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

What is Google doing with its open source teams?

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 339 posts

Re: What is Google doing with its open source teams?

#221

Post by temp-goog »

bbor wrote: post #36

As a google employee (who obviously has no privileged info) I really don’t buy this whole activist-investor explanation for the layoffs. Besides the fact that the investors in question own I’m much more convinced by the argument that they saw this sector-wide wave of layoffs as an opportunity to scare their engineers and change the culture to be a more intense, hierarchical one. Google engineering culture has long be…

Here’s some reliable second-hand information I’m posting on this one-off account. Take this with whatever degree of salt you wish.

My understanding from somebody in a position to know is each VP was given a target/quota of cuts. Then they basically had big spreadsheets with salaries and performance ratings, and then pseudo-blindly cut teams or people to make quotas without input from directors/managers, and gave those lists to SPVs. On receipt of these lists some of the VPs were then canned.

To avoid lawsuits for discrimination in the USA they then added some statistical “noise” by firing a number of people randomly so the numbers balanced out with no “bias”.

The company is run by total morons in my opinion. I’m an extremely high performer with world class expertise. I didn’t get cut, but I’m interviewing elsewhere. I won’t work someplace my tenure is based on a dice roll. I’d rather take PIP culture. Ultimately Google needs me more than the other way around.

Re: What is Google doing with its open source teams?

#222

Post by nvarsj »

enos_feedler wrote: post #220
hortense wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> These are not coasters. Citation needed. Even if they were not coasters, I suspect they had a fat paycheck disproportionate to what they brought to the company.

This ratio is key. Impact/pay. And from what I gathered working there until 2020, impact was starting to weigh more on how you elevate others around you. Meaning leadership. These “stars” might have personal brand power, but if they are collecting big pay and even working “hard” it might not be enough

IME, having worked with "tech celebrities", the veneer they can work so hard on maintaining isn't exactly reflective of actually working with them. I worked with one particularly famous person, who barely did anything internally, and spent all their time on external conferences and talks to preserve their external reputation - mostly coasting on past accomplishments. Not saying that's what happened here, but public visibility isn't correlated to internal engineering/leadership impact imo, and can even be detrimental.

Re: What is Google doing with its open source teams?

#223

Post by twoodfin »

fidgewidge wrote: post #87
adra wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft didn't miss mobile, they supported many or all verticals of mobile probably 10 years before it ever really took off. They absolutely bungled it and pulled 3-4 various strategies that all seemed to fall flat by miss-judging the market or self defeating strategies to protect their other products/partners. I do see some similarities with the companies though. It's hard to say or blame this on CEOs, but rather…

Did they misjudge the market? Windows CE was quite popular in the smartphone segment before iOS and Android steamrollered every existing incumbent. The idea that having a computer in your pocket was important, that was classic 90s era Gatesism and they were right on target. Microsoft lost (not missed) mobile because the Windows team had been losing the ability to execute competently. iOS was essentially macOS for mob…

I’d say the key mistake they made was accepting carrier and OEM intermediation. Apple figured out how to get the carriers out of the way (trading off support down to a single carrier!) while also owning the hardware, and Android OEMs piggybacked on this model.

Microsoft recognized that GUIs were important enough to their future to make what were arguably the best mice available. If they had “caught” mobile, they would have done the same for phones.

Re: What is Google doing with its open source teams?

#224

Post by temp-goog »

bbor wrote: post #73
PessimalDecimal wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sundar's recent pay package tied more of his compensation to performance of GOOG relative to the rest of the S&P 100 [1, 2]. That could also be related. [1] https://www.reuters.com/technology/alphabet-links-more-ceo-p... [2] https://www.theverge.com/2019/12/20/21031629/google-ceo-sund...

Yeah I’ve seen this a lot. I really hope that isn’t the reason, cause if so it didn’t even work that well…

What, exactly, makes Sundar qualified to be CEO? In my view, nothing. He’s at best a figure head for Ruth who actually calls the shots. He’s done nothing as CEO other than keep Larry and Sergei’s piggy bank full. He’s just a moderately intelligent man way over his head, doing what other people tell him, without ever making a tough call.

Re: What is Google doing with its open source teams?

#225

Post by [deleted] »

sokoloff wrote: post #173
cmckn wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m no expert, but the “eco” routes don’t usually pass the smell test with me. I’ll be routed away from a thoroughfare that’s mostly flat/downhill to take a slightly-shorter side street that’s a steep incline. It just seems like half-baked greenwashing.

The net altitude change is the same for all routes between two points.

[deleted]

Re: What is Google doing with its open source teams?

