|
My experience with Yahoo (admittedly ending more than a decade ago, so I'm sure much has changed) was that cost probably was a huge deal. I ran engineering for the European billing platform. We processed many millions of dollars worth of transactions a year. Yet when I had to ask for a new database server, I had to submit a written request to a committee in Sunnyvale, with graphs and other supporting documentation to demonstrate that the load of the server we already had was high enough to justify it. Then I had to join a hardware review meeting, that included maybe a dozen people. One of them being either Jerry Yang or David Filo (Yahoo founders; I've forgotten which one of them it was that did these). The people in the meeting, even excluding whichever one of the founders, easily cost Yahoo more in salaries for the time they spent discussing my request for one lonely server than the fully loaded amortised cost of operating it for a couple of years. It's not that I have an issue with reviews, and cost controls - on the contrary, but some degree of delegation and trusting staff with budgets would have been nice. I mean, I could have trivially cost Yahoo millions of dollars with a few keypresses if I wanted to or didn't pay attention - they trusted me with the ability to mess up their entire European payments platform with basically no oversight, yet I couldn't approve a single cent of hardware expenditure for the production platform, and neither could my manager, nor, I believe, could my managers manager, who was responsible for all of engineering across Europe. I suspect a structure like that may have created a lot of resistance to recommendations from the Paranoids even when engineering (they seemed generally very well respected; one of my old developers is part of the Paranoids now - he'd wanted to for years) would like to accommodate them for the simple reason that getting approvals would be a massive hassle and slow things down. |