5 ms·

>Zappos CEO Tony Hsieh Oh the irony. So basically what I gather is Zappos is trying to find a way to drive down the salary of all employees by removing their

• moron4hire 12y ago
  Look at yesterday's top topic here, the new Facebook office "largest open floor plan office, ever". This sort of disrespect, this sort of complete dehumanization of the worker, it's the new normal. "Our employees are our greatest asset" is just something to print in the employee manual.
  • nostrademons 12y ago
    Eh, I don't see any problem with either open-floor-plan offices or with a lack of managers. And I assure you, I'm quite human. The main reason I wouldn't want to work for Zappos is because I don't give a damn about shoes. These sorts of moves are usually filtering functions on the types of employees you employ. They'll encourage everyone who doesn't fit the company culture to quit - which, ultimately, makes the company stronger. The beauty of our market economy is that you don't have to work in a company whose culture you find offensive, you can find one whose culture is more to your liking.
    • comrh 12y ago
      > makes the company stronger maybe. or just an echo chamber of like minded drones?
      • nostrademons 12y ago
        Like most things in life, it depends on how you look at it. If you see an echo chamber of like-minded drones, it's pretty likely you aren't looking very closely, as even the most homogenous cultures have plenty of room for individual variation. (Although they may not let you, as an outsider, see it.)
        • comrh 12y ago
          Sure, but you have to admit it can also product Enron like negative feedback loops where bad behavior is okay, and rewarded, due to culture.
    • moron4hire 12y ago
      A company is not a nation of people separate from the people that comprise it, it can't have a culture unto itself. What people call "company culture" is just code-word for lazy management at best, discrimination at worst.
      • nostrademons 12y ago
        It certainly can - culture is just the sum total of the things that a group of people do without thinking too hard about them. Any group ends up with a culture, including companies. And when large numbers of people either leave or enter the group, the culture invariably changes.
    • tbrownaw 12y ago
      The beauty of our market economy is that you don't have to work in a company whose culture you find offensive, you can find one whose culture is more to your liking. <cue civil rights movement> <cue women's rights movement> Maybe for the most part now that those are done, but I'm sure there's a few things left. <cue religion-vs-LGBT flamewar> <cue women-in-silicon-valley flamewar>
  • AlexEatsKittens 12y ago
    Could you expand on that thought a little? I'm not clear how Facebook's open floor plan is dehumanizing.
    • moron4hire 12y ago
      It treats people like cattle, thrown into the same homogeneous pen together. It can't possibly be about "collaboration" because private offices don't impede on collaboration. It's about fitting as many people into as cheap of a space as possible. And because Facebook has done it, now everyone and their brother is going to start implementing it in their startups, if they haven't already.
      • onewaystreet 12y ago
        People used to complain about not having a corner office, then about having a cubical while the VPs had offices. Now no one has an office but people still complain. It's impossible for Facebook to give all of its employees offices, so what's the best solution? (People are overreacting to a single sentence by Zuckerberg anyways, the new Facebook headquarters has tons of conference rooms and private nooks.)
        • iamcurious 12y ago
          It's impossible for Facebook to give all of its employees offices, so what's the best solution? Why is it impossible?
          • onewaystreet 12y ago
            Because Facebook has thousands of employees. I suppose it might be possible to give everyone a closet sized office.
            • sheepmullet 12y ago
              Microsoft has shared decent size 2 people offices for thousands of developers.
  • freyr 12y ago
    > This sort of disrespect, this sort of complete dehumanization of the worker, it's the new normal. When you decide to work for a CEO who called his own users "dumb fucks" for using his product, I'm not sure you should expect respect and humanization from the top.
    • oh_sigh 12y ago
      I'm sure a lot of people who are 19 years old say dumb things . It's interesting that this is what you choose to remember.
      • freyr 12y ago
        > It's interesting that this is what you choose to remember. Not really. Throughout its existence, Facebook has routinely made decisions that make me doubt whether it, as an organization, values people. I don't choose to remember the quote, I'm constantly reminded of it.
        • oh_sigh 12y ago
          Then why not use a more relevant example than what a sophomore college kid flippantly said to a friend?
