5 ms·

> That's plausible, but if I were at Microsoft I'd be sending out my resume right now. No -- most people who work at a big company know _exactly_ whether they'

> That's plausible, but if I were at Microsoft I'd be sending out my resume right now. No -- most people who work at a big company know _exactly_ whether they're in danger or not. We're speaking about 5% of the original (pre-Nokia acquisition) workforce. You must know whether you're in the bottom 5%, or if your product is in the least critical 5%. Of course there are surprises and some good/productive guys will be laid off because of politics (as the process is not completely effective), but in general that's not the case. I've seen similar things happening inside the financial industry around 2008. Many people left (sometimes much more than 5%), but we could usually guess who's going to be affected (with really high accuracy).

rayiner 12y ago
> or if your product is in the least critical 5% In the brave new world of "mobile first, cloud first" what's the least critical 5%? In a "mobile first, cloud first" world, somehow the newly-acquired mobile division is getting the brunt of the cuts.
rondon2 12y ago
People can become illogical when faced with emotional scenarios. "If I loose my job my family/friends will think that I'm a failure". I was at IBM during a similar situations and it was people that were in the top 40%-20% that were the most worried.
- 72deluxe 12y ago
  Weren't they more worried about not being able to support their family instead of their "image" in the eyes of their family?
  - rondon2 12y ago
    Assuming their spouses' incomes wouldn't support their family, I would think so
smackfu 12y ago
Yes, employees can tell when their project is not a high priority. I don't think they have any visibility to whether they are in the bottom 25% or the bottom 5% though. So that's a quarter of the work force feeling the threat of layoffs.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
scrabble 12y ago
> most people who work at a big company know _exactly_ whether they're in danger or not Sometimes. I used to work at RIM (BlackBerry) and they announced huge layoffs for August 2012. I knew at that time that my whole team was gone. The rest of the team just talked about how valuable they were and how no one could do the job we were doing. I think they honestly thought that. A lot of people have a tendency to over-value their work and roles.
- sitkack 12y ago
  > A lot of people have a tendency to over-value their work and roles. I think most people are shitty at it on either side. You can be great at your work and role and still get the axe. Management doesn't often take that into consideration.
  - fenomas 12y ago
    In companies and layoffs of this size, it's often not "people" being cut, just teams and divisions and products. In many cases it makes no difference at all who on a given team is and isn't good at their role. When it's not whole teams, it's generally managers being told they're losing N reports but they can choose which N. Then, effectiveness at one's role is at least part of the equation.
bryanlarsen 12y ago
Sure, from the outside it's often not difficult to pick out who's vulnerable and who isn't. However, lots of people really suck at self-assessment, and many don't handle these sort of stresses very well. I've seen this sort of thing 3 times now, and invariably a good portion of your top people immediately leave. It's really easy for them to find new jobs, so they do.
weavie 12y ago
Whether you think you are going to be fired or not, working in a company with that atmosphere is not pleasant. It may not be you, but it could well be those people you like to hang out with in the coffee room. Generally a company making big layoffs is a sign of a sinking ship. If you are a hot programmer you aren't going to want to hang around waiting for doom. Much better to move to an expanding and thriving company.
nilkn 12y ago
I think you overlooked his point, which is that corporate politicking inevitably means that it's not just the bottom 5% that will get laid off. Also, I disagree with your assumption that it's easy to know if you're in the bottom 5% of performers. Of course you will have a general idea of where you stand, but in a company the size of Microsoft with considerable organization dysfunction I really doubt anybody can judge themselves with that sort of granularity.
BonsaiDen 12y ago
I wouldn't necessarily say that you immediately know whether you're in danger or not. There's no clear statement on how exactly they will "restructure" the company within the next year, this makes it incredible hard to judge whether your department will still be important the next quarter. I was a Zynga until last June, when the shut down their whole Shared Tech Group (basically the core Tech Support for all Teams / Server Management, Engine Development etc.) overnight, the whole group always had the feeling they would not be in danger because after all, pretty much everyone was dependent upon them. Until management thought otherwise, they announced "some cuts" at the Company Meeting, which was on Friday the next Monday we held the severance agreements in our hands and were instructed to leave the office. You never really know what management is planning unless you know someone up their or are part of it.
rhino369 12y ago
Layoff decisions are not always so well made, especially in industries were metrics make it harder to tell who the under performers are. It's even less true when you are talking about merger layoffs. Even if you are good, the Nokia guy might be better.

