Ask HN: Will you share company revenue/expenses/profit numbers with employees?

In the UK the directors of a closed company are required by law to maintain a degree of confidentiality. While this does not necessarily imply that the employees cannot be told things, the employees are not themselves bound by the same requirement for confidentiality. Therefore telling the employees things effectively releases them from the control of the directors, and that can be construed as a breach.<p>Additionally, not every employee has the same point of view, and not every employee has the same degree of understanding. A small blip that is, in truth, minor and irrelevant may be regarded with concern and possibly horror by employees who are otherwise intelligent, enthusiastic, and committed. This can cause concern for them where none is necessary.<p>So perhaps some should be told and others not? There is the consideration of "fairness" - some employees get very upset and concerned if they feel that others have information that they don't.<p>In short, there are serious problems with trying to share detailed information about prospects, negotiations, revenue, contracts, expenses, profits, cash-flow, <i>etc,</i> with the general work force.<p>This is not to say that there should be a culture of secrecy, but complete openness is potentially dangerous. Certainly in my experience, more than once, significant openness has led to significant problems.

I have been in a few companies that have shared financial information to their employees, my take on it is as follows.<p>In the first company this was seen by staff as a tactic to enforce an understanding as to why salaries were perhaps below average, and justify some of the recent company decisions/purchases or lack of, the directors assumed it would motivate their staff to try harder now they have a better understanding of the company.<p>In reality staff become concerned about the company financials instead of concentrating on doing a good job, they also might start looking for more secure alternative employment. It really didn't seem to help anything, also this information can get out into the public, which is never good for marketing.<p>The second company was more affluent in their business, however again this had it's problems. Probably the best example was the union backed anual pay negotiation. The company announced a £4million increase in profit and the union argued that staff should therefore be entitled to a 3% increase in base pay in light of the success.<p>However the company then went onto explain how this actually was only a 1% increase in profit and therefore pay should match the percentage. Needless to say there were many months of arguing before a settlement was made, for interest the final solution was a 3% increase.<p>In this example if the company made clear they only made 1% increase in profit it would have been much easier just negotiate the pay, however the details they provided made many people feel the company was "greedy".<p>Unfortunately many staff are not business minded and financial information will be viewed differently by many people, I would share a minimum with all your staff, any probably stick to percentages or similar figures which still leave out key information.

It depends on the company's culture as established by its leadership. Organizations can foster a positive workplace culture with complete transparency regarding income, expenses, salaries, etc. Governments are [perhaps] an example.<p>The litmus test would be, are employees expected to keep their compensation confidential in regards to their coworkers?