|
There used to be an implied contract between employee and company back in the day -- the company would provide growth opportunities and training for an employee, and the employee would stay with the company for years. That hasn't been the case for many many years, but the memory lingers and some employees feel beholden to companies. Many large public corporations these days look for maximizing "share holder value", which translates into "what can we do right now to maximize revenue". That being said, those short term actions will have long term effects. Cringely has done well to document the case of IBM. My graduate advisor was old school IBM and was still getting money from a time when (i don't know the exact specifics) where if an employee made a significant impact that saved the company money, they company would provide some renumeration in kind. His patents, etc. still brought him money from his time at IBM. This is going to be a gross over simplification, but it is based on personal experience at two companies -- both startups. There are certain nationalities, maybe it is due to national ties, sometimes it seems due to prior business relationships and potential kickbacks, where an individual in power puts significant pressure on the company to hire a particular out sourcing firm or sponsor an H1-B for a particular individual. Just like the numerous debates around "women in tech", there are factors at play and decisions made where hiring isn't always about "what's right for the company", but more about a "cultural" or "ethnic" fit. Skill and merit should be at the forefront (a pipe dream, but we like to think it is there). Any work place where there is a significant dominance of one culture over another (unless, say a whole team was brought in as a whole) speaks to a diversity and cultural problem. Unfortunately, a lot of these can also be coupled to Visas like the H1-B. |