> they're not really a tech company By your definition, what is a tech company?
My definition is that they use tech as their differentiator and/or as their value proposition. You can be a tech company and sell commodities, Amazon is an example of that.
Amazon has not only used technology as their differentiator/equalizer, they've also innovated in other areas of technology and now resell that to others. Amazon is definitely a tech company on that measure. Zappos - they sell shoes. Now maybe they've done some innovating/inventing themselves, but I don't think they are known for that aspect of their company.
There certainly are but are there that many reasons that are good enough to make someone stick around instead of taking 3 months pay while not having to work? I imagine most developers could find a job with similar pay in a month or maybe one and a half, so the reasons would have to be strong enough that you'd give up an extra 10% in salary, or even being able to take a 3 month long vacation. On the other hand, if th…
> I imagine most developers could find a job with similar pay in a month or maybe one and a half Geographic area heavily influences this. Last time, I spent 8 weeks with almost no nibbles (and then suddenly had two companies fighting for me on the 9th week). I've got mouths to feed. And when you interview for your new job, you are going to be asked why you took the buyout. "LOL 3 months salary" isn't a good answer.
Your point is valid. However, saying "LOL 3 months salary" would be a foolish answer in an interview even if you did take the buyout. Leaving a company over differences in philosophy (management, engineering, or ethical) are all perfectly acceptable reasons to part ways without compensation. I wouldn't take the buyout flatly, but if I wholeheartedly felt the direction the company was going in was foolish, I would certainly consider it.
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 imagine that people in management positions have reason to take the package even if their skill set is perfectly aligned to the new job. If you're on a career path where one of the major measures of your success is how many people are under you, then you better be pretty committed to the Zappos vision if you're staying on. A long stint of not having anyone reporting through you might be a bit of a black spot on you…
Yes, even the title change from something like "Senior Manager" to "Employee" might hurt your chances. With IT/dev it's not so bad, as some very good organizations list both grads and greybeards as "Member of Technical Staff." I have to imagine that those who remain plan to retire from there.
There's plenty of reasons to stick around that aren't religious zeal.
There certainly are but are there that many reasons that are good enough to make someone stick around instead of taking 3 months pay while not having to work? I imagine most developers could find a job with similar pay in a month or maybe one and a half, so the reasons would have to be strong enough that you'd give up an extra 10% in salary, or even being able to take a 3 month long vacation. On the other hand, if th…
Not everyone likes the ping-pong ball model of modern employment. A stable job, where I show up five days a week, the company takes care of me, and I get to form stable working relationships with my coworkers, is valuable to me and many others.
I'm not sure how to gauge this. I think Holacracy may be one of the dumber pseudo-science management theories that's ever come out. If it works for Zappos I'll eat my hat I guess, but I have a feeling that all we'll hear about it is that "it's working great!" as the ship goes down in flames. Holacracy and other ultra-flat org structures always share two features: - It consolidates power in the people at the top (the…
Motorola pioneered six-sigma, i guess Zappos wants to pioneer a brand of management style (sans management).
There certainly are but are there that many reasons that are good enough to make someone stick around instead of taking 3 months pay while not having to work? I imagine most developers could find a job with similar pay in a month or maybe one and a half, so the reasons would have to be strong enough that you'd give up an extra 10% in salary, or even being able to take a 3 month long vacation. On the other hand, if th…
3 months is less than 1% of lifetime earnings. Not worth throwingaway your plans (whatever your plans may be)
Well, today Paddy Ashdown in the UK said he'd eat his hat if the exit polls in the UK were correct. They were correct. He didn't eat a hat. No matter what happens, you won't eat a hat. No matter what happens at zappo's I can 100% guarantee you will never eat a hat. I will 100% confirm that you will never, ever eat a hat because you are a liar. The only thing we can be 100% sure about is that you are a liar who will n…
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 w…
I think that's one of the important roles of a team leader - to know who is getting how much done (among many others). I wonder how Zappos will accomplish this now that they have no team leaders.
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 imagine that people in management positions have reason to take the package even if their skill set is perfectly aligned to the new job. If you're on a career path where one of the major measures of your success is how many people are under you, then you better be pretty committed to the Zappos vision if you're staying on. A long stint of not having anyone reporting through you might be a bit of a black spot on you…
> If you're on a career path where one of the major measures of your success is how many people are under you,
My assumption would be that those are the people that this move is attempting to push out.
> they're not really a tech company By your definition, what is a tech company?
My definition is that they use tech as their differentiator and/or as their value proposition. You can be a tech company and sell commodities, Amazon is an example of that.
Not sure if you're aware, but Zappos is owned by Amazon.