|
|
|
|
|
by hintymad
2304 days ago
|
|
I find Netflix's model works better: allocating resources by visibility of a team. Roughly speaking, a manager gets a chunk of budget from her manager, and she can decide how big a package she gives to each of her team members. The more important a team becomes, the more budget the team gets. The more visible a person becomes to her manager, the more likely this person will get larger package. This comes with the following nuances:
* A team member is responsible for her visibility only to her team and her manager. There is really no need for any popularity contest if the team is small enough. I deem it as fair as it can get.
* A manager can definitely abuse the system, but then the team would suffer churn and productivity loss, and the manager would be punished. If the team performed anyway with little churn despite the manager's misbehavior, well, did the manager really misbehaved?
* To make the system work, the management chain needs to be perceptive, and teams need to be small. Netflix delivered both, which showed that Reed Hastings is a truly great CEO. |
|