Splunk to cut workforce by 7% after cisco deal
151–160 of 163 posts
Re: Splunk to cut workforce by 7% after cisco deal
#152Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That's an amazing cop out. Companies are run by people, people make the decisions, and ethics/morality can have an impact on the bottom line. Using "it's a company, ethics aren't real" is just an excuse people who make decisions use to act unethically. FWIW, I didn't read parent post as making an excuse , just describing the reality . In the corporate world, approximately nobody is rewarded for acting ethically , a…
But how? I can’t know if I’m buying xyz software if 3rd level manager Janet acted ethically, or not. There are many other people involved. Companies always claim to be ethical, in some way that might even be true.
The only way to achieve a change in behavior in corporations is to change the regulatory framework in which they operate.
In the narrow context of the OP, this doesn't even need to be very heavy handed (unlike say environmental devastation, which is a much bigger challenge). One option would be to pass legislation that makes it harder for megacorps like Cisco to eat smaller companies. Another would be to make layoffs relatively more expensive (require better severance, etc) or to limit them during the M&A phase that Splunk is currently in.
Re: Splunk to cut workforce by 7% after cisco deal
#153Re: Splunk to cut workforce by 7% after cisco deal
#154Re: Splunk to cut workforce by 7% after cisco deal
#155Re: Splunk to cut workforce by 7% after cisco deal
#156Earlier quoted context omitted.
> an excuse people who make decisions use to act unethically. at every level, the incentive is to maximize the profit margins. If acting ethically doesn't increase the profits, then any personal sacrifice on the part of the decision maker to act ethically is only going to get punished (may be not immediately, but certainly some time in the future).
>at every level, the incentive is to maximize the profit margins Over what time frame?