So now it seems that all big-tech was keeping tens of thousands of poor performers for years. I believe those performers were not really poor, it is probably matter of bad management so people were not able to present their true skill, but in any case - why they kept so many people as it seems they never needed them?
Google to lay off 10k “poor performers”
91–100 of 144 posts
Re: Google to lay off 10k “poor performers”
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
why? if they didn't perform why sugar coat it?
I'm not if you are serious or not, but in case you are: it is extremely difficult to assess someone's performance at work in a fair way, especially in tech. The ways to measure performance like LoC are largely inadequate and say nothing about the quality of one's work. And in some areas like DevOps, good luck assessing someone's performance - you can discover your mistake once that person you've fired is gone.
Usually in large orgs there is multi-layer reviews, and this is a quite efficient indicator;
if the colleagues say that you are not doing your job well
+ the managers say you are not doing your job well
+ the people under you say you are not doing your job well.
+ the customers say you are not doing your job well.
Then why an employee would even stay in a company where literally everybody thinks they are not helpful ?
When you are a relatively large customer/partner of Google, you sometimes interact with genuine impostors, who are not helpful, but you still have to go through them because there is no alternative.
So a bit of clean up in the bad elements is actually good for both bottom and top line of the company.
Re: Google to lay off 10k “poor performers”
#93Finally some positive news. There are too many people at faang and they are vastly overpaid.
Re: Google to lay off 10k “poor performers”
#94What crappy reporting.
This is just regurgitating an older article from The Information about the new rating process. The part of layoffs is unsourced & pure conjecture.
Re: Google to lay off 10k “poor performers”
#95It’s incredibly shitty to telegraph to other employers that all the people you’re about to layoff are damaged goods. Completely unnecessary.
Except that didn't happen.
Re: Google to lay off 10k “poor performers”
#96It’s incredibly shitty to telegraph to other employers that all the people you’re about to layoff are damaged goods. Completely unnecessary.
One of the wisest people I ever met was in a meeting, after another Fortune 250 bought our Fortune 250 (as a "merger of equals," which ended up in a textbook raid). The question at hand was: "What do we do about all the people who are going to quit and leave?" His response? "I'm more concerned with all the people who quit and stay." This keeps echoing in my mind as I read about these tech layoffs, 25 years later.
Re: Google to lay off 10k “poor performers”
#97It’s incredibly shitty to telegraph to other employers that all the people you’re about to layoff are damaged goods. Completely unnecessary.
Seems almost like defamation
Re: Google to lay off 10k “poor performers”
#98the link doesn't reach anywhere for me.
Are you on Google's network?
Re: Google to lay off 10k “poor performers”
#99Usually hiring managers are a bit compassionate about hiring workers laid off by other companies. But in this case, when an application of someone recently at Google comes up, the first question is going to be if they were fired due to performance reasons. Whatever happened to the do no evil.
Re: Google to lay off 10k “poor performers”
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not if you are serious or not, but in case you are: it is extremely difficult to assess someone's performance at work in a fair way, especially in tech. The ways to measure performance like LoC are largely inadequate and say nothing about the quality of one's work. And in some areas like DevOps, good luck assessing someone's performance - you can discover your mistake once that person you've fired is gone.
Usually in large orgs there is multi-layer reviews, and this is a quite efficient indicator; if the colleagues say that you are not doing your job well + the managers say you are not doing your job well + the people under you say you are not doing your job well. + the customers say you are not doing your job well. Then why an employee would even stay in a company where literally everybody thinks they are not helpful…
I completely agree, but we are talking about two different things. If my colleagues, customers, people from other departments say I'm not doing my job well, I should be fired - but immediately, without waiting for any global layoffs.
However, yearly performance reviews are a joke. At least in all places I worked at, and in spite of various efforts by the management to rationalize them. And I'm saying this in spite of getting great reviews all the time.