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

Buffer Layoffs

open.buffer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 429 posts

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#211

Post by tokensimian »

jpna66dd wrote: post #152
jsprogrammer wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying you can fly coach from SF to Berlin and actually still engage in a "retreat"?

I am trying to learn about the business habits in the Valley. I wish someone could inform me. To answer your question, obviously I am not from the valley, i run my own business, it is quite profitable, i don't do retreats, and i fly quite a bit, always coach. So if i ever organised a retreat, i would expect everyone to fly coach. Hence my question.

FWIW, the US Government's regulations for civil service workers (civilians working for the federal gov't) are pretty strict, and are often used as a basis for private companies. (EG, mileage reimbursement is usually a rate set by the feds.)

Their policy is business class for international flights over 8 hours.

Given that, I think it would be seen as common/acceptable to mimic.

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#212

Post by rhizome »

beachy wrote: post #76
btilly wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Machiavelli's _The Prince_ has excellent advice on this topic. If you must do bad things, do them all at once. Then create a steady stream of better than expected events. People will get over the shock of the bad, and will remember the good. By contrast if you try to hold back some of the bad, it will drip out bit by bit. Then people will get scared about where the real bottom is.

Such a great book. I've seen his tactics play our over and over again during my working lifetime.

From what I've experienced, I'd like to see both "The Prince" and "The Art of War" banished from the world of business.

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#213

Post by jmcgough »

Appreciate the transparency, but they mention that they let people off on a "last in, first out" basis, and their flowchart seems to suggest that if they like an employee they'll move them to another role.

I don't blame them for doing housekeeping in that way - if you need to reduce headcount, start with people who don't fit the culture and business needs - but they shouldn't pretend that it's perfectly unbiased.

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#214

Post by cyberpanther »

arcticfox wrote: post #170
cyberpanther wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree the whole family thing is ridiculous. However, the performance focus of Netflix is probably too far on the other end and ridiculous too. People are not machines and performance will not always remain high. And also measurements of performance of people are often silly and useless. Performance will fluctuate and change with time. So a level a loyalty in the face of bad performance is still very advantageous ev…

The voting on your post implies people disagree, but the method you mention is the way the vast majority of companies try to operate because it intuitively makes sense. Even in a cut-throat industry like sports, athletes aren't cut or traded the instant they enter a slump (if they still have future potential).

As mentioned below, Netflix has the philosophy "we're a professional sports team". Yet they don't pay people millions of dollars like an athlete. If you really want to be cut throat, great, pay people like an athlete then. Otherwise quit the BS.

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#215

Post by jes »

gohrt wrote: post #203
jes wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recommend thinking carefully about what is to your long-term self-interest, and then acting accordingly. That would include not creating children if you and your partner are not certain that you want them and will do what is required to raise them in a peaceful, loving and rational home.

What if the children are the ones disturbing the peace, not loving, and bering irrational? And how can you be "loving" and "rational" at the same time?

I think you've asked some good questions.

So, I think children should be disturbing the peace, and perhaps frequently. I see children as being engaged in absolutely critical work, which is trying to build up a set of abstractions, or concepts, that will allow them to succeed in the world as adults.

To do this, I think they have to do lots and lots of experiments. It may look like horsing around to us, but I don't think it is.

As regards being loving, I'd say a couple of things. First, I think children have a natural sense for justice. A child that is treated justly will, over time, learn to treat others justly. Too often, though, I'm not sure that the parents have an entirely firm grip on what justice is, though, and so they might act unjustly towards their children, and then be angry when the child doesn't act in a loving manner towards them.

As regards being irrational, I'd say that that is also sort of the expected-state for someone who is still developing. I don't think all parts of the brain (e.g., the pre-frontal cortex) is fully developed until about age 24 or so. I would also say, again, that one would want to look at what the parents are doing. Maybe they are treating the child in an irrational way, which I think is going to cause them to receive a response that, in their different frame of reference, seems "irrational."

I'm not sure I understand the dichotomy between being loving and rational at the same time. In my view, a rational person is a loving person, rather than an emotionless character like Mr. Spock from Star Trek.

Hope this helps.

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#216

Post by salmonet »

compiler-guy wrote: post #36

This may be a little cynical but: "With our culture of bringing our whole selves to work and seeing team as family, with shared values we live by,..." In the American business world, you are an employee until you aren't. Confusing being an employee with being "family" is a mistake, both for the company and the employee. When times get bad, companies do what it takes to survive, including throwing employees overboard.…

>In the American business world, you are an employee until you aren't. Confusing being an employee with being "family" is a mistake, both for the company and the employee.

I would say this is just a common philosophy for successful businesses. A happy family is a wonderful unit, but that happiness depends on giving preferential treatment to the least rational people. Which is a bad business philosophy.

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#217

Post by jes »

plainOldText wrote: post #185
jes wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I appreciate the comment. If downvotes facilitate thoughtful discussion and inquiry, I'm cool with them. I don't know if I see much of a difference between strategies that work in business, as against strategies that lead to successful, long-term relationships. If you're in a job where your manager ignores you, rebuffs your efforts for honesty in your communications, and generally treats you poorly, should you mainta…

I concur with your line of reasoning in your examples. I was not arguing against applying such strategies, I was merely suggesting we shouldn't always use them – to make room for flexibility – as I was trying to avoid claiming complete equivalence between the business and personal sides.

Ah, I now get your point. Thank you for clarifying.

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#219

Post by largote »

jpna66dd wrote: post #88
hammock wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$4,000 would barely cover business-class airfare between SF Berlin for one employee. Not to mention accommodations, event space, meals and entertainment.

Are you saying it is customary to fly people business class in the Valley, rather than coach? Especially for a team retreat?

For very long flights, it usually is.

Re: Buffer Layoffs

#220

Post by jimjimjim »

whatever_dude wrote: post #127
jc4p wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is so 100% on point. I think the Netflix NYT article from yesterday had a more realistic tone regarding the "family" aspect: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/19/magazine/can-netflix-survi... > The key concept is summed up in the 23rd slide. “We’re a team, not a family,” it reads. “Netflix leaders hire, develop and cut smartly, so we have stars in every position.” Your last sentence here is really important. If tha…

> cut smartly I actually think this is important. Working with an asshole is a big problem, and I fully admire leaders who know when it's time to let someone go because the situation cannot improve. It certainly beats working in a caustic environment because people are afraid to fire someone.

alas, usually in cutting environments like this the caustic assholes are the ones who stay and the ones who haven't presented their output in the best way are the ones who will be cut.
Post reply on HN