rayiner 12y ago

> or if your product is in the least critical 5% In the brave new world of "mobile first, cloud first" what's the least critical 5%? In a "mobile first, cloud first" world, somehow the newly-acquired mobile division is getting the brunt of the cuts.

rondon2 12y ago

People can become illogical when faced with emotional scenarios. "If I loose my job my family/friends will think that I'm a failure". I was at IBM during a similar situations and it was people that were in the top 40%-20% that were the most worried.

72deluxe 12y ago
Weren't they more worried about not being able to support their family instead of their "image" in the eyes of their family?
- rondon2 12y ago
  Assuming their spouses' incomes wouldn't support their family, I would think so

smackfu 12y ago

Yes, employees can tell when their project is not a high priority. I don't think they have any visibility to whether they are in the bottom 25% or the bottom 5% though. So that's a quarter of the work force feeling the threat of layoffs.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

scrabble 12y ago

> most people who work at a big company know _exactly_ whether they're in danger or not Sometimes. I used to work at RIM (BlackBerry) and they announced huge layoffs for August 2012. I knew at that time that my whole team was gone. The rest of the team just talked about how valuable they were and how no one could do the job we were doing. I think they honestly thought that. A lot of people have a tendency to over-value their work and roles.

sitkack 12y ago
> A lot of people have a tendency to over-value their work and roles. I think most people are shitty at it on either side. You can be great at your work and role and still get the axe. Management doesn't often take that into consideration.
- fenomas 12y ago
  In companies and layoffs of this size, it's often not "people" being cut, just teams and divisions and products. In many cases it makes no difference at all who on a given team is and isn't good at their role. When it's not whole teams, it's generally managers being told they're losing N reports but they can choose which N. Then, effectiveness at one's role is at least part of the equation.

bryanlarsen 12y ago

Sure, from the outside it's often not difficult to pick out who's vulnerable and who isn't. However, lots of people really suck at self-assessment, and many don't handle these sort of stresses very well. I've seen this sort of thing 3 times now, and invariably a good portion of your top people immediately leave. It's really easy for them to find new jobs, so they do.

weavie 12y ago

Whether you think you are going to be fired or not, working in a company with that atmosphere is not pleasant. It may not be you, but it could well be those people you like to hang out with in the coffee room. Generally a company making big layoffs is a sign of a sinking ship. If you are a hot programmer you aren't going to want to hang around waiting for doom. Much better to move to an expanding and thriving company.

nilkn 12y ago

I think you overlooked his point, which is that corporate politicking inevitably means that it's not just the bottom 5% that will get laid off. Also, I disagree with your assumption that it's easy to know if you're in the bottom 5% of performers. Of course you will have a general idea of where you stand, but in a company the size of Microsoft with considerable organization dysfunction I really doubt anybody can judge themselves with that sort of granularity.

BonsaiDen 12y ago

I wouldn't necessarily say that you immediately know whether you're in danger or not. There's no clear statement on how exactly they will "restructure" the company within the next year, this makes it incredible hard to judge whether your department will still be important the next quarter. I was a Zynga until last June, when the shut down their whole Shared Tech Group (basically the core Tech Support for all Teams / Server Management, Engine Development etc.) overnight, the whole group always had the feeling they would not be in danger because after all, pretty much everyone was dependent upon them. Until management thought otherwise, they announced "some cuts" at the Company Meeting, which was on Friday the next Monday we held the severance agreements in our hands and were instructed to leave the office. You never really know what management is planning unless you know someone up their or are part of it.

rhino369 12y ago

Layoff decisions are not always so well made, especially in industries were metrics make it harder to tell who the under performers are. It's even less true when you are talking about merger layoffs. Even if you are good, the Nokia guy might be better.