Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Can Netflix Survive in the New World It Created?

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 158 posts

Re: Can Netflix Survive in the New World It Created?

#11

Post by jasonkostempski »

distances wrote: post #4
yarapavan wrote: post #2

Spoiler: It's a long read! > Does this still holds? Is there any other organization in dissimilar industry where this works? McCord also convinced Hastings that he should ask himself a few times a year whether he would hire the same person in the same job if it opened up that day. If the answer was no, Netflix would write a larger check and let the employee go. “If you are going to insist on high performance,” McCord…

> You’ll have to fire some really nice, hard-working people. But you have to do it with dignity. I wonder if this is part of the reason why there are not too many Netflix-like high achieving companies in Europe -- firing people is not possible. Even totally sucking at your job isn't acceptable reason for employment contract termination, that'd be just a reason for further training. You'll have to go through different…

So someone can get hired, stop showing up and still get paid?

Re: Can Netflix Survive in the New World It Created?

#12

Post by distances »

durzagott wrote: post #8
distances wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You’ll have to fire some really nice, hard-working people. But you have to do it with dignity. I wonder if this is part of the reason why there are not too many Netflix-like high achieving companies in Europe -- firing people is not possible. Even totally sucking at your job isn't acceptable reason for employment contract termination, that'd be just a reason for further training. You'll have to go through different…

Isn't it only difficult to let go employees who've been in the job for more than 2 years? I'm pretty sure that how it is in the UK at least. Even then, there's the option of a PIP, which allows you to quantify their ineffectiveness and give you good cause for letting them go.

I can imagine UK being a bit different from the continental Europe. In the two countries I've worked in this is handled with a probation period of 6-9 months, but after this it gets much much harder.

Re: Can Netflix Survive in the New World It Created?

#13

Post by distances »

jasonkostempski wrote: post #11
distances wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You’ll have to fire some really nice, hard-working people. But you have to do it with dignity. I wonder if this is part of the reason why there are not too many Netflix-like high achieving companies in Europe -- firing people is not possible. Even totally sucking at your job isn't acceptable reason for employment contract termination, that'd be just a reason for further training. You'll have to go through different…

So someone can get hired, stop showing up and still get paid?

No they can't, they have a requirement to be at work and to perform their assigned duties. If they suck at their duties, well, employer should provide training I suppose. But they have to work of course, no question about that -- this was just about firing not being possible "at will" as it is often the case in the US.

Also, stuff like coming to work drunk is a valid reason for immediate firing.

Re: Can Netflix Survive in the New World It Created?

#14

Post by koralatov »

mercer wrote: post #9
kefka wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And this precisely is why we Millenials have no qualms about leaving a job. They have no problem divorcing us because of some vapid "performance" metric. How do they quantify understanding how to get things done in that org? I know with my job, I'm learning how the institution hinders growth, except through certain channels. That meta-knowledge is absolutely essential... yet seemingly ignored.

Instinctively and ideologically I mostly oppose the idea of this lack of loyalty toward employees. At the same time, for some reason it bothers me less the way it is presented to work within Netflix. I'm not sure why, though. Maybe it's to do with the fact that there are plenty of jobs in tech right now and Netflix apparently pays very well, enough for a future employee to accept that disadvantage. Partly it's also b…

> Partly it's also because of the transparency of it all.

What's transparent about it? The process is totally opaque -- some executive evaluates whether they feel you're meeting their standards, which may or may not be obvious, and then decides to let you go if they feel you aren't. I don't think it could be any less transparent.

Re: Can Netflix Survive in the New World It Created?

#15

Post by mc32 »

talmand wrote: post #6
yarapavan wrote: post #2

Spoiler: It's a long read! > Does this still holds? Is there any other organization in dissimilar industry where this works? McCord also convinced Hastings that he should ask himself a few times a year whether he would hire the same person in the same job if it opened up that day. If the answer was no, Netflix would write a larger check and let the employee go. “If you are going to insist on high performance,” McCord…

I hope there's more to it than that. Firing "really nice, hard-working people" is stupid. There are far better things to do with such people than firing them. All that teaches people is to have no loyalty whatsoever to their company since the company's leader directly gives them a reason not to. All that leads to is "really nice, hard-working people" you would not fire jumping ship at the first sign of a slightly bet…

One thing that pops up is that it does not include the context of the other people in the organization and how they work as a whole.

