Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft Looks to Cut Up to 18,000 Jobs

recode.net

11–20 of 338 posts

Re: Microsoft Looks to Cut Up to 18,000 Jobs

#12
post #5

Subject: Starting to Evolve Our Organization and Culture Body: Last week in my email to you I synthesized our strategic direction ... Christ.

When you fire that many people, then this is the tone you use, unfortunately. It's not specific (so people won't be able to argue that they're really needed, etc.), it does not have any negative statements (no blame on people who're let go), it not personal (Nadella cannot and should not express any strong positive or negative personal feelings about the event).

It can be a disgusting read, but everybody does that in a situation like this -- with a reason.

Re: Microsoft Looks to Cut Up to 18,000 Jobs

#14
post #8
post #3

And now, every day for a year, everyone gets to wake up and wonder if this is the day that they will get laid off. Why can't they wait and make the announcement once they know who they will eliminate and do it in one swift action? Why put people in limbo for a year?

It's actually an attempt to try to be smart about letting people go. Sure, yes, they could come up with a master list and just pull the trigger today. But the odds of sweeping up a huge number of "false positives" grow considerably. The idea behind waiting is that along with these layoffs are a lot of restructuring work - teams get moved around, some people actually get promoted, newly manager-less teams are absorbed…

Seems like this looming threat/uncertainty might also cause people to leave of their own accord. I don't know if that's the strategy, but I could see it being a desirable alternative to actually laying people off.

Re: Microsoft Looks to Cut Up to 18,000 Jobs

#16
post #8
post #3

And now, every day for a year, everyone gets to wake up and wonder if this is the day that they will get laid off. Why can't they wait and make the announcement once they know who they will eliminate and do it in one swift action? Why put people in limbo for a year?

It's actually an attempt to try to be smart about letting people go. Sure, yes, they could come up with a master list and just pull the trigger today. But the odds of sweeping up a huge number of "false positives" grow considerably. The idea behind waiting is that along with these layoffs are a lot of restructuring work - teams get moved around, some people actually get promoted, newly manager-less teams are absorbed…

That's plausible, but also plausible is that the drawn-out process causes the better performers to leave while they can.

It's easy to say from the outside that the layoffs will hit underperformers and people who are just coasting, but the fact is that layoffs of this scale inevitably involve politics. We're talking about an organization that had so much trouble getting the Office people on the same page as the Mobile people that they launched a make-or-break product (Surface) with a buggy beta version of its killer feature (Office). You think that organizational dysfunction won't extend to the restructuring process itself?

At least if you do them and get them done quickly, the people you want to keep know where they stand.

Re: Microsoft Looks to Cut Up to 18,000 Jobs

#17
post #7
post #3

And now, every day for a year, everyone gets to wake up and wonder if this is the day that they will get laid off. Why can't they wait and make the announcement once they know who they will eliminate and do it in one swift action? Why put people in limbo for a year?

I'm assuming that an announcement like this could effect stock prices. I have no knowledge of stock trading at all, but I would assume they would announce something like this if they expected it to have a positive effect.

Stock is up over 45 now . . .

Getting rid of dead wood is a great idea. Tons of middle management there, just sitting for years and causing obstructive damage.

Re: Microsoft Looks to Cut Up to 18,000 Jobs

#19

Too many words. He needs to drop the self absorbed thought leader babble and communicate in a straight forward manner.

Indeed. None of the words in his company wide email meant 18000 job cuts to me. Just a neutral line of babble in that email. Terrible leadership to start with
Post reply on HN