4 ms·
That struck me also. The mistake wasn't removing a perk per se, it was signaling that things had changed. But surely the employees would have noticed that soone
by pjungwir 13y ago
That struck me also. The mistake wasn't removing a perk per se, it was signaling that things had changed. But surely the employees would have noticed that sooner or later? So it seems there is a deeper problem, with no advice about how to address it.
- cinquemb 13y agoMight be a far out idea, but I wonder if around this stage, bringing in an anthropologist to study the culture of the company and suggest ways how to preserve some of the characteristics that originally attracted the first engineers would help address this problem.
- MartinCron 13y agoI worked for a company that brought in an organizational psychologist who tried to get a handle on what ways the company worked well and didn't work well. It seemed like an interesting exercise. And then we were purchased by a company run by insecure petty tyrants who alternated between neglect and micro-management, so none of it mattered. Sigh.
- cinquemb 13y agoDid you get at least any of that sweet equity that people say is one of the best points of tech sector to balance out your disappointment?
- njharman 13y agoThe deeper problem is companies change. You can't have the same organization, culture, environment at 10, 100, 1000. You really can't. Laws change. The CEO no longer has time to talk to everyone. Structure must be applied or company becomes unmanageable mess. The lesson is you will loose waves of talent at certain transition points. This can't be helped (other than by not growing). Leaders need to be aware and plan for this.