TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Amazon’s HR Failures

160 点作者 ramimac将近 4 年前

11 条评论

cletus将近 4 年前
One thing stuck out to me:<p>&gt; Or, as Vox’s Jason Del Rey writes in another story this week [see below], “Amazon corporate managers have goals for “unregretted attrition” — basically a percentage of their staff that should leave the company each year, either voluntarily or by being forced out.” It’s just like Adam Serwer put it in a different context: the cruelty is the point.<p>So, for anyone who is in even salaried positions in tech including engineering, sales, product management and whatever... don&#x27;t think for a second you&#x27;re immune to this &quot;up or out&quot; force. I hate to break it to you but Big Tech companies do this too. It&#x27;s just not as blatant.<p>Here&#x27;s how: all these companies have a performance review system. It might be 1, 2 or 4 times a year. The exact process varies. Typically you&#x27;ll review yourself and others will review you. Some will stack rank directly, others will stack rank indirectly.<p>How this works is that groups of managers will come together and decide what everyone&#x27;s performance was given their review and their level. To avoid &quot;ratings inflation&quot; each ratings bucket will have a range it needs to stay in. So the entire org can&#x27;t be &quot;strongly exceeds expectations&quot; by design.<p>But the dark side of this is that subpar ratings have targets too. For argument&#x27;s sake, say that number is 8%. That means the employees get ranked and those buckets will be applied so the bottom 8% will end with a subpar rating.<p>Depending on your company this can be the kiss of death essentially forcing you out the door.<p>In corporate America the &quot;up or out&quot; culture is more explicit (eg get promoted within 3 years or you&#x27;re out) but the effect is basically the same.<p>This is not limited to hourly employees and it is absolutely present in tech.
评论 #27550778 未加载
评论 #27550519 未加载
评论 #27550509 未加载
评论 #27550558 未加载
评论 #27550660 未加载
评论 #27552285 未加载
评论 #27550975 未加载
评论 #27552081 未加载
评论 #27551091 未加载
评论 #27552835 未加载
HillRat将近 4 年前
Although Dave Clark comes across as an unrequited villain in most Amazon reporting, he’s just a loyal shadow of Bezos’ dictum that Amazon employees at all levels are to unquestioningly serve his machine without thought of compensation. The image of a man who owns mansions in Seattle, DC, New York, and LA (amongst others) pontificating to his S-Team that paying employees more makes them &#x2F;less&#x2F; motivated is one that sticks with me.
评论 #27550853 未加载
评论 #27550507 未加载
评论 #27550380 未加载
评论 #27550455 未加载
throawayhn243将近 4 年前
There is one reason why Amazon gets away with paying smart white collar engineers lower than market and in general treating them bad. That reason is India and its unlimited supply of engineers to Amazon.<p>For last 10 years India has been producing more smart engineers than local market is willing to pay for. Note that the demand is more than supply but Indian companies still will not pay engineers top salaries.<p>So for years it became easy for companies like Amazon, Adobe, Microsoft to pay top of market and get their pick. And these engineers, historically, were willing to grind to any levels for a ticket to US. And Amazon offered that. 1.5 years in almost 70% of their Indian employees move to US on L1 visas. Even lower tech market salaries in US are life changing for most of these folks. Which is why 50% of lower level engineers in Amazon are Indians and around 70% are asians.<p>It hasn&#x27;t mattered to Amazon if people leave after 2 years. Because they always have a next batch coming from India. But then local companies started to pay and Amazon struggled to hire top talent. At this point they were smart enough to realise they need workers more than engineers. And now Amazon hires more engineers than any product company in India. It goes to more colleges than any other company. It pays them in top 80 percentile of market, they get to go to US where get paid top 70 percentile of market. So what if they get treated like shit for couple years. That&#x27;s the cost of buying a 3 bedroom house for many of them.<p>The day Indian market is big enough to absorb these engineers at their price, Amazon recruiters will be on their knees for their next batch. Unfortunately due to pure currency difference it&#x27;s always going to better financial decision for most Indian engineers to go to US, at least for next 10 years and Amazon will not have to treat it&#x27;s employees like humans.
