3 ms·
That is certainly one point of view. And if one person leaves it's not likely to materially affect the business as everyone else keeps it going. Another point
by harryh 11y ago
That is certainly one point of view.
And if one person leaves it's not likely to materially affect the business as everyone else keeps it going.
Another point of view is that if all the early employees disappear at the 4 year mark (or whenever they feel they've vested "enough") that could cause very serious problems for the business. There is an element of a prisoner's dilemma here and it's not unreasonable to think about ways to keep people from defecting.
As I said, it's complicated.
- x0x0 11y agoI'm operating under the assumption that most people aren't counting down the seconds until they can leave, but some will want to. Four years is a long time, and 10+ years to IPO is a quarter of your career.
- harryh 11y agoIndeed. Your points here make things even more complicated. :)
- s73v3r 11y agoIt's not complicated. If the company is that bad that people want to leave as soon as they're vested, then the company deserves to fail.
- harryh 11y agoSo you think the managers should just look around, say "yup, we deserve to fail" and give up? No. That's not the way it works.
- s73v3r 11y agoI'm saying they shouldn't consider a solution being something that restricts they're employees. They should be looking at why people want to leave, instead of how they can prevent people from leaving.