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

Employee happiness and business success are linked

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 228 posts

Re: Employee happiness and business success are linked

#71

Post by wanderer2323 »

rightbyte wrote: post #68
JJMcJ wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Remember the analysis of Losers/Clueless/Sociopaths in corporate life. The Losers are low level people who know they have lost the battle to be a big shot. Clueless are the strivers, the first level or two of management, who think they have a chance to be a big shot. The Sociopaths actually do have a chance. Not all of them are evil but they all know 100 hour weeks won't do it for them. Lumbergh in Office Space is cl…

Sociopaths? The groups should be audience, losers, contenders and winners.

GP is talking about the Gervais Principle analysis https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-...

Re: Employee happiness and business success are linked

#72

Post by rightbyte »

crimsonalucard wrote: post #60
mr_crankypants wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A preceding B does not imply that A causes B, it only implies that B doesn't cause A. Which doesn't really reduce the world of possible causal relationships by all that much, since there may be any number of other factors that weren't considered. For example, it could just as easily be the case that adjustments to dysfunctional aspects of the company's internal politics improve both morale and productivity, but the m…

Correlation does not imply causation. Little known trick to establish that A causes B is to trigger A at will and see if a B is observed. If you trigger A 100 times and it precedes a B 98 times then you have established causation to a degree. Similar to the correlation coefficient there must be some causation coefficient.

You might imply it, but not triggering A should give less B than triggering A, too.

"Turning on my TV at 5 a'clock causes channel 4 to broadcast The Simpsons."

Re: Employee happiness and business success are linked

#73

Post by jmalicki »

RhodesianHunter wrote: post #67
klyrs wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just workers. I've repeatedly asked for reduced hours, or more vacation, in lieu of a raise. Every time, my employer's response has been some form of "we can't do that for unspecified technical reasons" or "if you get that, everybody would want it." Honestly I don't get it. The big irony is that several people in the upper strata who are ostensibly making these decisions only work part-time and have at least…

Who has two C-Suite jobs? The people at that level are frequently the ones working the longest hours.

Elon Musk has 3 (SpaceX, Tesla, the Boring Company).

Jack Dorsey has 2 (Square, Twitter).

Steve Jobs was CEO of both Apple and Pixar.

Re: Employee happiness and business success are linked

#74

Post by crimsonalucard »

rightbyte wrote: post #72
crimsonalucard wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correlation does not imply causation. Little known trick to establish that A causes B is to trigger A at will and see if a B is observed. If you trigger A 100 times and it precedes a B 98 times then you have established causation to a degree. Similar to the correlation coefficient there must be some causation coefficient.

You might imply it, but not triggering A should give less B than triggering A, too. "Turning on my TV at 5 a'clock causes channel 4 to broadcast The Simpsons."

Good point. If B was just happening all the time, then a B would always happen after A. Have to make sure the inverse is true.

Though if B happens all the time, but also A causes B. Then there's really no way to establish causation.

"The Channel four studio has electrical sensors that will trip and broadcast the simpsons either at 5pm or when I turn on my TV at 5pm."

Re: Employee happiness and business success are linked

#75

Post by nine_k »

ergothus wrote: post #55
nine_k wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why, this makes sense. In every industry, there are employees whose influence on the company success is outsized, and who are hard to hire or train. In software industry, they are experienced engineers and product managers. In a fashionable restaurant, they are experienced cooks. In an airforce, they are experienced pilots and repairmen. Etc. When these people are happy with their work, they achieve great results. Wh…

> There is no incentive for their bosses to walk an extra mile to keep them happ, especially when pressing them a bit more yields an extra bit of performance, so they mostly aren't happy about their jobs That's the theory - but I don't see the distinction you listed ever proven. People do it because it's the easiest thing, that doesn't make it the best thing. I can just as easily theorycraft that happy employees impr…

Yes, having everyone happy is likely the best long-term policy.

Pressuring a bit on the suckers that got to cling to their jobs still looks like a good short-term policy, especially if the higher-up executing it is also not very happy but is clinging to the job.

