Employee #1: Amazon
themacro.com
Employee #1: Amazon
1–10 of 124 posts
Re: Employee #1: Amazon
#2This is interesting:
Craig: Had you and Jeff stayed close?
Shel: Not really. When he replaced me in my original job and I
was moved into the CTO slot, I was nominally in charge of
architecture, but in fact that just meant rubber stamping
projects that were 95% complete by the time I saw them. That
was all after having told me that my job was mine as long as I
wanted it. And I didn’t have resources other than myself to
work on anything I was interested in either. So I would say we
were not really on particularly friendly terms at that point.Re: Employee #1: Amazon
#3On modern technology:
"You walk down the streets, you have to weave around people standing there in random orientations in the middle of the sidewalk looking at their cellphones. Then you see people speaking robotically so that their speech recognizer can understand them. Now they are running around in mobs in parks with their phones in front of them trying to catch imaginary animals. I don’t necessarily see all that as a positive development."
Re: Employee #1: Amazon
#4This is interesting: Craig: Had you and Jeff stayed close? Shel: Not really. When he replaced me in my original job and I was moved into the CTO slot, I was nominally in charge of architecture, but in fact that just meant rubber stamping projects that were 95% complete by the time I saw them. That was all after having told me that my job was mine as long as I wanted it. And I didn’t have resources other than myself t…
Beautiful example of Peter principle and how to promote someone into uselessness and inefficacy.
Re: Employee #1: Amazon
#5I was hoping Shel would talk about using Lisp in the early days of Amazon.
https://sites.google.com/site/steveyegge2/tour-de-babel#TOC-...
Re: Employee #1: Amazon
#6This is interesting: Craig: Had you and Jeff stayed close? Shel: Not really. When he replaced me in my original job and I was moved into the CTO slot, I was nominally in charge of architecture, but in fact that just meant rubber stamping projects that were 95% complete by the time I saw them. That was all after having told me that my job was mine as long as I wanted it. And I didn’t have resources other than myself t…
Beautiful example of Peter principle and how to promote someone into uselessness and inefficacy.
Re: Employee #1: Amazon
#7This is interesting: Craig: Had you and Jeff stayed close? Shel: Not really. When he replaced me in my original job and I was moved into the CTO slot, I was nominally in charge of architecture, but in fact that just meant rubber stamping projects that were 95% complete by the time I saw them. That was all after having told me that my job was mine as long as I wanted it. And I didn’t have resources other than myself t…
Beautiful example of Peter principle and how to promote someone into uselessness and inefficacy.
I think this was more honorary than anything. It sounds like he didn't necessarily have the skills necessary to be a true executive, but putting him on a team where he's managed by someone else would seem like a slap in the face. This was a decent way to keep him compensated fairly for his past contributions.
I've seen at other companies where people like this are moved into "R&D" so they can keep working on cool projects while the company can do what's needed to grow.
Edit: fixed typo
Re: Employee #1: Amazon
#8This is interesting: Craig: Had you and Jeff stayed close? Shel: Not really. When he replaced me in my original job and I was moved into the CTO slot, I was nominally in charge of architecture, but in fact that just meant rubber stamping projects that were 95% complete by the time I saw them. That was all after having told me that my job was mine as long as I wanted it. And I didn’t have resources other than myself t…
Beautiful example of Peter principle and how to promote someone into uselessness and inefficacy.
How is that the Peter Principle? It sounds like he was shunted into a ceremonial position rather than any incompetence on his part in the position.
Re: Employee #1: Amazon
#9This is interesting: Craig: Had you and Jeff stayed close? Shel: Not really. When he replaced me in my original job and I was moved into the CTO slot, I was nominally in charge of architecture, but in fact that just meant rubber stamping projects that were 95% complete by the time I saw them. That was all after having told me that my job was mine as long as I wanted it. And I didn’t have resources other than myself t…
Beautiful example of Peter principle and how to promote someone into uselessness and inefficacy.
Quoting from The Peter Principle:
in most hierarchies, super-competence is more objectionable
than incompetence.
disrupts and therefore violates the first commandment of
hierarchical life: the hierarchy must be preserved.Re: Employee #1: Amazon
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
Beautiful example of Peter principle and how to promote someone into uselessness and inefficacy.
I think this was more honorary than anything. It sounds like he didn't necessarily have the skills necessary to be a true executive, but putting him on a team where he's managed by someone else would seem like a slap in the face. This was a decent way to keep him compensated fairly for his past contributions. I've seen at other companies where people like this are moved into "R&D" so they can keep working on cool pro…
Personally I actually wish more liberal use would be made of this strategy. I've worked at a lot of companies where obstructionist employees are kept in their slots due to management's concern over the personal fallout (both for their relationship with the employee and for the employee's relationships with others).
It's none of my business whether they stay on payroll or not, and I don't mind at all if they do if that's what management desires, I just want them put in a sandbox where they can't do damage anymore. Scoot them over to R&D, give them a title with a nice ring to it, heck, even give them a pay raise, but just keep them out of the way.