Unpopular opinion: This policy lets managers take bigger hiring risks. They can take a chance on diamonds-in-the-rough without feeling embarrassed for it.
Without this, managers are incentivized to just "hire the best", instead of hiring and developing under-valued talent. Amazon know to hire undervalued engineers and helps them punch above their weight. Compared to Google, who boast about paying top dollar for incrementally better engineers, Amazon's feat seems more valuable to me.
This also avoids homogenous teams. I would prefer to work in a team with a spread of skills over a crack-team of A+ players. This way, I get to develop people who want to improve, instead of being in a band of elite jocks.
I would guess it’s probably that, some kind of secret trial period, or some scheme to get out of paying benefits. I can’t imagine Amazon of all companies has a pattern of “accidentally” firing people they just hired.
Without this, managers are incentivized to just "hire the best", instead of hiring and developing under-valued talent. Amazon know to hire undervalued engineers and helps them punch above their weight. Compared to Google, who boast about paying top dollar for incrementally better engineers, Amazon's feat seems more valuable to me.
This also avoids homogenous teams. I would prefer to work in a team with a spread of skills over a crack-team of A+ players. This way, I get to develop people who want to improve, instead of being in a band of elite jocks.