News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Buffer Layoffs. Parent comment

Re:Buffer Layoffs by toomuchtodo on Thursday June 16, 2016 @04:43PM (#11918729)
Perhaps its because I've been at more failed companies than most? Regardless of transparency vs secrecy, you reach a tipping point where the situation "feels" dire enough that employees leaving accelerates. I'm sure it depends on the demographics of the org, employees with families, mortgages, etc are willing to stick out volatility far less (in my experience) than employees with no obligations.

Anecdotal of course! I'd love to have more data on this to find out what that tipping point is.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Buffer Layoffs by dasil003 on Thursday June 16, 2016 @05:08PM (#11918877)
I agree with everything you said. But it doesn't address why you think secrecy is always necessary.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Buffer Layoffs by toomuchtodo on Thursday June 16, 2016 @05:13PM (#11918907)
If you work because you need a job, and your company is transparent, and its in a financially precarious state, why would you stay?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Buffer Layoffs by dasil003 on Thursday June 16, 2016 @05:30PM (#11919039)
In this case though, the graph shows that the layoffs are bringing Buffer to profitability. If they kept that secret and just told the employees not to worry, they would be just as likely to assume that management was merely decreasing the burn, in which case their assumption would be worse than reality. Secrecy cuts both ways.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Buffer Layoffs by st3v3r on Thursday June 16, 2016 @05:52PM (#11919153)
I fail to see what the problem is here.
[ Parent | on HN ]