Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Toward the Open Company

Posted by kdawson on from the putting-it-on-the-line dept.

Arto Stimms writes "The author of the e text editor is using the principles of open source to transform his company into an Open Company. Not only is he releasing the source, the company itself becomes totally open: no concept of bosses or employees. Anyone can join in at any time, doing whatever task they find interesting, for whatever time they find appropriate. This is in service of the idea of 'the real freedom zero': the freedom to decide for yourself what you want to work on."

6 of 272 comments (clear)

  1. Just like a closed company... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...but without the paycheck.

    1. Re:Just like a closed company... by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "At least in Canada, you don't get unemployment insurance if you quit, it's only for people who are laid off."

      "Same in the US."

      Generalizations are always a bad idea! (it's funny; think about it.)

      In Massachusetts you can quit and still collect under certain circumstances, though you may need to go for an appeal. I have done it. In my case my job responsibilities changed drastically . I explained to the appeals officer that they were trying the equivalent of demoting a lawyer to secretary and keeping the title (the new boss was afraid of technology and wanted to do all the testing manually, and I was in charge of SQA at the time). He understood that even with the same title and pay, I would still only have the experience of a secretary to show on my resume for my efforts. Case closed. I got approved via snail mail the next day !

      The best part was wiping the smile off the face of the HR moron who told me he loves to go to appeals and I don't have a chance of winning because he does it all of the time. No I take that back. The best part was explaining to one of the three lawyers that he brought with him to intimidate me that it wasn't as court of law, and he couldn't object. It's like the Visa (Mastercard?) commercial:

      Winning the case: 26 months of income if needed.
      Watching the way the lawyer was on the verge of tears of anger: priceless ! ;-)

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  2. Cool by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 5, Funny

    They can invent "Open Bankruptcy" next. Call me when they reach "Open Assets Selloff" by the creditors.

    What? Too cynical? Is that even possible anymore?

  3. Re:Ok, I will join! by Quothz · · Score: 5, Informative

    Oh, you mean this company is not going to pay me and I should work for free?

    Read. The. Fucking. Article.

    No, really.

  4. Re:I don't think it will work... by mrlibertarian · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...a policy where no person could make more than seven times as much money as any other person in the company.

    Imagine two goods, good A and good B, that are sold on the open market. Good A sells for a price that is eight times greater than good B. Person A was able to produce good A in one day, and person B was able to produce good B in one day. So, on the open market, person A makes eight times more money than person B in the same period of time. That means consumers have judged person A to be eight times more productive than person B, even if person B worked much harder!

    So, if person A and person B happen to be working for the same company, why shouldn't their boss pay person A eight times more than person B? Why should their boss come up with some arbitrary limit?

  5. Re:I don't think it will work... by JoeMerchant · · Score: 5, Informative

    Once a cornerstone of its socially responsible identity, the company removed its salary cap on the compensation of its highest paid employee in 1994. The company historically limited the salary of its highest paid employee to no more than five times the salary of the lowest paid worker (though the ratio was revised to seven-to-one in 1993). With the removal of the cap, the gap between the highest and lowest paid employee has risen to unprecedented levels. The ratio was an astounding 16-1 in 1998 and is even higher once the current value of unexercised stock options are factored in! Of course, even under the former stringent salary cap, the ratio was misleading for it did not take into account stock options for executives. http://leda.law.harvard.edu/leda/data/236/Patel,_Tupate_-_Paper.html