          • freyr 12y ago
            Specific actions are symptoms of the underlying problem, namely, the founder's low opinion of the people who use his service. That particular quote is an extremely relevant example. If you want examples that illustrate the effects of this mindset, you can find many here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Facebook http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Facebook The common theme is flagrant encroachment on the privacy rights of its users, which I don't believe Zuckerberg feels his users deserve. Presumably because they're dumb fucks in the first place for using Facebook.
• mc32 12y ago
  I had the same reaction. But I think it makes sense. It's basically a distribution center with some good customer service, so there is little use to people adding more value and climbing ladders. Meaning they only need what are essentially entry-level employees. Jobs which in yesteryear would have employed students... But now employ the undereducated instead. At least they doing it in a nice way. Sure it hides what they are really doing by making out to be something different and fancy, but they are giving the atheists a way out, instead of going for their head (count)s.
  • Sanddancer 12y ago
    I disagree. Interesting people can and do work through the ranks at companies. Additionally, a good manager is someone who can encourage and help a mediocre employee become a good or great employee. A flat team means that everyone is stuck doing the same repetitive job, and there's no one /to/ go to to discuss issues who has a bit of detatchment.
    • mc32 12y ago
      I don't disagree... But all they Zappos need is pretty much a basically functioning employee. Not any management value added. They can formulate these cells to expel any non-hackers* (those who dont meet their reqs). You want to find some followers among the jaded, found a cult/church with a twist. It's vaguely familiar but oh so different and full of vigor. Not staid and old. Those naysayers just don't get it. * the other meaning of hacker. In other words it gives grunt work a new shiny sheen.
    • nostrademons 12y ago
      I think the point of this move is that Tony Hsieh does not want anyone who "can and does work through the ranks" to be working at Zappos. He's built a business upon great customer support for selling shoes. The ideal employee for this business is someone who is really passionate about helping customers solve their shoe problems. A manager above them would just get in the way of their helping customers, and an employee who wants to be a manager is not focusing on helping customers.
  • 12y ago
• codeonfire 12y ago
  When you say high paying, keep in mind the jobs you are describing are $250-1000k jobs where everything (work, risk, and blame) is delegated down to the grunt level anyway and attendance is probably 50% at best.
• rdtsc 12y ago
  > . So basically what I gather is Zappos is trying to find a way to drive down the salary of all employees by removing their titles. Sounds like you've worked in a "flat" organization ;-)
• zobzu 12y ago
  You could also keep the same salary for executives and share the savings across the employees.. which is probably what is being done. So sure, that makes the gap executives-employee seem bigger, but in reality its the same. With the advantage of a flatter hierarchy. For I have experimented some of these, I found it way more enjoyable than having 3 to 10 bosses on top of me, where you consistently spend your time: - covering your ass - covering your boss asses - discussing in meetings until another boss comes over and changes everything - having to do whatever the manager decides if its a bad manager, even thus its against the team opinion - discussing in meetings until the boss that isnt in your range of bosses decides a political coup (approx every 6month) - etc. Ie, corporate life of a low-end employee.... yeah zappo's hierachy isn't near as bad as you make it to be, in fact - and while im sure its company depend, it seems rather enjoyable.
  • pinterestaway 12y ago
    Zappos sounds pretty good to me. I work in a similar environment and I love it. There is so much joy in going to work and being your own boss and sharing in the company success. Yes, I have a manager, but my manager doesn't (can't?) tell me what to do or what to work on. My manager acts as a coach/facilitator/personal-agent instead of manager-as-god. It sounds unworkable until you work at a place that executes it well and now I can't imagine going back to a traditional corporate structure. I'm not sure what the pre-reqs to executing it well are. Probably benevolent-ruler CEOs who own enough of the company to keep anarchy from developing (e.g., Gabe @ Valve). Or at least investors who are willing to get on board.
• nostrademons 12y ago
  It's interesting that Larry Page also tried to have a "no manager" organization, when Google was in its infancy. The experiment was a disaster, and employees asked to have managers reinstated.
  • smsm42 12y ago
    I have always considered a good manager to be a service to me as an employee, not a burden. Luckily, most of them were. When they stopped to be, it usually proved a good sign to look for the next gig, because something is rotten in that kingdom.