's not news for anyone who has worked at upper mgmt level in corporations. rule no.1 is you keep your mouth shut about anything there. and of course it's for economic reasons.. it's a business, not a charity to provide lifelong employment for employees who aren't aligned to mgmt goals. Mgmt tells stories depending on who asks. Levels below execute them (by identifying those who aren't aligned).