#226

Post by bagacrap »

AStellersSeaCow wrote: post #212
drblastoff wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A layoff is motivated by business reasons, but where does it say that performance can’t be considered when deciding who gets cut and who stays? “Sometimes, job performance does play a role, too; for example, if a company has to fire one-third of its sales force, those with the lowest numbers will almost certainly be more on the chopping block than those with higher numbers.” - https://work.chron.com/decides-employee-…

I'll temper my general "layoffs must be done without regard to performance" into a more specific "in this case, layoffs were done with at most marginal regard to performance". Google and other big tech companies who participated in this round of layoffs explicitly ignored the most recent performance signal. They may have used older signal, but it clearly wasn't a significant driving factor. At most it may have been a…

> "in this case, layoffs were done with at most marginal regard to performance".

Do you actually believe this to be the case? Why on Earth would Google do this? You are not privy to either the list of employees who were let go or their historical performance reviews, so at best this is just a hunch you have. Ask yourself if it's a hunch that makes sense.

Sundar is never going to actively cast shade on the people he just let go, but he did emphatically say "the process was far from random".

Re: What is Google doing with its open source teams?

#227

Post by throwtothemoon »

AStellersSeaCow wrote: post #212
drblastoff wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A layoff is motivated by business reasons, but where does it say that performance can’t be considered when deciding who gets cut and who stays? “Sometimes, job performance does play a role, too; for example, if a company has to fire one-third of its sales force, those with the lowest numbers will almost certainly be more on the chopping block than those with higher numbers.” - https://work.chron.com/decides-employee-…

I'll temper my general "layoffs must be done without regard to performance" into a more specific "in this case, layoffs were done with at most marginal regard to performance". Google and other big tech companies who participated in this round of layoffs explicitly ignored the most recent performance signal. They may have used older signal, but it clearly wasn't a significant driving factor. At most it may have been a…

Whatever the messaging may be, I can assure you, MS is using this as an opportunity to clean house of low performers and particularly low-revenue generating teams, see: HoloLens team.

Consider this: you have a high-performer and a low-performer. You have a mandate to reduce your team size by 1. Who do you choose?

No matter what language they use e.g., layoffs, the net result is still the same. People who aren't having as high impact or on high revenue generating services are going to get culled. I'm assuming the same is going to hold true for Google, Amazon, whatever... if they don't do that, they're at a competitive disadvantage.

Re: What is Google doing with its open source teams?

#228

Post by granshaw »

Sunspark wrote: post #119
klodolph wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO it makes perfect sense for Google to be in cloud. Cloud infrastructure services are a race to the bottom—storage, compute, etc. You get people into your ecosystem and upsell them on SaaS offerings that integrate with your IaaS offerings. You have to be able to scale without growing staff linearly, which is already Google’s model (although Apple and Amazon are better at it). Google’s main problem IMO is the lack o…

Google doesn't have the ability to speak with a customer at ALL. If there is a problem, basically the only recourse you have is to flail about on HN, Reddit or Twitter and hope that you are noticed by a random Google employee who feels sympathy for your plight and decides to try and help you. The ONLY official channel they have where you can talk to someone that I am aware of, is sales and restricted to sales only. T…

Google Ads has full fledged customer service. I’m tempted to mention everyone’s favorite saying here, but won’t :)

Re: What is Google doing with its open source teams?

#229

Post by throwtothemoon »

szundi wrote: post #215
drblastoff wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A layoff is motivated by business reasons, but where does it say that performance can’t be considered when deciding who gets cut and who stays? “Sometimes, job performance does play a role, too; for example, if a company has to fire one-third of its sales force, those with the lowest numbers will almost certainly be more on the chopping block than those with higher numbers.” - https://work.chron.com/decides-employee-…

Parent commenter's point is that they have to fire some good performing to make it legally a layoff, not a mass firing.

The key definition people are missing here is "good performing". What does that mean? In times of macroeconomic certainty, companies are going to focus on core revenue generating business. It makes a ton of sense that some OSS folks got fired, because OSS doesn't generate revenue. Managed services generate revenue.

Re: What is Google doing with its open source teams?

#230

Post by bagacrap »

nfRfqX5n wrote: post #164

crazy to see people with 15-20 year tenures hit in layoffs

Is there something about a tenure of that duration which precludes someone from underperformance? Lots of middling engineers in the 15-20 year range are likely to be coasting and over-compensated relative to their output.

But those with a longer tenure did get a more generous severance package (more than a year's salary for a 20 year Googler), so they weren't treated with disrespect. They now have an entire year to figure out what to do next --- although someone who was there for Google's IPO is likely to be in a position to retire if they so choose.

Post reply on HN