[selfmodruntime]

In my (unpopular) opinion and experience, companies are realizing that workshop / course trained employees who were after tech industry salaries as well as middle management types can be largely trimmed off after post-pandemic growth. I guess you don‘t need as many unmotivated employees / management / DEI types as previously thought.

All of my friends who feel real love for their work and live and breathe tech are still employed or have no problem finding employment. It‘s these people who drive innovation if managed competently and I guess companies want to go back to that. This is not to say that it‘s all fun and roses. A lot of tech employees that love tech in itself work long hours, are stressed and are unable to not think about work at home. I‘m that type of person. Companies really profit of these types.

[johhns4]

How are you going to identify the ones that are productive though through a layoff? If you just do a general cut across the board based on 'opinions' how do you know that the ones that are left are the useful ones that will keep you lean?

And then it's the fact that most who see productive people being slashed will ultimately reach the conclusion that productivity isn't the most important but being loud enough is.

Feels like a fine line. But yes, if these companies were bloated then something needed to be done. I'm just curious if "departing with very talented people" is the way to go.

[selfmodruntime]

> If you just do a general cut across the board based on 'opinions' how do you know that the ones that are left are the useful ones that will keep you lean?

This is hard. Which is why you identify obvious outliers first. It's much easier to identify obvious slackers and top engineers who sell their soul for your company (again, not a good thing, but for the sake of the argument -- and realism -- we're forgoing ethics here) than it is to identify lower-than-average or higher-than-average employees who are much closer to the median.

Next, a company looking for saving costs would be looking at top-earning employees with a long tenure. There is most likely not a lot of fat to trim here, but the profits could outweigh the risks.

If you're looking to increase productivity and profits only, you'd also have a look at non-value-producing employees, or those who introduce friction. These employees may add to a company's culture by providing equality strategies or acceptance groups in strong economic times, which in turn could also attract more employees with a similar culture fit, but money is scarce now and shareholders want profits, so they must go. I've seen this happen first hand.

[johhns4]

However, you are forgetting one thing most people who are productive may not be loud enough to show that they are productive. It's not until they leave that you understand the work they have done.

This becomes even harder if it is top level down that makes the decisions, maybe cutting the manager at the same time. Here, it's impossible to know which has potential, who is running the show and who is doing very little.

We saw this with Twitter, when Elon Musk cut across the entire company and then had to beg people to come back because they realized this after the fact.

In most cases you'd be too stubborn to ask people to come back as it would look bad on you as a leader.

[ignoramous]

> I guess you don't need as many unmotivated employees / management / DEI types as previously thought. All of my friends who feel real love for their work and live and breathe tech are still employed or have no problem finding employment.

  In my circles, those who get offers and those who are still employed are artisans par excellence, of course. No exceptions. Luck and circumstances have nothing to do with it. Others must really be shit or DEI.

[selfmodruntime]

No. In my circles, those who are still employed are in positions not easily replaced, e.g devops or security. Webdevs and those in game development have suffered the most. As has management.