Slashdot Mirror
Google Memo On Cost Cuts Sparks Heated Debate Inside Company (bloomberg.com)
"A 2016 document proposing cost cuts at Alphabet's Google, including fewer promotions and bonuses, sparked heated debate when it was shared inside the technology company for the first time this week," reports Bloomberg, citing people familiar with the matter. "At a companywide townhall meeting on Thursday, Chief Executive Officer Sundar Pichai fielded questions about the proposals, some of which have been implemented." From the report: The ideas were in a 2016 slide deck drafted by the company's human resources department from a brainstorming session. The document, portions of which were read to Bloomberg News, was circulated in recent days by employees via Google's internal communications systems. It detailed proposed changes to employee compensation, benefits and perks. The document also discussed how the proposals could be best presented to employees to minimize frustration, according to one of the people. That caused the most anger among some staff after the document was circulated, said this person.
Perhaps the most significant change in the proposal called for trimming the rate of promotions. Each year, a certain number of employees are up for promotions based on performance and other metrics. The slide deck suggested reducing this by 2 percentage points. The document said this could be rolled out without upsetting staff because workers didn't know what the existing rate was, so wouldn't notice if it declined. The brainstorming deck also proposed reducing wage bumps when workers get promoted. It also suggested changing Google's approach to "spot bonuses," sums that managers can award at any time of year. Managers receive emails reminding them to dispense this money. The slide deck proposed ending the emails, arguing that few people would notice. The proposal also included converting holiday gifts to staff into charitable donations -- something Google did at the end of 2016. Google confirmed the veracity of the 2016 document, although it was never presented to the company's top management.
Perhaps the most significant change in the proposal called for trimming the rate of promotions. Each year, a certain number of employees are up for promotions based on performance and other metrics. The slide deck suggested reducing this by 2 percentage points. The document said this could be rolled out without upsetting staff because workers didn't know what the existing rate was, so wouldn't notice if it declined. The brainstorming deck also proposed reducing wage bumps when workers get promoted. It also suggested changing Google's approach to "spot bonuses," sums that managers can award at any time of year. Managers receive emails reminding them to dispense this money. The slide deck proposed ending the emails, arguing that few people would notice. The proposal also included converting holiday gifts to staff into charitable donations -- something Google did at the end of 2016. Google confirmed the veracity of the 2016 document, although it was never presented to the company's top management.
Google needs to be careful with this slippery slope. The reason they can attract so many great employees despite being a huge company is because of a culture of taking care of their employees better than most big companies. The moment they become just another HP, IBM, etc, they will start to degrade quickly.
In addition to "cutting costs" why doesn't Google at least fix their deficient software?
One product I can think of is GBoard. Imagine, just adding a new word to its dictionary if so cumbersome. One may think the app is still a beta version. While using it, it underlines any word it doesn't know; long clicking this "unknown" word brings up a menu sans "Add to dictionary!"
Google; you surely can do better.
This is an established company following a predictable path. From the maxing-out-your-personal-creditcard days of the startup, to the exuberant days of VC money rolling in and the freedom to shape the company in your own ideal image, to the celebratory IPO and early bird employees getting their payday, to the bean counters taking over. So from bonuses and generous wages and free fruit and foosball tables, to the soon to be accelerated penny shaving. The only surprise is that it took this long to begin.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
That's what they say. Yet some of it was implemented. That's a little... coincidental.
What is shocking is that the google employees dont know how it works outside of google. This happens everywhere, perks decrease as a company grows, plain and simple
The reason they can attract so many great employees
Like who now? Where is the evidence that in the past five years, they have attracted "so many great employees". I see a LOT of failed projects and an inability to stick to anything. Core search remains really good as always, but don't you get the impression of a group of ten people in a small room, who have barricaded all the doors and are trying to keep the howling mob at bay from the one area of Google that still functions perfectly?
because of a culture of taking care of their employees
Yes they certainly have a. culture of "taking care" of employees now. Just ask Damore...
The moment they become just another HP, IBM
Google has chosen a different path, far less boring and far more self-destructive.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
.
Time to stop having an important company from being run by a college student-thinking mob.
I figured they'd start doing this sort of shit. I used to simply dislike Google, because Google. In the last few years, it's become a deep, profound loathing.
I avoid Google and the other Intertube predators any way I can, including removal, or if unremovable disabling, and avoiding the restart of any Google shit. I can't say I'm certain I've ended Google's collection of my data from my Android phone, but I've certainly done my best to minimize it. Fortunately it's easy to find alternatives to the Googleplex for anything I want to do, but I'm frequently astonished by the length of the Googlefingers, and the depth to which they've pressed them into the 'net.
As much as I love having so much of human knowledge at my fingertips today, along with the wealth of "free" time retirement allows me, I'm beginning to believe that the Intertubes are terribly misused, and I'd not want to be young today. Glad I was young when I was.
I see a LOT of failed projects and an inability to stick to anything.
This is what happens when you try lots of new ideas, and explore all the options. Some will pan out, most will not.
Some will pan out, most will not.
The problem is that some panned out (a user base that liked what they were doing), and Google killed them anyway, in a lot of cases like taking a kitten that you loved and exposing it to powerful miutagens just to see what it would transform into. Or just plain shot the kitten, as per Google Reader.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
You got modded down because you are siding with google even after they fired him. When they shouldn't have. You are ok with hurting people because of their beliefs and that is NOT OK. That's why you got modded down. Learn the difference idiot.
