Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Most companies will have a counter force, the 'cutter'.

The 'cutter's compensation is tied to how much they cut.

Of course, they will also need a team, to more efficiently cut other teams.

And they in turn will also be incentivized to grow their team, the manager of the cutting team isn't immune to wanting to grow their team.

But then it gets up to CEO, who has someone reporting to them who's only goal is cutting. The cutter has a team, with some managers of teams of cutters. It's turtles all the way up, but it does end at CEO.

Generally every big company I've worked for, yes, had empire building. But then also had people to cut empires.

So every few years there were layoffs to trim it up.



When I was at Intel 10+ years ago, they had this down to an art. They had a name for it, like, "the pool"; they'd reorg all the time. Everyone went into the pool, then the mgrs would pick teams. Your actual progress through your career was loosely tied to how quickly you were chosen. Especially bad IC's never got out of the pool; if you didn't have a req (or title) then you were let go after a year. This had the nice effect that mgrs rarely had to terminate employees: just wait for the reorg & don't pick out the bad ICs.


> Everyone went into the pool, then the mgrs would pick teams. Your actual progress through your career was loosely tied to how quickly you were chosen.

Reminiscent of choosing teams in PE/sports lessons at school. The sporty kids who were good at the teacher's favourite sport get to pick, and kids like I was get left to the end. Nice way to get familiar with the pecking order at an early stage.


It is a good way to make even teams. But the teacher should do it in his head or make the kids draft from the class list.

I did class list drafts when I was a substitute teacher. It worked OK. But so did random too, which I ended up with using.


It's a good way of getting the best team(s), which is what you want in a company. Maybe not so great for the emotional development of children, of course, but it's hard to say.


> It's a good way of getting the best team(s)

You get the teams with people who 'get along' not the best for the company. Mediocrity with friends in high places gets far further. That's not any form of meritocracy.


> Mediocrity with friends in high places gets far further

That doesn't happen all the time, at all. It happens more in places where results are less measurable, or where you don't have to attract customers, but that doesn't mean it happens a lot. And merit isn't just competence. If a leader knows from experience they can communicate with someone and be understood, that is a big advantage.


Well, low effect teams are much easier to spot than low effect individuals. So on this case, management actually has a way to solve the problem.


That sounds like google's 'team matching' process lol.


That is also how the bones function in the human body.

There's a type of cell called the osteoblasts which grow and reinforce tissue, and there's another type called the osteoclasts, which dissolve it.


So, just an endless cycle of non-economic activities?




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: