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

210 Zappos employees – 14% of the staff – take buyouts after CEO ultimatum

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 327 posts

Re: 210 Zappos employees – 14% of the staff – take buyouts after CEO ultimatum

#111

Post by [deleted] »

Spooky23 wrote: post #61
exelius wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the idea with Zappos is that they're supposed to be such a great place to work that you wouldn't want to leave. And in Zappos' case, I get why they offered severance deals. They were embarking on a radical experiment in organizational structure, and not everyone is going to be on board with it. Rather than having a bunch of people at the water cooler talking shit about the changes, you offer them money to lea…

I'm surprised the number of people taking the deal isn't higher. If I need religious zeal, I'll go join a religion.

[deleted]

Re: 210 Zappos employees – 14% of the staff – take buyouts after CEO ultimatum

#112

Post by ChuckMcM »

logicalmind wrote: post #22

I work at a company that was in bad shape during the financial crisis. A temporary CEO was put in charge. Ultimately, a number of companies were merged to create one company that could survive. In the end, one of the CEO's of the merged companies became the CEO of the final company. His first act as CEO was to offer everyone in the company a tenure-based package to leave the company. I don't know the full numbers, bu…

This is the risk (the "wrong" people taking the buyout). It was the source of a lawsuit during one of HPs many acquisitions and then downsizes where HP tried to give "selected" individuals the option to leave early, and the folks who were not given the option sued. The courts affirmed that you could not give preferential treatment for early retirement/severance it was everyone had the same choice or no one did.

For what it is worth, managing staffing levels is one of the hardest things to do in a large organization because the visibility of contribution is so low. You have the quiet guy who gets things done everywhere but is invisible, and the useless guy who keeps up a very believable patter of what they are getting done. If you layoff people just based on the optics of the situation you screw yourself.

Re: 210 Zappos employees – 14% of the staff – take buyouts after CEO ultimatum

#114

Post by Touche »

sliverstorm wrote: post #109
Touche wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can find a good job easier than I can find $30k+ free money.

If you can find a better job than you have, why haven't you done that already?

No one's giving me 30k to go look for one.

Re: 210 Zappos employees – 14% of the staff – take buyouts after CEO ultimatum

#115

Post by [deleted] »

ValentineC wrote: post #87
sageabilly wrote: post #14

This sounds a lot like the flat structure they have at Valve, except at Valve they have had that since Day 1 and everyone is used to it. I can't imagine the headaches and the absolute confusion that would result from trying to take a traditional management tree and flatten it. It seems like by its very nature the kinds of people you hired when you had tiered management might not be able to easily transition to a flat…

There are articles on how Valve has "hidden management" cliques though [1]. I'm not sure if this was ever addressed by Valve itself. [1] http://www.develop-online.net/news/valve-s-perfect-hiring-hi...

[deleted]

Re: 210 Zappos employees – 14% of the staff – take buyouts after CEO ultimatum

#116

Post by calinet6 »

ValentineC wrote: post #87
sageabilly wrote: post #14

This sounds a lot like the flat structure they have at Valve, except at Valve they have had that since Day 1 and everyone is used to it. I can't imagine the headaches and the absolute confusion that would result from trying to take a traditional management tree and flatten it. It seems like by its very nature the kinds of people you hired when you had tiered management might not be able to easily transition to a flat…

There are articles on how Valve has "hidden management" cliques though [1]. I'm not sure if this was ever addressed by Valve itself. [1] http://www.develop-online.net/news/valve-s-perfect-hiring-hi...

It's very similar in holocracy: the people who are natural leaders will fill the management needs of the organization; it's just more chaotic, less predictable, and not as good. The lack of structure brings out the worst in human behavior.

In my experience, it is a horrible system in which to exist. It's highly ignorant of psychology and behavior theory almost intentionally, and it creates far more drama and politics than any organizational system I've ever seen. It's not a good thing.

Re: 210 Zappos employees – 14% of the staff – take buyouts after CEO ultimatum

#117

Post by keithpeter »

1123581321 wrote: post #96
gergles wrote: post #54

Every time this comes up, I have one simple question that I have yet to have answered to any degree of satisfaction. (Someone who endorses this structure) explain to me in one sentence with fewer than 20 words how a 'lead link' is not the same role as a 'manager'.

A lead link can appoint people to roles, but the people have autonomy in that role. A manager has the authority to both appoint roles and micromanage execution. Also, there is a parallel to lead link called rep link who is appointed by the lead link's circle to check against bad decisions/behavior by the lead link.

Another way to look at 'micromanage execution' is as 'support and mentoring in the role' based on honest feedback on perceived performance. How do people get support for challenges?

Re: 210 Zappos employees – 14% of the staff – take buyouts after CEO ultimatum

#118

Post by jmtame »

calinet6 wrote: post #116
ValentineC wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are articles on how Valve has "hidden management" cliques though [1]. I'm not sure if this was ever addressed by Valve itself. [1] http://www.develop-online.net/news/valve-s-perfect-hiring-hi...

It's very similar in holocracy: the people who are natural leaders will fill the management needs of the organization; it's just more chaotic, less predictable, and not as good. The lack of structure brings out the worst in human behavior. In my experience, it is a horrible system in which to exist. It's highly ignorant of psychology and behavior theory almost intentionally, and it creates far more drama and politics…

Are you speaking from experience? It seems that if you completely do away with job titles, the politics would go away right?

Re: 210 Zappos employees – 14% of the staff – take buyouts after CEO ultimatum

#120

Post by rasz_pl »

sageabilly wrote: post #14

This sounds a lot like the flat structure they have at Valve, except at Valve they have had that since Day 1 and everyone is used to it. I can't imagine the headaches and the absolute confusion that would result from trying to take a traditional management tree and flatten it. It seems like by its very nature the kinds of people you hired when you had tiered management might not be able to easily transition to a flat…

> flat structure they have at Valve

is a lie. It all depends on who you know and are friends with. Read on how Valve handled Jeri Ellsworth and her hardware team, they were all fired with no notice by Gabe himself.

Post reply on HN