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

301–310 of 327 posts

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

#301

Post by mcherm »

eclipxe wrote: post #236
exelius wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that Amazon is content to let Zappos experiment. If Zappos loses customers, statistically most of them will end up at Amazon anyway. Tony Hsieh is pretty out there, and a lot of his ideas sound kind of crazy, but I think Bezos believes in him and is willing to let him try. Even though everyone says "Oh, that won't work" you don't know until you try. If Zappos can experiment with a new leadership style, maybe…

It's a great place to work. There, you can no longer say "you never heard it's a great place to work". Sample size of 1, but I love it.

That brings the total count of satisfied workers I have heard from to 2.

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

#302

Post by bane »

epsylon wrote: post #285
bane wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's Valve's reviews http://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Valve-Corporation-Reviews-E... Here's some choice quotes: "While it's true that Valve has no official job titles or promotions, compensation varies greatly among employees and many teams have an obvious pecking order. There is no formal management structure, but it's clear that some people have substantially more control over project direction and the work of ot…

It's interesting to note that these come from various ex but also current employees. Talks a lot about the culture over there. > "The random mass firings of 2013 tanked moral, and the stream of talent leaving the company during 2014 didn't help." I think this one is talking about the departure of Michael Abrash (and several others) to Occulus.

And pretty much all of the kinds of obvious things that you'd expect to see in a "self-organizing" environment are called out.

- de-facto hierarchy takes its place (at valve it seems that there are several overlapping hierarchies, all of which are toxic)

- highly centralized power at the top results in the de-facto highest people jockying for favor and acting as gatekeepers

- innovation stops

- complex projects take forever

- risk taking gets turned into position jostling

- unclear structure leads to unclear reviews

- nobody to resolve disputes

- secrets and rumors dominate information flows

- these problems remain unacknowledged

Look at reviews for other large flat organizations and you'll see the same issues echoed over and over again. Anybody who's worked for a reasonably sized "flat" org will recognize all of these problems as persistent and near universal.

Zappos will be no different. It's just a terrible way to organize labor.

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

#303

Post by rifung »

SEJeff wrote: post #205
rifung wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is 30k-40k really correct? That seems a bit high to me.. If you could make even 30k more a year from switching jobs, and you started at the standard 100k, after 10 years you would be making 400k. I haven't heard of any developers who make 400k. Then again, I suppose you never said this was for developers, so is there another job where this actually applies?

You absolutely can make 400k or more by working as a developer in finance. I work in finance and have made more than that some years at my previous job.

Hey I appreciate the input. I'm actually EXTREMELY interested in finance so I'd love to know more about it.

Do developers in finance require any unique skills? Also is there anything special one would have to do to break into the finance industry?

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

#304

Post by dingbat »

some1else wrote: post #288
dingbat wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

well another way to look at it is that there is already a fundamentalist organizational religion that most people adhere to, they're just unaware of being part of one already

Please identify this "fundamentalist organizational religion" a bit clearer. Did you mean capitalism, b-school, emergent hierarchical organizations.. tribes?

its pretty simple, there is obviously a very ingrained faith in the standard organizational structure w/ management, staff. its so obvious that is how things should be (its "fundamental"), that its difficult to consider that belief is possibly also a matter of faith, even if that standard structure was itself emergent in some respects.

its possible the commenter i was responding to was referring more to the "rah rah" aspect of zappos as a whole, rather than religious zeal re: this new organizational concept. those are different things in my mind, also both are exhibited by the directive "to all employees: read this book and indicate you have done so".

anyway it isnt a comment on whether or not the zappos idea itself is useful and/or just another fad coated with new terminology (i have no idea). just that when you can identify someone else as engaging in religious zealotry, its fun to consider what that zealotry is being compared to, which probably turns out to be something like "everybody knows its supposed to be this way", aka. some sorta implicit religion.

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

#305

Post by a3n »

danjayh wrote: post #278
ChuckMcM wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 had a team leader who had to convince me that I was getting things done. One of the best.

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

#306

Post by a3n »

danjayh wrote: post #278
ChuckMcM wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Yes, and another way to look at this is that team leaders maintain teams. They're not there merely for leadership's sake, they happen to have a particular role, maintenance.

Who will maintain teams without people whose specific role is maintenance?

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

#307

Post by a3n »

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?

There's always a better job. At some point you have to stay somewhere for awhile, to gain whatever it is you're trying to get: stability, experience, improvement, contribution, pay, benefits, community.

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

#308

Post by a3n »

slg wrote: post #52
velodrome wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What percentage would quit? The ones that could land another job by the quit date. They would essentially get a 3-month "bonus" for doing nothing. I would say this is only possible if the these people were looking to jump ship anyway.

That is assuming that everyone is a hired mercenary. I could rather easily find a job that pays me a 10%-30% raise over what I currently make. I don't do that because I already make "enough" and I like my current job, company, and coworkers. It isn't even a matter of loyalty, it is a matter of different priorities that puts money further down the list than job satisfaction. Finding a good paying job is much easier th…

There is nothing wrong with being a hired mercenary.

If you consciously attempt to hire true believers, then you will get two kinds of employees: true believers, and people who lie about true believers.

That set of employees is probably pretty small compared to the larger set of qualified employees without such a restriction. You write off a huge pool of talent.

Just because you're a mercenary doesn't mean you won't bring your all to the task at hand.

Also, consider the employee relationship from the other direction. No corporation is going to hire an employee because the corporation is a true believer in the employee's mission. That relationship is a strictly mercenary one: Can you do for us what we need you to do for us?

Full disclosure: I'm old.

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

#309

Post by a3n »

logfromblammo wrote: post #170
SEJeff wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Corporate loyalty died when companies stopped paying pensions, or severely reducing pensions. Our parents always worried about pensions and corporate loyalty. In our generation, and especially technology, we make a lot more money, and can generally make even more by switching jobs. Therefor, corporate loyalty, in the current tech industry, is virtually dead. The one case that it isn't is perhaps companies like google…

Corporate loyalty is a two-way street. In medieval times, the vassal paid homage and swore fealty in a commendation ceremony, and the lord granted him a fief. The vassal had a duty to aid his lord, and the lord had a duty to protect his vassal. The vassal gave loyalty, and got a secure income in return. It was a permanent relationship. To dissolve it, you had to use an axe, rather than a pink slip. Corporate loyalty…

Exactly. There's no "there" there.

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

#310

Post by a3n »

jotux wrote: post #91
libria wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's essentially "Explain it like I'm 5", which in this case can help discern between an interesting corporate experiment and PR bullshit. No one wants to get halfway through an article claiming the former and ending up being the latter. If Zappos has a unique take on how to replace middle management, let's all hear it.

The ability or inability to describe an idea in simple terms has no relation to the validity of the idea. >If Zappos has a unique take on how to replace middle management, let's all hear it. I think their idea is in this book, mentioned in the article, that they asked all zappos employees to read: http://www.reinventingorganizations.com/

Everything can be initially described by an elevator pitch. That's never the whole explanation, it's just a sense that there's something in the idea (or not), and allows the listener to decide whether it's worth pursuing the long discussion.

It's not a guaranteed indicator, but the chances are better that a good elevator pitch is good because it describes something good.

Post reply on HN