I think they take less risk in each hiring decision and because of that, can take on more risky / less proven candidates, ergo more risk acceptance in the hiring practices.
Re:At this company, we are family
by 6D794163636F756 on Tuesday July 25, 2023 @03:45PM
(#36868282)
To rephrase, you're saying that US companies are able to more quickly divest from failed ideas so they are more willing to take on a venture that's not likely to succeed (risky) because failure will not hurt them as much (less risky).
This is a scoping issue, the action contains the risk because the system has mitigated it.
You are right - but because each hire is less risky, a US company can afford to take the risk of hiring for an "experimental" role that may not work out. I think this additional risk is what they were referring to.
less risk, you used the wrong word. If they can fire easily, they take less risk by hiring. That's more risk for the employee though, you miss the fact that most of the people is not HN, and they don't get paid 6 or 7 figures and don't find a job in days if they really need to.