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

At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 335 posts

Re: At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

#101

Post by asdfasgasdgasdg »

marssaxman wrote: post #54
asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #41

I would really not like to work there, but out of the FAANG companies, Netflix is definitely the most all-in on its quirks. My sense is that the culture at Google, Apple, MS, and FB are all in a cluster compared with the culture at Netflix, which is a real outlier. It's also an outlier in my unwillingness to go there. But I think they and I are both happier that way.

"FAANG" seems like a bizarrely arbitrary grouping overall, with Netflix as a clear outlier; I understand that it might make superficial sense to an investment banker, but in terms of the businesses they are engaged in and the type of work their employees are doing, Netflix should be dropped from the list and replaced with Microsoft.

I think this was "the group of big tech companies with increasing fortunes," which at the time the acronym was coined did not include Microsoft. Anyway this is a popular thing to gripe about on HN recently, but the acronym seems fine to me.

Re: At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

#102

Post by i_made_a_booboo »

ahmedalsudani wrote: post #31
stevenjohns wrote: post #6

> Richard Siklos, a Netflix spokesman, said the company only fires employees for performance reasons, not because managers don’t like them Oh how I wish I could have had that. I've had an experience in the past where I was dismissed because my manager decided he just didn't like me anymore. Although I was the best performing, most senior developer on the team and was doing all the hiring and mentoring of others, it d…

I can't help but wonder why just about every company has terrible hiring/HR/management practices. You would think that someone out there would fix those problems at their companies and reap the rewards: an effective, highly motivated workforce. The fact that we haven't seen that means either that it's a hard problem to solve, that nobody pays attention to it, or that there is no economic value in working to have "goo…

Software is art, fashion and politics.

Re: At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

#103

Post by dunpeal »

Balgair wrote: post #100

Careful now. Taken at face value, this paints a pretty 'fun' portrait of Netflix. I'm NOT doubting the WSJ, especially after the Theranos articles, they do really good reporting and have the back-ups. The firewall between Mr. Murdoch and Ms. Ramachandran and Mr. Flint's reporting should be considered as good as it gets. At least, it was for Mr. Carryrou despite it costing Mr. Murdoch literally millions of dollars. Ho…

> Look, again, I'm NOT doubting that any of this is true. In fact, as it's coming out of the WSJ, I'm pretty certain it is true.

So you are "certain the article is true", then why does it matter that the companies used to have some tenuous corporate relation over 5 years ago?

With how consolidated media is nowadays, especially news media, this really is nothing to see here.

Re: At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

#104

Post by rpdillon »

dunpeal wrote: post #37

> Many employees say they see the keeper test as a guise for ordinary workplace politics while some managers say they feel pressure to fire people or risk looking soft. Postmortem emails and meetings explaining why people got fired are viewed by some employees as awkward and theatrical when the audiences can be dozens or even hundreds of people. So every employee gets to be badmouthed in front of as many as hundreds…

It's interesting to me that the discussions in this thread treat performance and ability to work with others as distinct. In a team-based work environment, one's ability to work effectively with others is a critical aspect of performance. If an employee engages in behavior that frustrates, annoys, or confuses others, performance suffers, particularly in any role above entry level, where leadership, communication, and mentoring ability are part of the job description.

On the other hand, I find it very strange that the article describes a sort of 'post-mortem email' that goes out to dozens of people that describes the failings of the (now-departed) employee. That seems like it would cause more problems than it would solve.

Re: At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

#105

Post by maxxxxx »

dsnuh wrote: post #99
maxxxxx wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" and they had no desire to learn about the cloud." Is that true? I have seen it quite a bit that people in similar situations were never asked if they would like to switch.

I don't think it works like that... The company doesn't ask you if you'd like to switch to the cloud, and then you give a yes/no answer. In my experience, what happens is there is a technology shift -- the company leadership decides they want to use the cloud (or use containers, or start moving their codebase to ${LANG}, etc.) and there is a group of employees that will lead this effort by learning and working with t…

" and there is a group of employees that will lead this effort by learning and working with the new technologies, and there is another group that will actively oppose taking responsibility to learn about the new technology, and may actively work to sabotage or slow down the process. "

And I have seen groups that would like learn the new tech but never get involved by management.

Re: At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

#106

Post by mulmen »

Balgair wrote: post #100

Careful now. Taken at face value, this paints a pretty 'fun' portrait of Netflix. I'm NOT doubting the WSJ, especially after the Theranos articles, they do really good reporting and have the back-ups. The firewall between Mr. Murdoch and Ms. Ramachandran and Mr. Flint's reporting should be considered as good as it gets. At least, it was for Mr. Carryrou despite it costing Mr. Murdoch literally millions of dollars. Ho…

I don't get it, what are you suggesting?

Re: At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

#107

Post by TheSpiceIsLife »

threatofrain wrote: post #48
dunpeal wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never seen an employee getting fired "because their manager didn't like them". I've seen plenty of employees getting fired because their manager, who didn't like them, gave them a bad review. In fact, across companies and even industries, being disliked by your manager is the single most reliable way to get fired. Anyone claiming you can be disliked by your superior yet reliably keep your job - is BSing you. Sin…

No matter how people perform on any side, It sounds a little draining to work with people you don't like, regardless of the reason of dislike. Some people aren't in control of that so they just suck it up, whereas others get a say over their lives. The question is whether they will find sufficient incentive to prioritize company interests where they differ. One thinks of that when one joins a team with a lead that is…

All we need now is for generally disliked to become a protected class.

Re: At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

#108

Post by dsnuh »

maxxxxx wrote: post #105
dsnuh wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it works like that... The company doesn't ask you if you'd like to switch to the cloud, and then you give a yes/no answer. In my experience, what happens is there is a technology shift -- the company leadership decides they want to use the cloud (or use containers, or start moving their codebase to ${LANG}, etc.) and there is a group of employees that will lead this effort by learning and working with t…

" and there is a group of employees that will lead this effort by learning and working with the new technologies, and there is another group that will actively oppose taking responsibility to learn about the new technology, and may actively work to sabotage or slow down the process. " And I have seen groups that would like learn the new tech but never get involved by management.

True, I think it depends on the culture where the drivers of change come from, but in my experience that matters less than the fact that there is a change at all.

Re: At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

#109

Post by colejohnson66 »

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #107
threatofrain wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No matter how people perform on any side, It sounds a little draining to work with people you don't like, regardless of the reason of dislike. Some people aren't in control of that so they just suck it up, whereas others get a say over their lives. The question is whether they will find sufficient incentive to prioritize company interests where they differ. One thinks of that when one joins a team with a lead that is…

All we need now is for generally disliked to become a protected class .

Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t that called “right to work”?

Re: At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

#110

Post by dboreham »

strangerlands wrote: post #36

Sure, they fire for performance reasons by setting up one of those kangaroos courts where your voice is nowhere to be heard. The build-up to the inevitable firing is something akin to an Ionesco play, one absurdity after the other. The higher-up gets some sidekicks onboard, people who would sell their grandmother for a half-chewed piece of chocolate, and the smearing campaign begins. The apologist has the words ready…

Nice to see a mention of Ionesco. Haven't run into him since high school French class..
Post reply on HN