4 ms·

It seems like it would be really hard to keep up, but I have no specific first-hand knowledge. That's why it's imperative that there be only 1 round of layoffs

It seems like it would be really hard to keep up, but I have no specific first-hand knowledge. That's why it's imperative that there be only 1 round of layoffs every 5 years or so. One round = shit happens, this sucks, but it's impersonal, so let's get back to work. 2+ rounds = people get paranoid, and typical corporate politics set in. Can an open-allocation philosophy really work if you can be fired for choosing an allocation that turns out to be the "wrong" one? Open allocation doesn't mean "people work on whatever they want". It means they're individually responsible for making their work useful to the company, and choosing projects that have this effect. It shuts down the traditional middle-management extortion of "you work for me or you don't work here" and gives everyone the same "freedom of the castle" in their choice of projects, but it's not a free-for-all. suddenly people are back to feeling like they have bosses and assignments they need to fulfill to keep their jobs, only it's even worse because those aren't transparent... Actually, that's a false security, in that you can do all your assignments well and please your boss and still get laid off... I know what you mean, though. I agree with you: it's going to be hard for Valve to preserve its culture. These are the kinds of times that test people.

_delirium 14y ago
True, I agree with you that if they can credibly convince the remaining employees that this is a one-time event due to extraordinary circumstances, and they are sure (as much as anything can be sure) it is not going to be repeated for >=5 years, culture is recoverable. I've never seen that happen before, but I also mostly have information about more bureaucratic companies (especially my dad working for a top-100 global conglomerate as I was growing up), so Valve might do it right. One reason to think they might is the lack of lots of layers of management: multiple layoff rounds are often due to trying to cut the least possible to fulfill a target, but using the most optimistic assumptions, so finding out a few months later that, surprise, it wasn't enough. I also agree that one round is pretty much the max you can explain away. Once you've gone to two, nobody believes that this is the last one.

_delirium 14y ago

True, I agree with you that if they can credibly convince the remaining employees that this is a one-time event due to extraordinary circumstances, and they are sure (as much as anything can be sure) it is not going to be repeated for >=5 years, culture is recoverable. I've never seen that happen before, but I also mostly have information about more bureaucratic companies (especially my dad working for a top-100 global conglomerate as I was growing up), so Valve might do it right. One reason to think they might is the lack of lots of layers of management: multiple layoff rounds are often due to trying to cut the least possible to fulfill a target, but using the most optimistic assumptions, so finding out a few months later that, surprise, it wasn't enough. I also agree that one round is pretty much the max you can explain away. Once you've gone to two, nobody believes that this is the last one.