评论 #27552429 未加载
评论 #27552993 未加载
评论 #27552489 未加载
mindvirus将近 4 年前
Paradoxically, I think Amazon has been able to get away with this because their stock is doing well. When your stock is going up 10%-30% per year, people will put up with a lot (my new grad offer there 10+ years ago is worth $500k&#x2F;year now). I really do think that if they have a few down years, they&#x27;ll have an incredibly hard time with retention and hiring.
评论 #27550994 未加载
评论 #27551567 未加载
评论 #27550886 未加载
alangibson将近 4 年前
Hot take here. Amazon is the harbinger of a permanent, systemic and pervasive bifurcation between what we now call the PMC and basically everyone else as enabled by technology.
评论 #27550391 未加载
评论 #27550225 未加载
评论 #27551669 未加载
newsclues将近 4 年前
And yet it’s market success, supports the notion it’s had remarkable HR success by hiring the right people to develop new products and services.
评论 #27550325 未加载
评论 #27550615 未加载
JackPoach将近 4 年前
I think Amazon, as any IT giant, is a two-tier or a three-tier company. Meaning different HR principles are applied to &#x27;line workers&#x27; compared to mid-management compared to VP level hires.
greenail将近 4 年前
In my experience the farther left DEI policy goes the more chaos, distraction, and resentment it creates. There also seems to be some correlation between how far left DEI policy goes and how acceptable vocal political activism is. The final anecdotal observation is that the farther left the DEI policy is the more likely you are to destroy your career by being voicing any dissenting critique of the DEI policy.<p>Amazon tends to embrace&#x2F;reward constructive critical thinking but not disruptive&#x2F;revolutionary critical thinking and so it may not be possible for Amazon to keep it&#x27;s culture and adopt a left leaning DEI policy. I think the Amazon culture and staying focused on people who will thrive in that culture are the things that have made it so successful in so many areas.
评论 #27550825 未加载
meepmorp将近 4 年前
HR exists to protect the company from liability and to enforce policy. Since the high attrition rate and generally miserable nature of the job are apparently intentional, that means it&#x27;s a feature, not a bug. There&#x27;s no HR failure here, because this is the kind of relationship management wants with (at least part of) the humans it employs.<p>Amazon&#x27;s the poster child at the moment, but I think this is just how Americans have decided to do capitalism. At some level, we&#x27;re collectively ok with employees only power in the working relationship being to find another job. Maybe there&#x27;ll be congressional hearings if the story catches on, but then nothing will change.
评论 #27550594 未加载
wonderwonder将近 4 年前
This article has an inaccurate title. It appears that HR is not failing at all, they are implementing the desired process successfully. Many people seem to think that HR is there to help the employees, but it is not, it is there only to help the company, very often when the company is in direct opposition to those employees. While the Amazon process is cruel, one would be hard pressed to label it a failure, the warehouses appear to work flawlessly, I cant recall a single time Amazon has missed a delivery date of mine.<p>If one wants to say that people should not be treated like this, I agree, reducing people to nothing but statistics is inhumane but for Amazon the company it has been a complete success.
MattGaiser将近 4 年前
&gt; Or, as Vox’s Jason Del Rey writes in another story this week [see below], “Amazon corporate managers have goals for “unregretted attrition” — basically a percentage of their staff that should leave the company each year, either voluntarily or by being forced out.” It’s just like Adam Serwer put it in a different context: the cruelty is the point.<p>Performance is the point. It is just seemingly cruel if you cannot perform relative to your peers. It may not be the best tool to get that in some cases, but I am pretty sure that nobody is setting &quot;make 6% of the staff miserable&quot; as a goal.
评论 #27552536 未加载