There's something that makes me feel very uncomfortable about this article. It's a fact of life that companies change and sometimes they need to focus on different technologies/projects/challenges. That's fine and it causes problems you have to face and it's not going to be good for the people you no longer need. Especially if the people you no longer lead took a risk to join your company and have a vesting schedule.<p>So let's break it down
>Something we could do better at is making it really possible and a really great experience<p>First thing: It's not going to be a great experience to be redundant or have the company you've helped build to no longer need you or you're no longer contributing.<p>> for people to leave when they know that it’s time<p>What is that even meant to mean? 'they know it's time'? How do they know it's time. Is it time because you've fired them? Is it because they're redundant.<p>They say they've got great management, but it sounds less like they've got good management, it sounds like they've got management that's been lucky. The company has grown quickly and hired quickly and their options scheme means people are massively incentivized to stay. But if you don't want people to stay why don't you just modify their vesting schedule, or offer them redundancy? Or retrain them? Or move them a different project. The reason you're having a problem getting rid of the people you don't want is because your management team is failing to make the decisions that are best for the company because they prefer feeling popular. This seems like a bizarre thing to brag about.<p>I think what it comes down to is that I really object to this disingenuous double speak where the company is trying to say "Isn't this great! This is a great thing we're really happy trying to solve this challenge" - when actually it's not a good thing, and it's fairly obvious to anyone with a brain, so it's quite insulting to have someone to lie to your face like that.