Digg Cuts 10% of Staff
techcrunch.com
Digg Cuts 10% of Staff
1–10 of 46 posts
Re: Digg Cuts 10% of Staff
#2I'm surprised they cut so little. I could never understand, for the life of me, why they had such a big staff. It seems to me Kevin Rose could have made himself a very nice living off the site with a staff of around 5 people maintaining the site, but instead they had to get all "future of news" and overstretch themselves.
Re: Digg Cuts 10% of Staff
#3They have 72 staff? Doing what??
Re: Digg Cuts 10% of Staff
#4[deleted]
Re: Digg Cuts 10% of Staff
#5They have 72 staff? Doing what??
next you'll say it takes no labour to goto reddit everyday and filter out things and then post on Digg for sake humanity.
Re: Digg Cuts 10% of Staff
#6It's been my experience that, if a company has not had recent layoffs, there is almost always a bottom 10% that is bad enough to be worth cutting. This has been most noticeable to me at companies of 100+. I've always wondered if smaller periodic layoffs would work better than waiting for a downturn to make hard decisions, which seems like the norm.
Re: Digg Cuts 10% of Staff
#7They have 72 staff? Doing what??
It really boggles my mind till today what the hell do they do with so many employees?
Is it a standard practice for startups for keep many employees to justify raising more funds?
They have no significant changes in how the site works, at-least in the last 2 years or so. The site speed, though better, still sucks. No new features. Site gaming is rampant (just look at the comments).
What are they doing?
Re: Digg Cuts 10% of Staff
#8It's been my experience that, if a company has not had recent layoffs, there is almost always a bottom 10% that is bad enough to be worth cutting. This has been most noticeable to me at companies of 100+. I've always wondered if smaller periodic layoffs would work better than waiting for a downturn to make hard decisions, which seems like the norm.
This would become a morale nightmare if employees were ever aware this was taking place, unfortunately. Pretty hard to pull off with consistency/as a standard because of this.
Re: Digg Cuts 10% of Staff
#9It's been my experience that, if a company has not had recent layoffs, there is almost always a bottom 10% that is bad enough to be worth cutting. This has been most noticeable to me at companies of 100+. I've always wondered if smaller periodic layoffs would work better than waiting for a downturn to make hard decisions, which seems like the norm.
This would become a morale nightmare if employees were ever aware this was taking place, unfortunately. Pretty hard to pull off with consistency/as a standard because of this.
Jack Welch strongly advocates for this approach, and it's how GE operated when he was CEO (I don't know if they still do or not). NetFlix also does something similar.
Why do you think it would be a morale nightmare? If you're doing well at your job, wouldn't you take comfort in knowing the person down the line who isn't pulling his weight will be cut out of the company at some point? High expectations are motivating.
Re: Digg Cuts 10% of Staff
#10Does anyone know what kind of revenue they have?