Really? I've only seen the opposite happen where I work: A very big hospital company that many cyberpunk fans might refer to as a megacorp.
And I gotta say, it's good to work for a megacorp like the one I work at, and nothing is more fun than making conspiracy theorists that think they live in a cyberpunk novel feel opressed.
And it's also nice that the megacorp I work for paid 100% of the cost of my lung transplant (caused by CF) in addition to paying 100% of the cost of the meds I need for it for as long as I work for them. (And for those wondering: I'm part of the rank and file, not management.)
What has panned out?
Google Maps.
Google Docs.
Gmail.
Android.
YouTube.
Waymo (still in progress).
Each of these is worth billions.
That's what they say. Yet some of it was implemented. That's a little... coincidental.
This was probably the first draft; what was actually presented to management was much, much worse.
How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
If I brainstorm a bunch of ideas with co-workers, I try to present the best ideas to management, rather than every idea that came up. Sometimes a hybrid of multiple different ideas from the brainstorming session sounds better than the original ideas, or even inverting the idea.
It's entirely possible that some of the ideas were presented to top management without this particular document being presented.
Android is the one original thing theyâ(TM)ve done on that list.
Android was acquired.
Gmail and Waymo were built internally.
According to Marx under normal circumstances capitalists will only pay workers enough to ensure bare survival and reproduction of labor. Which used to mean some rags to cover yourself and a corner in a workers dorm.
US-UK-Israel: The real Axis of Evil
Really? I've worked at 3 places, a university, a mid-sized 850 person corporation (independent branch of a larger, 20k person multinational) and a small business (now about 50 people).
The small business has near zero perks. Pop in the warehouse fridge, sometimes and if you like diet cherry Coke or some Mt. Dew variant about half the time. Shitty TGIFridays level appetizer platters about 3 times a year during phony quarterly meetings held at 3 PM on Friday. Travel and other expenses can be parsimonious.
The university was about what you expected from a state institution, there was no free stuff but we seemed to have more food around the office than the small biz. The department was run by seasoned bureaucrats, I imagine they had weaseled in some staff welfare line item that let them buy grub.
The bigger business seemed way more generous. Food/pop was common in meetings, including lunches. Expense limits for travel were beyond generous, I actually asked the guy responsible for them if I could split the savings if I stayed in cheaper hotels and ate cheaper meals but he gave me some song and dance about how I should eat and sleep well to perform well away from home, the company had some concern about employee safety, etc.
My sense is there's just more slop in a large organization than a small one. I'm sure big companies are top notch at treating large groups of identical employees cheaply, but they aren't always very efficient and you can sometimes get in on the extras. Small business is the worst.
When the role of HR becomes cost cutting, instead managing and promoting an effective team environment, then your outfit is just another asshole corporation. And i think days of " Do no Evil " died about the same time.
I worked at a company where we got a LOT of free stuff. X-mass presents where so big that people who would come with public transport, would come by car. Otherwise they could not transport it.
Birthday presents, gala dinners and what not. Company sold our department to another similar sized company. None of the perks we previously had.
I have worked at small and large companies. In general smaller companies tend to be more genrous, as the distance between people is less. The CEO might know you personally. And this he might be willing to OK a perk busdget easier. With a large company, it will probably be several levels to the CEO. The perks budget has to be OKed by several directors and becomes just an amount, part of a budget, not a perk.
Small company "Hey, there is an icecream car outside, who wants icecream? I pay!" (Yep that actually happened).
Large company: "Memo: Concerning the distribution of Icecream paid for by the company: Untill the question that was raised concerning how to compensate people who are lactore intollerant, are doing homeworking and on what budget we wil be billing this, we ask people not to leave their desk. As soon as this matter is solved in quearter 3, we will get back to you."
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
That is an opinion. Damore wrote an essay that misused various studies to make an argument in apparent bad faith. If Google had said "Yeah, well, marketplace of ideas right?" a huge proportion of the workforce would have, rightly, seen the lack of disassociation with Damore as acceptance of behavior that devalued the work they did.
In that context, Google was put in a very difficult position, and given the context - where Google was already under fire for a culture hostile to women - they gave Damore the boot. Which is something that usually happens to people who say "I want to start a union", or who flick off Trump motorcades, or who just say they support Obama's election to their bosses, but in this case happened to someone who said something on the other side and is thus somehow a massive war crime or something.
serverscope_minor, like me (I'm not idiot enough to think I won't be modded down for this too), is expressing "wrongthink" on Slashdot. For the most part, if you say things like "Women are people too", or "maybe saying 'blacks do all the crime' is racist", you get modded down here. This seemed to start around Gamergate, when for some reason Slashdot got infested with people obsessed with a female game developer's sex life, which they got wrong, naturally. The same people likewise think that Brandon Eich was fired as a developer for his private political views, rather than that he resigned as CEO because he recognized his very public homophobic views were divisive and meant 5-10% of his company couldn't reasonably trust him to treat them fairly.
But the fact that you're modding these obvious facts down doesn't make it justified, and it doesn't stop them from being "wrongthink", legitimate and perfectly normal and reasonable opinions, opinions that people with good characters and a sense of decency have, that for some reason you can't express on Slashdot because alt-rightist shitheads are a bunch of snowflakes.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.