That is, the best org is where everyone is level 4 or 5 on the "Tribal leadership" scale [1], but a lot of orgs are at level 2 at the lowest rungs.

[1]: https://emergentbydesign.com/2012/06/28/a-step-by-step-guide...

Re: Employee happiness and business success are linked

#76

Post by ghaff »

CobrastanJorji wrote: post #53
ergothus wrote: post #29

I've seen these arguments repeatedly, yet I only see this mattering to those companies where employees have a relative level of power and choice (e.g. non-game industry programmers, etc). Elsewhere, the attitude appears to have remained: "use them as much as possible". Consider assistant managers at your local chain store. Pick a chain! Outside of a handful of companies that are well noted for their bucking of the tr…

I agree that there are many companies that ignore this correlation, but I'm not convinced those companies are making the most rational choice. If Burger King significantly increased the salary of their workers or otherwise found ways to improve their morale, would it benefit Burger King in the long run? I tend to suspect so, but it would be hard to prove. The burger joints known for taking care of their people are al…

They tend to be somewhat upscale in terms of ingredients, employee training, overall experience, etc.

That's not to say that Burger King or McDonald's couldn't do better. I don't really have enough experience with them as a customer or anything else to have a real opinion. But I suspect that, if Burger King were to try to improve their experience in a way that forced them to raise prices by 25% they'd lose a lot of business from people basically just looking for the cheapest burger.

See also the experience of JC Penney and Ron Johnson. A lot of people are pretty much in the position where they have to shop on price.

Re: Employee happiness and business success are linked

#77

Post by chronic84920 »

H8crilA wrote: post #58
Sonnol53 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Compensation is easily measurable and comparable than something like 'happiness' and wellness. I'm definitely not on the company's side for neglecting company happiness, but it so so subjective and it's probably easier for them to set this standard and have people find happiness and balance in their lives.

You can start with true working hours per week. Simple honest rules - checking email at home counts, being paged counts double (because I can happen anytime, so you need to be alert), eating lunch does not. Transit time counts. Divide by 5 - that's your average daily load due to work. You get more than 9 - that's too much, I hope your compensation is superb (i.e. well above average).

> You get more than 9 - that's too much, I hope your compensation is superb (i.e. well above average).

At FAANG, the number is most definitely less than 9. Combine this with the freakishly high compensation, and this looks like the best deal one could predicably get on Earth.

Re: Employee happiness and business success are linked

#78

Post by lettergram »

My startup is working on identifying and maximizing happiness for this reason [1]. Largely the reason we believe this is the case, is because people tend to stay where they are happy.

“Tribal knowledge” is the single most important thing an employee can bring to the table. It’s also only obtained through time at a given (or related company). At the same time, hiring and training a new employee is the single most expensive cost to a company. So identifying and keeping experienced employees really improves productivity and reduces costs. Which makes it much easier for a business to succeed.

[1] https://metacortex.me/

Re: Employee happiness and business success are linked

#79

Post by throwawaysea »

zemo wrote: post #14
throwawaysea wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...are experiencing pay and conditions that are vastly better than other warehouses. See https://quillette.com/2019/07/19/the-problem-with-tourist-jo...

on twitter, @amazonnews tweeted a link to that and they got ratioed so hard that they deleted the tweet a few hours later. that is ... not a good piece.

Can you critique the article's points or the author's experiences specifically? Talking about Twitter tropes like ratios is not substantive.

Re: Employee happiness and business success are linked

#80

Post by rhizome »

RhodesianHunter wrote: post #66
rhizome wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a LONG standing dominant philosophy in US business that "morale" is pretty much the last thing to be concerned with. Someone not working well? Get rid of them and replace them with someone better. This has been going on for generations, and I wouldn't be surprised if it's taught all day long, every day, in every business school in the nation.

It's not.

Conventional wisdom? Or "common sense?" It's too common to be sauna talk.
Post reply on HN