11–20 of 86 posts
If employees were to do ruthless "business as usual", people would join a company, not work much, jump ship to another within a few months. Wasting everyone's time, energy and money. How does that sound?
You speak as if this is a hypothetical thing that literally no employee is doing? What it sounds like to me is how a certain segment of the employee population is already behaving, so you hardly need to hypothesize about how it sounds when you can just consult reality.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oof... in all regards absolutely abysmal. That not only hurts that's systemic failure and I'll take the response with a grain of salt now. If something like this happens in your organisation you just plain suck at management. You can read it between the lines that he really believes stomping his foot one time will fix it as he thought before that such a thing wasn't possible in his org. It's management blindness the…
I’m not sure why you assume he should have known or a good manager would have known. If you made a list from scratch of the most important things for the Cloudflare CEO to keep track of, would the HR script in layoff calls even make the top 100? I‘ve also seen bigger things than this change with one stomp of a CEO’s foot.
If employees were to do ruthless "business as usual", people would join a company, not work much, jump ship to another within a few months. Wasting everyone's time, energy and money. How does that sound?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Scroll to the top up the Tweet or click here: https://twitter.com/SMB_Attorney/status/1745609324544536778
Oof... in all regards absolutely abysmal. That not only hurts that's systemic failure and I'll take the response with a grain of salt now. If something like this happens in your organisation you just plain suck at management. You can read it between the lines that he really believes stomping his foot one time will fix it as he thought before that such a thing wasn't possible in his org. It's management blindness the…
> We fired ~40 sales people out of over 1,500 in our go to market org. That’s a normal quarter. When we’re doing performance management right, we can often tell within 3 months or less of a sales hire, even during the holidays, whether they’re going to be successful or not.
Which sounds like they have an implicit probationary "we'll fire you in <= 3 mos. if you don't make a sale" that--according to the video--isn't communicated by managers or written in hiring contracts.
If employees were to do ruthless "business as usual", people would join a company, not work much, jump ship to another within a few months. Wasting everyone's time, energy and money. How does that sound?
This is a great response — accepting that it was handled poorly, reinforcing that this was purely about the person/role fit rather than the person, noting that layoffs in general are business as usual, and committing to do better. Nicely done, @eastdakota .
This is a great response — accepting that it was handled poorly, reinforcing that this was purely about the person/role fit rather than the person, noting that layoffs in general are business as usual, and committing to do better. Nicely done, @eastdakota .
Hard disagree.
> accepting that it was handled poorly
Technically he accepted it 'wasn't perfect'. Which is different to 'poorly' (other side of average).
> reinforcing that this was purely about the person/role fit rather than the person
He hinted at three reasons (without actually stating which one applies in the individual case): poor performance, lack of improvement after communicating poor performance and "poor fit".
In the original video the the individual countered the first two by pointing out the fact their manager's communications to them were all positive. Additionally, they've only been "off ramp" for a month. In my experience one month is pretty short for expecting someone to improve when they're performing badly.... especially when they haven't been told they were performing badly.
---
my take away:
either [edit: or both]
- cloudflare needed to do some layoffs, did some quick stats and didn't set limits on when people were hired when doing the stats. this person got mixed up in it as a result.
- manager fckd up and didn't tell the individual they were performing badly. in which case, really bad individual management.
What was the viral termination video?
Scroll to the top up the Tweet or click here: https://twitter.com/SMB_Attorney/status/1745609324544536778
Not sure what was the point of her arguing though. Just for the Tik Tok video?
It's not like you will argument yourself out of being terminated.
I also find her argument forced. "Just because I haven't closed anything, it doesn't mean my performance hasn't been good", that's nonsense, it's sales, performance is valued on sales.
Not closing a single sale in 5 months does not qualify as good performance, and you don't need 1v1s with your manager to find this.
If employees were to do ruthless "business as usual", people would join a company, not work much, jump ship to another within a few months. Wasting everyone's time, energy and money. How does that sound?
As an employee I think every time you do that you are burning some credibility (assuming you are honest about your work history)
You are, but like you said, only if you are honest. But why are you being honest in a game where the rules are "business as usual"?
If employees were to do ruthless "business as usual", people would join a company, not work much, jump ship to another within a few months. Wasting everyone's time, energy and money. How does that sound?
You speak as if this is a hypothetical thing that literally no employee is doing? What it sounds like to me is how a certain segment of the employee population is already behaving, so you hardly need to hypothesize about how it sounds when you can just consult reality.
It is time for a larger share of the employee population doing this. Just keep hopping without producing much of value.