This may be an earnestly applied standard, and it may even be a fairly accurate description of what they do. But the real impact is the internal and external propaganda message: "we're all above average".

In reality, only some few of the best/highest-pressure companies can maintain that for any length of time. The rest probably won't profit from the distrust and ill-will caused by the rhetorical slight of hand that defines "adequate" as "well below the actual standards we consider adequate".

Surely this is like turning the volume up to 11 because it's 1 louder.

"Adequate" is inadequate by Netflix's standards, so it's not "adequate" it's "below expectations". Daft.

damn right. Totally stupid idea - perhaps they should revise their expectations to something more realistic?

Or at least be honest about their high expectations for adequacy.

it's just the definition of the word, right? You presumably hire someone with a set of responsibilities - some mix of write this software, design this UI, optimize this server and you're at some degree of freedom on the requirements. Set high bars in quality and speed, sure, but if someone meets those levels then that's adequate and why replace them?

I'm reminded of fast food places that label the smallest size of drink or pizza "medium".

what the article doesn't state is which segment of their comapny this applies to. engineering? management? i'm going to guess not janitorial staff.