That's to say you may have it where the most efficient organization is made up of non individually optimum components rather than it being comprised of the most optimum individual components.

Re: Can Netflix Survive in the New World It Created?

#16

Post by aianus »

talmand wrote: post #6
yarapavan wrote: post #2

Spoiler: It's a long read! > Does this still holds? Is there any other organization in dissimilar industry where this works? McCord also convinced Hastings that he should ask himself a few times a year whether he would hire the same person in the same job if it opened up that day. If the answer was no, Netflix would write a larger check and let the employee go. “If you are going to insist on high performance,” McCord…

I hope there's more to it than that. Firing "really nice, hard-working people" is stupid. There are far better things to do with such people than firing them. All that teaches people is to have no loyalty whatsoever to their company since the company's leader directly gives them a reason not to. All that leads to is "really nice, hard-working people" you would not fire jumping ship at the first sign of a slightly bet…

> All that leads to is "really nice, hard-working people" you would not fire jumping ship at the first sign of a slightly better deal, because why not?

If you combine this behavior with really high compensation for those you keep, you'll likely be the best deal. Most companies' compensation does not match their rhetoric about 'hiring the best' and will balk at the cost to poach from you.

That and the fact that high-performers want to work with other high-performers so they wouldn't risk a crappier work environment without a big raise.

Re: Can Netflix Survive in the New World It Created?

#17

Post by athenot »

mercer wrote: post #9
kefka wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And this precisely is why we Millenials have no qualms about leaving a job. They have no problem divorcing us because of some vapid "performance" metric. How do they quantify understanding how to get things done in that org? I know with my job, I'm learning how the institution hinders growth, except through certain channels. That meta-knowledge is absolutely essential... yet seemingly ignored.

Instinctively and ideologically I mostly oppose the idea of this lack of loyalty toward employees. At the same time, for some reason it bothers me less the way it is presented to work within Netflix. I'm not sure why, though. Maybe it's to do with the fact that there are plenty of jobs in tech right now and Netflix apparently pays very well, enough for a future employee to accept that disadvantage. Partly it's also b…

It works for Netflix because they appear to pay above average. So the marketplace can accomodate companies that pay less and tolerate more, as well as ones that are super demanding but pay more.

But if the labor market were compressed more like in Europe, all companies could afford that behavior, without having to spend abnomally higher in salaries, and that would be a problem.

Re: Can Netflix Survive in the New World It Created?

#18

Post by roblabla »

jasonkostempski wrote: post #11
distances wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You’ll have to fire some really nice, hard-working people. But you have to do it with dignity. I wonder if this is part of the reason why there are not too many Netflix-like high achieving companies in Europe -- firing people is not possible. Even totally sucking at your job isn't acceptable reason for employment contract termination, that'd be just a reason for further training. You'll have to go through different…

So someone can get hired, stop showing up and still get paid?

Probably not, because that'd be a breach of contract (assuming you're contractually obligated to show up). But being good at what you've been hired to do is usually not a contractual obligation.

Re: Can Netflix Survive in the New World It Created?

#19

Post by maxerickson »

koralatov wrote: post #14
mercer wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instinctively and ideologically I mostly oppose the idea of this lack of loyalty toward employees. At the same time, for some reason it bothers me less the way it is presented to work within Netflix. I'm not sure why, though. Maybe it's to do with the fact that there are plenty of jobs in tech right now and Netflix apparently pays very well, enough for a future employee to accept that disadvantage. Partly it's also b…

> Partly it's also because of the transparency of it all. What's transparent about it? The process is totally opaque -- some executive evaluates whether they feel you're meeting their standards, which may or may not be obvious, and then decides to let you go if they feel you aren't. I don't think it could be any less transparent.

That they fire people rather arbitrarily is being written about in a national publication. So someone applying for a job has a good chance of understanding it going into the process. That's a pretty high degree of transparency about how they do things.
Post reply on HN