21–30 of 51 posts
> Because by invoking the image of the family, the valor of doing whatever it takes naturally follows. You’re not just working long nights or skipping vacation to further the bottom line, no, no, you’re doing this for the family. Same trick used by college fraternities to do all sorts of crap.
I would argue that the first paragraph is a critique of capitalism itself. The implicit assumption of capitalism is that you have a perpetual debt that cannot be repaid, much like the Christian "debt" that cannot be repaid to the Abrahamic God. Capitalism is as much an economic system as it is a moralistic and religious system.
Start with student debt, add mortgage, financed car, credit cards, ...
Combined with "at-will" employment, it's a wonderful tool for social control / keeping the serfs in their place.
Individuals temporarily have self-interest that aligns beautifully and lends itself to pattern flying. Individual incentives and goals will inevitably change over time.
Maybe one person will veer off in a different direction if the startup doesn't get A-list funding, maybe another will get bored after the prototype is finished, maybe another will fly off in chase of a relationship, etc.
Even large companies are like this. The CEO may be putting 150% into it for two years but will rationally give up and move on if things don't turn around. Someone may have tried hard to get hired right out of school, but after two years of experience fully plans on quitting to attend a PhD program.
I like to be very upfront with would-be hires about their goals. I don't expect someone to fly with the pack out of loyalty, there has to be something about their overall life plan that makes flying in this pattern a big win for some period of time.
I do want to talk about that life plan. How can time with my company help you get where you want to get and also help us get where we want to get? My goal of course is to make the experience of working there so incredible that you change your life plan to allow more time flying in our formation.
Some people don't have kids or spouses and would rather be the best indoor soccer player they can be or the best at spoken word night at the local coffee shop. When someone is at work I want them to be focused on goals that matter to them and that are meaningful to the company, but I also want them to switch gears and live their life whatever it is, since I know that they will do that anyway if they have any sort of independent, inner drive.
> Because by invoking the image of the family, the valor of doing whatever it takes naturally follows. You’re not just working long nights or skipping vacation to further the bottom line, no, no, you’re doing this for the family. Same trick used by college fraternities to do all sorts of crap.
Isn't the point of a fraternity specifically to facilitate these kinds of "do everything for your brother" type of relationships?
Reid Hastings (Netflix founder) uses a different analogy. He compares a company as a high performing "sports team". With the idea being, you're working towards a collective goal. You each have you're own role. But if you're not performing, you get cut. Just like any athlete would get cut. The problem with the "family" analogy is it implies "unconditional love" regardless if you're messing up, failing, not performing.
I challenge the idea that people in a company are working towards a collective goal. - The goal of those with lots of equity, like the founders and investors, is that "collective goal" of company profit. - The goal of one employee may be to keep their job, provide for their family, and spend as much time with their family as possible. - The goal of another employee may be to learn as much as possible. - The goal of a…
I think it's a fine analogy even when you add the nuances. Not all companies are good teams though - sometimes you have the marching band deciding what plays to run so they can play their favorite song, to mix analogies...
e.g. The company is going through great hardship, so we will have to mistreat you. You are part of our "family" so you understand and put up with that, right?
I've been in that situation many years ago and was frustrating.
It's not that I have problem with this notion itself personally, but when it is used with a subtext of excuse for the problems, that's where I have issues. e.g. The company is going through great hardship, so we will have to mistreat you. You are part of our "family" so you understand and put up with that, right? I've been in that situation many years ago and was frustrating.
Having said that, the article is correct in that it doesn't really treat you like a family. If you did something they didn't like, they would more likely fire you than cut you a break like a family would. I mean take it for what it is, a description of a comfortable, good working environment and not a place that won't hesitate to fire you for the usual reasons.
I think calling it a family is slightly disingenuous or maybe hyperbole, but unless they are using it as power over you, I don't worry about it much. Like I said, it sure beats some alternatives.
I would argue that the first paragraph is a critique of capitalism itself. The implicit assumption of capitalism is that you have a perpetual debt that cannot be repaid, much like the Christian "debt" that cannot be repaid to the Abrahamic God. Capitalism is as much an economic system as it is a moralistic and religious system.
The implicit assumption of capitalism is that you have a perpetual debt that cannot be repaid What? Care to clarify?
There are various equilibrium states between supply and demand, but utility is infinite. If utility is infinite, then the goal of production is to satisfy an equally infinite debt to maximizing utility.
Reid Hastings (Netflix founder) uses a different analogy. He compares a company as a high performing "sports team". With the idea being, you're working towards a collective goal. You each have you're own role. But if you're not performing, you get cut. Just like any athlete would get cut. The problem with the "family" analogy is it implies "unconditional love" regardless if you're messing up, failing, not performing.
To me, the family analogy implies dysfunctionality, rampant gossiping and a general lack of boundaries. Team is a much better analogy. Hell, it's not even an analogy really, every company is literally a competitive team within the game of capitalism.
I would argue that the first paragraph is a critique of capitalism itself. The implicit assumption of capitalism is that you have a perpetual debt that cannot be repaid, much like the Christian "debt" that cannot be repaid to the Abrahamic God. Capitalism is as much an economic system as it is a moralistic and religious system.
The implicit assumption of capitalism is that you have a perpetual debt that cannot be repaid What? Care to clarify?